Stock vs Chassis for Field Shooting

[1991Bushman]

I have 8 tikkas t3's. 2 in Mesa/Pure precision altitude stocks that I like a lot for the weight, length of pull, and cheek height fits me well. Another in a Mcmillan Game Warden 2.0, but found the length of pull a bit short. So, I may be buying my first chassis, whiskey 3, to set it up as heavier precision rifle instead. Personal preference, I like carbon stocks for something I'm going to carry longer distances, and might have to shoot offhand occasionally. Not that it can't be done with some of the newer lightweight chassis... It's all user preference.

Rokbottom, on here actually has a tikka Supervarmint stock for sale that I want to buy, for another build, but I'm pretty new to this site and can't post in classifieds or even PM users yet. I've opened up some of the factory tikka ctr and varmint barrel channels for proof prefits and quite like them, for what they are. They have fiberglass or something blended in their polymer injection mold matrix, and are pretty stiff.

 

[idahodave]

I don’t hunt with a chassis gun, I hunt with a Kevlar handle….but all this talk about what a detriment Chassis guns are in the cold seems foolish to me and I MAY have hunted in unpleasant weather a time or two.

Damn few mountain hunters are carrying their rifles in hand. If you don’t need your hands free for trekking poles or moving/grabbing brush and trees…then you’re not hunting very rough ground…at least in Idaho anyway. My experience tells me hunting unpleasant ground is THE single most important component in regularly killing big game animals in OTC, public land hunts…so this is an issue near and dear to me.

I‘m a Kifaru gun-bearer convert myself. Trekking poles with the wiser connection are in hand about 90 percent of the time. I‘m not be a Delta force operative, but I’ve been hunting some of the roughest country in the lower 48 for for about 35 years now, and still stacking the bodies up pretty regularly. I know a thing or two about killing big game in rough country.

If the rifle is not in hand except when comes to killing time, then its largely a moot point imho. Now….range days in the dead of winter where a guy goes through a couple of hundred rounds….sure. I can see how that argument holds water. Coyote hunting in sub-zero temps with my AR where it’s in my hands while calling have also taught me that metal handles can suck tremendously.

For mountain hunting in the west for big game though?….color me dubious.

Dave

 

[hereinaz]

PRS/NRL competitions are contrived, some so much to be annoying. The rifles are built to perform in that competition.

BUT, if you go shoot it with your hunting rifle and get the experience. You will come away with a huge appreciation for the skill needed.

Even better, go shoot the NRL Hunter matches. Lots more realistic rifles with the weight limits.

Don’t listen to the hater hype. Just go for the experience at local matches. I guarantee that there are local shooters who have mountain rifles for hunting.

 

[hereinaz]

I like a McMillan Sentry with a vertical grip and adjustable stock for a loaner rifle.

I always add an ARCA rail and shoot off a tripod. I can be far more accurate than shooting in a weird position off rocks and trees.

 

[TaperPin]

I like this thread - after remembering all the kill shots and shots not taken for distance reasons in the rocky mountains over the years and all the rifles (and a few pistols), then imagining if a chassis, tripod, bipod, rear bag, 5x-25x scope, or 10 round magazine, would have made a difference. Mostly out in the sagebrush is where a reliable 800 yard rifle could have been handy. I have yet to meet anyone good enough at 1000 yards in the Wyoming wind to make first shot kills. The idea that even if it’s wounded you’ve got 9 more shots is laughable and not in the spirit of waiting for a sure first shot kill.

It hit me that it doesn’t matter what someone wants to hunt with - heck, wear a gilly suit if that is what turns your crank. I’ve often carried an elk rifle mulie hunting, used a lever action and 30-378 antelope hunting, even carried a Ruger #1 375 H&H n the timber after elk, and at that point in time it was exactly the right rifle for me to produce the most enjoyment.

Back when the only chassis was something on a pickup, I can still remember how good it felt to upgrade from a 700 adl and carry a featherweight Winchester, then a Model 7, then a Kevlar stocked custom with the weight of the model 7 and reach of a 26” 7 mag. When I could finally afford any stock and any bottom metal, my favorite gun to hand carry was a Remington adl, so the Kevlar pounder with nothing but a little trigger guard was perfect. A tiny compact scope shot 1/2MOA groups so that’s plenty. Still to this day with an unlimited budget that’s my ideal mountain rifle, although one of the benchrest actions would be a nice upgrade, but not needed. I’m probably even going to get a big scope just to show the grandkids and nephews that the old dude can ring plates and keep up with their chassis guns.

Still, a great post with a lots of great viewpoints and a lot of trigger time. I‘m impressed with this new interest in long range shooting and competition. The skill level of everyone in here is better than 99% of typical hunters just a few decades ago.

 

[General RE LEE]

I think the Tikka UPR is a good fit for some on here. I really like mine. The stock is stiff, allows a free floating barrel, has an adjustable cheek piece and is light. It has a vertical grip and a palm swell similar to the KRG Bravo which is akin to the Sako TRG 22. It’s a good “hunting” stock that has some similarities to a chassis.

 

[rbutcher1234]

I do appreciate this thread. I hunt in an area where the coldest temps of the year just crack below 30 degrees... Most of the time its 40's and 50's. Consequently, I have never regretted my decision to hunt with a metal chassis rifle. I also recognize that not everyone is packing an AI on their backpack and choose something lighter, but the most miles I've had to put out in a day was around 6. Different strokes for different folks.... I really enjoy learning about how y'all handle those really cold environments and how it drives y'alls gear choices.

 

[RepeatPete]

That’s a pretty good list. Answers below will be for the 5-95% of people. Generally if you aren’t below 5 foot, or above 6’5” that’s you.

I am speaking to observed function in hundreds of shooters/hunters and tens of thousands of rounds fired in the mountains and deserts for all position field shooting- I.E., hunting animals from Florida to Alaska; not PRS, barricade benchrest, or F-Class.



Considerations:

• Rigidity/Accuracy
  
  • Bedding required vs not
    
    • Ease of install
  • Proclivity for shift to occur

All things being equal, and aluminum or magnesium mini chassis is probably best for bedding and stability.

• Ergonomics
  
  • Grip
  • Hand position
  • Access to bolt and safety
  • Access to magazine
  • Head position
  • Recoil management
  • Length of pull

- Grip should be near vertical, thinner rather than large, and a small palm swell does well for most. Distance from trigger face to grip face should be shorter than most stocks feature.

- hand position should be near vertical, with the tang being rounded and/or scalloped for the firing side thumb to line up neutrally.

- access to bolt and safety, true vertical grip, not a pistol grip. Thumb neutrally inline with tang; not PRS offside, or totally wrapped around.

- Access ti magazine. Magazine release should be unobtrusive, and not susceptible to inadvertent release.

- Head position. Not sure what you mean here? Angle of the head/face? If so, not totally vertical, and not totally parallel.

- Recoil management. Straight line, neutral.

-Length of pull. That is based on each person, however the trend to shooting short LOP’s doesn’t seem to be great across the board. It’s great in prone, or a perfect tripod position, but in alternate field positions it seems to be causing more issues than a slightly too long LOP. FWIW, I shoot a longer LOP than would be suggested.

• Field Position Shooting
  
  • Interface with rear support
    
    • Bag vs other options
  • Interface with front support
    
    • Bipod
    • Tripod
    • Bag/other
  • Other considerations for adverse conditions/odd spots

- Interface with rear support. Toe line should be parallel, or near parallel with bore. Bag.

- Interface with front support. Forend should be parallel with bore. Rounded for carry comfort, and ability to wedge/lock in on odd supports. Should bot be overly wide. Nothing should be hanging from the bottom of the forend unless currently using that item- I.E., no pic rails, Arca, etc. They suck when shooting from odd positions and only hurt the shooter when not utilizing them. If required to have a rail, having a short rail mounted all the way to the front, or all the way to the rear (sucks when carrying) has the least interference when shooting.

• Weight
  
  • Minimum weight
  • Option to add weight(truck hunts, load development, etc)

- Minimum weight without sacrificing stability. Currently that seems to be between 20-30 ounces.

- Adding weight is a game thing. Waking up on day and being like “I’m going to add four pounds to my rifle for this deer hunt this morning” is not a real thing. Either the gun is shootable or it isn’t.

• Other characteristics
  
  • Folding to minimize packed OAL
  • Use in cold weather
  • Carrying-sling or other
  • Magazine compatibility

- Folding would be great, unfortunately in conventional stocks it adds a lot of undue weight. Not a requirement generally.

- Cold weather. No metal. Metal chassis absolutely suck in the cold. I know two people that have gotten mild to sever skin tissue damage from carrying and shooting metal chassis in Montana. No can not overstate how much metal chassis suck in the cold.

- Sling use seems to be person specific. Almost no one I am around hunts with them on the rifle anymore.

- AICS is the standard. However, at least with Tikkas if the carriage fits in the factory mag, they are more reliable and better feeding than AICS.






A field stock should be composite or wood, not metal. Jesse for ideally with a magnesium mini chassis/bedding block. A near vertical grip, not pistol grip, that is rounded and scalloped to allow the thumb to be inline with the tang. Trigger reach should be relatively short. It should have a negative comb, and negative drop at heel (butt pad inline with barrel). The toe should be parallel with the bore, or at least have a usable flat spot. The forend should be parallel with the bore, of standard width, flatter on the bottom with rounded sides. A hidden or recessed way to quickly attach tripods or bipods, that does not interfere with the forend or carrying.



Of every stock on the market, this is as close as anyone has come to getting it all correct-
View attachment 577411

In your opinion, what did the first generation Gunwerks Magnus not get correct?

 

[Formidilosus]

In your opinion, what did the first generation Gunwerks Magnus not get correct?

The recoil pad could have been raised 1/4” or a bit more, with the resulting negative comb. Otherwise/ it’s not available to buy and was never inlet for a Tikka.

 

[BlackCore]

Interesting perspectives on this thread. I'm new to bolt rifles and I just swapped mine from stock to a chassis. I'm not a hunter, but I do like seeing your thought processes laid out on paper. Thank you.

 

[pucmw11]

@Formidilosus we need to get you a eh1tk with a mini chassis to beat up.

No negative comb but it’s so close in all other regards. Really enjoy the ones I have.

Totally agree on the metal chassis. I have one for a game gun, and wouldn’t consider it for hunting, pretty much ever.

View attachment 577435


This is a good topic though.

Oh yea, on chassis…. Rusty screws…. The more screws the more rust.

What is the difference between the EH1tk's with and without the mini chassis? I can't seem to find a good description on Manner's website. Cost worth the mini chassis?

 

[JohnJohnson]

What is the difference between the EH1tk's with and without the mini chassis? I can't seem to find a good description on Manner's website. Cost worth the mini chassis?

When a Manners has a mini-chassis in it that usually (at least for R700 actions) means you don't need a bottom metal for it and probably don't need to bother bedding it.

 

[Lawnboi]

What is the difference between the EH1tk's with and without the mini chassis? I can't seem to find a good description on Manner's website. Cost worth the mini chassis?

The mini chassis that I have (they make a few styles as alluded to below) is the t3x bottom metal mini chassis. Essentially they took a block of aluminum that’s machined for the action, like a chassis, and bedded it into the stock. I dont think they are necessarily needed but I like that my rifle goes from bottom metal, to action in a solid piece of metal.

In my tikkas if you can picture it the pillar/inlet area is just a solid piece of aluminum instead of a mix of dense fill and pillars.

I’d take a picture but one rifle is getting a new barrel and my other rifle is my primary shooter right now.

 

[pucmw11]

The mini chassis that I have (they make a few styles as alluded to below) is the t3x bottom metal mini chassis. Essentially they took a block of aluminum that’s machined for the action, like a chassis, and bedded it into the stock. I dont think they are necessarily needed but I like that my rifle goes from bottom metal, to action in a solid piece of metal.

In my tikkas if you can picture it the pillar/inlet area is just a solid piece of aluminum instead of a mix of dense fill and pillars.

I’d take a picture but one rifle is getting a new barrel and my other rifle is my primary shooter right now.

Ah, that makes sense. So just a more secure connection that is designed to interface perfectly with the stock instead of reusing the plastic bottom metal. Does that swap everything? (mag well, bottom structure, and trigger guard) or are those separate parts that get reused from the barrelled tikka action? (sorry if this is a dumb question, never swapped bottom metal on a rifle before). Also, does this affect the magazines you can use and COL as it pertains to reloading?

 

[Lawnboi]

Ah, that makes sense. So just a more secure connection that is designed to interface perfectly with the stock instead of reusing the plastic bottom metal. Does that swap everything? (mag well, bottom structure, and trigger guard) or are those separate parts that get reused from the barrelled tikka action? (sorry if this is a dumb question, never swapped bottom metal on a rifle before). Also, does this affect the magazines you can use and COL as it pertains to reloading?

In the factory tikka mini chassis it utilizes the factory bottom metal or plastic. I’m using MT bottom metal in both mine. And utilizes the factory magazine.

They also make this for the ctr version of the tikka. Utilizing the factory ctr bottom metal.

They do offer a tikka version that includes the bottom metal and runs on aics magazines, I had it for a time for a match rifle and it was also great.

 

[Wmsc]

I didn’t broad strokes anything. If you prefer barricade benchrest setups, ok great. I’m not writing to you. I’m writing a counter point for information for the vast majority that don’t know any better and are getting pushed advertising.

PRS has dominated every facet of “precision” shooting, from hunting to military for a few years now. Every scope, every chassis, every rifle, every tripod, bipod, etc is being built for or by PRS shooters and being marketed as the solution for everyone else. It isn’t. What makes a good PRS reticle makes a terrible field reticle. What makes a great PRS chassis makes a terrible field chassis. Would a great pack for PRS make a great pack for backcountry hunting?

The vast majority of the hunting community is getting inundated with PRS specific items, almost always marketed by people that have extremely limited or no backpack hunting experience at all. Most of the items that help in PRS, are specific to PRS and are a hindrance everywhere else.

In kind, what makes a good CQB rifle, makes a terrible long range field rifle.



This person started with this rifle a few weeks ago, believing it was awesome for hunting and probably couldn’t have convinced him it wasn’t the best thing available. Five days later, after shooting in the exact positions and places that we kill dozens of elk in from 50 yards to past 1,200 yards, he wanted something very different for hunting.

View attachment 577801

View attachment 577802

There is nothing “wrong” with the rifle- it’s good components, and great machining/smithing. The issue is that it isn’t a field rifle- it’s the wrong tool for the job.


This isn’t a preference or a “I like, I think, I feel”. It’s what is constantly observed. Alone I average four days a week shooting in the mountains. I see and shoot with dozens of different people a year in field conditions. I average more than 25 big games animals killed a year, from contact to very long range; yet without saying a word about it, no one wants their chassis rifle after spending a month shooting and hunting in the winter with us. As in no one. I love “PRS” rifles and setup for shooting at the range… and absolutely loath them in the field.

It starts with taping the hell out of the rifle with vet wrap to make it comfortable to carry and use, then they tape all the spots that snag, then they add more tape. It almost always ends up with them buying a KRG Bravo to replace the chassis or buying a new rifle. And the most common statement is to the effect of- “why in the f**k do people think these rifles are so awesome”. They believe they are so awesome because they spend their time on a contrived range, not in the field killing things.

How do you kill 25 big game animals a year? That’s a lot of tags.

 

[Harvey_NW]

How do you kill 25 big game animals a year? That’s a lot of tags.

Culling.

 

[Frank Dux]

I’m going to chime in with something that I don’t know if I’ve seen mentioned. A Pistol grip chassis requires you to carry your rifle in a specific way in order to be ready to shoot at a moments notice. Similar to how you’d carry an AR. Slightly more restrictive than guns that have sporter or sporter with vertical grips where you can more easily bring the rifle to shoulder from various positions because you’re not having to hold the grip from under the buttstock. You can be gripped from side or above the stock and then it’s just a slight shift of the hand. Also easier to run the bolt if you’re not wrapping your thumb under the stock.

 

[Frank Dux]

So KRG Bravo still the go to for an affordable good stock?

I got a Magpul Hunter on one rifle specifically cause I like the hybrid type sporter grip it has and because it was cheap. I like the built in cheek risers because there’s nothing to snag anywhere. Still use factory bottom metal cause I don’t like mags sticking out.

My only nitpicks are the front end is too wide for easy carry and the grip is not quite vertical enough. Probably a little on the heavy side too.

As far as the range goes I am able to shoot it better than the basic sporter stock the gun came out of.

 

[Dobermann]

So KRG Bravo still the go to for an affordable good stock?

I got a Magpul Hunter on one rifle specifically cause I like the hybrid type sporter grip it has and because it was cheap. I like the built in cheek risers because there’s nothing to snag anywhere. Still use factory bottom metal cause I don’t like mags sticking out.

My only nitpicks are the front end is too wide for easy carry and the grip is not quite vertical enough. Probably a little on the heavy side too.

As far as the range goes I am able to shoot it better than the basic sporter stock the gun came out of.

Errr ... you seen this thread?: https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/rokstock.329754/