Am I missing something...???

[Sooter76]

Admittedly I'm new to this world, but the most common complaint I often hear about chassis systems is the weight. I always took it for granted without giving it much thought that the traditional stocks were lighter, much lighter going by what you hear on the interwebs. For some random reason I actually looked at the weights today and they're much closer than I was led to believe...

A Bell & Carlson Tactical with adjustable cheek and length of pull comes in at 5lbs.
A H-S Precision Pro-Series M24 Tactical weighs 3.5lbs.
A McMillian A-5 weighs 3.7lbs.

By comparison the KRG X-ray weighs less than the traditional stocks at 3.1lbs., and the XLR Element doesn't add much at 3.10lbs.

So am I missing something or is the weight complaints bullshit!?

 

[Hairball]

While taken at face value the weight differential is not bad; however, a few pounds here and there over several miles or a physically demanding course can make a world of difference. I prefer heavier rifles but then again I don't run around shooting in comps and I don't hunt anymore so its not an issue for me. Just like hunting rifles, they are lighter for a reason, you have to carry them longer in most cases. Take a little hike with a 7 pound rifle and then do the same thing with 10 pound rifle and see for yourself just how much of a difference a few pounds can make.

 

[BoilerUP]

Did ya by chance check the weight of an AICS, KRG Whiskey-3, McRee or XLR Evolution for your comparison?

 

[Sooter76]

Did ya by chance check the weight of an AICS, KRG Whiskey-3, McRee or XLR Evolution for your comparison?

I couldn't find the weight on the AICS, The Whiskey-3 was still lighter than the B&C at 4.7lbs., and the XLR Evolution only adds another 3oz to over the Element's weight.

I'm not saying they aren't a lil heavier than some traditional stocks, but I don't consider a few ounces enough to be a big deal... My point is according to what I've heard, I would have though the difference would have been much greater.

 

[Captain Kirk]

The AICS is upwards of 5 lbs. Traditionally, chassis systems have weighed more than composite stocks. While more chassis are becoming lighter, fiberglass/composite stocks can be found in lighter weights as well, much lighter than any chassis. I think the weight was definitely a concern at one point, but is becoming less of a deciding factor. I find myself ordering heavier fills in composite stocks and heavier contour barrels these days, where before I was much more conscious of weight going with Palma contours and lighter fills.

The fact is, the biggest factor for me in a stock or chassis is how it fits and feels. I prefer composite stocks every time over a chassis, but I also run a DTA which is a far stretch from traditional.

Kirk R

 

[DeadSilence]

I also think it is more than an issue of weight. Current trends in tacticool chassis have very squared off designs. A lot of the ergonomics for these chassis are shooting related. Cheek risers, LOP adj, mounting points for rails, rails, equipment to go on those rails... I could go on and on. Conversely the trends in hunting rifle equipment has trended to more rounded designs and less areas to catch and snag on brush or rock. Popular equipment for hunting has trended to have smaller bolt knobs, shorter or smaller turrets, turret caps with rounded edges. These designs lend themselves to not snagging on clothing or rubbing a sore spot on someones body as they carry this equipment for several to many miles. I love my tactical chassis, but I would not want to carry it on a hunt. Even if the weight of the tactical designs were the same or even less the hunting specific designs would imo be considerably more comfortable to carry.

There are designs which are hybrids that try to cross the best of both designs but many times they do not do very well on the market because they leave hunters wanting less or tactical shooters wanting more. There is no right or wrong. There is no better or worse. There is a difference in pricing. Whatever seems to be new and exciting will normally garner a higher price in the market. Think on this scenario: If there were no ranges, if there were no automobiles, if you had to carry everything you needed to shoot with yourself, which designs would you prefer?

And so that brings up the question; shouldn't you be using and practicing with the type of equipment designs that you perceive you will be using?
I look at hunting centrist designs as what we should all have and be able to shoot competently. I look at tactical centrist designs as maybe better at some things (ie maybe better accuracy, maybe more lethal looking, maybe more comfortable to shoot) but, I want to have that minimalist hunting design that I can rely on and be competent at shooting with so that I can enjoy hunting and god forbid have available if I do find myself in a minimalist type of environment for an extended period of time.

 

[HBARLeatherneck]

You mentioned weight of the Mcree's chassis. I own 4 of their chassis and I love them , their G5 tmag folder for a 700 weighs 5 pounds. no folder 4.5. then if you want to go lighter they have the ar buttstock compact chassis for 2 lbs 8 ounce without the ar buttstock attached.

 

[Infringed711]

I like manners stocks if weight is an issue

 

[devldogs55]

I ordered an XLR Element last week.. I had never really considered a chassis until I saw that one, and realized how little it weighed.

 

[Sooter76]

I like manners stocks if weight is an issue

Even those are comparable in weight... The adjustable tactical stocks all come in around 4lbs.

 

[steve123]

Weight can be a blessing or a curse.

For prone off the bipod weight is your friend, so nice! I have rifles with heavier longer barrels that are purpose built for that task. They suck for anything else.

For one of those rifles I have a medium weight barrel. It's still a bit heavier than I'd prefer, a couple pounds too heavy for comfortable offhand shooting but okay for sitting and kneeling, even so - not bad at all off the bipod. Also a bit too heavy for me to be hauling around all day. For my size and strength and having a rifle best suited for being able to use reasonably well all positions and with reasonable comfort for carry I would need a rifle in the 12 -12.5 pound range including scope and all accessories.

Opposite side of the spectrum is a rifle that is too light for a match rifle. It'd be great to carry around and pretty good for offhand. I need a little more weight in a match rifle and don't want a thinner barrel that walks when it heats up.

Peoples strength and fitness varies, peoples needs and preferences vary also. If you are built like a tank a 18 pound rifle might be just fine. It's easier to make lighter rifle heavier than a heavier rifle lighter. With my rifle I'd have to put on a March 3-24 scope, a fluted light palma contour and go to a lighter rear stock, maybe have some machining done to the chassis to make it close to 12 pounds which are all things I would rather not do.

So for me a few pounds makes a big difference.

 

[bkw1911]

The AICS is upwards of 5 lbs. Traditionally, chassis systems have weighed more than composite stocks. While more chassis are becoming lighter, fiberglass/composite stocks can be found in lighter weights as well, much lighter than any chassis. I think the weight was definitely a concern at one point, but is becoming less of a deciding factor. I find myself ordering heavier fills in composite stocks and heavier contour barrels these days, where before I was much more conscious of weight going with Palma contours and lighter fills.

The fact is, the biggest factor for me in a stock or chassis is how it fits and feels. I prefer composite stocks every time over a chassis, but I also run a DTA which is a far stretch from traditional.

Kirk R

+1. Typically aics and mcree folder weights are discussed when people complain of chassis weights, me included. The xray and element are newer and definitely exceptions. Going from a 12lb rifle with a mcm a5 to a 15+ lb rifle with almost identical specs but switching to a mcree was a huge difference. A non adjustable fiberglass stock weighing in in the 3lb range can be a major difference in how heavy the rifle feels and balances. I personally dont like the way chassis typically feel over a broad array of shooting positions. They operate great for prone but i struggle building good positions outside of that than i do with a mcm or manners stock.