Cadex verses MDT tac 21 .

B

Brianma65

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
197   0   0
Location
Canada
I've had a Cadex and liked it very much. I'm planning on another system but not sure which. I have a CTR stock and pistol grip and I'm not sure which system to get. From looking at pics , the Buffer tube and stock on the MDT seems more inline with the action ?? Looks better that way , to me. Any other major differences? Thanks. View attachment 47441View attachment 47442
 
I don't own one but for the MDT tac 21 I think you have to remove butt stock before you can remove bolt. Where as the MDT (I have an MDT HS3) you do not...

Both of those have that AR style for end, just more nooks and crannies for dirt to get in and moisture to settle.. lol I like the HS3
 
Last edited:
I can't remove the bolt on my HS3 without removing the skeleton stock. Although Shane from EM Precision has modified his cheek riser on that stock by grinding a little bit off the cheek riser to be able to remove his bolt without removing the stock.
 
I guess this is why the Cadex buffer tube is dropped so far below the action and top rail then. I'm guessing you need a higher set of rings with the MDT. Can anybody comment on the quality of the roller bedding system in the MDT, is it as good As the Cadex?


I guess I should be able to remove my CTR stock from the tube and then just slide the bolt out?
 
Last edited:
DILLIGAF said:
Own both, Cadex is far superior.
Click to expand...
Not what I wanted to hear :) as I really like the inline look of the MDT. Thanks , that settles it for me.



I had a Cadex on a .308 and really liked it but was hoping for an inline look. I guess a Cadex is going on my Tikka 7 MM
 
Brianma65 said:
Not what I wanted to hear :) as I really like the inline look of the MDT. Thanks , that settles it for me.



I had a Cadex on a .308 and really liked it but was hoping for an inline look. I guess a Cadex is going on my Tikka 7 MM
Click to expand...

I like the look of the HS3 too...

DSCN9328.jpg
 
Brianma65 said:
I've had a Cadex and liked it very much. I'm planning on another system but not sure which. I have a CTR stock and pistol grip and I'm not sure which system to get. From looking at pics , the Buffer tube and stock on the MDT seems more inline with the action ?? Looks better that way , to me. Any other major differences? Thanks. View attachment 47441View attachment 47442
Click to expand...

If you want to know what it feels like to have God-mode in real life....

IMG_8607.jpg


Patrice with the new Cadex Tremor.

I'm a big fan of Cadex products. I have a custom built ATRS 700 sitting in a Dual Strike chassis and a few months back I ordered something larger, also mounted in a Cadex Dual Strike.
 
Tac 21 issues- the one I had exhibited sloppy fit on the stock to reciever adapter. The major issue though is that the scope is mounted to the main body, and the action simply uses the action screws to fix to the main body. The scope is not mounted directly to the action = wandering zero.

Hs3 issues- trigger location in relation to pistol grip, you're reaching upwards to the trigger. No qd sockets built in. No quality folder mechanism.

Get an aI ax folder, krg folder, or xlr folder and be happy.
 
ntm said:
Tac 21 issues- the one I had exhibited sloppy fit on the stock to reciever adapter. The major issue though is that the scope is mounted to the main body, and the action simply uses the action screws to fix to the main body. The scope is not mounted directly to the action = wandering zero.

.
Click to expand...

Anyone else testify to this? Ive been considering a tac21 for a while now, but this would definitely be discouraging...
 
ntm said:
Tac 21 issues- the one I had exhibited sloppy fit on the stock to reciever adapter. The major issue though is that the scope is mounted to the main body, and the action simply uses the action screws to fix to the main body. The scope is not mounted directly to the action = wandering zero.
Click to expand...

The earlier TAC-21 chassis had issues with the stock adaptor play, but that has been fixed in later versions.

Never had a issue with a "wandering zero" due to how the scope mounts. Know many others who shoot a TAC-21 and they have never experienced this issue either.

 
I've had both in the past. Forums are here to help you learn from OTHER peoples mistakes so you can save money and time. The only system I now own is Cadex. It's quite simply the best available chassis on the market.

Don't take my word for it just make sure you have EE permission so you can sell your MDT to buy a Cadex when you're done.
 
I have never seen a wondering zero on a Tac 21. A couple of the top Fclass and PR shooters have shot them with great success. The MDT stock mount there actions in a "V" block. As long as you torc you bolt properly you will have zero issues with this stock. The best part of the design is the in-line action. This makes recoil management amazing.

Ryan
 
i really liked the last Cadex I had, but I just seen a pic of the MDT and I'm really liking that inline look. But no bad comments about the Cadex and few bad reviews of the MDT has me wondering,which one. I'm so torn, I hate these big decisions... LOL.
 
Ryan_mcle said:
I have never seen a wondering zero on a Tac 21. A couple of the top Fclass and PR shooters have shot them with great success. The MDT stock mount there actions in a "V" block. As long as you torc you bolt properly you will have zero issues with this stock. The best part of the design is the in-line action. This makes recoil management amazing.

Ryan
Click to expand...

The wandering zero manifests itself most distinctly on cold bore shots, or after significant movement to a new shooting position.
It seems to take a couple rounds to settle in, the only people I know using them successfully have glued their actions in.
The inline bore thing didn't make any difference at all to me vs other chassis. And most good chassis will allow the buttpad to be adjusted vertically to give an inline profile.

Brian, try something different, although the cadex's are nice, I would not say they are the best chassis. I prefer the 2014+ ax, based on the mag well profile, grip shape, forearm shape and weight, and bedding type.
You're going to short change yourself if you're looking strictly for a chassis that recycles your ar furniture. Pretty much any chassis that uses ar stuff is going to be a compromise ie. - trigger position and bolt access on the hs3.
 
ntm said:
The wandering zero manifests itself most distinctly on cold bore shots, or after significant movement to a new shooting position.
It seems to take a couple rounds to settle in, the only people I know using them successfully have glued their actions in.
The inline bore thing didn't make any difference at all to me vs other chassis. And most good chassis will allow the buttpad to be adjusted vertically to give an inline profile.

Brian, try something different, although the cadex's are nice, I would not say they are the best chassis. I prefer the 2014+ ax, based on the mag well profile, grip shape, forearm shape and weight, and bedding type.
You're going to short change yourself if you're looking strictly for a chassis that recycles your ar furniture. Pretty much any chassis that uses ar stuff is going to be a compromise ie. - trigger position and bolt access on the hs3.
Click to expand...
That sure is a nice looking chassis, but I couldn't find anything on it regarding a Tikka T3 7 mm
 
The more I research, the more I find and the more undecided I get:). I've had a really good experience withe the Cadex before so I think I'll stick with , what I know works. And I'm familiar with.

Thanks for the help guys.

Thanks NTM , the MPA looks nice , but I think the Cadex will be suitable for what I do.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom