• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

MDT ACC Elite

Thanks for the quick reply Anthony.

Does MDT plan to cut in the longer posts (butt pad posts) into regular production or do they have to be specially requested.

And the stiffener plate…because it raised the minimum comb height, I presume this will remain by special request. Correct?
We will be talking about the longer posts internally, a very solid maybe. For right now, they will need to be requested.

Yes, it likely won't get added into an assembly, but we will monitor and adjust accordingly to feed back.

-Anthony
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baron23
Are you going to ever sale a green grip for the elite chassis?
 
Are you going to ever sale a green grip for the elite chassis?
Brother, if that's what you want then that's what you want.

But why green grip on a chassis that comes in three colors, black, FDE (tan), and blue? You have a green BA?
 
Are you going to ever sale a green grip for the elite chassis?
Possibly in the future, adding a lot of new color options to the line up is a huge thing internally right now.

-Anthony
 
We will be talking about the longer posts internally, a very solid maybe. For right now, they will need to be requested.

Yes, it likely won't get added into an assembly, but we will monitor and adjust accordingly to feed back.

-Anthony
Thank you so very much, Anthony. I have to complement MDT (and in particular you and Josh) for being super responsive to inquiries here on the Hide. That really cements customer loyalty, IME. 👍:love:
 
Thank you so very much, Anthony. I have to complement MDT (and in particular you and Josh) for being super responsive to inquiries here on the Hide. That really cements customer loyalty, IME. 👍:love:
Thank you so much for the kind words; we're always here, everyone!

-Anthony
 
  • Like
Reactions: SdotW
Badass!

I never really intended these things to be run backwards, and definitely didn't expect people to want a fully enclosed ACC Elite! Oh Sniper's Hide... you never cease to amaze me lol. In all earnest, we could make a fully enclosed, one piece hood if there was enough request for it? With the scope installed, it overhangs the rearmost NV bridge regardless, so I am not sure how much of a difference it would make?

- Josh
100% would purchase a 1-piece enclosed top - control bridge style or NVG bridge, don't care. I just want it to be enclosed... and after seeing Hennig's backwards mount, I really like the sleek symmetry of the bottom & top of the chassis angled.
 
I think I like it angled back best, matches the ATX top cover (among others). Forward just doesn’t look right. Ideally they’d angle toward the middle on both ends /——————\, but it is what it is.

I’ve been messing around with a paint pen for the scheme on this elite - doing something a bit spacey-something schemed, in a similar vein to my little 223ai.

IMG_0272.png

IMG_0273.jpeg
5E086DD2-FFFE-4A06-BEF5-5A504BE30EE7.jpeg
 
I got lucky and checked the MDT site earlier this week and they had new lefties in stock. The package just showed up today.
 
Anyone got insight into an adjustable bag rider that fits the elite? I’m waiting to hear back from CS regarding if the Longshot precision MPA flat mount ABR would fit but figured I’d ask around here as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stoweit
Anyone got insight into an adjustable bag rider that fits the elite? I’m waiting to hear back from CS regarding if the Longshot precision MPA flat mount ABR would fit but figured I’d ask around here as well.
No idea about that one, but it is flat and has an M-Lok on the bottom of the buttstock so long as that bag rider is flat and can attach to M-lok it should work.

-Anthony
 
@MDT_OFFICIAL any idea on when they are going to be available as a separate sku?
Anthony is on vacation right now, but I can say that we're just trying to keep up with production demands right now! I am sure that once Black Friday and our production hype has settled a little, we will be sure to sell them as an individual SKU! [That puts us in the "early next year" timeframe most likely].

- Josh
 
Anthony is on vacation right now, but I can say that we're just trying to keep up with production demands right now! I am sure that once Black Friday and our production hype has settled a little, we will be sure to sell them as an individual SKU! [That puts us in the "early next year" timeframe most likely].

- Josh
MDT's Black Friday website.....

1697499426848.jpeg
 
@MDT_Josh , @MDT_OFFICIAL

Any plans for any additional products to plug into the two not-quite-MLOK screw holes on each side of the chassis? So far, the only things I'm aware of are the data card holder and the spare round holder, neither of which I'm hugely interested in.

Maybe even something as simple as a blanking plate?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MDT_Josh
@MDT_Josh , @MDT_OFFICIAL

Any plans for any additional products to plug into the two not-quite-MLOK screw holes on each side of the chassis? So far, the only things I'm aware of are the data card holder and the spare round holder, neither of which I'm hugely interested in.

Maybe even something as simple as a blanking plate?
Anything that's 1 mlok pattern wide will fit. I'm sure you could find a picatinny section to fit if you wanted to put something there. You can mount a send it adapter there as well.
 
@MDT_Josh , @MDT_OFFICIAL

Any plans for any additional products to plug into the two not-quite-MLOK screw holes on each side of the chassis? So far, the only things I'm aware of are the data card holder and the spare round holder, neither of which I'm hugely interested in.

Maybe even something as simple as a blanking plate?
Nothing in the works specifically for that right now unfortunately!
@MDT_OFFICIAL and @MDT_Josh I'm really hoping something like Francis Colon's thumb rests come out. The current adjustable thumb rest sits too low on the chassis for my liking.
Thanks for the feedback and we are getting a lot of data from those 3d prints right now to validate whether or not we want to invest the money to make something like Francis has designed!

- Josh
 
@MDT_OFFICIAL and @MDT_Josh

Just a generally curious question.....what is/was the reason for the control/nvg bridges not being able to cover the entire forend without some overlap?

I generally place my hand anywhere from right under the optic objective to as far out as I can reach comfortable in the middle. So, can just run two bridges.

But just on the aesthetic side, IMO, looks better with the entire rail covered. Also covers entire barrel to help with mirage.

Again, nothing bad. Just generally curious the thought process on not making the bridges a little shorter or a littler longer where 3 or 4 bridges would completely cover the forend.


Screenshot 2023-10-29 at 10.34.15 PM.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Terp and NiteQwill
@MDT_OFFICIAL and @MDT_Josh

Just a generally curious question.....what is/was the reason for the control/nvg bridges not being able to cover the entire forend without some overlap?

I generally place my hand anywhere from right under the optic objective to as far out as I can reach comfortable in the middle. So, can just run two bridges.

But just on the aesthetic side, IMO, looks better with the entire rail covered. Also covers entire barrel to help with mirage.

Again, nothing bad. Just generally curious the thought process on not making the bridges a little shorter or a littler longer where 3 or 4 bridges would completely cover the forend.


View attachment 8260259
Cuz why sell 1 shield when you can sell 4! In January they'll probably have the half shield to make it look nice, then they'll sell that too. Nickel and dime you to death......
 
  • Like
Reactions: iceng
Cuz why sell 1 shield when you can sell 4! In January they'll probably have the half shield to make it look nice, then they'll sell that too. Nickel and dime you to death......

My question would still allow them to sell 3 or 4 pieces. Didn't ask for a single piece.

You can't cover the entire rail with 3 pieces now and 4 pieces has an overhang.
 
My question would still allow them to sell 3 or 4 pieces. Didn't ask for a single piece.

You can't cover the entire rail with 3 pieces now and 4 pieces has an overhang.
Poor engineering? Maybe they assumed nobody will want a perfectly flush fit covered rail? I understand the short rails in the ability to mix and match if you want a Pic rail atop the bridge. I don't like their execution of the bridge sections, I however have two atop my chassis.
 
@MDT_OFFICIAL and @MDT_Josh

Just a generally curious question.....what is/was the reason for the control/nvg bridges not being able to cover the entire forend without some overlap?

I generally place my hand anywhere from right under the optic objective to as far out as I can reach comfortable in the middle. So, can just run two bridges.

But just on the aesthetic side, IMO, looks better with the entire rail covered. Also covers entire barrel to help with mirage.

Again, nothing bad. Just generally curious the thought process on not making the bridges a little shorter or a littler longer where 3 or 4 bridges would completely cover the forend.


View attachment 8260259
Good question! In many cases of aftermarket R700 clones, the scope base rail sit's flush to the end of the action, but on an actual Remington with a bolted on scope base rail, it is extremely common for them to overhang further forward (including our design). In that case, it is illogical for us to make the NV/Control bridges flush with the front of the action because we'd almost certainly run into compatibility issues.

Poor engineering? Maybe they assumed nobody will want a perfectly flush fit covered rail? I understand the short rails in the ability to mix and match if you want a Pic rail atop the bridge. I don't like their execution of the bridge sections, I however have two atop my chassis.
Bold claim cotton! We generally avoid anything leaving our doors without being properly vetted, tested, broken and revised numerous times by internal and external testers, so the claim of "poor engineering" is a little hurtful. Regardless; I didn't anticipate shooters wanting to fully enclose their forend with control/NV bridges, and rather saw most o internal/external development testers running 1 or 2 of them along the forend to actually mount NV or use as a forward control point (hence the name). Furthermore, as the bell of your scope undoubtedly extends forward of your scope base rail (or integral rail) then it is not necessary to have the bridges extend rearward to cover off the chamber in the event that you are trying to bock mirage.

Finally, we do not try to Nickle-and-dime our customers as we were founded on the principal of our founder not being able to afford an AI chassis, so he made his own! We try to provide premium products at an affordable price range where possible ;)

<3 Josh
 
Good question! In many cases of aftermarket R700 clones, the scope base rail sit's flush to the end of the action, but on an actual Remington with a bolted on scope base rail, it is extremely common for them to overhang further forward (including our design). In that case, it is illogical for us to make the NV/Control bridges flush with the front of the action because we'd almost certainly run into compatibility issues.


Bold claim cotton! We generally avoid anything leaving our doors without being properly vetted, tested, broken and revised numerous times by internal and external testers, so the claim of "poor engineering" is a little hurtful. Regardless; I didn't anticipate shooters wanting to fully enclose their forend with control/NV bridges, and rather saw most o internal/external development testers running 1 or 2 of them along the forend to actually mount NV or use as a forward control point (hence the name). Furthermore, as the bell of your scope undoubtedly extends forward of your scope base rail (or integral rail) then it is not necessary to have the bridges extend rearward to cover off the chamber in the event that you are trying to bock mirage.

Finally, we do not try to Nickle-and-dime our customers as we were founded on the principal of our founder not being able to afford an AI chassis, so he made his own! We try to provide premium products at an affordable price range where possible ;)

<3 Josh
An ai atx chassis is $1300 and their full length bridge is $275. The acc elite is $1600, full bridge is another 420$(3.5 control bridge pieces). Say what you want, companies like to make profits. I own both, prefer the forend of the atx, but prefer the acc elite buttstock because with lower/thinner cheek and adj mag latch. However the atx chassis has better execution on all their tool-less adjustments vs the elite(plus all their hardware is coated, no rusting after a light rain😉). Wish they could have a mlok baby and all would be right in the world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MDT_Josh
An ai atx chassis is $1300 and their full length bridge is $275. The acc elite is $1600, full bridge is another 420$(3.5 control bridge pieces). Say what you want, companies like to make profits. I own both, prefer the forend of the atx, but prefer the acc elite buttstock because with lower/thinner cheek and adj mag latch. However the atx chassis has better execution on all their tool-less adjustments vs the elite(plus all their hardware is coated, no rusting after a light rain😉). Wish they could have a mlok baby and all would be right in the world.
And Josh was just explaining that the idea behind the MDT chassis is to make it affordable because the founder, at one time, could not afford the gucci name.
;)
 
And Josh was just explaining that the idea behind the MDT chassis is to make it affordable because the founder, at one time, could not afford the gucci name.
;)
Eggsactly. Yeah, the atx is the most affordable chassis that AI has ever sold, it's also the best they've ever sold, cept it doesn't come with the folder included, oh that's another 250$, but a folding atx is still cheaper than standard unfoldable elite.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MDT_Josh
They have an official fanboy thread for that ugly piece of shit here, if you're interested:

 
They have an official fanboy thread for that ugly piece of shit here, if you're interested:

I have a few......I also have xlr, mdt, xylo, krg, had a foundation I like to try, keep what I like. Some people love the spuhr chassis, I think it's ugly as phuck and it doesn't fit me well at all. Different strokes for different folks. My points about the atx chassis were just price related. There sadly is no one chassis/stock that is the best of all in every way for every shooter.
 
Good question! In many cases of aftermarket R700 clones, the scope base rail sit's flush to the end of the action, but on an actual Remington with a bolted on scope base rail, it is extremely common for them to overhang further forward (including our design). In that case, it is illogical for us to make the NV/Control bridges flush with the front of the action because we'd almost certainly run into compatibility issues.


<3 Josh

Thanks for the reply.

I wasn't asking for a bridge that sits flush with the action. I'm asking why you didn't size the bridges where one would sit flush with the muzzle end of the chassis if they were to also run a bridge all the way to the rear (as many actions don't hand over as you pointed out).

Seems like a very small dimensional (length) change would have made this possible. Just food for thought for future parts/chassis.

You could likely take the measurement between the two lines below, divide by 3, and add that length to the bridges and three of them would work. Then just have hole spacing in the forend which allows virtually unlimited placement. This would also align with not milking customers as only three sections would be required instead of four.



Screenshot 2023-11-04 at 11.25.11 PM.png
 
Could also offer a single piece control and nvg rail that covers the entire forend. Not sure if it would be popular enough to warrant a run of them. But if it was profitable enough, it would also add even more rigidity to the system.
 
Gah, it’s so annoying that 3 top covers doesn’t give you a fully enclosed chassis. Im still trying to figure out if I like them pointing forward or back, but nonetheless, it’d be cool to have an option to have them run further back.

The picky/dumb part of me wants to buy a 4th and mill it to suit, but I already feel like a dumbass for spending $450 on these when I bought an entire KRG Arca enclosed forend for $280.

The things we do to make shit look cool.

View attachment 8205190View attachment 8205192View attachment 8205191
View attachment 8205193

Hadn't read through the whole thread. Glad we aren't the only one's who would like to see a full rail.

Probably will do something ridiculous tomorrow and either mil or cut off the end of one to sit close enough to action for the 4th to sit flush at the end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hennig
Thanks for the reply.

I wasn't asking for a bridge that sits flush with the action. I'm asking why you didn't size the bridges where one would sit flush with the muzzle end of the chassis if they were to also run a bridge all the way to the rear (as many actions don't hand over as you pointed out).

Seems like a very small dimensional (length) change would have made this possible. Just food for thought for future parts/chassis.

You could likely take the measurement between the two lines below, divide by 3, and add that length to the bridges and three of them would work. Then just have hole spacing in the forend which allows virtually unlimited placement. This would also align with not milking customers as only three sections would be required instead of four.



View attachment 8264639
I understand what you're saying, and I think that we both agree, we're just handling the problem from wither side of the forend in this case! What I am saying is that in order to remove that overhang at the front, you'd move the bridges all back a notch on the forend, but then you'd run into your action/scope base at the back. We never intended for anyone to want to run a control bridge(s) all the way from front to rear, and maybe
that was a mistake on our part.

Regardless, we can look into making a single piece control bridge or NV bridge, I am also just not sure how big the demand is!

- Josh
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ronws
I understand what you're saying, and I think that we both agree, we're just handling the problem from wither side of the forend in this case! What I am saying is that in order to remove that overhang at the front, you'd move the bridges all back a notch on the forend, but then you'd run into your action/scope base at the back. We never intended for anyone to want to run a control bridge(s) all the way from front to rear, and maybe
that was a mistake on our part.

Regardless, we can look into making a single piece control bridge or NV bridge, I am also just not sure how big the demand is!

- Josh
And I totally get that part, too. Manufacturing. For example, I have the MDT LSS Gen 2 with the folding stock adapter and the SCS butt stock. And two of the Oryx chassis. Those pads are unforgiving. One one of my regular stocks I have a Falcon Strike hydraulic recoil pad that is very comfortable. I sent a drawing and a pic to Falcon Strike and eventually had a phone call with one of the engineers. There is not a way to adapt their AR style carbine pad and it is cost prohibitive to make a special run piece just for little ole me. So, Limbsaver Airtech works well. It just doesn't look "factory."
 
  • Like
Reactions: MDT_Josh
Just to chime in, I would like to see it cover the whole forend also. I ordered two of them as it was just purpose driven like they were thinking, but it does look a bit strange.