Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Bell & Carlson vs. H.S. Precision?

I'm thinking about a new stock for a Remington Model Seven. I have several rifles with H.S. Precision stocks, and I like them very much. I have no experience with Bell & Carlson. How does the latter compare with the former? Looks like the B&C stock is about $100 less than the equivalent H.S. Precision and, well, $100 is $100 ...

Just don't want to make a purchase I will later regret. Input welcome.

Both of those are very heavy and I'd not recommend either for a model 7. They are fine for a heavy varmit or tactical type rifle, but make no sense on a trim ligthweight gun in my opinion.

But if you want to go that way I've had both and the B&C Medalist with the aluminum bedding block is every bit as good as the much more expensive HS. With more options and easier to find. I wouldn't have one of the non-Medalist B&C stocks as a gift though.

Except for bad weather and ultra precision rifles I always wondered about using a synthetic stock that weighed about the same as a wood one. I think if you Swiss cheesed a laminate stock enough it would be in the same weight range. Solid wood might be even lighter if hollowed out.

My preference is wood or hold off for a light weight stock.

Both of those stocks are good though. I would guess the HS is slightly stronger but you would have to run over it with a truck to tell the difference.

I have both in a cooper. H&S just "feels" better. B&C seems or feels cheap to me.

I've had great success with H&S in other rifles also.

My choice is H&S.

Thanks for the feedback. So if not B&C or HS Precision (because of weight), who makes a lightweight composite that doesn't feel like cheap plastic? I really don't like the feel of Remington's non-wood stocks.

The McMillan Edge is the default answer for a lightweight quality stock. But they ain't cheap, $518 if you order from here last time I looked.

If you are handy you can order a stock blank and finish it yourself from www.hightech-specialties.com for under $300. I've done a couple. It ain't rocket science and they turned out OK for a working rifle. If you are anal about perfection, by the time you pay someone to profesionally finish one the McMillan ends up cheaper.

If bad weather isn't a concern the factory walnut stocks are not much heavier than synthetic. Much lighter than HS or B&C would be.

It's not an ultralight Mcmillan edge, but the B&C stock is 8 oz lighter than the factory synthetic stock, with a much better recoil pad than factory.

So it is quite a bit lighter, and shifts the balance point forward about 1/4". I just got one a few days ago, and it trims the weight of the stocked bare rifle down to 5.95 lbs. Unfortunately, the straight alaskan shape that most people love doesn't fit my long neck well, and I'm looking at having to sell it. Love everything else about it.

Best,
Christopher

Unless you're bent on saving weight H&S is a great stock for the money. It doesn't feel cheap.

Look at a Mcm Edge or Bansners if you want light.

IMHO, the HS is twice the stock BC is, so half price is not always a bargain.

HS Precision would be my choice.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2138289/posts
HS Precision hired Lon Horiuchi as a spokesman after Ruby Ridge.


FWIW I would pass on either. HS for conscience and B&C because I don't like their stocks.

I have one of the new B & C medalist for the model 7 from Stockys. Really nicely done.. almost a perfect fit right out of the box... not the lightest as noted but a fine stock.. Wish they made the same quality stock minus the aluminum insert

the Carbolites are not among my favorites.

I own several H_S and the new medalist are just as nicely made..it a matter of feel as to which you might like.

also have a high tech on a model 7.. very light..but be prepared for a lot of fit and finish work... around $230 or so

I've owned and do own both HS and B&C Medalists. Here are some facts:

1. They weigh about the same, and both use the exact same aluminum chassis as each other.

2. BC has a slimmer stock profile, and has checkering.

3. The HS has better quality paint.

4. Every BC stock I have messed with did not have the aluminum blocks or even pillars for that matter set properly in the stock. You had to fix it with bedding. The HS's I have owned were perfect right out of the box.

If you like a slimmer stock, and are good with bedding and fixing inletting then get the BC. Otherwise get the HS.

+1 on the HS stuff.

I put a HS on a model 7 ,7MM SAUM and did not like the weight or the feel of the stock, it felt more like a club that a stock.
Sold it to a frend and he thinks it is magic.

Different strokes for different folks.

Had them both and currently only have B&C. The HS was durable and was a true drop in for me. I like the ergos of the B&Cs better, but have had to at least skim bed even the alum bedding block models...

I haven't used a B&C but I love my H.S. It seems far stiffer than most other composite stocks I have put my hands on.

I own both. Like the "feel" of the HS better. Had to "tinker" with both to get the barreled action to fit "just right". But, had to do significantly more tinkering with the B&C than the HS.

I put my LH M7 clone in a McMillan M7 stock set up as an ADL. No desire to change stocks over the past 10 years. Just take it out and shoot it...

Thanks, all. I have purchased a couple of aftermarket H.S. Precision stocks, but never a B&C. Given the feedback, think I'll stick with what I know and like.

I prefer HS, but own BC too. The HSs seem stiffer to me. Both work great with a good skim.