Something else to consider. The scope rail runs past the joint of the handguard on the front. I don't like the idea of a scope ring being clamped past the last rail screws before the joint. I figure different pressures being applied to the handguard could cause issues. The handguard is a long lever against that joint, which is just a slip fit that you try to stabilize with opposing screws.
- Thread starter oda175365
- Start date
Agreed, just noticed quite a few pictures of these rifles that have the front ring all the way on the end and wondered if it could be causing some to chase their tail.
I think I’m in that boat. I’ve gotten some unexplained inconsistencies and realized that my front ring is ahead of the last base screw in the receiver. The only place I’m used to dealing with rails is on my AR rifles, and those rails are only for accessories. Time to take it apart and start over.
Has anybody considered rosin applied to the rings? Might be worth checking out if you believe scope movement is your issue.
Really glad you mentioned that! I do tend to load the hand guard with the tripod when I shoot. I took a look and the front ring was just ahead of the last screw on the hand guard side. I fiddled with everything and was able to slide everything back a bit so the front ring is now mounted to the rail above the receiver and not over the hand guard. I can still achieve a good eye box with the scope.
The blue stuff is painter's tape. It'll tell me if the scope moves any, fore or aft.
No! But that's a fantastic idea! If my latest methodology doesn't work, I'll give that a whirl. You rock.
Fuck I just realized my scope is mounted there. Thanks Cabelas
Not sure where y'all's front ring is mounted, but here's where mine is and I've had zero issues with consistency, one of the most consistent rifles I've owned. Of course this hunting scope is relatively light, heavy scopes on light rifles are going to be more likely to have issues slipping in rings.
Quick update on mine. I got it back from Sig yesterday. They replaced the hinge and the LOP assembly. Both seem ok now. The new hinge has about the same amount of play as my MCX folder which isn’t solid like an AI or Fix but is acceptable. So despite mine and every one I handled at a local shop being sloppy AF I guess Sig has some better hinges on hand to replace with if you call and complain.
Good news, glad to hear you got it sorted out.
In real life, the 'skeltonized' stock on the AI-AX folder is pretty wide (like a ruler) its maybe 1 inch wide (guessing, don't have a ruler). In any event, the SIG is about half the width. Thats where AI gets the beef (rear heavy) and SIG gets lighter.
Keep in mind, when you go to use a rear-bag, AI=better because alot more surface. In particular resisting the twist force (equal and opposite to spin/ drift from rifling.) But the SIG is usable with a good "pinch" technique (don't overfill bag).
In real life, the 'skeltonized' stock on the AI-AX folder is pretty wide (like a ruler) its maybe 1 inch wide (guessing, don't have a ruler). In any event, the SIG is about half the width. Thats where AI gets the beef (rear heavy) and SIG gets lighter.
Keep in mind, when you go to use a rear-bag, AI=better because alot more surface. In particular resisting the twist force (equal and opposite to spin/ drift from rifling.) But the SIG is usable with a good "pinch" technique (don't overfill bag).
They were replacing hinges, without asking, during the round trip for the trigger fix. It was posted upthread.
I don’t expect it to be as solid as an AI, but there’s no reason it can’t be as solid as a Fix. After all that’s really the only direct competitor for this rifle.
Agree, I feel like the sig designers were tying to hit a weight number
and maybe they could have added a couple grams and improve stuff
Given all the contracts Sig has, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the engineers are just given parameters and told to meet them, a la their military rifles.
You keep saying it's a competition is the Fix and comparing it to the Fix. The Sig is literally less then half the price of the Fix. It is a pretty good rifle, but you can definitely see where it could improve. I was happy to spend $1,400 instead of over $3k for the Fix.
Did Q ever figure out their feeding issues? Or is their recommendation to use tape on the magazine body?
Given that the fix is literally the only thing of similar in design and concept, yes the fix is it’s competition. Yes it costs twice as much. It it’s still a similar product.
Neither of my fixes ever had any feeding problems but I made no attempt with the Magpul mags because my experience with their SR25 mags was never positive in semi autos or RPR. I ran KAC mags and never had an issue with them. I know several other people that own them as well and also run KAC mags and also have zero feeding issues.
Just like I think Sig should charge a few bucks more for the rifles and make a few parts better to have a much better rifle, I think Q should charge a few bucks more for the Fix and send them with a KAC mag instead of a shitty PMAG. Personally I don’t mind buying a few KAC mags but they shouldn’t ship with a mag that doesn’t work well just because it’s cheap to supply.
If you look at post #2322, those are Athlon medium height rings with a 34mm body/56mm objective. The ring height is 1.069" and there's maybe 3mm in between the front objective and the hand guard. Conversely, I've run a Scalarworks LEAP with the 1.57" height with a 30mm tube/50mm objective and there was plenty of clearance. Something around 1" or greater would work.
Here's what I finally ended up with. I used 3M spray adhesive on the inner side of the rings instead of rosin and torqued everything down to specification. I moved the front back to the railing over the upper receiver and then moved the rear ring back a bit more. Hoping it's good to go and won't move on me again.
Here's what I finally ended up with. I used 3M spray adhesive on the inner side of the rings instead of rosin and torqued everything down to specification. I moved the front back to the railing over the upper receiver and then moved the rear ring back a bit more. Hoping it's good to go and won't move on me again.
Last edited:
I have an ARKEN SH4 inside Vortex 1” high in post 2308
No word yet.
If Sig keeps marketing this as a hunting gun they should do a .223/556 (1:8 twist), 6.8 spc, 6.5G, 300blk,and 224V.
Offer it up with a carbon fiber handguard or an adapter for using ar15 handguards or at least offer some neoprene wraps like we used to see in the early 2000’s for ar15 handguards.
This would be a sick predator/hog set up especially with some NVG on it.
Went back out today with a clean barrel and yep, she's a sub-MOA rifle. Did nothing more than clean the carbon. I didn't do any copper cleaning. As of today, I probably have a bit over 100 rounds through it.
I brought two loads I developed for my AR10 and both did quite well when I did my part. The first load was a standard Hornady 150 grain "plinker" load that just happens to shoot really, really well at 100 yards. Second was a Nosler 155 custom competition. Didn't do bad, a bit hotter load than the Hornady 150 grain but loaded them early on in my loading career. I can do better but thought I'd use them up. Had an SD of 23.3 with an average velocity of 2644 over 20 rounds. Last shot, which sat in the chamber for a bit, threw it off with a 2699 velocity.
I should have an update on the carbon barrel come Monday.
I brought two loads I developed for my AR10 and both did quite well when I did my part. The first load was a standard Hornady 150 grain "plinker" load that just happens to shoot really, really well at 100 yards. Second was a Nosler 155 custom competition. Didn't do bad, a bit hotter load than the Hornady 150 grain but loaded them early on in my loading career. I can do better but thought I'd use them up. Had an SD of 23.3 with an average velocity of 2644 over 20 rounds. Last shot, which sat in the chamber for a bit, threw it off with a 2699 velocity.
I should have an update on the carbon barrel come Monday.
Playing with scopes trying to find the ONE still. Mounted an 4-16 ATACR for now, might end up at the NXS 2.5-10x 42. But this gun continues to amaze me with factory ammo and 110yds.
Very nice! I swapped a Athlon Helos BTR 2-12 onto mine last night. It added some chonk (~1/2lb) to the package compared to the hunting scope I had been using, but the hunting reticle on that scope limited me to about 400 yds. Fine for hunting, but this rifle shoots eerily well, so I had to scratch the itch to stretch it out.
Going to see what the weather is like tomorrow morning. If it's nice I'll try to stretch it out. I have some 2/3 ipsc steel at 900-1,150 depending on where I shoot from. The calculator says I'll be transsonic by 850'ish though. So idk how it's going to work. Shooting factory 168gr FGMM.
Get the eye relief correct and mark either side of the mounts on to the scope with a pencil.
Remove the scope, couple of wraps of PTFE tape (its what plumbers use) between each set of pencil marks.
Torque everything down and the tape should take up any slack.
Also if it does creep again you have a quick visual as you will see a bit of the tape as it is white.
Good luck
Remove the scope, couple of wraps of PTFE tape (its what plumbers use) between each set of pencil marks.
Torque everything down and the tape should take up any slack.
Also if it does creep again you have a quick visual as you will see a bit of the tape as it is white.
Good luck
Well. As expected the bullets were passing thru trassonic and lost a lot of consistency. Good new is I was able to get some 168gr ELD-M loaded up with a single digit SD and averaging 2653fps versus the 2495fps I was getting with the Federal Gold Metal.
So should be able to get out to almost 1,100yds now.
So should be able to get out to almost 1,100yds now.
If you don’t mind having a 4” barrel probably!
I don't recall if the published weight of 6.5 pounds for the 308 version is dead on or not, but the factory barrel profile isn't super light. I wouldn't be surprised at all if you could recontour it and shave half a pound.
I believe the 20" carbon barrel in 308 reduces the weight by about 1/4 of a pound. I do know they'll produce other lengths, shorter lengths, which would help reduce weight. Other than that, it's going to get expensive to remove any real weight and they'd all be one-off items (other than say a Smoke carbon grip) since no one seems to be making lightweight anything for the Cross (not even Sig!).
So my 308 cross weighs 6.9lbs with the empty mag and the muzzle break for my can. Add 2+ pounds for the scope and mount and it comes in over 9lbs. I would like to shave it down a little bit if posible. Carbon barrel seems like the easiest option but I am not sure if there is enough of a difference to make it worth it?
Once I have my stock Sig 308 barrel off the gun, I'll weigh it and post it up here.
I don't think the carbon barrel is going to save that much over the factory barrel. The factory barrel isn't that heavy of a profile to start. I would be nice if someone was able to weight their factory barrel for us.
See post above yours. I'm just waiting for my carbon barrel to come back from CarbonSix and have it installed. Hoping any day now.
I may have my rifle back tomorrow with the carbon barrel swapped in. Waiting to hear back from the gunsmith tomorrow and I'll fill everyone in with the issue I had. Was a Sig tolerance issue (shocker).
-ON MY SCALE, the original Sig barrel weighed 2.22 pounds with the shoulder bushing and thread protector on.
-The Sig Cross, in 308, with the Schnee's 20" carbon barrel and a HUXWRX (OSS) muzzle brake weighed just over 7 pounds (like 7.03).
-The Cross with all of the above and a Athlon Cronus BTR II weighed in at 9.7 pounds.
-My scale is a cheap POS digital scale so it's not pinpoint accurate by any stretch but it's decently close.
So the short version of my issues, swapping in the CarbonSix barrel is that Sig apparently has a very small amount of guns that are at either end of the tolerance spectrum. Some are tight, some are loose but 99% are within the designed specification. Mine was on the tight side and the fix was to remove about 1/4 of the thread (just the thread on the barrel) which brought it into range and allowed to be within SAMMI specification on headspace. So we're now all good, just waiting to take it out to the range some time in the next few weeks.
-The Sig Cross, in 308, with the Schnee's 20" carbon barrel and a HUXWRX (OSS) muzzle brake weighed just over 7 pounds (like 7.03).
-The Cross with all of the above and a Athlon Cronus BTR II weighed in at 9.7 pounds.
-My scale is a cheap POS digital scale so it's not pinpoint accurate by any stretch but it's decently close.
So the short version of my issues, swapping in the CarbonSix barrel is that Sig apparently has a very small amount of guns that are at either end of the tolerance spectrum. Some are tight, some are loose but 99% are within the designed specification. Mine was on the tight side and the fix was to remove about 1/4 of the thread (just the thread on the barrel) which brought it into range and allowed to be within SAMMI specification on headspace. So we're now all good, just waiting to take it out to the range some time in the next few weeks.
It'd almost certainly be more than with the factory barrel.
I don't understand why people think carbon barrels are lighter. They're only lighter than a steel of the same contour, which most steel barrels are not. A thin steel barrel is lighter than any carbon.
Started breaking the new Schnee's/CarbonSix barrel in today. I'm getting about 100fps more out of the 20" Schnee's over the stock Sig barrel. I did have a suppressor on the carbon barrel as the picatinny adapter wouldn't work with the new configuration.
My average over 14 shots was 2800fps which is exactly what PMC claims for X-Tac with a 24" barrel. Air temps were 100+ degrees so maybe that and the suppressor accounts for the extra velocity. The average for the Sig barrel was 2644 (bare muzzle) and was further along in the break-in process. I still have about 30 rounds to go on CarbonSix's break in procedure. Groupings completely sucked but were getting better. I'd had enough of the heat and the entirely boring cleaning regiment so I'll finish up on another day.
I shot with the muzzle brake and no suppressor early on for ease of cleaning purposes. Noticeably reduced the rifle jumping around. Same with the suppressor, softened things up a bit.
My average over 14 shots was 2800fps which is exactly what PMC claims for X-Tac with a 24" barrel. Air temps were 100+ degrees so maybe that and the suppressor accounts for the extra velocity. The average for the Sig barrel was 2644 (bare muzzle) and was further along in the break-in process. I still have about 30 rounds to go on CarbonSix's break in procedure. Groupings completely sucked but were getting better. I'd had enough of the heat and the entirely boring cleaning regiment so I'll finish up on another day.
I shot with the muzzle brake and no suppressor early on for ease of cleaning purposes. Noticeably reduced the rifle jumping around. Same with the suppressor, softened things up a bit.
going from the 16" 308 barrel to a 20" sendero contour carbon barrel, here is the weight difference. Not a huge difference, for 4" more length and a heavier profile.
More great info here
Have you offered a 16" carbon barrel? It would be really nice to get rid of that stupid tapered shoulder.
Yes. Just got some in today, but they are gone already. More coming in the next few weeks. Again, they are usually gone before arrival.
Have you been able to weigh any of them?
