Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Accuracy and rifle stocks

Todate, I've only three semi-custom hunting rifles. One Rem 700, Sako 75 and a Wby Mark V all in magnum chamberings.
They wear match grade barrels, squared actions ,tuned factory triggers, and bedded stocks. The stocks are a Hogue overmolded, Sako 75 synthetic, and one injection molded Weatherby factory replacement. All three rifles shoot very good to my standards, but am wondering how much, if any improvement in accuracy, could be gained by utilizing the popular McMillan stocks ?<p>Has anyone done any comparisons, utilizing the same loads and bedding proceedures, but switching between the Mcmillan and any other synthetic ?<p>I'm not sure I would exchange any of the above mentioned stocks unless a definate improvement in accuracy could be realized, but I do have two new rifles planned for the near future. One will be on a Rem 700 SA ,Tactical style in 7-08, and a McMillan will definately get the nod here. Any and all opinions are very welcome. Thanks

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.<p>I had a Sako L691 with a wood stock that shot 1/2 moa. I put a HS on it, now the gun barely holds 1 1/4 moa.

Canon,<p>I don't think accuracy will change significantly between properly bedded rifles in any of the good quality synthetics (McMillan, HS, Lone Wolf, even Hogue, etc). I do find a big difference in how they handle recoil. The Kevlar HS stocks are very stiff. The do not flex much and subsequently transmit all the recoil to the shooter. The McMillans (fibergalss) do flex and mitigate recoil. I have also found this with the Hogue (another fiberglass stock).<p>Durability is another issue. If you break through the hard shell finish on an HS, you get into some very soft and fragile foam.<p>A big reason I like McMillans is I can get them in the style and length of pull I want. I like the Sako Varmint style best, and McMillan will make them to fit my 700s.<p>I plan to replace the Hogue (FL aluminum bedding block model) on my 416 with a McMillan. I want to get the rifle's weight down to 10 lbs, the MvMcMillan is lighter than the Hogue. If I had the money, I'd replace all my HS stocks with the McMillan Sako varmint. Now I do like the HS varmint stock, but not on anything over the 300 Win/338 Win level of recoil. In fact, I took my 338 Win out of the McMillan and put it in an HS so I could use the McMillan on my 338 Ultra, which is the hardest recoiling rifle I have. The Ultra kicks much harder than even the 416 Rem.<p>The Lone Wolf seems to be decent enough quality and it is very lightweight. However, I like the flat forend of a varmint style stock better then this stocks typical sporter forend. I also like a beefier grip area. Lone Wolf would have done all that for me, I just didn't know to ask.<p>The injected molded stock really aren't are that stable. They often won't take bedding. At least that what guys have told me--I haven't tried (and probably won't). However, if a rifle is shooting consistently with the injection molded stock, I wouldn't mess with it.<p>Blaine

Mild Bill, Blaine / Thanks for taking the time to educate me [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img] In reading a few posts here and on other boards, I got the impression that unless your pet rifle was wearing a McMillan, it couldn't achieve maximum potential. Must have been reading BETWEEN the lines [img]images/icons/laugh.gif" border="0[/img] <p>If that 338 Ultra recoils harder than the 416 Rem than it's coming off my want list. After shooting a freinds 416 Rem., I found that to be about the maximum recoil I would care to endure. Did the stock change make a significant difference ?<p>As for bedding the injection molded stocks ,I've done four so far, and it seems to be hanging in. Besides ruffing the surface and drilling small holes at different angles, a few small stainless screws are installed at varied places to form a mechanical lock. Neither S steel bed or glas gel have moved on the magnums , but they haven't been out in extreme cold weather for more than a couple of hours. The ultimate test would probably be a day or two in -20 deg.

Canon,<p>Hogue's help tame the recoil of a friend's lightweight 7 mag as well as an 8mm Rem Mag I temporarily had. It also significantly reduced the recoil on a 35 Whelen I had. Because of that, my 375 Ack wore a Hogue as does my 416 Rem--from the start. <p>The 416 isn't unpleasant at all. It weighs 10.5 lbs, and on paper it generates as much recoil as my 9.75 lb 338 Ultra. However, the 416 is a long push. If you can shoot a 9-10 lb 300 Win, then the 416 won't be a problem. To me, even a 10lb 300 Win seems to recoil with a "jab." Now an 8.5 lb 416 Rem would be a monster.<p>The 338 Ultra recoils with a long, hard jab. Even after three years in Japan where I only got to shoot my rifles once a year, I was able to comfortably and accurately shoot the 416. However, 15 rounds of the 338 Ultra was all I could take. Though I didn't flinch, I thought about recoil each time I pulled the trigger on shots 16,17,18. That'a a sure way to develop a flinch. <p>I highly recommend you shoot a 338 Ultra before buying one. If you really want one, then maybe a muzzle brake might be in order--though I personally don't like or use muzzle brakes. Even though I have one, I'm thinking a 338 Win with a 185 or 210 Barnes XLC would certainly hit hard enough. Not sure the Ultra's extra velocity means all that much.<p>Also realize you can increase your recoil tolerance. It just takes time and practice. basically, you shoot the heavy kickers until you start to get tired or start thinking about how the gun is going kick each time you pull the trigger. Then you quit for the day.<p>Blaine

Blaine<p>I didn't find the 416 to be unbearable or even uncomfortable, but it is my upper limit on recoil. Any additional recoil would no doubt inspire some flinching. I shoot a 458, 375WBY, H&H , and an 8Mag. without any reservations of recoil, but find the 338s with 250 grainers to deal out a fairly sharp punch. Instead of shooting lighter bullets, I would use the 8 mag.<p> I sold a couple rifles in 338 Win because they were fairly light rifles, and had a very sharp kick, comparable to the 375 WBY. As much as I like the idea of the 338 Ultra, 90 plus grains of powder has to generate a serious jab to the shooter.<p> There is one alternative to get Ultra mag performance without having too heavy a rifle or too much recoil. A friend of mine developed four cartridges off the 300 Winchester, one of them in 338. Basically it would be a 338/300 AI or ICL improved. Other than the need for expanding necks, bumping the shoulder back and fireforming, this round will push a 250 Nosler at 2900 with about 80 grains of Rel-25. Sort of like the new short Ultra mags. With the 10% or so powder reduction, heavy sporter weight barrel and a Hogue stock, this could be an exellent long range heavy hitter. I think one could still rechamber to the Ultra or 340 WBY later if one got carried away and shot the throat out [img]images/icons/wink.gif" border="0[/img]

Canon,<p>I agree with your assesment on big 338 bores, especially with 250 grainers. They recoil very sharply. Now my 338 Win weighs 9.75 lbs and is a pussycat, as is my 375 H&H. Of course, I don't expect many to believe us that 338s kick harder than 375s and 416s--I guess htey'll just have to try it themselves.<p>Before I had the 338 Ultra, that rifle was chambered in 340 Wby. In fact, I started life as a Rem 700 in 7mm Mag that I had rebarreled to 8 Mag, then reabarrled in 340. My 340 would shoot 250 grain bullets at no more than 2800 fps with decent accuracy, and that was with a match-grade Shilen #5 on an accurized Rem 700. (I know Wby claims almost 3000 fps with 250 grainers from factory ammo, but I suspect that is like many of Wby's velocity claims--greatly exaggerated.) The 340's recoil was nearly as stout as the Ultra's. I became disgusted with the 340 chambering--100 fps over a 338 Win just wasn't worth the substantial increase in recoil.<p>The 338 Ultra seems to be a different story. The recoil level is similar, but I do have the Ultra in a McMillan while I had the 340 in an HS Precision. I haven't finished load development yet. So far, 2900-3000 fps is obtainable with good accuracy, but much over 2950 with the 250 grainers causes sticky bolt lift. Realize that is with the same barrel as the 340--it was just rechambered. Since I did use the same barrel, I take that to mean the 338 Ultra is worth 150 fps over the 340. <p>I have heard of much higher velocities with some guy's hadloads, ie 3100 fps with 250 grainers. Perhaps my barrel is a little slow, or more likely, the 3100 fps is from a fast barrel. Most of the magazine reports I've read, as well as the reloading data and factory ballistics show 2900 fps with 250 grainers as a more typical muzzle velocity. <p>I have noticed that there is a substantial increase in velocity with 225 grainers over the 250s in the 340 Wby and up cases. I'll plan to try some 225 XLCs next in the 338 Ultra. My goal is 3000+ with the 225 grainers with excellent accuracy at moderate pressure levels. After talking to a lot of folks, the idea of a lighter bullet that retains all of ti's weight is appealing. A 250 Parition will lose 30% of its weight on impact, leaving it with 175 grains of mass to finish penetration. A 210 grain Barnes X retains virtually all it's weight, so it has 210 grains of mass to penetrate. This isn't just my speculation--Big Stick and hsi buddies in Alaska have "been there and done that" with these bullets for a while now.<p>I hope the 338/300 IMP will give you the 2900 fps with 250 grainers at normal pressure level. Based on my limited expereince developing loads for the 338 Win, 340 Wby, and 338 Ultra, it's easy to see how I would be a little skeptical. The more I mess with the 338s, the more I wonder if a 26" barreled 338 Win with 185 or 210 XLCs isn't the optimum solution. I hope not, because if so, I have wasted a lot of time, effort, and money of the 340 and 338 Ultra.<p>Blaine

Canon. I think I've done some of what you asked about. I have a Win. M70 Featherweight in .308 that started out with a wood stock. It now wears a McMillian synthetic in the same pattern. I had McM add graphite to the stock to stiffen it more.
When the wood stock was bedded to exert upward pressure on the barrel-the pressure point system-it would hold around one MOA with Ferderal Throphy Bonded ammo. But, using a shooting sling shifted the POI over 3 inches. And the POI would change an inch, or more, per year. That stock has a weak, flexible forend that is not very consistant.
So I went to a free floated barrel. The groups opened to about 2 MOA. But, the group shifts, from time, or a shooting sling, stopped. A fair trade.
When I went to the McM stock there was no change in accuracy. But, I can take the rifle out of the stock, and put it back, w/o having to rezero. I have also found that my handloads shoot into the same group as the factory ammo. My handloads are 150 gr. CT Fail Safe bullets that I'm sure are much faster than the 165 gr. TB bullets out of the factory Federal loads. The wood stocked rifle wouldn't do this.
I have two custom rifles with Pac-Nor barrels, and McM stocks. The the very light contour barreled rifle shifts POI more, say a half inch per grain of powder charge change, than the sporter weight barreled rifle. That rifle take a charge weight shift of 3-4 grains to move the POI over an inch. Again, I can pull the rifle out of the stock, and it will return to zero when reassembled.
Another advantage to the McM stock is they shift the weight of the rifle forward. Very important in a light rifle.
I also have a Rem. 700 VSFS in .308 with the factory H-S stock. Glass bedding did nothing to improve accuracy. E

Canon,
McMillan would certainly be my choice. However, two of the tightest shooting rifles in the safe are factory Remingtons with H-S Precisions. One is a VS in .223 that is box stock short of a trigger adjustment that shoots PMC 52 Match loads into bugholes. The second is a Remington LTR in .308 that shot consistant sub .5 MOA(center to center) out of the box with a 175 grain Match load. The aluminum bedding block was remachined and bedded in Marinetex by Crane NWS at the last Atlantic Fleet Match. The groups are now in the .25-30 MOA range with the same previously mentioned load. Given groups were shot with a Leupold LRT 8.5-25x50 with a fine duplex and Jewell trigger set extremely light. The rifle now wears the original trigger that has been adjusted and a Leupold LR M1 3.5-10x40 in Mark 4s. I can't hold to the target groups, however, I can still manage consistant .5 MOA performance. The barrel is cleaned with JBs and a Dewey bore guide at regular intervals and shows almost no tendency to foul prematurely. All in all I prefer McMillans, however, I will have to say H-S Precisions can get the job done. I certainly would'nt buy one to replace a current stock though as a factory issued item they get the job done. Regards, Matt.

Eremicus, Matt
Thanks for taking the time to relay your experience with the McMillans. I will surely have to give one a try on my next project. It will be a mail order as none are available locally, that I am aware of, or there probably would be a few on my guns now.<p>Blaine
I can appreciate your frustration with the 340, as I had a similar experience when a 375 was reamed to the Weatherby chambering. Obtaining H&H velocities was hard to get with a bunch more powder, recoil and muzzle blast. My smith showed his concern by grinding the freebore flighting from his reamer, and setting back the barrel and rechambering. Safe loads of 2800 fps with a 270 X were easily attained once the generous freebore was removed. An increase of about 170 fps.
I can understand your doubting the numbers on the 338/300 Imp. but I have one of his 300 Imp. and am getting 3400 fps with a 180 Nosler or a 165 XLC with good case life. These numbers are only possible with Rel-25. He claims 2800 fps with a 300 grn bullet in the 375 caliber in this cartridge. Rel-19 for the big one. I think the 40 deg. shoulder plays a BIG part in the burning charactaristics, in these types of improved cartridges, yielding the good velocities attainable. Anyway, the man guarantees me a full refund on barrel, chamber work and dies if the numbers aren't attainable with safe loads. We've known each other for over twenty years, so I don't think he will mind giving me one of his rifles in this chambering to take for a little test drive. I suppose if she meets these qualifications, I'm pretty much committed to placing an order, but theres always room for one more good one.
I agree with yours and the others thinking on the X bullets, but haven't taken any large animals to draw a full conclusion. Two of the three deer taken with X bullets were instantanious, and at longish range. The third 8 pointer, shot with the 300 Imp. 165 XLC BT's at about 75 yrds, really rocked my confidence in this bullet. He left the scene like it was a clean miss, jumping deadfall and avoiding trees til he disappeared. He was found 100 yrds away, and after dressing him found only the tip of his heart and a small portion of lung that were not damaged. The bullet had clearly done it's required job. I've never in many years of using varied ammo from the 30-30 to the 375 H&H seen another deer react this way when shot in this text book location. In spite of the fact that the X bullet had performed very well, it caused me to pass on a longish shot on a cow elk that same day. I was confident in making the shot, but did not have the confidence in the little blue pill doing enough damage to take her cleanly. That was the only opportunity after waiting six years for a draw, just because I found a young buck with a strong constitution [img]images/icons/crazy.gif" border="0[/img] <p>I'll be sure to let you know how the 338/300 Imp performs

Canon,<p>It is definitely worth a try, and do keep us informed. Does this gentleman do any pressure testing?<p>My 340 started out with the STD 3/8" Wby freebore and a 27" barrel. After all the frustrations, I had my rifle-builder set the barrel back about 1/2" and get rid of the freebore. That's when I finally did get 3000 fps with 250 grainers with none of the normal pressure signs. However, that load pressure tested to 74,000 PSI. <p>My 375 Ack (40 degree shoulder) was a different matter. I settled on 300 grain SAFs at an easy 2775 fps. I did get as much as 2900 fps with 300 Partitions, but that was pushing things. All that in a rechambered 24" factory barrel.<p>With some very limited testing so far, my 28" barreled 300 Win hasn't been impressed by blue bullets. The good thing is they clean up like a conventional bullet, so I'll don't think I'll have any problem working on other loads in conjunction with the blue bullets. My rifle doesn't seem to need any fouling shots, but I have found this to be true with most of my aftermarket barrels. I do have a promising load of H-1000, but the velocity is only about 3070 fps. While I like that this is a mild load, I think a 165 grainer should go faster in a 28" barrel. Maybe 180 Partitions are next. I know Gamekings will shoot, but they just seem to have to narrow a terminal performance envelope.<p>Blaine

Blaine
I can see this conversation is heading in a direction I really don't want to be going [img]images/icons/laugh.gif" border="0[/img]
Awhile back I spent three days one finger typing, explaining the merits of measuring case head expansion, and pray my comments now won't lead us there again. To answer your question, regular pressure test equipment was not used by my friend or myself, but precise expansion measurements were the guideline. In the 300Imp, my loads at 3400 yield an expansion measurement of .00025" or a quarter of one thou.,which still yields good case life. However, I shoot it throttled back two grains, which results in a more user freindly recoil and virtually no measurable expansion, and excellent case life, with only giving up 75 fps.<p>My friend has also experienced good velocity out of factory 24" barrels, comparable to 26-28" custom barrels chambered to his wildcat cartridges. He reasons this to the custom barrels having tighter tolerances restricting bullet travel.<p>I have found out one aquaintance of mine does own an Oehler 43, which he get's very little use out of now. After checking his handloads for safe pressures with the Oehler, he feels confident in his ability to determine safe pressures without pressure testing each and every load. Perhaps he can check a few of my deemed safe loads with his equipment. <p>After the three day debate on case head expansion, I did contact Oehler to price out the 43. The prices were fairly reasonable, but they have a 25% surcharge for Canadian orders, which combined with the exchange rate and taxes took it a little higher than I was prepared to pay. A laptop is another requirement of using the 43. One day when I have some cash that hasn't been spent yet, and I can get around the surcharge, a 43 will have a new home. My only reservation is that if in fact my method of determining safe loads proves accurate, it will end up gathering dust, such as the one mentioned earlier.<p>To my delight, the first three blue bullets sent down range out of the 300 landed in the same hole.(it wasn't a caliber sized hole,so I didn't miss the target with the other two) I had worked up to safe loads(opinion)indoors prior to that, so the next rounds loaded went huntin'.

Canon,<p>The difference between you and I having such a discussion is it wouldn't be an ego-challenging argument. From your posts, I can see you are like me--interested in ideas and the merits of those ideas, not personally criticizing someone. Regardless, my questions about pressure weren't designed to get a debate going. I had to conclude that I loaded ammo way too hot in the past--thank the Lord I shoot Rem 700s. I also see many others loading ammo well past sensible pressure limits. Whenever someone talks about a substantially increased velocity over what is normally obtained, I now suspect high pressures. Based on the way you are using case head expansion, I am certain your loads are well within reasonable pressures. <p>BTW, I had one bullet maker tech rep tell me that case head expansion of .001" was okay. I should have got his name, so I can make sure I am nowhere near him when he shoots such loads. <p>My chronograph is one of the best tools I have for checking pressures. If velocities start increasing exponentially, or I'm getting velocities significantly faster than handloading manual data, then I'm pretty certain my loads are too hot. With the tight chambered rifles John Ricks has built me, the most consistent sign of high pressure is slighty sticky bolt lift. That is, the bolt opens easily until that last little bit where there is a slight "catch." Interestingly enough, that "catch" happens very near where the loading manual says max pressures are, and the velocities are very close to the manual data as well. This catch happens before any other sign manifests itself. I back off at least a grain from that, if not more.<p>There is a $200 strain gauge system you can buy. You can even talk to it's maker, Dr Steve Faber. Here is the website: http://www.mcs.net/~sfaber/ and his e-mail: sfabermcs.net. I will eventually get one. He uses a system similar to the 43.<p>Blaine

Blaine
My only concern was that some view my method of load development to be a dangerous practice. A chronograph and case head measuring in my opinion are two very good tools to safe load development.They both indicate when max loads are being approached before any visible signs are present. <p>Very much interested in having a look at the strain guages but the site you posted doesn't seem to work. If this is the correct address than I will try an email. Thanks

As I recall Bob Hagel used to recommend the case head expansion method, but not the same way. He'd go for .001 inches, and then back off one grain for his maximum. He would also recommend that one watch his case life. If he didn't get at least 8-10 reloads from his once fired cases because of enlarged primer pockets, he'd figure he was "probably too hot".
I note that some of our alaskan hunters "push the limits" a bit too. They, and others, are in a slightly different set of circumstances than myself. My ammo has to function properly in temperatures as high as 110 degrees. [img]images/icons/laugh.gif" border="0[/img]
Not 65 degrees.
I'd say if your getting good case life under the warmest conditions, then your OK. E

Eremicus<p>I suppose the post should have had a new name a while back, but am curious as to what's out there to shoot in that hot sun at 110 deg. besides scorpions and rattlers [img]images/icons/laugh.gif" border="0[/img] I know I'd be in the shade melting somewheres. The varied temperatures between areas is a good reason not to post charge weights unless temperatures are included as well.<p>I think Mr. Hagels recommendations are boardering on hazardous.(opinion) Speer recommends taking once fired cases to .0005" and backing off 6%.
I take them to .0005" and back off to .00025 to zero expansion depending on how it shoots and if the necks will except a bullet after firing. This yields good case life which is important if you are using rounds that require extra fireforming.

I agree on posting loads, and temperatures. I understand getting good readings on case head expansion under the .001 inch mark takes care, and multiple measurements. But, I agree that it is valuable when used with other techniques.
I've hunted Pronghorn, various deer, and certain varmits under those conditions. [img]images/icons/laugh.gif" border="0[/img]
You need to pay attention to your physical condition when things are hot and dry. Gator Aid has saved my azz many times. [img]images/icons/wink.gif" border="0[/img] E

Canon,<p>The Website address is correct. I doublechecked under the Shooter's Links as well. I can't get the website anymore either. Try the e-mail, sfabermcs.net was correct last time I talked to him.<p>Blaine