So pissed off, ruined my rifle......*UPDATE*
- Thread starter 50calshooter
- Start date
- Location
- Sudbury, On
"It's all uh-bowt da moneys." 
I knew I would stir the pot when I made the statement, "you don't need pillars".
I am not saying that pillars are not better in some instances. But I am saying that in some instances you can not demonstrate that adding pillars will show any difference in performance or accuracy over a good glass bedding job. In those cases they add nothing but peace of mind.
The theory of a heavy stock crushing with the amount of torque we apply to action screws is not realistic. It may compress but if it does not compress beyond it's elastic ability the stock is not damaged. The fact that a stock may compress slightly when the screws are tight is no big deal if you keep those screws at the same tightness when shooting. However it may be easier to do that if it is properly pillar bedded.
I understand the idea of doing it to prevent a possibility of a problem in point of impact shifting...
I also seriously doubt anyone will crush the bedding in an A5 McMillan stock made for a 700 in .308 Winchester.
I am not saying that pillars are not better in some instances. But I am saying that in some instances you can not demonstrate that adding pillars will show any difference in performance or accuracy over a good glass bedding job. In those cases they add nothing but peace of mind.
The theory of a heavy stock crushing with the amount of torque we apply to action screws is not realistic. It may compress but if it does not compress beyond it's elastic ability the stock is not damaged. The fact that a stock may compress slightly when the screws are tight is no big deal if you keep those screws at the same tightness when shooting. However it may be easier to do that if it is properly pillar bedded.
I understand the idea of doing it to prevent a possibility of a problem in point of impact shifting...
I also seriously doubt anyone will crush the bedding in an A5 McMillan stock made for a 700 in .308 Winchester.
one-mad-dog
Regular
- Location
- Central Ontario
I've done a couple of Remington 700's with synthetic stocks with Brownells acraglas and haven't had a problem. You don't put the screws back in though when you're letting it set up, you wrap it with stretched surgical rubber tubing to hold it together. If you got that bedding compound on the screws it's probably stronger than Loctite stud locker. You can also inlet any areas that need need it after with a dremmell. The end result is an action that fits in the stock perfectly and better groups.
"Not the HS, but some stocks (like the AICS) are solid aluminum blocks."
X-fan
You may want to have a look at the HS stock again. The aluminum bedding block goes through to the bottom. In essence,pillars!
The military test of the HS stocks that you reference is somewhat misleading.
The blocks in an HS stock are not the same as having a glove fit(bedding) to
the MacM stocks. If a skim coat was not layed in it's probably going to allow the action to swim a little in the HS. Something I'm sure the marine armourers are probably not unaware of. Maybe the MacM stocks have better ergonomics and enable them to be shot more consistently. Maybe the marines like their toys as they were and are resistent to change or that MacM is the flavour of the month with the acquisitions dept.
X-fan
You may want to have a look at the HS stock again. The aluminum bedding block goes through to the bottom. In essence,pillars!
The military test of the HS stocks that you reference is somewhat misleading.
The blocks in an HS stock are not the same as having a glove fit(bedding) to
the MacM stocks. If a skim coat was not layed in it's probably going to allow the action to swim a little in the HS. Something I'm sure the marine armourers are probably not unaware of. Maybe the MacM stocks have better ergonomics and enable them to be shot more consistently. Maybe the marines like their toys as they were and are resistent to change or that MacM is the flavour of the month with the acquisitions dept.
Sorry, didn't mean to mislead anyone or to compare the HS to the pillar bedded McMillan stock the new USMC sniper rifle uses.
I also should have mentioned that the USMC armorers obviously believe in pillar bedding...Certainly noteworthy.
I don't think the USMC armorers miss anything.....They statistically test everything. Also mentioned was that they found a statistical improvement in accuracy in support bedding the barrel, but declined to do this because it meant that you couldn't fit action "A" onto stock "B" in the field.
Military politics being what they are we can't rule out favoritism....I agree.
My Remington "HS" block did not come through to the guard screws? In fact the stock exhibited the worse factory bottom metal fit-up I have ever seen. The bottom metal would actually spring a bit when both screws were tight....Perhaps my stock was defective?
Also of note is that I accidentally discovered that it shot better with the rear guard screw backed off? The rifle shot shot better and significantly more consistent in a McMillan.
Shorty,
After quoting Dennis you said...
You want a nice solid rifle. If you're going to half-ass it, why bother doing anything to it at all? Would you perfect the body work on your hot rod, only to skip primer and go straight to the colour paint? Why not? You won't see the primer.
Doesn't your statement essentially accuse Dennis of doing half-assed work? Seemed like it did to me.
I also should have mentioned that the USMC armorers obviously believe in pillar bedding...Certainly noteworthy.
I don't think the USMC armorers miss anything.....They statistically test everything. Also mentioned was that they found a statistical improvement in accuracy in support bedding the barrel, but declined to do this because it meant that you couldn't fit action "A" onto stock "B" in the field.
Military politics being what they are we can't rule out favoritism....I agree.
My Remington "HS" block did not come through to the guard screws? In fact the stock exhibited the worse factory bottom metal fit-up I have ever seen. The bottom metal would actually spring a bit when both screws were tight....Perhaps my stock was defective?
Also of note is that I accidentally discovered that it shot better with the rear guard screw backed off? The rifle shot shot better and significantly more consistent in a McMillan.
Shorty,
After quoting Dennis you said...
You want a nice solid rifle. If you're going to half-ass it, why bother doing anything to it at all? Would you perfect the body work on your hot rod, only to skip primer and go straight to the colour paint? Why not? You won't see the primer.
Doesn't your statement essentially accuse Dennis of doing half-assed work? Seemed like it did to me.
- Location
- Northern Ontario
Now hat the damage is done and everything is all freed up...
Hindsight is alway 20/20
What if 50CALSHOOTER had gone ice fishing for a couple of days and cooled off.
MaKe a call to DENNIS or RICK ...what would have been to correct way to unglue this Rem 700?
Hindsight is alway 20/20
What if 50CALSHOOTER had gone ice fishing for a couple of days and cooled off.
MaKe a call to DENNIS or RICK ...what would have been to correct way to unglue this Rem 700?
benchrest
Just for interest, several ways to un-stick the rifle have been mentioned, freezing, etc. Usually a sharp strike straight down against a bench top of the barrel, while pulling down on the stock will usually break it loose but consider that bench-resters purposely glue their rifles into the stocks and they shoot loose in a year or so.
If one was careful in masking while bedding and it won't come loose, so what? Shoot it. It will come loose sooner or later.
Just for interest, several ways to un-stick the rifle have been mentioned, freezing, etc. Usually a sharp strike straight down against a bench top of the barrel, while pulling down on the stock will usually break it loose but consider that bench-resters purposely glue their rifles into the stocks and they shoot loose in a year or so.
If one was careful in masking while bedding and it won't come loose, so what? Shoot it. It will come loose sooner or later.
- Location
- 54°52'56"N 112°10'7"W Alpha Bravo
UPDATE... Better Then Ever!
So I just got my rifle back from ATRS, As you would have guessed, I'm completely satisfied with everything. I'm glad I screwed up that bedding job. The tuned trigger feels amazing, crisp, and breaks off so easily.
Specs...
-Rem 700 .308 win
-Fully Loaded McMillan A5
-Versa Bi-Pod
-Tuned X-Mark Trigger (3lbs.)
-Badger Bolt Knob
-KPA Pic Rail
-Leupold PGW Rings
-Falcon Optics
So I just got my rifle back from ATRS, As you would have guessed, I'm completely satisfied with everything. I'm glad I screwed up that bedding job. The tuned trigger feels amazing, crisp, and breaks off so easily.
Specs...
-Rem 700 .308 win
-Fully Loaded McMillan A5
-Versa Bi-Pod
-Tuned X-Mark Trigger (3lbs.)
-Badger Bolt Knob
-KPA Pic Rail
-Leupold PGW Rings
-Falcon Optics
Last edited:
canucklehead
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Nice rig! The only thing I would change (ever so slightly) is lower rings (if possible) and an extra sunshade on your 4.5-18x56... like this..
- Location
- 54°52'56"N 112°10'7"W Alpha Bravo
yeah I want a NF but for now I gotta settle,, one day...
- Location
- 54°52'56"N 112°10'7"W Alpha Bravo
It might be jus the way it looks from the pics, cuz the rings are good, height is perfect. I also like having alittle bit of room between, Jus personal pref. I guess
- Location
- calgary alberta
Why lower rings? The rifle/scope have been set up to fit the owner.
With the adjustable cheekrest what does it matter how high the scope is off the bore, how the scope aligns with the shooters eye is FAR more important.
I have never understood the "scope must be nearly touching the barrel" thing?
To have the scope where the shooters eye is in perfect alignment with the center of the ocular, while maintaining a comfortable AND repeatable shooting position makes much more sense.
canucklehead
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
I will defer to your obviously superior knowledge on the subject, but I always assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that the less offset between bore an LOS, the better. Less variation in impact at given ranges?
But you're right- whatever is comfortable for the shooter is best!
But you're right- whatever is comfortable for the shooter is best!
- Location
- calgary alberta
I would not say "superior knowledge" just an observation from years of shooting.
Having a buggered neck has forced me to mount my own scopes REALLY high, as in 3/4" between the bell and the barrel, all that has changed is where the bullet intersects the line of sight both in both intersections. Typically is is further out, which is easily overcome with an elevation turret adjustment.
It does mean also that you need to input the corrected center of objective to center of bore in any of the ballistics programs.
As for accuracy it does not change anything.
If the rifle does not fit the shooter naturally he will never get the full potential from the rifle.
The only real downside of a scope that is a long way off the barrelled action is that cases are harder to find that will fit the rig and you can get snagged up on stuff a bit more if in real field use conditions.
a higher scope is OK
some of us Benchrest shooters who compete internationally use a very high ring to get the head more vertical, we then can run groups faster,
I shot a screamer (5 shots under 1/4 minute at 200 yards) in st loius missouri in 2006 to win a small group plaque at the us nationals with over 1200 groups shot to win that plaque.
the gorup was shot in under 15 seconds so you can get a second follow up shot quicker and more comfortably.
also just a hint to those getting the leopold scopes with the cutout in them you know the expensive ones,
do you think they work any better or are just a marketing tool, (and yes I shoot with a leopold manager in tacoma washington) and will they stand up to recoil any better, questions I would like to avoid so buy a regular fully round scope and get high rings and see how comfortable it is
especially as we age
Jefferson
some of us Benchrest shooters who compete internationally use a very high ring to get the head more vertical, we then can run groups faster,
I shot a screamer (5 shots under 1/4 minute at 200 yards) in st loius missouri in 2006 to win a small group plaque at the us nationals with over 1200 groups shot to win that plaque.
the gorup was shot in under 15 seconds so you can get a second follow up shot quicker and more comfortably.
also just a hint to those getting the leopold scopes with the cutout in them you know the expensive ones,
do you think they work any better or are just a marketing tool, (and yes I shoot with a leopold manager in tacoma washington) and will they stand up to recoil any better, questions I would like to avoid so buy a regular fully round scope and get high rings and see how comfortable it is
especially as we age
Jefferson
Last edited:
You're right about the low rings! I had low rings on all of my rifles, but it wasn't a natural fit for me. When I would shoulder the rifle I couldn't pick the sight picture up immediately because I had to move my head down where it wasn't natural! It cost me a nice buck last season because of it. Now I have the high rings on my rig & it fits me like a glove. Won't miss that crack shot on a monster ever again because of a setup that's not right for me! May be another reason I'd miss like buck fever though! (LOL)!!!!
