Changing stocks: Should I mess with a good thing?

For all the crap that the internet collective talks on Big Green, those 700 Tactical rifles really shoot. I would advocate for restocking it. I have one and the factory stock was okay but would make barrel contact in various shooting positions and that would cause fliers that turned very small groups into much larger groups. If you're happy with half inch groups with an occassional flier leave it be but restocking it wont make it worse.

Bayourambler said:

Will it get that much better if I change it?

Click to expand...

Let me say, I really, really doubt that changing stocks is going to drop group size. Assuming that your rifle really is a 1 MOA rifle. And that is a big question, for how many rounds did you fire to determine it was a one MOA rifle?

What I have seen, in what has to be a thousand posts, are shooters who shoot a three or a five shot group, shoot a whole bunch of three shot or five groups, one of them is sub MOA, (by random chance), but the shooters claim that because one of them was sub MOA, the load and the rifle is sub MOA.

In these 270 round targets, there are lots of three shot and five shot clusters, some sub Half MOA, if not bullets in the same hole. But, neither the rifles nor the ammunition is sub MOA.



Now this shooter is a former National Champio, winner of the 1000 yard Wimbleton Match. .If he claimed that his rifles and ammunition were MOA or sub MOA, these 20 shot groups would add great credence to his claims.





These were fired in NRA Highpower competition, on a reduced 100 yard range, all shots with iron sights, fired prone with a sling, single loaded, one shot at a time.

Anyway, so much for small sample statistics. I do have a M70 PBR in a Hogue tupperware stock, and you know what, it shoots good. Now shooting a little less than 2 MOA at 300 yards would be considered beneath the dignity of most Keyboard Commando's, but you know, that is not bad from a stock box rifle in a Tupperware Stock. I have not bedded this rifle, which I consider remarkable that it shoots this well as my experience with factory rifles with factory bedding has consistently been disappointing. The only reason I can see valid for monkeying around with success would be if the stock did not fit, or did not fit my purposes.








If your rifle is truly shooting MOA, don't change a thing. You don't know how lucky you are, go buy a lottery ticket for you sure have the luck, and don't mess up a good thing chasing after rainbows.

Could just be you that shoots the lighter kicking loads better. I know I do.

I'm with the above guys... If it ain't broke don't fix it. Shoot it until the barrel needs to be replaced and turn it into something custom

I would re-stock. It won't hurt. Look at Magpul Bell & Carlson, H&S Precision.

Probably best to figure out what your intended use of the rifle is before deciding how to proceed. Dedicated long range bench rest gun? Rough and tumble hunting rifle? Paper puncher for the kids to burn ammo in?

Don,t mess with
what works.





I

If your just looking for accuracy you could bed what you have. I for one hate flimsy plastic stocks. I picked up a savage 12fv today and that stock has got to go. It will be getting a Boyd's

If the stock feels good to you and your not having any isses with barrel contact id keep it.

Maybe try bedding it. Ive heard that the Hogue stocks dont take bedding well, but i bedded my mini14 with marine tex and it worked fine. That application is tougher on bedding than a bolt gun would be.

If you do decide to swap and want to stick with a synthetic, youll be spending 250-300 to improve on what youve got. You can bed it into a laminate for 130-200 if thats more your thing....and changing stock may not do any good. I dont think it will hurt tho, just keep the Hogue till your happy with the stock you put it in.

First of all lower speed loads tend to be more accurate than those which push the outer limit of what the case can do. That's been a reloading fact for a long time. When loading for accuracy you increase the powder charge in increments until it starts to open up, and back off. Speed has usually been available but accuracy comes from finding the sweet spot where the muzzle vibrations are at the minimum creating the least dispersion. Heavier loads bang the barrel harder opening up the group. So it's no surprise the light loads are more accurate. Factor in recoil and you have a better round for long strings in competition - which is exactly why the M16 starts running ahead in Service Rifle matches. It gains when the shorter timed events allow the lighter recoiling gun to demonstrate it's higher accuracy in rapid fire.

Restock? Do you have a demonstrated fact that the stock is actually hampering you? I think it's going to take 10,000 more rounds to prove it. Aside from that, stocks are largely cosmetic and most change them out just because of it. Few can pin point what, exactly, it does to make the shooter less accurate.

Drop at the heel? Length of pull both at the shoulder and grip? Highly incremental issues and rarely major. What we do in front of the barrel is to make sure it's free floated and won't touch the barrel, usually when it's warmed up and the barrel unwinds from heat allowing it to relax to it's more natural state. So - have you shot it enough to see a change in the group hot and cold? Until you can express it in fractions of an inch it's not a known issue.

You could do as well loading to see what OAL might be preferred, and double checking each round is within .001" concentric to the case axis. Getting the bullet at it's optimal position in the leade and concentric to the bore means it will launch straight and stay true as it travels down the bore. A bolt gun does do it incrementally better than a self loading action bashing the round into the feed ways and chamber. Optimize it and take advantage.

When that is done and a few more thousand rounds are down range with the best possible load then maybe the stock might be a problem, but for the most part, people change them for looks, not for a measured number which demonstrates the stock is a problem. In a lot of cases where shooters do change the stock they have to start over learning how to take advantage of the different fit, and when you go research that online I believe you will find a dearth of photos demonstrating a significant improvement. Stocks are by and large just a piece of wood or polymer we hold onto, not something that affects how the chamber and barrel send the bullet down the range. All it does is stabilize the rear of the gun and keeps your cheek weld and sight picture from changing at that end round to round.

We've seen sniper stocks with adjustable butt rests and cheek welds, at that point it's nearly a machine rest when coupled with a bipod. With those you may not even see a change in sight picture as you breathe. Nice to have for that narrow an application, but not considered more well rounded compared to your gun. If you do change the stock, consider what you will be giving up to get more precise targeting. There is always give and take, like a hot rod which does well at the drag strip, on a cold frosty December morning, driving to work on slicks and no heater, not so much. Make an informed decision and you will get the results you expect, not surprises.

I'm wondering about intended use. Reliable half-MOA groupings would have me figuring on no changes--and I have several half-MOA rifles.

It`s more of a personal preference. Opinion by committee just more confusing. J s/n.

Restocking a rifle might or might not improve accuracy a tad and it could possibly even be less accurate than your current setup. Restocking the rifle WILL cost you money and time. You may have to work up new loads, the stock itself will cost money and time (yours or a pro's).

Weigh those known costs versus the current rifle's .5-1 MOA known accuracy with the current stock and figure out for yourself whether an possible incremental improvement of accuracy from restocking is worth the possibility of incremental decrease in accuracy plus the costs. Only you can figure out whether that is worth it.

Weird, its never taken me 10,000 rounds to determine if a rifle is accurate or not, and what can be done to improve it.

I am not a fan of that particular stock to start with so under normal circumstances it would be changed out with a lament of one sort or another.

Find a stock you like.
Make two hundred rounds of the best load for that rifle.
On a hot, humid all around nasty day, using bags, and rests to eliminate as much of the human factor as possible, shoot the 100 rounds in what ever amount of shots per group you prefer. keep detailed records, and pictures.

Change out the stock and run the same test as above.

If there is no difference then you simply have upgraded to a stock you find more pleasing.
If there is an improvement then your preferred stock will also be a good investment.
If groups become ugly, then swap back to the Hogue, and sell the new one, or make it a project.

Ether way you should have an interesting set of data points for us all.

You're not in high school anymore. Don't be so easily peer pressured. If the stock functions for you, keep it and to H-E-double hockey sticks with what everyone else says about it. If your impressions are that the stock is flimsy or unergonomic, or you really feel the rifle can do better, then you can change the stock. But don't do it cause other people said to. Keep in mind a lot of the high end tactical stocks and chassis systems are going to cost more than you probably paid for the rifle, esp when you consider the cost of bedding.

"...Everything I read about the gun says..." Read and follow Rule Number One. If it works, don't fix it.
Oh and there's no such thing as a 'tactical' anything. It's a marketing term. All rifles are tactical. snicker.

Bayourambler said:

A lot to chew on here. My mind set is always "not what something is, but what it could be". I'm thinking with a better stock, maybe the heavier loads will shoot as good as the lighter ones. Nobody knows, put the coin in and spin the wheel. I want to do a project rem 700 in the future ANYWAY, so I'm looking at stocks! I cant help it , its an addiction. Looking at Bell and Carlson M40, looks good for the $.

Click to expand...

Try loading up some 168 Amax in the 2600 fps range, they always shoot very well in my rifle. The only way I could get 175/178 HPBTs to shoot worth a damn was to load them way out to .025" off of the lands, nearly a 3" COL. Do keep an eye out on other gun boards for 2nd hand or take-off stocks; you can usually score a pretty good deal if you are patient.

Many people live by the if it aint broke don't fix it theory. To me if I don't like something then it IS broken and I will find my way around to modifying it sooner or later to suit my liking. If you don't like something, then whats the point of owning it when it could be turned into money to get something you do like?

Bayourambler said:

I recently bought a Remington 700 tactical 308 from a guy that needed to sell it badly. He had yet to even shoot it, he only had it a few weeks. I loaded up a few different rounds and I am very impressed. It shoots under 1” with anything I put in it so far, my pet loads right at 1/2”. My question is , why do I want to put another stock on it!? Everything I read about the gun says the hogue stock is junk and should be the first thing to be replaced. Will it get that much better if I change it?

Click to expand...

If you're happy with the rifle as-is, don't bother to change stocks. Lots of rifles are purportedly "fixed" but end up worse if the new stock isn't bedded to the receiver properly. I suggest you look at the clearance between the barrel and stock. If it's not at least 1/16", make it so. Otherwise, "If it ain't broke, don't 'fix' it."

The Hogue actually sells two type of stocks one with the mold made out of just plastic and the other with a long backbone of aluminum bedding inside
that is 100 dollars more than the plastic one. Outside they look the same but they are not. so check this first.
The Hogue stock has a very nice feeling to it with that rubbery texture. One feels almost sad to see it gone.
The issue with the soft plastic one is consistency under different shooting conditions since it flexes so much that it can touch the barrel.
You can fix that to a degree for close to nothing using some ribbing and bedding.
If you are not going to change positions from bench to prone to a barricade and the factory is acceptable for you then you
might want to leave it alone but if you want more consistent repeatability the sag and bedding is the first thing that should be addressed.
I would shoot it a bit more ideally from different positions and different conditions and let the rifle tell you what it needs.
Again there are some DIY type of fixes one can do to improve to a degree if one is on a budget. I did a retrofit of a SPS tactical years ago
and put a thread but now all the pics are gone after the photobucket fiasco.
It seems the rifle is already a good shooter out of the box.
It all depends on the type of duty you are going to give it.
B&C are an amazing value for a quality stock.

Bayourambler,
Are you sure that rifle has a Hogue stock? My 700 XCR Tactical came standard with a Bell & Carlson stock. It's a nice stock.