A guide for beginners: Stock or Chassis. Which one should you choose?

xURSOx

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
97   0   0
Location
Sudbury ON
What does one do with a bunch of spare parts cluttering their bench? What does one build with said parts? You build something different than what you already have.

My mission

This year I set out to build a long range moose rig, chambered in .300WSM for some extreme knocking power in a relatively small package. At the same time, I wanted to explore this “Fiberglass Stock” thingy all you GunNutz have been raving about. Being a chassis type of shooter, I’ve never really looked at the fiberglass type stocks due to the pros of going straight to a chassis.

For a new shooter, this is probably going to be the most daunting decision along side your action choice. “What should I get? A chassis or a stock?”, I’m here to give my opinion on the age old question.

Straight off guys, I'm not comparing accuracy on the two, as the rifles are completely different. We’re dealing with different calibers, actions, triggers, you name it. Nevertheless, these rifles are both ragged hole punchers, easily capable of 0.25-0.5 MOA on a great day. Most of the time, yours truly maintains between 0.5-0.75 MOA in a typical field shooting scenario. I'm also not comparing prices as prices vary with features, manufacturers, colors, you name it.

And before I create a chassis vs stock fanboy argument here, think of the children. Both systems are awesome. I'm not bashing either the chassis or stock systems. I'd like new shooters to keep an "open mind" between the both.

You'll kick yourself if you don't

If I can offer one tid bit of advice before I get started, get the folder. Just don't ask, listen and get the folder. Fitting your rifle in a bag or case with the buttstock folded will save you space and money due to smaller cases/bags having smaller price tags.

21932678511_78f74e7e27_b.jpg


Rifle specs (Nobody has time for that ;))

If anyone has specific questions on the rifles/parts, I'll do my best to answer them in the comments. In short, the Savage is chambered in .260 Remington (By Casey Brouwer from Tactical Ordnance) and wearing an XLR Element Chassis and the Tikka is chambered in .300WSM (By Steve Emblin from EM Precision Rifles) and sporting a McMillan A3-5 Fiberglass Stock.

36257377224_6194cd4725_b.jpg


34629874091_451a6743ff_b.jpg


Your Budget

The first thing I would consider telling a new shooter building a rifle is “What's your budget”. If you have to think hard on this question, keep what you have and spend the money on ammunition. Learning how to shoot before dropping a wad of cash on something that might not “Fix your flyer”, might be more beneficial.

Now, if you have already told yourself, or your wife, that money is no option; then you have truly opened up the floodgates to more internet searching than you bargained for. Your options are endless…. Seriously. The amount of chassis/stock options available in 2017 is ridiculous. Your configurations, chassis/stock styles, and color possibilities are endless.

Do it yourself option

Now if the word “gunsmith” turns you off, buy the chassis. Period. The way manufacturers build these chassis now offer the shooter a “do it at home” installation. Drop your barreled action into the chassis. Torque everything down to the specified weight. Start the car and go shoot. That's pretty much it. If you don't want to send your rifle away, get the chassis.

The barrel contour roadblock

Now if you don't mind the waiting game, consider a fiberglass stock. These have to be ordered because of a few things. The main reasons are barrel contour and Bottom Metal. Almost all chassis will accept a straight taper in the barrel contour department while fiberglass stocks need to be ordered specifically for the barrel contour.

36279427823_ea42cc2b0f_b.jpg


31375933504_9629b1d18f_b.jpg


Magazine Systems

Bottom metal is a big factor. Chassis’s all come with an integral magazine system, usually making use of the AICS magazine platform. Fiberglass stocks, on the other hand, give you the choice on what to run. Bottom metal needs to be purchased separately, then fitted to the stock. Now fitting bottom metal to a stock, if done properly, can be done at home, but you should get a gunsmith to complete this task. We’ve all seen some nightmare fitting jobs out there on the internet by hotheads with their Dremel's.

34761368615_db5088306d_b.jpg


36904149926_f807dffb09_b.jpg


Now, from what the smiths told me, fiberglass stocks “should” be bedded, while chassis’s don't. If you want to go the extra mile and glass bed a chassis, then, by all means, go for it. Again, this can be done at home but is always nicer when professionally done.

Now that we got the fitting/installation procedures down, we should explore what type of shooter each option is designed for.

Shooting Applications

If you want a good, field shooting rifle (Standing, Kneeling, and Prone) I suggest leaning towards the fiberglass stock. In my experience, they’re more comfortable to shoot in. Now I know everyone will argue this one but it's clearly opinion based. That's what I think, others might prefer the chassis.

In a hunting application, touching fiberglass vs aluminum is much more pleasant. We live in Canada, or I think we all do. Our hunting seasons get cold moving into November. A chassis in 0 Celcius is not nice on the hands or even some lighter mittens. With moisture, you also don't need to worry about ice building up on your rifle as much as aluminum.

Weight vs features

If you want a rock solid boat anchor that can house longer sections of picatinny rail than your driveway, then go for the chassis. Since shooting with a fiberglass stock, I find going back to a chassis very bulky and heavy. The adjustability is great and all, but one can get all those features in a fiberglass stock now.

Being heavy is also not a bad thing, if your objective is just to shoot groups from a fixed firing line, the chassis might be up your alley. A heavier rifle is usually a more accurate rifle, and a heavier rifle is usually a more stable rifle. If you’re into PRS, the heavier chassis might provide a more stable shooting platform for newer shooters, especially when dealing with barricades.

21911028932_4f4f0566b1_b.jpg


36904155326_05ac979c0a_b.jpg


I almost forgot the most important thing. Chassis look more tacticool than fiberglass stocks. (which is the obvious decision maker nowadays).

At the end of the day guys, you're comparing apples to oranges. Find whats best for you and stick with it. Either option will do the trick.

I hope this little guide can help someone out with this decision. I know when I pulled the trigger on a chassis, I never thought of a fiberglass stock as another option. I find that the industry is so cluttered with chassis’s that people don't always see the benefits to the other side. I have both, so I don't really need to choose one over the other now.

I'd also like to know what everyone else is running? Stock or chassis? What are your preferences?

Cheers, Matt
 
Last edited:
Very good post.

Makes me think of the dilemma I am having right now.

I have tried both chasis (XLR, Cadex) and stock (Choate, Robertson, T3 Sporter, TRG, etc.) and agree with your pros and cons. When I first got into shooting I really liked shooting for groups / long range FClass type shooting. Stocks are great for shooting from the belly, all they really need to have is an adjustable cheek piece. I'm now really enjoying PRS type shooting and found that my TRG simply did not fit me well enough for positional shooting (the length of pull was too long). At the moment, my hunting rifles all have OEM stocks, which I like for the weight savings. For the PRS type shooting, I have a Cadex CDX-30 which I am quite enjoying, especially for its adjustability. The Cadex does have a drawback: weight ... which has me considering going back to a stock (I have a T3 Varmint that I'm trying to decide on what to do with. It will be a varmint gun / PRS trainer gun in .223). I really can't make up my mind and its even more difficult because it's next to impossible to get to handle all the different options. I also strongly agree with the bottom metal limitations of getting a stock and getting the DBM to fit the rifle.

PS, where did you source your McMillan for that Tikka?
 
Excellent post - regardless of what anyone thinks of the chassis vs stock issue ( i use both ) we should all thank you for taking the time to do this.

Bob8
 
Last edited:
Cool write up. Nice rifles.
Do you have experience in different mag conversions available for stocked rifles? I find its one of my biggest hang ups when choosing a configuration. The cost and availability range vastly.
 
Cool write up. Nice rifles.
Do you have experience in different mag conversions available for stocked rifles? I find its one of my biggest hang ups when choosing a configuration. The cost and availability range vastly.

Great question! I've built a Remington up using an HS Precision stock in-letted for Atlasworx BM, which is around half the price as the Lumley Stainless AICS bottom metal show above (The Tikka).

The main argument I can see is "Aluminum vs stainless". Stainless Steel is heavier, the aluminum is lighter. The stainless steel is far stronger than the aluminum. The quality between the two are very close. You just need to decide if $400 bottom metal is worth overlooking the $200 option.

Now if magazines are not your concern, your rifles floor plate will work fine. I started out with an internal magazine but quickly upgraded to a detachable magazine system. The AICS system is tried and trued, and arguably the best option out there.
 
Now here is a question for you. How does the chassis bedding system hold up in the cold for shooting compared to a properly bedded stock system. I had asked that question before. Sometimes I got fish kisses, deer in the headlight look, and other times guys just danced around the question. What is your thoughts on this, thanks in advance
 
Now here is a question for you. How does the chassis bedding system hold up in the cold for shooting compared to a properly bedded stock system. I had asked that question before. Sometimes I got fish kisses, deer in the headlight look, and other times guys just danced around the question. What is your thoughts on this, thanks in advance

I've been running an MDT chassis for almost a year now (2 different models, currently an ESS) prior to which I ran a bedded (by myself) Boyd's Pro Varmint. I've noticed no zero shift between the relative cold of March and the hot temps this summer. I had originally planned on bedding the recoil lug of the chassis so as to have a better chance of maintaining return to zero after disassembly for cleaning, etc. I didn't get around to doing that right away and realized quickly after the first time that I fully stripped the rifle and reassembled it that it was entirely unnecessary. If memory serves my zero didn't shift by more than 0.1 mil. I've since had to strip the rifle a couple times and reassemble and the zero shift has been just as non-existant. I can't speak for all chassis systems but my MDTs (that I always torque to 65 in/lbs) don't suffer from zero shift.
 
Now here is a question for you. How does the chassis bedding system hold up in the cold for shooting compared to a properly bedded stock system. I had asked that question before. Sometimes I got fish kisses, deer in the headlight look, and other times guys just danced around the question. What is your thoughts on this, thanks in advance

Great question! If properly bedded, cold temperatures shouldn't affect the strength of bedding compound on aluminum. Mind you, I've never tried such thing.
 
Back
Top Bottom