- Thread starter NOMAD
- Start date
Numero tres, but honestly I can't tell much difference between 2 or 3....maybe barrel contour and bottom metal finish?
I'd pick either one of those since I mostly run McMillan stocks on my other rifles. I can pm my dealer's info if you want to send either one of them my way.
I'd pick either one of those since I mostly run McMillan stocks on my other rifles. I can pm my dealer's info if you want to send either one of them my way.
Why only one....splurge and get them all!
would be hard to choose between one and four
would be hard to choose between one and four
The one with the can...
Hard choice - would need to have access to handle & shoot them all before I could make a decision. I'm looking forward to seeing a friend's V-22 when it arrives; will have to compare it to my jelrod-converted 40X & 40XB.
So hard to pick, but if I had to choose it would be number 1.
I'd probably go with the Ravage since it closely compares to my A-5 with that Grayboe stock...but something about that walnut keeps calling me back!!
DW
DW
I'd go with #3, looks like a bead blast/satin finish compared to #2
Number 3 or the M40 clone. So the magazines are the shape of an AICS mag? Thats convenient cause I hate the tiny 22 mags
Yup the mags fit in to standard AICS DBMs. It is nice to have a larger area to grab during mag changes.
I am in total agreement with this. So much so that my rainy day stash is getting itchy.
Kyle Taylor ( https://taylorprecisioneng.com/ ) is making those stocks. Great stuff.
Its a shame they don't show it but the butt plate is a heavy checkered affair that reminds me very much of the buttplates used on National Match M1903 Springfields.
Very nice design.
The beuty of that walnut is you use it hard with the knowledge that you can return it to a beautiful piece by just spending a little time hand rubbing in another coat of linseed or tung oil.
Classic but I agree rain becomes a bitch when you are sporting wood.
None of the Above!
Only 2 have an adjustable stock, so the other 2 are out.
Of the 2 with an adjustable stock, there are lot better options out there when it comes to adjustable stocks.
Sorry, not spending my money on any of those, when there are a lot better options out there!
Also honestly don’t understand why people are spending their money on options like that, but hey it’s their money to do with as they please.
Only 2 have an adjustable stock, so the other 2 are out.
Of the 2 with an adjustable stock, there are lot better options out there when it comes to adjustable stocks.
Sorry, not spending my money on any of those, when there are a lot better options out there!
Also honestly don’t understand why people are spending their money on options like that, but hey it’s their money to do with as they please.
Mine will be going in an AICS I have from upgrading my 6.5 to an MPA. Options improve functionality. Some guy shoots his rifle, finds a problem, says hey I can make this better, fixes it. Starts a small company, sells it, Merica!!!!!!!
Incredible. I shot a 1/2-3/4 inch group at 170 yards last weekend. Plus hitting 6 inch plates at 485.
hands down these are the most accurate .22 rifles I ever have shot.
I own multiple Anchutz rifles and shoot IR5050 bench rest and I can say that these rifles will outshoot them.
I plan to shoot the LR 22 matches with a V22 and at some point plan to build a 13.5 lb heavy gun for IR5050
i am sure once he word spreads these will become he action of choice for many bench rest shooters as well at long range tactical shooters.
hands down these are the most accurate .22 rifles I ever have shot.
I own multiple Anchutz rifles and shoot IR5050 bench rest and I can say that these rifles will outshoot them.
I plan to shoot the LR 22 matches with a V22 and at some point plan to build a 13.5 lb heavy gun for IR5050
i am sure once he word spreads these will become he action of choice for many bench rest shooters as well at long range tactical shooters.
So what stock would you put it in? It's a Rem 700 foot print so plenty out there to choose from.
- Fully Adjustable for Cheek, LOP, & Buttstock Position
- Takes AR style grips
- Has features/options for use with positional shooting
MPA would be my usual go to (with some mods). As you pointed out there could be others.
Seeing rifles like the ones posted above, brings this to mind
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/...vsNew.jpg?dl=0
(sorry, cant figure out how to post pictures since Photobucket pulled their crap)
It never ceases to amaze me to see someone shooting something that was based on what their Grandfather was carrying around in WWII, while at the same time they are using a LRF, Weather Station, and Ballistic Solver that are all wirelessly linked. Everything else has progressed and moved on, but people are still shooting with a very outdated design.
If it makes them happy, so be it. But it is going to take a lot of people refusing to buy outdated designs before the major manufacturers will make any changes.
Apologies for what is probably a side track, but it drives me insane to see outdated rifle designs be touted as being great.
Hats off to Vudoo for what they have done for rimfire, just to bad they are sticking them in the same old stocks. However I am sure that is what their customers want, so that is really no fault of theirs!
- Takes AR style grips
- Has features/options for use with positional shooting
MPA would be my usual go to (with some mods). As you pointed out there could be others.
Seeing rifles like the ones posted above, brings this to mind
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/...vsNew.jpg?dl=0
(sorry, cant figure out how to post pictures since Photobucket pulled their crap)
It never ceases to amaze me to see someone shooting something that was based on what their Grandfather was carrying around in WWII, while at the same time they are using a LRF, Weather Station, and Ballistic Solver that are all wirelessly linked. Everything else has progressed and moved on, but people are still shooting with a very outdated design.
If it makes them happy, so be it. But it is going to take a lot of people refusing to buy outdated designs before the major manufacturers will make any changes.
Apologies for what is probably a side track, but it drives me insane to see outdated rifle designs be touted as being great.
Hats off to Vudoo for what they have done for rimfire, just to bad they are sticking them in the same old stocks. However I am sure that is what their customers want, so that is really no fault of theirs!
You can put the V-22 in whatever stock you want that takes a 700. Those are just some of the rifles they built for the NRA World Shoot this past weekend. You really don't have to take it so personal or get so worked up about it. What you want in a rifle is not what I want or someone else wants. That is why there is a custom rifle company building these rifles. Want an MPA stock? Then get one. Honestly I don't like them or pistol grips. Does it make me or you wrong? Nope. It's about personal preference. A design is not "outdated" if someone still uses it and does as well as someone with a "new" design.
If that JAlenn is outdated, I must have missed a few generations of stock design. I would love to own one.
50% of the students that I deal with (MIL, LE, CIV) show up for training with rifles that are a train wreck waiting to happen.
They show up with ancient outdated designs:
- the combs are not high enough to support a proper or consistent cheek weld with an optic.
- the palm swells are not designed to support proper hand placement for optimal trigger manipulation.
- the overall stock size/design does not fit their length of pull properly.
- the butts and for-ends are not designed to optimally support positional shooting.
I can go on with a page full of issues, that shouldn’t be news to anyone.
As a result of that, the instructors have to spend hours, trying to either modify the rifles/setups, or having to work with the students to get them to where they can do the best with what they have. Most students then end up spending hundreds of dollars adding to or modifying their stocks, or they do the best thing and pitch their ancient stocks and switch over to a modular chassis system which can be configured to fit them properly.
Why do the students show up with rifles that don't fit them for $#!@, and don't function for $#!@?
- they listen to people who tell them, "buy what you prefer", rather than listening to people who tell them "buy what will actually fit you best" and "will work best for your shooting application".
- they walk into stores, and see walls & racks full of traditional rifle designs, so they figure that has to be what is best. The sales people sell them ancient outdated $#!@.
- they see a constant stream of posts on forums like these, where people glorify outdated designs and equipment.
- the agencies they work for, place things like tradition, over things like performance. We have always done it that way, if it was good enough for those that came before you, it is good enough for you!
“Professional Rifle Shooters”,
- do whatever it takes to insure that they have proper rifle fitment.
- have rifles that change/adjust as they change shooting positions.
- choose a rifle based on facts & science, not personal preference.
Why would any other rifle shooter striving for optimal performance accept anything less? Because their heads have been filled with BS, and they don't know any better!
Rimfire trainers, like the ones posted here, can be a phenomenal training tool. However training with an outdated rifle design is very counterproductive to developing an optimal skill set.
The people with gold medals, 1st place trophies, and their names in the record books, are not shooting rifles based on ancient outdated designs. They are shooting modular designs that can be quickly and easily be configured to fit them properly and positively support their shooting applications/positions.
Sorry, I am not trying to be an @$$hole, but the “personal preference BS” has no place when it comes to optimal performance whether you are shooting for a trophy or shooting for your life. Success comes down to skill and equipment, and equipment that does not properly fit you or optimally support your shooting application is worthless. If your shooting skill set is plinking bottles in your back yard, rock whatever floats your boat. But we owe it to every serious shooter, to make sure that they truly understand what is in their best interest if they are striving for the very best outcome possible.
They show up with ancient outdated designs:
- the combs are not high enough to support a proper or consistent cheek weld with an optic.
- the palm swells are not designed to support proper hand placement for optimal trigger manipulation.
- the overall stock size/design does not fit their length of pull properly.
- the butts and for-ends are not designed to optimally support positional shooting.
I can go on with a page full of issues, that shouldn’t be news to anyone.
As a result of that, the instructors have to spend hours, trying to either modify the rifles/setups, or having to work with the students to get them to where they can do the best with what they have. Most students then end up spending hundreds of dollars adding to or modifying their stocks, or they do the best thing and pitch their ancient stocks and switch over to a modular chassis system which can be configured to fit them properly.
Why do the students show up with rifles that don't fit them for $#!@, and don't function for $#!@?
- they listen to people who tell them, "buy what you prefer", rather than listening to people who tell them "buy what will actually fit you best" and "will work best for your shooting application".
- they walk into stores, and see walls & racks full of traditional rifle designs, so they figure that has to be what is best. The sales people sell them ancient outdated $#!@.
- they see a constant stream of posts on forums like these, where people glorify outdated designs and equipment.
- the agencies they work for, place things like tradition, over things like performance. We have always done it that way, if it was good enough for those that came before you, it is good enough for you!
“Professional Rifle Shooters”,
- do whatever it takes to insure that they have proper rifle fitment.
- have rifles that change/adjust as they change shooting positions.
- choose a rifle based on facts & science, not personal preference.
Why would any other rifle shooter striving for optimal performance accept anything less? Because their heads have been filled with BS, and they don't know any better!
Rimfire trainers, like the ones posted here, can be a phenomenal training tool. However training with an outdated rifle design is very counterproductive to developing an optimal skill set.
The people with gold medals, 1st place trophies, and their names in the record books, are not shooting rifles based on ancient outdated designs. They are shooting modular designs that can be quickly and easily be configured to fit them properly and positively support their shooting applications/positions.
Sorry, I am not trying to be an @$$hole, but the “personal preference BS” has no place when it comes to optimal performance whether you are shooting for a trophy or shooting for your life. Success comes down to skill and equipment, and equipment that does not properly fit you or optimally support your shooting application is worthless. If your shooting skill set is plinking bottles in your back yard, rock whatever floats your boat. But we owe it to every serious shooter, to make sure that they truly understand what is in their best interest if they are striving for the very best outcome possible.
Note how many votes it DID NOT get? (Also note, how many times have you seen a first place finisher using one?)
Note how the rifle stocks with little to no adjustment or modularity are the majority of responses?
But hey, it is "personal preference"!
LRShooter101
While I can agree with about 97% of what you have ranted about in this topic, however this wasn't made to debate rifle setup and adjustable stocks. Which be a great topic to revisit.
This was, a which one would you pick topic. Strictly a fun topic.
But in the same breath your making a factless claim thinking everyone needs a adjustable cheek piece. There are many rifles out there that don't have adjustable cheek pieces that are properly setup.
Every person is different and every Shooters individual needs vary.
The rifles pictured 2 of them are adjustable and the other 2 come with a adjustable I'd so desired. As well as what was already pointed out the V22 action fits in anybstick woth a rem 700 foot print.
But since you have done a outstanding job with thread drift where do you teach and what qualifications do you hold?
While I can agree with about 97% of what you have ranted about in this topic, however this wasn't made to debate rifle setup and adjustable stocks. Which be a great topic to revisit.
This was, a which one would you pick topic. Strictly a fun topic.
But in the same breath your making a factless claim thinking everyone needs a adjustable cheek piece. There are many rifles out there that don't have adjustable cheek pieces that are properly setup.
Every person is different and every Shooters individual needs vary.
The rifles pictured 2 of them are adjustable and the other 2 come with a adjustable I'd so desired. As well as what was already pointed out the V22 action fits in anybstick woth a rem 700 foot print.
But since you have done a outstanding job with thread drift where do you teach and what qualifications do you hold?
You are supposed to show up at class knowing everything while the instructors regale you about their awesomeness.
Sure at their very essence my firearms are just tools and function should be everything over form but reality firearms are more personal.
Perhaps it is smething you need to stake your life on or maybe just your hobby gun you ENJOY.
Your personal preference determines your decision not some experts decision.
This is 'Merica. We are spoiled for choice. Choices good and bad.
A shooter that loves his rifle and wants to shoot it is going to use it and practice with it more than a gun he just hates and that hate may just be based on the ugliness of an MPA stock no matter how ergonomic and good for him it may be.
People don't give their weapons names because it makes them shoot better, they do it because they have personified it.
If I were to be shipwrecked on a deserted island Charlie Babbit from Rain Man or The Professor on Gillian's Island may be the perfect companion to be marooned with but in reality wouldn't you want Ginger or MaryAnne?
In the long run you will be more successful get more enjoyment out of the irrational choice.
Last edited:
You are making an assumption that these so called "outdated designs" don't fit anyone. You think that if it doesn't have all the adjustable parts that it could never fit anyone. That's a false assumption. Not all stocks need adjustability if ordered correctly in the first place.
Tony and I also teach and have to fix people's stocks when setting up rifles for comb and length of pull but it's not due to the stock design per se but the student design and what they purchased in terms of stocks. You buy off the rack and your suit might not fit and same with rifles and being a student they don't know what is wrong as they came to us to learn. Once taught they fix the issue. Even if they read here they might not have the money or desire to buy a $1000 stock for their first rifle. It's about learning. Learning and personal preference are not exclusive and in fact they are inclusive as you learn what your personal preference is by shooting different stock types and styles.
You seem to have an an issue with the phrase personal preference. Sorry I am not using a MPA as it doesn't fit me right in the grip, cheek weld or how the fore end is set up. Should I use it because you think it's high tech or should I use the Manners T3 with a better grip, comb and formed feel for me? See that is personal preference and fitting a stock to the shooter. Personal preference does not mean using an illfitting stock but using the one that works well for the shooters needs but also fits them. That is the part of your assumption that doesn't hold true.
You obviously get pretty worked up about this subject but this isn't a thread about that. So again if you wanted to use one of those stocks you like with the Vudoo V-22 you can. Others might not like them and choose another. Personal preference.
Nomad,
Replied to you offline via PM about my qualifications, sorry but I don't post my personal info online.
This is not a personal pissing contest, so please don't take it that way. To respond:
Rob,
Pretty sure that I hit most of yours with my response above.
IMHO, you guys need to rethink how you throw arond "Personal Preference". If you pick a stock because it fits you, then that is matter of fact, not preference. Per your example, you picked a stock over a chasis because of specific performace parameters such as fit and function. Once again if it fits you and works for you, that is not preference, it is fact. If you had 3 stock designs that all fit you the same, and all performed the same, and you picked one, that is preference. There is a difference, and that is what I am trying to get at! Sorry, but I constantly see shooters using "personal preference" as a crutch or excuse to try and explain away poor decision making. That is also what I am trying to address.
If I got someone's attention with this, and it makes them really think about what they are going to spend money on, GREAT!
Replied to you offline via PM about my qualifications, sorry but I don't post my personal info online.
This is not a personal pissing contest, so please don't take it that way. To respond:
Sorry, but to me when you are talking about spending your hard earned money on a high dollar rimfire trainer, that is not a "Fun Topic", it is in reality a very serious topic because you are talking about purchasing a very serious and vital item for your training purposes. If you asked which rimfire rifle would you purchase for under $150 to shoot with your kids for fun, I would call that a "fun topic". When serious rifle choices are "fun", then IMHO people have lost focus on what should really be motivating them. Once again, what you shoot for entertainment is a "personal preference", what you shoot to win matches or stay alive, is far from being about personal preference, it should be 100% factually based on what is actually needed to produce optimal results. Could you have a "personal preference" that is also optimal for performance, sure, the key is not to confuse the two!
There are obviously many ways to properly setup a rifle. Whether you match the height of the optic to the comb with proper mount height, or whether you match the height of the comb to the height of the optic through various means (padding, riser, etc), the necessary outcome is that you are able to produce a proper alignment and cheek weld. Pretty sure we agree on that! However, what is better, to have to add a bunch of stuff to a fixed stock design for proper fit, or to just be able to adjust the stock for proper fit like you can do with an adjustable stock or chassis design? The answer to that could be "personal preference", however having a stock that actually fits properly, is not a matter of "personal preference".
Not getting any argument from me on that, but that is also why I stress the need to have a rifle that actually fits the shooter and their needs. Which based on what I actually see on a daily basis, is NOT what is happening. Shooters are picking a rifle because it works for their buddy, some top shooter is using it, people are raving about it on an internet forum, or my favorite because it is "Tacticool". When shooters understand, as you pointed out, that it is about them, and not anyone or anything else, then they will end up with a rifle that truly fits them and their needs.
Rob,
Pretty sure that I hit most of yours with my response above.
IMHO, you guys need to rethink how you throw arond "Personal Preference". If you pick a stock because it fits you, then that is matter of fact, not preference. Per your example, you picked a stock over a chasis because of specific performace parameters such as fit and function. Once again if it fits you and works for you, that is not preference, it is fact. If you had 3 stock designs that all fit you the same, and all performed the same, and you picked one, that is preference. There is a difference, and that is what I am trying to get at! Sorry, but I constantly see shooters using "personal preference" as a crutch or excuse to try and explain away poor decision making. That is also what I am trying to address.
If I got someone's attention with this, and it makes them really think about what they are going to spend money on, GREAT!
Last edited:
No that is personal preference. I prefer a certain stock. Hence it's my preference. My personal preference. You are trying to twist the words. Nowhere did I say someone should use a stock that doesn't fit them. They should use a stock that fits them and they prefer. Their personal preference. Calling something a fact is just saying it's correct.
Ok lets get back on track here.
This was purely meant to be a leisurely, lets enjoy some great looking rifles. If you were to get pick one which one would YOU prefer. We all know everyone's flavor differs and that your DREAM build will be different and your likes different.
Which one of the V22's get your blood flowing.
This was purely meant to be a leisurely, lets enjoy some great looking rifles. If you were to get pick one which one would YOU prefer. We all know everyone's flavor differs and that your DREAM build will be different and your likes different.
Which one of the V22's get your blood flowing.
Number 3. Still undecided on a stock. I like the bead blast look.
Im just collecting the other parts and will save my pennies. Have a lot of big expenditures coming up in the next year so a better rimfire will have to wait a little bit.
Im just collecting the other parts and will save my pennies. Have a lot of big expenditures coming up in the next year so a better rimfire will have to wait a little bit.
Good idea! Out of the 4 choices available; I would answer: Yes Please
By the way, my dad was in WWII not my grandfather. Fricken' Millennials...
Number 4 for sure. Love that setup, even if it don't "fit" me right.
I was a RO on Stage 5 (USPSA). Had the opportunity to shoot one of the Vudoo side matches.
#1 for me, I'm an AI fan. BTW does your action & mag work with the new AX AICS stocks?
Great thread Guys, thanks.
We're currently working with stock makers on their current line of stocks and we're developing a few new stocks as well. We've also tested most every chassis out there, so the sky is truly the limit where form, fit, function and personal preference are concerned. As far as M700 chassis systems having a monolithic type top rail, running from the rear of the receiver to the end of the forend, we're offering the Remington rear bridge with .600 hole spacing as an option so the monolithic rails properly interface the receiver. Our standard receiver is round front and rear with .860 hole spacing. I have a V-22 dropping into my RACS chassis and plan to run a CADEX at some point using the optional rear bridge. This makes it easier for everyone to perfectly re-create any possible centerfire configuration but train with Rimfire.
Thanks again,
MB
We're currently working with stock makers on their current line of stocks and we're developing a few new stocks as well. We've also tested most every chassis out there, so the sky is truly the limit where form, fit, function and personal preference are concerned. As far as M700 chassis systems having a monolithic type top rail, running from the rear of the receiver to the end of the forend, we're offering the Remington rear bridge with .600 hole spacing as an option so the monolithic rails properly interface the receiver. Our standard receiver is round front and rear with .860 hole spacing. I have a V-22 dropping into my RACS chassis and plan to run a CADEX at some point using the optional rear bridge. This makes it easier for everyone to perfectly re-create any possible centerfire configuration but train with Rimfire.
Thanks again,
MB
Oh my! (In Sulu voice)
Wouldn't this be special........
http://www.eurooptic.com/Remington-D...sis-86485.aspx
Id be dead man walking if the accounts payable manager found out but still.
Wouldn't this be special........
http://www.eurooptic.com/Remington-D...sis-86485.aspx
Id be dead man walking if the accounts payable manager found out but still.
Last edited:
MB that is a huge advantage over most other trainers out there. People can build almost an exact replica and train with it so they get the same feel and balance but without cost of firing a lot of centerfire ammo. Also for competing in .22 PRS matches they get the same feel as their centerfire rifles.
Thanks Hoser you just cost me a few "K".
Is the bolt throw about like other 22lr or more like a std. sa?
Is the bolt throw about like other 22lr or more like a std. sa?
That M40A6 chassis is cool and all but why would you pay that kind of $ over a new model AIAX chassis? For the price of the Remington you can buy the AIAX chassis with enough left over to cover the V-22 barreled action and trigger...
Oh I agree and from the sounds of it the A6 chassis isnt as plug and play as perhaps it was hoped it would be.
Despite all its adjust ability it looks to me like a Snagalotostuff. Im more a fan of the antique ergonomically depressing HTG.
If I bought a A6 chassis Id have to put a V22 A6 clone BR in it because .22 ammo would be all I would be able to afford.
The only thing cool about the A6 chassis is like everything else that may have had USMC dickskinners on it at one time it is likely to be collectible and sought after.
I present to you exhibit crazy for reference......
https://www.rockislandauction.com/detail/71/1626/colt-government#detail
Note the sold for price in the top right corner.
Oh my, now that's just retarded! But your right people love the USMC stuff (as long as your not the Marine having to use it... ha!).
Im having a hard time not getting a V22 on order. But unfortunately I'm deep into another project that is currently destroying my budget.
Im having a hard time not getting a V22 on order. But unfortunately I'm deep into another project that is currently destroying my budget.
My problem is coming across shit that I wasn't intending to buy but my weakness for shiny things keeps me from buying the things I should buy....
A decom Marsoc M45A1 in April (for much less than $10K), in July a S&W Performance Center 952-1 (Blued) and yesterday this distraction....
How is a fella supposed to get ahead when he has attention deficit disorder?
Last edited:
