Conventional Stock or Chassis?

[Phil3]

I am uncertain on whether to use a conventional stock or chassis system for a 6.5 x 47 Lapua build. The rifle will be used off a bench (maybe prone, but unlikely), in a non-competition environment, using a bipod and lightweight rear bag. For initial ammo development, I would use my heavy mechanical front rest and heavy rear bag.

Are there any pros and cons for either the chassis or conventional stock for bench shooting from an ergonomic fit and suitability point of view?

I was looking at McMillan A-5 or Manners MCS-T4A stocks, vs MDT ESS-XL Gen 2 chassis system with the skeleton stock.

https://mdttac.com/products/lss-xl-gen-2-chassis-system?variant=154629406726

Phil

[sonofeugene]

I'm not a long range shooter, but it seems to me that a chassis gives you a lot more adjustability (and ease of adjustability) when it comes to setting the rifle up for you. Just my two cents.

[NorCalFocus]

Chassis give you more flexibility for add on's and changing things out. Stocks are what they are for the most part. For a bench gun, a stock will be fine. You don't need to add arca rails, barrier stops, and night vision. The biggest thing you'll want on either a stock or chassis is an adjustable LOP and cheek riser.

[LynnJr]

Phil
You won't find a chassis on any bench gun but they look cool.
If you have all the parts from your AR the chassis might be worth getting. If you don't have all the parts those chassis will run $1000 for all the pieces.

[Phil3]

Hi Lynn,

True, you do not see a chassis on a bench gun, but I will not be doing BenchRest shooting either. If I was doing that, then I would get the dedicated BR stock. I can get the chassis I want for $499, plus the desired butt stock for $299, and a magazine for $40. I was surprised this was LESS than a high end conventional stock with bottom metal, bedding, etc. Every time I configured this, it was north of $1,000. Ouch! No question, both are expensive, but the chassis I am looking at comes in a bit less.

I like that the chassis I am looking at has adjustable LOP, cheek riser height, butt pad height, offset, and angle, and I think it may have offset for the cheek riser (but not sure).

Phil

[LynnJr]

Phil
If you can get it complete for $840 that isn't bad. I tried getting one for a long 700 action and while nice looking it was north of $1100 as I don't have a bunch of spare AR parts laying around.
Anytime a rifle fits you it makes sense atleast to me that you will shoot it better and that to me is the appeal of the chassis.

[BillyGoatMachine]

I can't stand the ergonomics of a chassis myself, but I am the exception. Most people love them and you can't beat the adjustability for the price. I have a brand new LSS chassis with new skeleton stock with NV rail that I'll let go for a discounted price if your interested. Its for a Rem700 footprint. I also shoot the x47 and love the caliber. My chassis is the exact one in your link, which is the LSS rather than the ESS.

[sigstroker]

Looked at the KRG Bravo yet? $400-ish for the base chassis, add-ons like the adjustable buttplate are under $100.

[ar15barrels]

I am uncertain on whether to use a conventional stock or chassis system for a 6.5 x 47 Lapua build. The rifle will be used off a bench (maybe prone, but unlikely), in a non-competition environment, using a bipod and lightweight rear bag. For initial ammo development, I would use my heavy mechanical front rest and heavy rear bag.

Are there any pros and cons for either the chassis or conventional stock for bench shooting from an ergonomic fit and suitability point of view?

I was looking at McMillan A-5 or Manners MCS-T4A stocks, vs MDT ESS-XL Gen 2 chassis system with the skeleton stock.

https://mdttac.com/products/lss-xl-g...t=154629406726

Few chassis are really setup well for use in bags.
Most stocks will work good in bags, especially if the forend and the bottom of the buttstock are parallel like a T4A or an A5.