If you guys made your standard front end on your 3 chassis like 2" longer it would be my favorite chassis system. As is I love the W3 and Bravo but thats my one gripe...its so short on the front.
- Thread starter YotaEer
- Start date
Maybe it doesn't have that weird angle misalignment between the forend and middle section on the Bravo? What's up with that anyway? I was going to buy a Bravo this past summer but every single example I saw in person had the forend angled up slightly and the lines weren't aligned with the rest of the chassis; kind of looks like some shavings or plastic sprue was left in the joint, but it was on every one I saw. I ended up buying an MDT instead; I'm a function over form kind of guy but that obvious misalignment left me wondering what other details were missed.
Last edited:
It has to do with the way you mount the action and tighten up the rear bolt. The chassis is rock solid and an extremely mild visual issue. Unless you are looking directly at it I've never noticed it in use.
All the following is hazy in my memory, but when I last read up on this issue I think (but do not absolutely know) that:
- Most (all?) KRG chassis are based off of the Sako TRG
- The Sako has the same issue
Since I wouldn’t bet my life on the above info, I’d do your own research to confirm.
My main compliant with the chassis is there is a lot of fasteners…I haven’t used other chassis to compare, though. It’s a quality chassis.
I don’t think tightening the rear bolt has anything to do with it; I’m not talking about misalignment with an action, I’m talking about misalignment of the forearm to the rest of the stock. All the examples I saw were new right out of the box and not mounted to an action, but had very noticeable misalignment. It looks to me like a quality issue directly from KRG.
I’ve noticed it in a few pics of member’s rifles here too, like in the “Precision Rifles, Show ‘Em” thread, so it must be pretty common.
particularly on the Bravo if you look there is another rear bolt just behind the tang of the action. this tightens up the rear of the stock to the front AFTER the action is screwed down. The grip panels are attached to this part so when tightened up it can give a little cant to the panels. I've owned two and set up multiple rifles and you can see the panels shift when tightened. Its just part of the design. As mentioned a lost if not most of KRGs stuff is modeled after the Sako TRG and if you look up pictures of their various stocks its the same.
Off of their Instagram post…
Sub $300
2.5lbs short action
2 barrel channel widths, as previously stated
Sub $300
2.5lbs short action
2 barrel channel widths, as previously stated
As someone who has owned more KRG chassis than any other brand … (hell I have 2x C4s in the safe).
It’s actually wild that they haven’t sorted the panel alignment thing, and updated the backbones to allow for trigger hangers. No idea why they keep making new stuff when these are such simple things that everyone wants fixed.
It’s actually wild that they haven’t sorted the panel alignment thing, and updated the backbones to allow for trigger hangers. No idea why they keep making new stuff when these are such simple things that everyone wants fixed.
Long action.
I love KRG stuff, but they seem to march to the beat of their own drum. They were like 3 years late to the “update your chassis for PRS” trend MPA and MDT did. The trigger hanger thing has been ongoing for years. You still can’t get full length mlok foreends. There’s others too. They’ll probably make all that eventually, just whenever they feel like it
Yes. But not just that minor offset at the gap, but the way the forend slopes upwards compared to the rest of the stock when those lines were supposed to be aligned. KRG's own pictures don't show that, so the fact that the final product is misaligned, both before and after installed on an action, seems to indicate something ended up different than design intent. That was enough to make me wonder why KRG accepted that, and why I'd want that rather than a comparably priced stock from a competitor. Sometimes little details point to larger problems in the background, and not owning other KRG stuff it made me look elsewhere.
All I'm saying is if they'd had the Echo stock available for the rifle I wanted last summer, I might have bought from them instead.
I would also like to see something of that style for the remingtons so you dont have to use the AISC mags
Although not perfect fit between the two pieces, there is a sequence to tightening the action screws to torque, then tightening the tang screw to torque. It also helps to insert a magazine in the rifle and stand on butt and squeeze action into stock with one hand while tightening. You'll get the two pieces to align better and also not have feeding/fitment issues with mag when installed this way.
My CIP length mags required the triggerguard to be seated in the rearmost position on the LA Bravo to fully seat mags into action(Origin) so that may be a concern as well.. The SA didn't need the triggerguard to be adjusted in this manner.
TM6
LA Origin w /CIP mags
SA Origin
That's it?
I thought Bravos were LA as well.
At any rate, they need to make Bravos in other colors and patterns before they do anything else.
No other KRG is available for Tikka LA. Very few chassis from any manufacturer are.
I can’t decipher what you’re talking about with the fore end. It’s a sub $400 mass produced plastic chassis. All sub $400 plastic chassis are fugly. bravo less so than some. I never thought to worry about whether the cheap plastic panels on my budget chassis were perfectly lined up but I do love how my bravos fit and shoot. Been tossing the idea of taking my gamer gun out of the MPA and putting it in a bravo too.
Trigger hanger deal seems like a legit gripe.
It's close to grammatically correct if they're talking to a guy named "Weather"
This isn't a flop, we're just not their target market. It is, hopefully, a bulletproof hunting stock for a platform they had neglected up until now.
Maybe we'll see this inletted for the Sako S20, or S75/86/90? Or Howa short actions, etc, etc. I'd love to see KRG just dominate the rest of the stock market, since i usually feel like I'm getting 2x the value over something like MDT.
Maybe we'll see this inletted for the Sako S20, or S75/86/90? Or Howa short actions, etc, etc. I'd love to see KRG just dominate the rest of the stock market, since i usually feel like I'm getting 2x the value over something like MDT.
@zunrj5 Like with the regular Bravo, can one buy a W3 backend from your site and replace the Echo Bravo’s buttstock? That’s how I was going to build a Tikka CTR W3, but running into some mag issues with 204+CTR mags and might go with regular Tikka mags (or aftermarket metal ones with the same form factor).
Hoping to stay away from AICS (which works fine, but heavy and loooonnnng).
Hoping to stay away from AICS (which works fine, but heavy and loooonnnng).
The Echo looks like one solid piece, it isn't a front/back assembly like the Bravo. This might look Bravo-ish but almost everything is different. The stock is finally one piece and it doesn't have a full length chassis.
Where’s my 7 axis dremel lol
Dang. Probably lacks the internal mounting points too. Hopefully the cheek piece is exactly the same, as I like that angled KRG add-on option.
Adjustable Cheekpiece Mount for W-3, X-Ray – Kinetic Research Group
kineticresearchgroup.com I wonder if it will be stiff enough for an arca rail up front given the lack of a full-length backbone.
Huh? if it's stiff enough to use a bipod or the forearm as a front rest it should be stiff enough for a rail. The only question Id have is how does an arca fasten to it. From pics there are a bunch of holes in the bottom that might work for that purpose?
On the front end there's 3 threaded brass inserts, further back are holes that will have a well for hex nuts to attach ARCA rails. You can have a full length if you wish but I think if you follow the new Manners or McMillan hunter offerings, you can set this up the same with 1913 up front and a short ARCA in the back.
2nd quarter release, no number on weight as they are looking different polymer. Initial release in black, no other stated color offerings, has to do with the polymer. 2nd gen Bravo looks good, mainly fore end changes. The whole gap issue with the fore end is mainly to do with the variance in Temps and mold process. I don't know the weights but didn't feel the Echo was heavy. Seemed light to me.
Shown with the smallest fore end insert and a standard Tikka factory sporter barrel. I also have a couple pics of the new 2nd gen Bravo, really just the fore end change and dual Side mount points for round quivers. Any exposed inserts should have the brass blackened or finished to not appear shiny.
These two are the 2nd gen Bravo
These two are the 2nd gen Bravo
I dig that Tikka stock more than I thought I would. That looks clean. It's really nice that they don't have that gap by the trigger guard, and that it isn't sized for a monster barrel diameter.
I wonder if the KRG regular cheekpieces will slide in there…I like those skinny things (I know it would look a little weird).
I somehow doubt it.
I apologize for the delay! It was a BUSY week and I just got back from the show.
The Echo body (forend, triggerguard, & backend) is all one piece, plus the backbone/bedding block is shortened, so it’s really a different animal than our traditional line of chassis. There are some accessories that will work, but it’s not as modular as our others. Thanks!!
We’re getting closer… part of the delay was finding a lighter polymer without compromising stiffness and price. That said, our recent test shots look promising. Barring any unforeseen delays I believe we’ll see the release by the end of summer. Sadly, I don’t have a better ETA than that at this time. Thanks!!
Thank you!
