RokStok

[atmat]

Understood- I don’t even know how they work, Ive never adjusted the spacers. I am not really saying anything about that- maybe it’s a broken spacer system, maybe it’s UM’s fault- I don’t know. But MRC isn't at fault. BLJ’s premise was a fallacy.

Gotcha, just wanted to clarify.

Also, not speaking for BLJ, but I don’t think he’s blaming MRC. I think he’s saying it’s a UM QC issue that something is wrong with the spacer system they installed.

Whether it was a mistake or not we’ll see.

 

[Formidilosus]

As was yours, blaming @atmat

Oh my god. Nevermind. You people get the industry you deserve.

 

[BLJ]

What? You’re referencing a person that had a rifle modified after it left the factory, and then he himself stripped the screws out because he didn’t know how it worked- as proof of what?

I was referring to @wind gypsy saying you get what you pay for.
I would be under the impression that an almost $4k rifle wouldn’t have these issues.
Specifically the stripped screws in the stock.

Not sure what’s false about that.

 

[wind gypsy]

Hopefully Unknown does not take that approach. Essentially, they will become the vortex optics of aftermarket components.

Especially if scope project is still in the works. Is the motto for that gonna be you get what you pay for…..guess you should’ve bought a Nightforce?

I’ve had a bunch of $700-1200 LOW manufactured scopes. Not one of them had glass quality or controls refinement of my $3k kahles. So yeah, if you buy the $1k’ish “rokscope” expecting ATACR build quality/refinement, you’re a dumbass.

If you expect rs1.2 or LRHS type quality I’d say you have reasonable expectations.

 

[Formidilosus]

I was referring to @wind gypsy saying you get what you pay for.
I would be under the impression that an almost $4k rifle wouldn’t have these issues.
Specifically the stripped screws in the stock.

Not sure what’s false about that.

Because a $4,000 rifle didn’t. A modified rifle did. MRC did not ship the rifle with a stripped screw. So bringing it up only confuses the potential issue and makes getting a solution for whoever is at fault less likely.

 

[Marbles]

Because a $4,000 rifle didn’t. A modified rifle did. MRC did not ship the rifle with a stripped screw. So bringing it up only confuses the potential issue and makes getting a solution for whoever is at fault less likely.

Please show were it was modified and by who?

From what I have read so far in both threads this sounds suspiciously like a Silencer Co style deflection of responsibility. Perhaps I missed something?

@atmat when was the rifle modified? My impression is that it was in as received condition. Am I missing something?

 

[5811]

Oh my god. Nevermind. You people get the industry you deserve.

I'm just a dude playing an expert gunsmith/marksman/hunter on the internet.

 

[BAKPAKR]

Please show were it was modified and by who?

From what I have read so far in both threads this sounds suspiciously like a Silencer Co style deflection of responsibility. Perhaps I missed something?

@atmat when was the rifle modified? My impression is that it was in as received condition. Am I missing something?

In the MRC thread, I am pretty sure @atmat said that Unknown Munitions added the spacer system. I wouldn’t have given a second thought to having them “modify” the stock RokStok (add the spacer system) on the MRC rifle had I ordered one myself.

Once @atmat gets the spacer issue fixed, I hope he has a rifle that shoots 100-10X!

 

[BLJ]

Fair enough.
So the RokStok on the MRC had no issues when it left the MRC factory. Sorry for the confusion.

When an attempt was being made to adjust the LOP on the RokStok that came on the MRC Marshall by loosening a screw, the screw was stripped out rendering the rifle inoperable.

@wind gypsy had stated earlier that you get what you pay for in reference to the RokStok.
In this example the RokStok is what you get on a $3850 rifle.
I would be under the impression that the screws would work on a $3850 rifle. Regardless of component manufacturer.
Thus getting what you paid for.

To me it sounds like a RokStok issue. That’s why it was referred to in the RokStok thread.
It just happened to be bolted to a MRC rifle.

 

[khuber84]

Can you please measure that on both of those stocks, and if you can in the factory Tikka stock as well.

Heres all my data. Don't have an oem Tikka stock to compare to anymore. Her rifles been in a bravo, and a MESA Altitude. None the dimensions below are bedded. Just raw inlet.

F: Front pillar height, R: Rear pillar height

Rokstok 1 F. 0.927 R. 1.357(Received last year)
Also had to short screws and mod mag latch

Rokstok 2 F. 0.903 R. 1.327(Received last week)

Stockys VG F. 0.948 R. 1.382(purchase last summer)

MESA Altitude Tikka. F. 0.971 R. 1.407

To get everything working for Rokstok 2, I just removed 1.5 threads from front action screw, and 3 threads from rear action screw, then took a file and removed material from mag latch until it clicked in without a ton of pressure, and depressed to release relatively easy. This is the wife's rig, so it all has to be easy with a woman's touch.

I really think these just need pillar bedded honestly, include some pillars that are the exact height as Tikka factory pillars. Say on the website it'll likely require some fitting work, but for best results, glass pillar bedding is suggested with included pillars.


Edit: Buddy has a Tikka oem stock, I'll get some dimension on that and post em in here when I do.

---------------------------------------

Rem 700 Rokstok F. 0.658 R. 1.031

Manners M5 mini Chassis F. 0.705 R 1.085.(3 different stocks averaged, +-0.001

MDT Crbn w/ Magnesium m5 mini chassis: F. 0.723" R. 1.082

0.050 is a lot when trying to get AW mags working correctly. I will just not run AW mags in this setup, or buy the new core m5 dbm from MDT and install the adjustable mag latch. Everything worked perfectly in the Manners Mini chassis.

 

[Formidilosus]

Heres all my data. Don't have an oem Tikka stock to compare to anymore. Her rifles been in a bravo, and a MESA Altitude. None the dimensions below are bedded. Just raw inlet.

F: Front pillar height, R: Rear pillar height

Rokstok 1 F. 0.927 R. 1.357(Received last year)
Also had to short screws and mod mag latch

Rokstok 2 F. 0.903 R. 1.327(Received last week)

Stockys VG F. 0.948 R. 1.382(purchase last summer)

MESA Altitude Tikka. F. 0.971 R. 1.407

To get everything working for Rokstok 2, I just removed 1.5 threads from front action screw, and 3.5 threads from rear action screw, then took a file and removed material from mag latch until it clicked in without a ton of pressure, and depressed to release relatively easy. This is the wife's rig, so it all has to be easy with a woman's touch.

I really think these just need pillar bedded honestly, include some pillars that are the exact height as Tikka factory pillars. Say on the website it'll likely require some fitting work, but for best results, glass pillar bedding is suggested with included pillars.

---------------------------------------

Rem 700 Rokstok F. 0.658 R. 1.031

Manners M5 mini Chassis F. 0.705 R 1.085.(3 different stocks averaged, +-0.001

MDT Crbn w/ Magnesium m5 mini chassis: F. 0.723" R. 1.082

0.050 is a lot when trying to get AW mags working correctly. I will just not run AW mags in this setup, or buy the new core m5 dbm from MDT and install the adjustable mag latch. Everything worked perfectly in the Manners Mini chassis.
View attachment 946085View attachment 946086

Thank you. Will you please call UM and speak to Jake about it. Him getting real numbers is the only way to attempt getting change.

The R700 isn’t surprising at all. There is no across the board true “drop in” due to the wildly different manufacturers of actions. The Tikka should be correct. Because I can not remember- do the RokStoks come with aftermarket action screws? If so, and even if they don’t- can you measure the functional length of them with factory if you have some.

 

[Lawnboi]

An easy fix would be to have stockys bore the stocks out and have SRS build some mini chassis to screw/bed in the stock blanks.

 

[Formidilosus]

An easy fix would be to have stockys bore the stocks out and have SRS build some mini chassis to screw/bed in the stock blanks.

Haha. That’s not “easy”.

 

[khuber84]

Thank you. Will you please call UM and speak to Jake about it. Him getting real numbers is the only way to attempt getting change.

The R700 isn’t surprising at all. There is no across the board true “drop in” due to the wildly different manufacturers of actions. The Tikka should be correct. Because I can not remember- do the RokStoks come with aftermarket action screws? If so, and even if they don’t- can you measure the functional length of them with factory if you have some.

I'll give him a call once I have the Tikka oem measurements. The rokstoks don't come with action screws. I removed approx 0.120 from rear screw, and about 0.050 from the front. I'm sure they're all a lil different. But there is a pretty large variance there, 3 from same manufacturer, one from a different, believe AG makes the MESA stocks.

 

[willfrye027]

I have 4 tikka rokstocks at the moment. One of them required filing off a couple threads on the action screws but it was nowhere as bad as pictured above and would still run the bolt, just catching mildly on the read screw.

Part of this could be the torquing to 65in/lb is deforming the bottom plastic.

Part of it could be different action screws, I have a hodgepodge of them.

There’s multiple layers of tolerance issues especially if you include a spongy plastic bottom metal and varying torque.

IMO that aspect is very minor. Recoil lugs more problematic but supposedly fixed.

Happy with the product at the price point and would have easily paid more regardless of fitment