Questions for the Chassis Gang

[SSG Graybush]

I also own rifles with both a chassis stock and older stocks. In my opinion as others have also stated, chassis are great for range shooting or hunting out of a shooting house, but not so much for stalk hunting. I can't rapidly pull a chassis up to my shoulder and rapidly make it fit/align to shoot an animal as I can with an older stock. I also like the angled hand grip of the older stocks better than the straight grip stocks for rapid acquisition of game. The straight grip throws me off. I like the adjustability of stocks like Savage or Manners which can have thumb shelves, etc., but still have the angled grip. The angled grip has been around for a couple of centuries and there are more rifles with that angled grip than without for some good reason. I'm sure the straight grip was tried 200 years ago also and the angled grip became the standard.

No the vertical grip is much better for prone and in general. It doesn't put your wrist in a awkward angle / postion. If angled grips are so much better why dont BR guys use em? Cuz their not better. A vertical grip with a thumb rest allows the shooter to consistently pull the trigger back straighter without torquing the rifle. Period. You can try to pick that apart but its 100% true.
Couple that with a adj comb and a solid rest and even a total newbie with some instructions can produce sub moa groups, 95% of the time with say a Bergara HMR. I RO'ed and helped this happen numerous times. And took them out to 300 yards only a couple hours after zeroing for the 1st time. And most almost never missed a 6" plate at 300. So imo a stocks ability to allow a shooter to be comfortable behind it has a direct relationship to performance. Innovation of the Monty Carlo style stock was to get a more consistent cheek to stock weld. Innovation of the vertical grip was for a more comfortable grip and consistent trigger pull especially when prone. Its called progress. And the thumb shelf on traditional style stocks is a way to get a more consistent straight back trigger pull as well. But still not as good as a vertical grip. Even AR grips are getting more vertical. And with more innovation the chassis hunting stocks will point and shoot as well or better then a traditional. Their type is in its infancy still. But its still personal preference. Personally, I love the McMillan ultra-lite Game Scout for hunting. A traditional looking stock with a vertical grip.

 

[kgunz11]

Ignoring for a moment that rail guns aren't built ANYTHING like traditional rifles. They mostly run barrel block setups and floating actions, which is reversed from what every other traditional setup is.... Show me one instance where rail guns are being shot where sighters aren't being used.

I'll wait.

Go talk to an accomplished rail gun shooter and ask him if he'd fire for record, cold, with no sighters... just after taking his rail gun out of a 70f house and shooting in a 100f condition.

Are you going to accept my challenge? ... or are you just going to sit here on the internet trying to claim I'm the one that doesn't know what he's talking about?

-----------
Follow on Instagram
Subscribe on YouTube
Amazon Affiliate

I'll take your challenge. You said, and I quote: "The fact is, Chassis rifles don't shoot as small as composites or even un-bedded Foundations. That IS the fact. "

That's a lie, wrong, misinformation, poorly informed, whatever you want to call it. You're just wrong, Greg. Now you can walk that back and state it a little differently and fix your error, but as written, you're just wrong. So it is quite apparent to anyone reading this that you don't know what you're talking about. As stated in the article, rail guns are the epitome of accuracy, and anyone with a clue already understands this. You're basing your misguided opinion on how metal changes with temperature swings. As a machinist, I'm completely aware of the hows and whys. A rail gun is a barreled action bolted into a stationary chassis, despite where and how it is affixed to the chassis. Have you done any testing on Foundation stocks, or micarta composites, to determine the amount of change across the platform in delta of temperature or humidity? How about fiberglass? At what comparison between aluminum and the others? Do you have real data or is it just a "I know it moves because I was told so" kind of thing?

I've seen chassis rifles that shoot exceptionally well, I own some. I have several Foundation stocks that shoot well, and Manners too. I've seen them all require bedding at some point. That's not always due to the stock, but the receiver body can contribute to that.

Try to avoid talking in absolutes. Not everything is absolutely a fact all the time.

 

[kgunz11]

Take a breath, and perhaps your meds, it seems you've forgotten, again this morning.

You've certainly been blocked already

 

[JustMe2]

No the vertical grip is much better for prone and in general. It doesn't put your wrist in a awkward angle / postion. If angled grips are so much better why dont BR guys use em? Cuz their not better. A vertical grip with a thumb rest allows the shooter to consistently pull the trigger back straighter without torquing the rifle. Period. You can try to pick that apart but its 100% true.
Couple that with a adj comb and a solid rest and even a total newbie with some instructions can produce sub moa groups, 95% of the time with say a Bergara HMR. I RO'ed and helped this happen numerous times. And took them out to 300 yards only a couple hours after zeroing for the 1st time. And most almost never missed a 6" plate at 300. So imo a stocks ability to allow a shooter to be comfortable behind it has a direct relationship to performance. Innovation of the Monty Carlo style stock was to get a more consistent cheek to stock weld. Innovation of the vertical grip was for a more comfortable grip and consistent trigger pull especially when prone. Its called progress. And the thumb shelf on traditional style stocks is a way to get a more consistent straight back trigger pull as well. But still not as good as a vertical grip. Even AR grips are getting more vertical. And with more innovation the chassis hunting stocks will point and shoot as well or better then a traditional. Their type is in its infancy still. But its still personal preference. Personally, I love the McMillan ultra-lite Game Scout for hunting. A traditional looking stock with a vertical grip.

What's your problem? I stated what I like and my experience. Don't try and tell me what "MY" opinion is.

 

[Rob01]

I'll take your challenge. You said, and I quote: "The fact is, Chassis rifles don't shoot as small as composites or even un-bedded Foundations. That IS the fact. "

That's a lie, wrong, misinformation, poorly informed, whatever you want to call it. You're just wrong, Greg. Now you can walk that back and state it a little differently and fix your error, but as written, you're just wrong. So it is quite apparent to anyone reading this that you don't know what you're talking about. As stated in the article, rail guns are the epitome of accuracy, and anyone with a clue already understands this. You're basing your misguided opinion on how metal changes with temperature swings. As a machinist, I'm completely aware of the hows and whys. A rail gun is a barreled action bolted into a stationary chassis, despite where and how it is affixed to the chassis. Have you done any testing on Foundation stocks, or micarta composites, to determine the amount of change across the platform in delta of temperature or humidity? How about fiberglass? At what comparison between aluminum and the others? Do you have real data or is it just a "I know it moves because I was told so" kind of thing?

I've seen chassis rifles that shoot exceptionally well, I own some. I have several Foundation stocks that shoot well, and Manners too. I've seen them all require bedding at some point. That's not always due to the stock, but the receiver body can contribute to that.

Try to avoid talking in absolutes. Not everything is absolutely a fact all the time.

Good luck! Lol

 

[Chas1]

I prefer conventional stocks on most of my rigs.

 

[Oryx_Official]

With something like the MDT XRS you get most of the benefits for a chassis, though in the same feel of a stock. Those "mini-chassis" are pretty solid.

 

[XLR Industries]

The feel of a chassis is something that you have to grow accustomed to. It is like a Glock vs a 1911, one of them just feels right. For me personally once I grew accustomed to the chassis I can no longer get comfortable behind a stock. Obviously I am a little biased but that is what I noticed years ago before I had any affiliation with XLR. I think a lot of it depends on how much time you spend behind the rifle! It is going to feel different from your traditional stock, no doubt about it! But once you grow accustomed to the feel you are opened up to a world of adjustment and comfort!

 

[Deleted member 123841]

I like manners stocks. The T2A, T4A, and PRS style stocks by them specifically. McMillan and BC are 2nd and 3rd respectively in their versions of the manners. I don't like chassis bc I can't really get comfortable behind them.

 

[Wyo37]

No idea if chassis' are inherently more accurate. I use one specifically on a tikka for better recoil management to spot impacts/misses. Plus aics mags are nice too.

 

[SSG Graybush]

What's your problem? I stated what I like and my experience. Don't try and tell me what "MY" opinion is.

I wasnt trying to come off as argumentative. But you stating that angled grips were the standard over time implies superiority over the tried and discarded vertical grips, your words but not verbatim. And I completely disagree. Old tech is not always correct. Take old school thought that light bullets going fast as possible was where it was at, but the innovation of scopes has taken us out way farther, and now high bc, efficient, heavy for caliber bullets starting slower have proven more consistent at distance, and is the norm. Times change.
I agree that for hunting a rifle needs to point and shoot, and currently traditional stocks do this and swing better. But give chassis's time, most were designed for bench and PRS. Shotguns even have adj combs and lop nowadays. But will never change much anymore, probably. Never say never. But again its personal preference. I prefer a Magpul K2?/the more vertical grip on a AR. And thats a point and shoot rifle. I have become accustomed to the vertical grips.
But my problem was, to address your reply...
Vertical grips have advantages over angled ones, but take a bit to get used to. And firearm innovation and progression as a whole has driven this. So sorry. I guess. But because it was the norm back in the day doesnt make it better nowadays. And to imply that doesnt hold water.

 

[JustMe2]

We're good.

 

[Rick Richard]

I wasnt trying to come off as argumentative. But you stating that angled grips were the standard over time implies superiority over the tried and discarded vertical grips, your words but not verbatim. And I completely disagree. Old tech is not always correct. Take old school thought that light bullets going fast as possible was where it was at, but the innovation of scopes has taken us out way farther, and now high bc, efficient, heavy for caliber bullets starting slower have proven more consistent at distance, and is the norm. Times change.
I agree that for hunting a rifle needs to point and shoot, and currently traditional stocks do this and swing better. But give chassis's time, most were designed for bench and PRS. Shotguns even have adj combs and lop nowadays. But will never change much anymore, probably. Never say never. But again its personal preference. I prefer a Magpul K2?/the more vertical grip on a AR. And thats a point and shoot rifle. I have become accustomed to the vertical grips.
But my problem was, to address your reply...
Vertical grips have advantages over angled ones, but take a bit to get used to. And firearm innovation and progression as a whole has driven this. So sorry. I guess. But because it was the norm back in the day doesnt make it better nowadays. And to imply that doesnt hold water.

+1 on the VERTICAL grip too.

 

[orkan]

I'll take your challenge. You said, and I quote: "The fact is, Chassis rifles don't shoot as small as composites or even un-bedded Foundations. That IS the fact. "

That's a lie, wrong, misinformation, poorly informed, whatever you want to call it. You're just wrong, Greg. Now you can walk that back and state it a little differently and fix your error, but as written, you're just wrong. So it is quite apparent to anyone reading this that you don't know what you're talking about. As stated in the article, rail guns are the epitome of accuracy, and anyone with a clue already understands this. You're basing your misguided opinion on how metal changes with temperature swings. As a machinist, I'm completely aware of the hows and whys. A rail gun is a barreled action bolted into a stationary chassis, despite where and how it is affixed to the chassis. Have you done any testing on Foundation stocks, or micarta composites, to determine the amount of change across the platform in delta of temperature or humidity? How about fiberglass? At what comparison between aluminum and the others? Do you have real data or is it just a "I know it moves because I was told so" kind of thing?

I've seen chassis rifles that shoot exceptionally well, I own some. I have several Foundation stocks that shoot well, and Manners too. I've seen them all require bedding at some point. That's not always due to the stock, but the receiver body can contribute to that.

Try to avoid talking in absolutes. Not everything is absolutely a fact all the time.

It's too bad that some people will read your post, and think you're right... and head down the chassis road.

Eventually, when they are outclassed by enough shooters, they'll start wondering if I was right and get a composite with a great bed job or a Foundation. They'll tire of a perpetually shifting zero. They'll tire of drastic POI shifts every time they abort the chassis to do some trigger maintenance. They'll get tired of first round shift, what is commonly referred to as "cold bore shift" but is mostly actually due to improper action to stock fitment. They'll tire of chasing that zero from season to season, from morning to afternoon.

Yet most won't even realize it's happening. They'll think it is them. They'll think they are just not doing something right, and that's why they're chasing a tenth of a mil every direction from POA all the time.

You clearly don't even know what I'm saying. 90% or more of precision rifle shooters will not ask any more than a chassis can produce. The rest will remember this thread as a monumental turning point in their shooting capability. They'll remember I helped them, and who cares if they remember you tried to hurt them? It's been happening like that my entire career. Every day I talk to someone that was mislead by people on forums. I give them advice on how to fix it, and then they circle back with all manner of praise and thanks. That's good enough for me! There's no changing anyone's mind here in anonymous land.

So go ahead and be happy with your bigger groups, farther from POA. I'm not stopping you.


-----------
Follow on Instagram
Subscribe on YouTube
Amazon Affiliate