That is my experience with these stocks. I've had a bunch but don't have any currently. What I can tell you is the actual Remington Ti take-offs that I have had where all better quality and lighter weight versus the B&C Ti stocks you could buy at Midway or Stockys. Those always weighed a bit more and just weren't as nicely finished as the actual factory ones. I've had them from 24 ozs all the way up to 27 ozs for a short action so it really depends on the stock and when it was made.
"Rather hunt Mule deer than anything else" "Team 7MM-08"
I'd be looking at one of the Christensen FFT stocks that Brownells has. It's an 18-20oz rock-solid stiff stock.
That does indeed look like a damn nice option…especially for the money. Would a guy HAVE to use Christensen Arms bottom metal….or would any 700 footprint work with that stock?
The stock in question for anyone that might know….
I repair, rebuild, and modify composite stocks and I'm not disagreeing with OregonMuley, just that my experiences have been different. When someone brings me a stock that they want to use for shorter barrel and/or lighter-weight, it usually involves shortening the forend & installing a new front slingswivel stud anchor, converting/installing a front ADL trigger guard (middle) screw anchor, and a repaint - about half of these also involves fitting and bedding the customer's rifle. However, probably two out of three want the narrow mountain-barrel channel enlarged which means also having to rebuild the barrel channel's top rails - this is because the outside edge of the top rail tapers in somewhat to match the edge of the barrelchannel. In either situation if the customer is shooting a thumper or magnum cartridge, instead of the normal ADL front screw conversion, I install a new front one-piece pillar from which is run an 1/8-in thick x 1-in wide aluminum bar back to the ADL trigger guard. I know this may sound involved but it's not rocket science, just common-sense and 'bondo' work. I'm not a high production shop, just a one-man operation but it does make it easier for me to keep detailed records of what I do. I'm relating all this not to impress with "credentials" but to show that I've had to learn the hard way about what does and does not work. Most of my clients are either senior shooters or beginners - young and/or smaller - who require stock modifications for fit and comfort - but I also for those who have disabilities that require stock changes.
Since I started keeping formal records beginning in March 2017, I've done (129) various stocks - Model 70's, Mausers, but mostly 700's of which (14) were original Rem TI stocks including the two I'm currently working on. On almost all the front mounting system had an issue. As weight-saving measure, instead of a longitudinal aluminum chassis, the TI employs two separate, independent front & rear pillars. The front pillar is a square ALUMINUM block with a flat bottom designed to fit flush and on top of a round STEEL knurled grommet on the bottom. On all the OEM TIs that I've seen, the grommet appears to have been pressed in - unevenly - rather than fitted and permanently seated with structural glass/epoxy resin. As such what frequently results are issues where the front 'guard' screw does not have a straight, concentric channel from the bottom of the stock through the two sections into the intended hole in the front receiver ring. Invariably, there's binding because the gromment is not seated in true alignment with the pillar block. To this day, I wonder why Remington persisted with this asinine two-piece front pillar system - probably the same engineering genius designed the 8-36 middle screw setup in the ADL. The least invasive fix is to heat the grommet with soldering iron just enough to soften the immediate, surrounding material and ease it out of the stock. Then using a drill press, re-drill the screw hole large enough to accomodate a new pillar; if no more 1/2" the old aluminum recoil block on top remains in the stock - I've done two this way using the 1/2" OD - 1/4" ID aluminum tubing that I make most of my pillars from. Epoxy in place and good to go. However, now if I'm refitting/rebedding the action, I justr replace the upper and lower with the new pillar which is a little more involved but easy enough when done with the re-bedding.
Anyway I'm not trying to disuade you from getting a TI stock, just share some additional information you may want to be aware of before you do and not have to spend $ with someone like me that you could put to better use. As I explained above, the main concern is the barrel contour. So unless you plan to stay with the original Rem mountain barrel contour, I would advise you to find one with the magnum barrel channel. If you want to drop a standard sporter or larger barrel in the original TI stock, by the time the barrel channel has been enlarged (widened) to make room for the larger barrel, there are no flat top rails left on either side . . . what you end up with looks more like parallel knife blades. As it relates to the barrel channel, Remington's magnum barrel starts out only 50-60 thousandths larger diameter than its standard sporter (only 25-30 thousandths more each side) and tapers to the same diameter as the standard sporter at around 10-inches. In other words a Rem standard sporter will look and function fine in magnum contour channel. Bell & Carlson's 700-TI with the magnum barrel channel is Model# 2952.
For those of you who're still awake or give a s__t, I hope this is of some help. Yes, I'm 72 and "becoming my parents".
PS. I weigh all stocks before and after I do my thing. Every unmolested TI stock that I've worked on weighed 28-29 ounces.
Last edited by Offshoreman; 08/10/23.
AKA The P-Man
If you cherish your memories with kids, be a good role model . . . . so the RIGHT memories of you mean something to them.
I repair, rebuild, and modify composite stocks and I'm not disagreeing with OregonMuley, just that my experiences have been different. When someone brings me a stock that they want to use for shorter barrel and/or lighter-weight, it usually involves shortening the forend & installing a new front slingswivel stud anchor, converting/installing a front ADL trigger guard (middle) screw anchor, and a repaint - about half of these also involves fitting and bedding the customer's rifle. However, probably two out of three want the narrow mountain-barrel channel enlarged which means also having rebuild the barrel channel's top rails - this is because the outside edge of the top stock tapers in somewhat to match the inside edge. In either situation if the customer is shooting a thumper or magnum cartridge, instead of simple ADL front screw conversion, I install a new front one-piece pillar from which run an 1/8-in thick x 1-in wide aluminum bar back to the ADL trigger guard. I know this may sound involved but it's not rocket science, just common-sense and 'bondo' work. I'm not a high production shop, just a one-man operation but it does make it easier for me to keep detailed records of what I do. I'm relating all this not to impress with "credentials" but to show that I've had to learn the hard way about what does and does not work. Most of my clients are either senior shooters or beginners - young and/or smaller - who require stock modifications for fit and comfort.
Since I started keeping formal records beginning in March 2017, I've done (129) various stocks - Model 70's, Mausers, but mostly 700's of which (14) were original Rem TI stocks including the two I'm currently working on. On almost all the front mounting system had an issue. As weight-saving measure, instead of a longitudinal aluminum chassis, the TI employs two separate, independent front & rear pillars. The front piller is a square ALUMINUM block with a flat bottom designed to fit flush and on top of a round STEEL knurled grommet on the bottom. On all the OEM TIs that I've seen, the grommet appears to have been pressed in - unevenly - rather than fitted and permanently seated with structural glass/epoxy resin. As such what frequently results are issues where the front 'guard' screw does not have a straight, concentric channel from the bottom of the stock through the two sections into the intended hole in the front receiver ring. Invariably, there's binding because the gromment is not seated in true alignment with the pillar block. To this day, I wonder why Remington persisted with this asinine two-piece front pillar system - probably the same engineering genius designed the 8-36 middle screw setup in the ADL. The least invasive fix is too heat the grommet with soldering iron just enough to soften the immediate, surrounding material and ease it out of the stock. Then using a drill press, re-drill the screw hole large enough to accomodate a new pillar - I've done two this way using 1/2" OD - 1/4" ID aluminum tubing. Epoxy in place and good to go. However, now if I'm refitting/rebedding the action, I replace the upper and lower with a new pillar.
Anyway I'm not trying to disuade you from getting a TI stock, just share some additional information you may want to be aware of before you do and not have to spend $ with someone like me, that you could put to better use. As I explained above, the main concern is the barrel contour. So unless you plan to stay with the original Rem mountain barrel contour, I would advise you to find one with the magnum barrel channel. If you want to drop a standard sporter or larger barrel in the original TI stock, by the time the barrel channel has been enlarged (widened) to accomodate, there are no flat top rails left on either side . . . what you end up with looks more like parallel knife blades. As it relates to the barrel channel, Remington's magnum barrel starts out only 50-60 thousandths larger diameter than its standard sporter (only 25-30 thousandths more each side) and tapers to the same diameter as the standard sporter at around 10-inches. In other words a Rem standard sporter will look and function fine in magnum contour channel. Bell & Carlson's 700-TI with the magnum barrel channel is Model# 2952.
For those of you who're still awake or give a s__t, I hope this is of some help. Yes, I'm 72 and "becoming my parents".
PS. I weigh all stocks before and after I do my thing. Every unmolested TI stock that's I've worked on weighed 28-29 ounces.
Awesome information and very kind of you to take the time to share with myself and the rest of the Fire. Much obliged friend.
Dave
If you're not burning through batteries in your headlamp,...you're doing it wrong.
The B&C Medalist has an aluminum chassis molded into the stock that makes them VERY strong. The Medalist is around 28 oz. The Ti stock does not have the chassis and is only 2-4 oz lighter. But it is a MUCH weaker stock. They look good, feel good, and are light. But if you are concerned about breaking the stock on a horseback hunt, or from it being dropped the Ti isn't what I'd use.
I read a post several years ago where one in 30-06 broke at the wrist just from recoil when fired off a bench. The guy posted photos.
Not all fiberglass is the same. McMillan and all the other high end stocks glue up layers of fiberglass cloth to form a block around the action from the grip out past the magazine similar to plywood. They then inlet that block of fiberglass for the action. The buttstock and forend only have a couple of layers of fiberglass cloth on the outer skin. The hollow interior is filled with foam.
The less expensive stocks like the Ti are a mixture of shreaded fiberglass (think blown attic insulation) mixed with molten plastic that is then poured into a mold to form the stock. The ones with the aluminum chassis are plenty strong, but they are a little chunky and not as light due to the aluminum block. The Ti stocks without the almuinum chassis aren't nearly as tough.
For such a small difference in weight I'd go with the Medalist.
Most people don't really want the truth.
They just want constant reassurance that what they believe is the truth.
The B&C Medalist has an aluminum chassis molded into the stock that makes them VERY strong. The Medalist is around 28 oz. The Ti stock does not have the chassis and is only 2-4 oz lighter. But it is a MUCH weaker stock. They look good, feel good, and are light. But if you are concerned about breaking the stock on a horseback hunt, or from it being dropped the Ti isn't what I'd use.
I read a post several years ago where one in 30-06 broke at the wrist just from recoil when fired off a bench. The guy posted photos.
Not all fiberglass is the same. McMillan and all the other high end stocks glue up layers of fiberglass cloth to form a block around the action from the grip out past the magazine similar to plywood. They then inlet that block of fiberglass for the action. The buttstock and forend only have a couple of layers of fiberglass cloth on the outer skin. The hollow interior is filled with foam.
The less expensive stocks like the Ti are a mixture of shreaded fiberglass (think blown attic insulation) mixed with molten plastic that is then poured into a mold to form the stock. The ones with the aluminum chassis are plenty strong, but they are a little chunky and not as light due to the aluminum block. The Ti stocks without the almuinum chassis aren't nearly as tough.
For such a small difference in weight I'd go with the Medalist.
I agree with hat you’re saying for a “normal” rifle…but when sub-6 pounds is the goal a 28 ounce stock makes that near impossible.
Dave
If you're not burning through batteries in your headlamp,...you're doing it wrong.
If Your Looking For One Of The Best Bang For Your Buck..The New Christian Meas FFT Stock's is What I'd Look For..I've Had two And Both Where 17.1 Oz..You Can Buy These straight From Christian arms..
