Tricking out my SPS Tactical

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TonyAngel

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
4,150
Hey guys, I just got a new (to me) stock for my SPS Tactical, thanks to kis2. It just came in tonight. It's an H-S Precision, LTR pull off stock. The action didn't quite drop in. Apparently, the LTR comes with a different trigger. Mine came with the "X-Mark", I think it's called. Anyway, I had to do a bit of relieving to get the action to drop right in. The safety mechanism on the trigger was getting in the way, so out came the dremel. Oddly enough, the screws that came with the stock were too short too. I had to use the stock screws. For the front one, I had to cut it off about 1/4" so that it wouldn't interfere with the bolt lug. All of this kind of makes me wonder exactly what the differences are between the LTR and the SPS, other than the trigger, that would cause the screws to be too short on my rig.

I thought that what I got was just like the LTR with a different barrel. If anyone can expand on this, I'd appreciate it.

Anyway, here it is....
DSC_0011-1.jpg

I have a Wyatt's DM kit coming in too. It'll be here Thursday. This weekend should be interesting at the range. I'm wondering if my groups are going to tighten up any.
 
DM=Detachable magazine. I have one five round and one ten round on their way.

What does "bed it" mean? I'm completely new to bolt guns.
 
hmm, never heard of wyatt's. i have a friend with an SPS that needs to be able to change mags. got a link?


"glass bedding" is a process where you use a layer of fiberglass between the action and stock that sticks to the stock and molds to the form of the action so that you get complete and consistent contact between the action and stock. (particularly the lug). the consistency often makes it more accurate. if you search the gunsmithing forum, youwill likely find lots of info. i think marine tex is the latest greatest "glass" people use.

the alternative is pillar bedding, or "free floating" barrels so they don't contact the stock. (if they don't touch, then you don't have to worry about them touching consistently.
 
Bedding may or may not be "necessary" but in my experience it'd be recommended. That way you can get a perfect fit. That's the whole purpose of bedding. Differences in mfg when the block is molded into the stock, differences in the guns, etc. mean that the likelihood of having a perfect fit is well... unlikely.
 
OK, I'm going to shoot it this weekend. Last weekend I was getting some good groups in the very sub MOA range at 100 yards with the Hogue on it. If it shoots better than that, I may just leave it alone for fear of jinxing myself.

I'm going to look into that "marine tex" though.
 
TonyAngel said:
If it shoots better than that, I may just leave it alone for fear of jinxing myself.
Click to expand...

You, Sir, are wise. I've seen a lot of people mess up good shooters trying to "improve" them. If it is already shooting sub-MOA I'd dump the extra dough into glass and boolits.
 
sorry to hear it didn't drop straight in for you, makes me wonder the differences as well. everyone says it's the same barreled action...?

some text from my HS precision stock instructions:

"Epoxy bedding is not required as the bedding block is designed so that all stocks are interchangeable, action to action. This was proven in testing for the Army's M-24 Sniper Weapon System"

of course, I'm sure there is valid disagreement on this subject, however group size can't lie, so try that first. and I know you have an expert smith in your area you could ask as well.

looks great!
 
kis2, thanks a lot. I just hope it shoots as good as it looks.

Bryan, I do hand load for it. It's too expensive to shoot factory and hand loads are more accurate anyway, once you find the magic combo.

I posted some groups in this thread. These were shot with the Hogue barrel still on it...

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=548461
 
Since I mentioned that I was getting a detachable magazine kit, I wanted to update. The kit came in today. I got one five round and one ten round magazine with it.

DSC_0017.jpg

Sorry about the mess, my bench just gets to look like that when I'm working on something.

The good is that it dropped right in. All I had to do was trim like 1/100 of an inch off of the front screw. It was stopping the bolt from going into battery. It seems to cycle ok, although the throw is not a little harder than it was before. Maybe this will tame down a bit as the mag gets some use. The magazine is of a center feed design, which is pretty nice so the only angle the bullet has to deal with is up getting into the chamber. Of course, I haven't shot it yet, so I'll have to see if it functions well.

Now the bad.
DSC_0018.jpg
That's the five round magazine. It's LONG. I guess that's the price you pay for a center feed magazine. I didn't snap a pic, but the ten rounder sticks out more than twice as much.

DSC_0020.jpg
The magazine seems to be suffering from follower tilt. I didn't know what the heck was going on. I was also noticing that it was almost a pain in the butt to load the magazine. Due to its design, you have to push down on the forward part of the bullet causing the rear of the already loaded round to pop up. At this point you have to kind of fight the rear of the bullet down to get the round in the magazine.

Well, I field stripped the magazine and the root of the problems revealed itself. The magazine spring only extends enough to support the back of the bullet. For those that are familiar with them, the spring looks like an oversize mag spring for a 1911. So, when your loading a magazine and you push down on the front of the already loaded round, you are actually pushing down on something that is completely unsupported by a spring and you have to fight the rear of the already loaded round down to get the next round in the magazine. Notice all of those scratches on the brass? That's from LOADING the magazine. Maybe I'll run through it with some emory cloth and see if I can smooth out some of the sharp edges.

Personally, I would have rathered have a double stack mag with a proper spring. It's almost as though they designed the mag and then said, "oh crap, we need a spring for it.

In any case, I'm going to shoot it this Sunday. Hopefully I'll be able to get to something longer than 100 yards.

The way I'm feeling right now, I'm tempted to sell this thing at a big loss and get in line for a Badger setup. We'll see.
 
Tony:

Nice set-up! Get a picatinny rail on it. I have a spare Ken Ferrell G-Force, 20 MOA picatinny rail that I do not use. It was on my M700 Tactical. I paid about $120 for it. If you want it, PM me. I could give you a decent price on it.

Geno
 
Let me try to understand what you did. You got an HS stock and then you added a detachable magazine? Did you have to cut out the bedding block in the stock that gives your action a solid mount, to fit the DM?

I'm curious how it's going to shoot. Let us know.



NCsmitty
 
I was considering getting a 20MOA rail. But I think that my scope mounting holes are not lined up square on the receiver. I had to use almost all of the adjustment on the mount to get the scope on paper and then another 20 clicks of windage to zero. I was going to take the rifle back, but it shoots so well that I didn't want to send it back. Until I get around to confirming, I'm going to stick with the Leupold setup.

And yes, I got an HS stock. It's actually an LTR pull off, I believe. I only had to relieve a very small area of the bedding block to allow for the safety on the trigger to fit without rubbing. All else dropped right in, as did the detachable magazine conversion.
 
I was considering getting a 20MOA rail. But I think that my scope mounting holes are not lined up square on the receiver. I had to use almost all of the adjustment on the mount to get the scope on paper and then another 20 clicks of windage to zero.
Click to expand...

So, get the rail and use the Burris Signature Zee rings with the offset inserts to correct for any misalignment caused by your off-center scope mount holes.

Don
 
Zee rings do that? OK, going to find them now.

NCsmitty, why would you think that I would have had to cut out the bedding block? Is that something that usually needs to be done when adding a detachable magazine? I'm asking, because if it is, I might just live with the shortcomings of the kit that I got. I didn't get the HS stock to have to cut the bedding block out of it.

BTW, what's wrong the setup that I have? The scope mount that is? I know about the 20moa base for more adjustability for long range, but all I have access to is 300 yards anyway and that's if I'm lucky. I'm usually shooting at 100.
 
NCsmitty, why would you think that I would have had to cut out the bedding block?
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that a solid aluminum block ran the length of the inside bottom of the stock, and in my mind would be in the way when adding a through the bottom magazine. Apparently I'm wrong, not having seen an HS stock's interior. All I can envision now is that it has a factory cutout in the aluminum block for the factory mag. Is that correct?




NCsmitty
 
BTW, what's wrong the setup that I have? The scope mount that is? I know about the 20moa base for more adjustability for long range, but all I have access to is 300 yards anyway and that's if I'm lucky. I'm usually shooting at 100.
Click to expand...

The Leupold/Redfield dovetail-type base is fine for a hunting rifle, but not particularly suited for a precision rifle. You may only have access to 300 yards now, but why handicap yourself should you ever have a chance to shoot LR in the future?

Don
 
Smitty, the detachable magazine kit was intended to be drop in. The profile of the bottom metal matches that of the stock bottom metal to the tee. It fits into the well that is left open in the block for the stock top feed magazine. The system seems to work and I'll have to try it out this weekend. I know that my statements above sounded negative. It's just that for the price of something like $300 for the bottom metal and two magazines, I expected the kit to be a bit more refined. I'm coming over to the bolt gun camp from shooting ARs. When you buy a $300 part for an AR, it's nice and you know what you paid for. I'm feeling a little like I got ripped off with the magazine kit. It's something that I would have easily paid $200 for, but at $300, I'm disappointed.

USSR, the Swarovski scope that I'm using has a bdc reticle in it. When I sighted it in, I manually set the scope to vertical center and then sighted. I had to go through one full revolution to adjust the elevation, so I do have a bit of leeway. Still, I'm going to look into that 20moa base. Does this base make the eyepiece sit any higher?
 
I'm going to look into that 20moa base. Does this base make the eyepiece sit any higher?
Click to expand...

Scope eyepiece will not be much different. Your objective lense will probably sit a bit lower. However, from the looks of your scope as mounted now, you have plenty of clearance from the barrel.

Don
 
OK guys, it's almost done. I just have to look into a better base.

Tonight, I broke out the reciprocating saw and whacked 1.5" off of the back of the stock and installed a limb saver. I know it may have been a wimp move, but I popped off 180 rounds last Saturday and I'm going again this coming Sunday. Anyway, I'm a small guy, so I reduced the LOP by .5" too. It's amazing what half an inch can do to the way a rifle feels.

I had a heck of a time finding the right size limb saver to fit the stock where I was going to cut it down to, but I think I got pretty close. Here it is....
DSC_0021.jpg

DSC_0022-1.jpg
 
You have a nice clean looking rifle there guy, congratulations. Now you can concentrate on your technique and consistency.



NCsmitty
 
Thanks smitty, and you're right. I do have to practice a bit. I was reviewing my groups from the last outing and got to thinking. I had, as a knee jerk, immediately classified one load as being more accurate than another based on group size. Now that I review the groups, those groups that weren't so tight were due to horizontal stringing. Now I'm thinking that as a matter of coincidence, I may have exercised bad trigger control on those groups. I'm going out tomorrow to concentrate on the tightest groups possible with one load, regardless of how tight they are.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
XCR vs SPS Tactical
Replies
2
Views
554
Lovesbeer99
L
B
  • Locked
Remington LTR vs. XCR Compact Tactical vs. SPS Tactical
Replies
5
Views
3K
Ridgerunner665
R
backwoodzboy
  • Locked
Ultimate Varmiter floorplate installation
Replies
0
Views
223
backwoodzboy
backwoodzboy
T
  • Locked
Need help with Remington 700 decisions
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
Skylerbone
Skylerbone
D
  • Locked
Remington 700 sps DM? Stock differences?
Replies
8
Views
4K
jimmyraythomason
jimmyraythomason
Back
Top