Worth it to upgrade to chassis?

[kds857]

This question is for Randall or any of the other regular contributors that are knowledgeable about precision rifle setups.

I am starting to really enjoy the bolt action platform with optics (as opposed to shooting ARs with Eotech at 50/100 yards and not being able to see any of your hits). I shoot for groups at 100, and I shoot metal plates at Angeles range out to 400 (haven't been able to hit consistently at 500, and its hard to tell if I hit because the round barely moves the target)

I have a beginner setup:

Howa 1500 heavy barrel 24 inch 1-12 twist in .223
Bell Carlson Medalist A2
Timney trigger
Leupold PRS rings
Sightron SIII 10-50x60 Mil Dot (.05 mils per click)

Question: I wanted to get into a XLR Element chassis for no other reason than i like pistol grips and it looks less bulky than the Medalist.

1. Will I see any improvement from the Bell and Carlson everything else being equal? (ammo is Fiocchi 40Gr Vmax and Federal AE 50gr Vmax)

2. Is it not worth it to spend $800 on a chassis for a 223 shooting only light varmint rounds out to 400/500?

3. Really happy with my scope (glass and tracking), but I realize .05 mils per click really does not make sense when using your turrets instead of holdovers... and why the heck are the mil dots so huge on the Sightron? Perhaps a used Razor 1st Gen or used Nightforce is a better option around $1K?

Thanks

[postal]

I dont think a chassis would give much benefit until you go to a larger cartridge.

The BC is a halfway decent stock that should be a fairly solid platform. It isnt a savage wet noodle accustock.

Whats odd... is your scope... a 10-50 is for dedicated BR....

[ExtremeX]

I have a B&C M40 stock and an AICS chassis for a Remington 700… I have swapped my 223 barred action in and out of both stocks and honestly don’t really see a difference in performance. The groups pretty much print the same and the only difference is ergonomics. Both seem rigid enough for the 223 cartridge.

That said, buy a stock because it fits you, not because you like the way it looks. I would try and get behind stocks or chassis that interest you before dropping big cash on something like that. The purpose of changing stocks is to get something that works for you, and is ergonomic for you, and in turned you end up shooting better because of good fitment.

I think the B&C offers a lot of value for the price, and so far I’ve enjoyed the stock very much.

Also… if you are enjoying shooting at longer distances, I would spend that money to get a new barrel. Howa makes a nice action, but I really dislike the 1-12 twist rate.

[MongooseV8]

Id spend the money on other things for your situation. Shooting a 223 with factory ammo at 100-400 yards will not improve very much going from a BC to a chassis.

Get into reloading, or rebarrel, or etc.

When you are ready to move out further or change to a more "substantial" cartridge a chassis or top shelf stock would be much more of a benefit.

[JMP]

I'd expect zero improvement with a .223 rem except to make it overly heavy in a cartridge where you don't need the weight.

It's a little unclear to me what the difference between a chassis and a stock are. Is a chassis simply just an all-metal stock like the AI?

[kds857]

gentlemen, thank you for your responses. I will save the money for another rifle in a more substantial cartridge. Seems like the B&C is more than enough for the 223.

[Khromo]

I would make sure the B&C stock fits your barreled action. Make sure the barrel and the bolt handle float, maybe bed the recoil lug area. Pay close attention to your torque values and scope mounting.

Then spend all the money you saved on your new reloading rig, because:

1. Reloading is a lot of fun, and very satisfying, and...

2. Reloading will shrink your groups a lot more than a chassis or a more expensive stock. That's almost guaranteed. I would say a 30-40% reduction in group size is a reasonable expectation for most shooters.

You sound like you are doing fine. I predict you will do very well in the future!

[hermosabeach]

What is your current group size?

[Khromo]

What is your current group size?

That's a question I should have asked before I "almost guaranteed" a 30-40% reduction in group size!!!

[MongooseV8]

It's a little unclear to me what the difference between a chassis and a stock are. Is a chassis simply just an all-metal stock like the AI?

Chassis is the new trendy buzzword, didnt you get the email? A few even creeped right into my safe when I wasnt looking lol.

[ExtremeX]

No expert on the nomenclature but I thought in a "chassis" things like the magazine system and action bedding block area are all integral part of the system... but I generally see metal stocks referred to as chassis.

I think most "stocks" still have a separate bottom metal or detachable box magazine and generally has nothing to do with the bedding area of the stock itself.

If you look at the Manners mini chassis is combines the DBM and the bedding block into one integral piece, but doesn't extend to the entire stock like it would on the AICS or other similar chassis system.

I don’t know if it’s right, but that’s my take on it.

[LynnJr]

JMP
A stock has a buttstock attached to the forend in one continuous piece.

A chassis uses as many parts as is humanly possible with as many rails as humanly possible.

On a stock your scope has to have two rings with 8 small screws to hold the scope in place and it is 100% trouble free and very cheap.

On a chassis you need a minimum of 3 rings all with 3/4-10 threads to hold the same scope on a boron rail held down with at least 12 1/2-13 nickel cobalt bolts. It is only 2% reliable as most operators use there chassis to open up nuclear reactor cores with it.

For some reason unknown to myself you want 678 screws holding all the parts on your chassis together and they never have a problem but the scopes fall off all of the time.
Ooops gotta go MacGiver is on his way over with more rails.

[ar15barrels]

Worth it to upgrade to chassis?

This question is for Randall

Question: I wanted to get into a XLR Element chassis for no other reason than i like pistol grips and it looks less bulky than the Medalist.

1. Will I see any improvement from the Bell and Carlson everything else being equal? (ammo is Fiocchi 40Gr Vmax and Federal AE 50gr Vmax)

2. Is it not worth it to spend $800 on a chassis for a 223 shooting only light varmint rounds out to 400/500?)

1. No.

2. The 1:12 twist rate is limiting you to bullets that are not appropriate to your needs. Get a faster twist barrel and heavier bullets in your ammo before you worry about how the stock looks.

[kds857]

Thanks again everyone.

I'll just keep the current setup for groups at 100, which I know doesn't mean all that much... and I can still plink out to 400 or so. I'll get another rifle later for the longer range stuff and choose a round where I can actually see hits at 500/600 at Angeles.

My best 5 shot groups are roughly about 0.7 with the Vmax at 100... and anywhere from 1.5 inches to 3 inches with other factory 55gr FMJ ammo.

[JMP]

JMP
A stock has a buttstock attached to the forend in one continuous piece.

A chassis uses as many parts as is humanly possible with as many rails as humanly possible.

On a stock your scope has to have two rings with 8 small screws to hold the scope in place and it is 100% trouble free and very cheap.

On a chassis you need a minimum of 3 rings all with 3/4-10 threads to hold the same scope on a boron rail held down with at least 12 1/2-13 nickel cobalt bolts. It is only 2% reliable as most operators use there chassis to open up nuclear reactor cores with it.

For some reason unknown to myself you want 678 screws holding all the parts on your chassis together and they never have a problem but the scopes fall off all of the time.
Ooops gotta go MacGiver is on his way over with more rails.

Is this a stock or a chassis? It's as simple as it gets--piece of aluminum with an action attached. The forend rail was added aftermarket with the bipod block extension as well as the picatinny undermount. The buttstock has a hinge, but they sell idental stocks/chassis without it, which would make it fixed. Since it was sold as a "chassis" I see no difference from what you said is a stock. That's why I was thinking a chassis is all metal or something. So, really, is there any difference, other than just this "chassis" is solid metal. It's actually more simple in design that what folks call "stocks". To me, it fits your definition of a stock.