I like the idea of using the control stock to see what is possible on a bare bones budget...get a cheap kydex cheek riser to make it more comfortable then leave it be on the other hand the "control" aspect is out the door now so go nuts is another option
Yes-I would like to see that! Back to the stock with any kind of cheek riser-kydex or any of the Amazon type neoprene, ballistic nylon with different fillers and see what happens!!!
I'd like to see them keep the same barrel on the modified rifle, they can still mod the barrel by threading it and lapping it, pretty much anything without swapping it out for an aftermarket barrel. I think a barrel swap should be saved for the very last modification if they decide to go that far.
I was also thinking a kydex riser to make it comfortable. I still like the stock control gun idea cuz i have done the cheap mods like glass bed to all my rifles cuz i like to tinker. That classic stock design is more for offhand or sticks. Maybe ok for a fencepost or barricade. It is horrible for prone.
If you want to see the control results again go to the first video? I doubt they want to shoot the same stock rifle every time and get the same results as a week ago... stock baseline has been established an shooting the stock rifle is now literally a waste of ammo.
@@driaannel9090 well it was touted as a control situation...really appreciate your non suggestion/idea response...the rifle clearly shoots great with the factory stock...my suggestion was just to make it more comfortable to get a cheek weld
The point of a “control” specimen is to be able to compare the modified to the “control”. If you are going to continue to modify both, why even buy two rifles. You aren’t comparing modified to stock anymore, you are just competing two modified rifles against each other. If that’s your intent, carry on my friends. But I thought the intent was to take 2 identical rifles, use the best one as the “control” (which means do nothing to it at all the entire test) and then start building the other to see how good you can get it to shoot compared to where you started and if it’s worth the money spent to do that? Should have never modified the control rifle in my opinion. You could have just bought one rifle and shown how much better it shoots with each modification. Love the channel and the content though, and love my EC tuners.
YOU are exactly right Ben. Nailed it. Return the control rifle to it's original stock... or put it in the test rifle's stock and then don't mess with it again. There's no need to shoot it and THAT is where you guys went awry. Modify the test rifle as much as possible, then and ONLY then, put them up against each other. That's the way the scientific method works.
keep any changes to the control to a total of $100 or less, or some other low value. how good can you get the control to shoot on a budget, vs the big bucks upgrades on the other rifle when money is less of an object. then compare the improvements of each, and to each other.
Do a different modification to each and compare the change to each. I.e. will a trigger make more of an improvement than a muzzle brake. Then make both changes to both rifles, now they are the same again (returning a control because they are the same again) now make different change again to each I.e. springs to one or lapping to the other again comparing the change. This will demonstrate which change has the most impact and allows for a control as they are similar to each other after each series of modifications.
After you cut the threads for tuner brake, shoot groups before installing brake, to see what effect loosing that little bit of weight on the end of the barrel has on groups. Thnx again!!
MY VOTE: Stock stock + EC Tuner break V.S. Orix + EC Tuner break. (changing the chassis didn't really do much, so leave it in stock stock. -- I want to see what's the cheapest way to keep em small.)
My vote for this as the next step too. I would love to know how good the control can group with simple upgrades. With tunerbreak can it go better then 0.5moa?
@@MJKulig I'd love to see it. If you can use the tuner to take 0.5moa off a group, I'll take of the designated suppressor off and turn my 500yard gun to an 800 yard gun (I require 4" groups for my applications.)
Leave the factory stock on the control and keep throwing money at the custom until the groups start to equal out. Polish the trigger on the control, put a cheek rest on it if comfort is so important. If the recoil is so bad on the control put a pull on pad on it. Leave the cheap one cheap and make the other match it. Don't make them the same. Stick to your guns on your original premise.
@@captainamer71 I think one of them said, I believe it was the shooter, said that the expectation of recoil throws the shot off. I've never shot a 6.5 Needmore but I've shot a 6.5 Swede and the recoil isn't much. They've now put a tuner brake on the custom, I think they should put one on the control rifle too and see if that brings accuracy up to where the custom rifle is now. Keep the cheap rifle cheap.
The best use of this series is to compare different mods to see where you get the most bang for your buck. You have already shown what you can do with a stock gun, so no need to keep doing the same thing. Try different mods on each and compare results. For example, put a Trigger in one and an EC tuner break on the other, and compare the results. Then bring them back to equal and try something else.
The "control" should keep the barrel and action stock, on the non-control you should add a brake, upgrade the trigger, change the bolt, etc. especially if they are shooting the same in the same Oryx stock. This way you can see what modifications are help the most and also rule out the difference being barrel break-in. Then after you have ruled out barrel break-in upgrade the control to the same point and see if you can duplicate the results.
I HIGHLY recommend that while your installing the tuner, put a 11 degree crown on the barrel and also lap the bolt lugs until there is equal contact on both lugs. The Remington crown is full of burrs and the lug contact causes irregular clamping. That will help a lot to produce sub-MOA groups.
How about doing the same upgrades to each rifle (stock, trigger, bipod, etc) but one gets a high quality model and the other gets a budget model? This way you can show the differences between going crazy on a build vs going very budget oriented. This would show what items are really worth spending money on and what isn't necessary?
For me personally, I would like to see one gun as close to a “budget” gun as possible with minor inexpensive modifications such as a trigger and simple muzzle break and maybe lastly a custom load work up The second gun…go all out with modifications, giving no regard to expense to trigger, stock, EC Tuner, barrel etc and of course doing a custom load work up as well. Doing the comparison of the two may give viewers a direction of what they may want to do with their own rifles and the expenses in which to do it with
Loving the testing but one five shot half MOA group from the modified stock doesn't prove anything(especially when all the previous groups were ~1moa). You should really be shooting at least 3 5 shot groups and taking an average if you want to approach statistical relevance. You've said yourself that one quarter minute group doesn't make it a quarter minute gun. Thanks for your efforts.
Where to go from here. Suggestions: Check the bedding accuracy with a dial indicator. Attach a clamp to the barrel and put the indicator on the stock. Stand the rifle up and loosen and tighten the lug screws one at a time. If you have more than .003 run-out it will affect the accuracy. I have been doing custom pillar bedding since 1975. My bedding accuracy is around .0001 to .0004 when I am finished bedding a rifle. Check the bolt lug contact by using a sharpie to ink up the back of the lugs on the bolt. Degrease both action and bolt lugs surfaces first. Work the bolt 3 to 5 times up and down. If you do not have good contact on both lugs it can again affect accuracy. Check both 6.5 rifles for bedding and bolt contact. If the bedding and bolt contact are acceptable then the Remington barrel might improve with a cryogenic treatment. (maybe) It worked for the Krieger 222 Remington Mag barrel I installed on my Cooper model 21.
You should have made no modifications to the control and just shoot exactly same number of rounds with it as with the test unit. This would have given you info on how the barrel changes and you would have been able to isolate the impact of the modifications.
Leave the original stock on the poor shooting gun that shot 1/2 moa. Take the "control" rifle and add brake tuner. Then you can see if major upgrades are worth "the juice" over just pillar bedding and free floating a stock rifle.
I have seen many rifles break the rules of accuracy. The last mass produced rifle I sighted in and developed a load for was a rush job for a friend that needed his rifle for the first weekend of deer season. The rifle was a Remington 700 in 270 Winchester with the black Tupperware plastic stock. Had to scrape the action area of the stock for a high spot with a pocket knife because you would get rocking of the barreled action when you would tighten or loosen front and rear action screws. Did not have time to piller bed. Mount the scope, bore sighted , worked a latter loads of H4831 and 130 gr Sierra Boat tail soft points. Max load of 60gr. Of H4831 shot best 3/4 in group five shot from skinny factory barrel. Not only that . The bullet had About 1/8 inch jump to the land because of a long throat. Never obtain accuracy so fast with so little work. I repeated to test the following morning to make sure it was not a fluke. Shot 3 more 5 shot group with same results.
To everyone complaining about the modification of the “control” rifle. Eric explains they already have enough data points on its original configuration at the beginning of the video. That data is the constant. They can do whatever they want to the “control” rifle to see what improvements are. Now the major problem everyone has is the continued use of the word “control” regarding the rifle after its been modified.
Catch both barrels up to = rounds, same stocks, triggers, whatever y’all decide and then try to advance the weaker/less accurate one with tuner and bed job. Whatever y’all decide will make great content. It’s a win win
At this point, you have a new control. The data from this rifle in all of the different stocks is your control. Stop shooting it. Start upgrading the other rifle and shooting it until the round counts match and then re-access your data. Depending on what happens with the other rifle, you may want to go back to the control rifle At THE END of the planned testing and only apply the modifications that showed noticeable improvement on the upgrade rifle. This will allow you to determine the minimum upgrades you need to maximize the accuracy of these rifles. Once you start cutting metal, you can't go back. This is a great series, btw. Thanks for doing it.
Thanks for trying different stocks, I was wondering if I should upgrade mine, at least I know what to consider now. As for the next upgrade I would do the trigger as this is a DIY upgrade rather than pay a gunsmith at this stage. You could try two different triggers one with a sear and a Triggetech, I noticed a significant improvement when I upgraded to the TT. Next would be the tuner break (My EC tuner is working wonders on my Vudoo, Thank you!) and finally you go the whole hog and true up the action and replace the barrel. Great series guys, looking forward to the next instalment.
Do the same things to both, so you have a sample size of two instead of one. When you are done all the modifications, and have all the results, put them both back in the stock stock to see how much error came from the factory stock.
I think another video at some point you could make in this project is just re-verifying your test results by repeating a select few tests and just seeing if they're repeating in results as well
Really enjoying this series! Can't wait to see what the EC Tuner Brake does. Based on my experience, I'm expecting a sizable improvement in groups. I have an EC Tuner Brake on my 6.5 Needsmoor and am getting ready to order one for a 300 Win Mag. Thanks Eric & Jason!
Follow the natural progression of a beginning precision shooter. 1. Put off the shelf rifle in a chassis with entry level scope, Athlon, or similar. Use good factory ammo, like Federal GMM. 2. Upgrade scope from entry level to mid-level like Vortex or Bushnell or Burris. 3. Upgrade trigger. 4. Begin using hand loads. 5. Replace barrel with Brux, Krieger etc.
I feel the only way to really know what effect the changes are making is to start to reload your ammo. Berger factory ammo is good, but still factory ammo.
One suggestion is if you have the 2 rifles in oryx, try changing torque settings on each rifle. Torque tuning a smalllbore rimfire rifle can have drastically different effects. Let's see what it does on centerfire
Erik, another great video series! I’m watching some of your older reload videos and learning a lot about what makes an accurate load. I have my own personal rifle range and am obsessed with rifle accuracy with low recoil easy to buy calibers. I do not compete with anybody but myself. In your experience what is peak to near peak accuracy life of 223 and 6.5 creedmoor? Shooting a lot more 223 lately. All shooting is done with a cool barrel. All guns have cut rifle match barrels. My loads are mild and some factory match ammo.
You started with identical rifles with different accuracy. The upgrades made a major difference. I agree to make the same upgrades and start to determine if the accuracy is at the same ratio. By making the same upgrades to both rifles it should determine if the barrels are the reason or the difference. However, it is your efforts and content, and I am just the guy that enjoys your channel and the dynamic you have with each other. Thank you both for sharing.
Great content and really enjoying the series! So many keyboard scientists commenting about losing the control, but there is already enough "control" data. I like the idea of keeping one rifle one step behind the other rifle. I would suggest upgrading the trigger before threading the barrel and adding a tuner brake. Here are some next step suggestions: trigger upgrade, thread barrel and add a tuner, develop a load for one rifle, blue print the action and upgrade to a match barrel, add a guided firing pin (for consistent ignition).
I'd play with torque specs and also check each chassis for any unwanted tension. Also if a chassis fits well I belive the playing field is level as far as accuracy. The bipod is going to make a bigger difference than another chassis will. This is just what I've seen. Of course when you get into positional shooting you want the chassis to work with your body more.
Wow, this is really opening my eyes. I was thinking of putting my Savage 12FV into a chassis but I'm having second thoughts for the cost. With my 120gr handloads and good glass I started out at 1/2moa and long story short with load development, if I do my part that rifle has posted 5 shot groups at .360". Call it 3/8moa. Of course that is at 100 yards to minimize my mistakes but that rifle groups amazingly. The 12FV sits in an upgraded stock, still Tupperware but it's much stiffer than my Axis 270 and has a wider, flat bottom forend. Currently I'm only shooting at 300 yards that's why the 120's get loaded but 140's are in the works for ranges over that but at 300 I have seen a few 1moa groups. I'm very interested in this project and can't wait to see where it ends up. How about trying some simple handloads to see what better consistency will do for groups and what the rifles will do compared to off the shelf ammo ? Thanks.
Ammo used? But actually years ago I fiber glass epoxied the whole sythentic stock, I dremeled out the interior, glass bed the rifle, made the stock rigid with fiberglass and epoxy and did my own trigger job. it shoots like a dream. I don't get out enough because of costs lately, but for my first rifle that wasn't handed down and that I made modifications too, it shoots like a dream. I have no regrets even though an aftermarket stock would have been easier, I would have learned less and it would have cost a lot more. (oh, and I put a brake on it for fun), didn't need to, but I did.
The Remington700 is available in the Magpul stock out of the box. I have one in 260 with a threaded barrel. I have a lime saver rubber tuner on it now and it shoots great as a hunting rifle. My suggestion. Would be to continue movi forward with the control as a hunting rifle and the other as a competition rifle and compare costs as you go. I paid around $800 for mine plus shipping and all I've added is a $10 rubber vibration dampener. It is 1/2 MOA for under $1000. Full disclosure, I'm shooting handloads that I formed from 308 because factory 260 was not available at the time. I didn't do load development, it was a middle of the road load data from my Lyman 50 reloading manual. I literally looked at the minimum and maximum for the 140 grain SST, went to the midway charge and rounded off to the nearest even number. Which ended up being 40 grains of H 4350. I think my barrel is a heavier contour also, it was what ever came stock in the Magpul 700 configuration.
I have done the same thing to two Ruger 7mm mags same results till I went to reloading for both. And to my surprise one gun wanted shorter oal and 1 grain less powder and the other wanted longer oal and 1 more grain of powder to get the same group.
Given a ‘control’…leave one in the stock-stock and see how it can be improved without changing the overall look of it. Guts…change away and swap out. As for the modified…see how crazy on can get on a budget…if it’s possible. Soooo many forks in the road…thanks for doing this video series, guys.
Here’s a thought… Run 40 more rounds thru #2 to get the count back to being even again, go ahead and put #1 in an Oryx, thread both barrels so you can put a tuner brake on both, clean both like you have been, BUT!!!! While you have the barrels off, inspect/ compare both side by side to see what differences you find. Chamber details, crown, bore scope to see how the bore is being polished, etc. If no real differences are found during inspection, during re-assembly you’re going to know for a fact that both are torqued identical- which they might not be exactly the same right now and could be effecting harmonics- and at that point you’ll know without a doubt that everything is as close to exactly the same as possible.
I'm sure yall know this but some may not. It's easier to measure inside to outside edges or outside to inside which always equal to center to center. Great videos.
Erik, see if you agree with my analysis of your stock change: If an action is attached to an infinitely large mass, the barrel harmonic vibration will be primarily a result of barrel movement. If you change the mounting of the action to an extremely flexible stock, the forces of the harmonic vibrations are now shared with the stock. If another stock is less flexible, it should also change the harmonic vibration distribution. You could probably put a movable weight in the stock and tune the rifle platform, much as you do with the movable weight on your turner brake. Your thoughts???
I also like the idea of making them the same. It would be interesting to see how the groups and velocity changes as the barrels speed up, settle in, break in, or whatever you want to call it.
I think adding a trigger next is the way to go. I think it might be a good idea to exhaust all modifications that can be done at home first without a gunsmith. Trigger is the last piece of that before you start with a brake/barrel/etc.
It's hard to justify the cost , when the factory stock bedded shoots the best. Comfort is great but for the cost the stocks don't offer enough of an improvement. Let's see a trigger or tuner and if they are worth the cost/ benefit.
I agree, all I require of any rifle I buy is 1 MOA or better. Comfort is not that big a deal when you're only going to shoot a few deer per year with it.
Mutton dressed up as lamb. Just go all out step by step on 1, to show it's progress on each modification, at some point you are spending more money than its worth. Keep #2 within a budget of your every day users capabilities of modifications eg: drop in or bolt on mods that can be down without the need for a smith, when you have achieved this, them possible move onto the ammo for #2 improving it again within the capabilities of your average user. After all these NEED-MORE'S are not going to be brought by your average shooter with the intention of F Class.
I dont think you should do the same to both. This is a good opportunity to compare a nice gun to a hyperfocused gun. What I mean with that is this; The gun that originally got the Oryx chassis, I'll call this gun 1, was found to be nicer (as a direct result of said chassis) than gun 2 (the control gun) with the bedded and free floated stock, but at roughly the same accuracy. So, if you keep hyperfocusing gun 2 on accuracy, and forego all the niceties in favor of cost savings, while g1 gets upgraded with a nice but still good bang for buck parts, like the chassis, then you can see at the end of the ride where you end up in terms of how nice a gun is for a certain cost and accuracy. So if next test is going to be, say, triggers, then the outcome might be that the nice triggers is much easier to shoot, but given enough practice the original trigger can shoot just as well. In that case, G2 gets to keep the original trigger, and G1 gets upgraded to a favored one. If trigger upgrades do make a difference, but various price classes still perform the same, then the cheapest goes into G2 and G1 gets the nicer one. So the intention is to keep G1 and G2 equally accurate, but completely disregard the niceties on G2 in favor of cost savings. Keeping the guns equal has some value in statistical analysis but honestly 2 still isnt much and you'll gain almost as much from just shooting twice the number of groups per gun. If that sort of statistical reliability is important to you at all, then it would be good to see how many groups were shot in each configuration, the minimum, maximum and average sizes and, given enough samples per configuration, the standard deviation of the group size, but that last one's going to start eating into the ammunition funds at that point and probably not quite necessary.
Drill holes through the webbing in the forearm of the factory stock. Then fill to the top of the webbing with a resin mixed with hardener. You may need to channel it out again to make sure the barrel is floated. This will add weight and help rigidity of the factory stock. Do that for the control, then do each upgrade for the other, one upgrade at a time. New chassis, trigger, tuner brake, hand load, etc…
After you upgrade the one and tune it to the best possible group size, then using the factory stock of the control start changing one item at a time, such as the trigger, then load ammo to find its best node, then add tuner brake.
Erik, In my experience every time you pull & replace an action in the stock it can (not always) change the POI. take it out and put it back in and it can change, tighten the screw different it can change. If the lug is a press fit or bedded it can be very repeatable as long as the torque is consistent.
We can all say whatever but its up to Eric regardless. But the control was off because they weren't shooting the same to begin with. This just show what some of us are faced with what to do with what we got. Experience is priceless and these guys have plenty of it. That factory stock can be improved with a cheek piece and some plumbers putty in the butt stock on the cheap in my mind. You can also add a bag rider on the rear stud another $100 total and you may have a tack driver. Jb weld has been proven for me on my bedding jobs and iv tried some . Great series gentlemen. Maybe needs a little more
Take the control, and shoot it thru all of the stocks. That should give you an idea about barrel superiority. It is also catches you're up on round count. Then you can take run both out of orix stocks and make changes. I really enjoy this series because, it shows a step by step progression in finding accuracy from what most people are capable of doing with something that they actually have. Keep this kind of content.
I have a bergara B14 that was 1 MOA and I bedded the stock with Devcon, added a triggertech special, lapped the bolt lugs and now I get 1/4 MOA even at 600 yards.
I love doing these kind of experiments, and i love it even more when i don't have to spend the money to get an answer (thanks guys). I'd like to see what it costs to turn one of these into a consistent 1 moa rifle at 1000yds
Ahhh... you two are killing me! :) The reason for the control is this: it CONTROLS for the external variables... like a bad batch of ammo, a windy day, or shooter being in a funk. The whole point is to compare shooting the new thing to the old thing on the same day at the same time with the same shooter. By doing so, you can remove all doubt about whether the change you made was responsible for the improvement, or the external circumstances were responsible. Do the WHOLE set of tests you intend to do with the control, then when you are done, go nuts on the control and see if you can improve it then. But don't do it now.
@@CoyoteRegulator That's just it. There is no problem here. In science we call this "failing to reject the null hypothesis." What they've just proven is that their mods (so far) don't actually improve the accuracy of the gun. FULL STOP. If you can't come to that conclusion you aren't doing science, and you shouldn't use words like "control." You've got to be capable of coming to that conclusion, or else you're simply steering your experiment to fit your desired outcome. By modifying the control now, they are LITERALLY saying they have no faith in their future mods either. If they DID have faith in their planned mods, they'd keep the control as-is to demonstrate that they do in fact improve the rifle over a stock one. What are you going to do if the control starts to shoot WORSE after the mods? Also, mad respect to all veterans and especially to Jason for his service, but I'm shocked a trained sniper is turning out to be such a whiner. Sacrifices must be made to do good science. I know it's uncomfortable to shoot a crappy gun, but it must be done. Just like it's crappy that someone who needs a new medication still has to take the placebo. We do this to know FOR SURE the medicine works. As I said before - finish the experiment the way it was designed, then afterword you can go hog wild on your control gun and see what it can do. We've all got plenty of time to see this through. What's the hurry?
You already know what the control does, you have the paper with holes in it. I say modify them both, but choose different options for each. A brake on one and a suppressor on the other. Brand X trigger on one, brand Y on the other and so on. The only valid thing for leaving the control as it is, is see how it shoots after the same amount of rounds. That will tell if the change is the barrel improving or the mods making a difference.
I agree, start throwing more into it to see if that barrel is capable of consistency. Trigger, chassis. Maybe make a cheek rest if you’re going to use that Remington stock. And sell us on that tuner brake 😁
I’m a shooting hobbyist and educated scientist. I did the same thing by following a scientific method (with more discipline) on two 700s (both .308s). Came to the conclusion that being hunting rifles, they need hunting stocks. One now lives in a Magpul Hunter 700 and the other is in a B&C Medalist. Both shoot sub-MOA with Hornady American Whitetail ammo. Both hate Hornady Match ammo. After tuning up some hand loads, they both shoot sub-half MOA.
Eric & Jason 5enjoying the videos, here in N. Ireland. I have a question for you. I just changed my old 6.5x55 Swedish for a new Tikka T3x Varmint 6.5x55 Swedish 20" barrel. Been looking at an Oryx stock. However, my gun has recesses either side of the chassis mounting bolts. These would go into the stock & I think improve stability in the stock. I have noted that some after market stocks, you just set the action into the stock which just has mounting bolt holes, no recesses either side of the bolt holes. Finally the question: does this matter? I'm concerned that the rifle action isn't as well supported & will shift when firing. What's your thought on that?? Also can you glass bed the action in an Oryx style stock?? Thank you for reading this far. Regards Hugo Dale
Run the other rifle thru all 4 stocks, and get your 40 rounds caught up. Obviously they are still "breaking in". And, as I've said from the beginning, add the extra weight to the factory stock. I fill an Altoids tin with cast bullets and stick it in the stock, wrapped in a rag if it's loose, hammer down corners of tin if it's tight...adds about a pound of weight, made a HUGE differance on a couple of my rifles/ muzzleloader. Also helped with balance..
Change triggers first, since that is probably the most common upgrade and then do the tuners. Following those you might consider blueprinting the actions and bolt mods. Great series, lots of info 👏.
We have a factory baseline for both rifles and we have seen what modifying the chassis system will do put them both back in factory stocks with an upgraded trigger so we can isolate the improvement of each modification individually then cut the barrel add a tuner break then we can see which modifications gave the most improvement individually and then combine them all together to make the rifle as good as it can possibly be
Most important thing in my opinion is the fire control system. You've got shooter comfort, so after that fire control, trigger, and David Tubb’s Speed Lock system. The break would be dead last if this is a hunting application.
Since they are both basically the same then walk improvements up on each one at a time. As an example, add a EC tuner to one then compare, then add an EC tuner to the other and compare again. I would like to see the improvements you make with each mod. Love the videos by the way!
You are doing an experiment I have been wanting to do.. Build 2 identical base rifles, then go 2 different directions with the options. For one try one the tuner brake, the other different store bought brakes. Different upgraded triggers or modded stock triggers. Eventually change scopes, etc.
Leaving the control alone definitely does provide benefit, even though you already have data for it...because as you already saw, it might shoot differently as break in occurs or some other reason. But if you bedded it, then there's no way to know if it's break-in, or bedding or combination of both.
Hi Erick, here is my humble opinion. The mass of people that shoot do not shoot in matches but watch your channel to be the best they can be. So here is my suggestion. Leave one in the stock formation (even though you already bedded it and it shoot sub MOA) then start with the other one and ad small updates (one at a time) like adding your tuner/brake so we can see the most bang for the buck. I realize the factory stock is uncomfortable but in the everyday application (not matches) the first shot is what counts (like hunting or bragging rights). So what I am saying is lets find out what improves the riffle the most in steps so we can see were we (your audiances) might want to. Thanks for asking, you have a great channel and I enjoy watching.
A control is not necessarily the absence of treatment. A control is doing what you would normally do, to compare that with whatever it is that you are evaluating. So if you normally would not keep the factory supplied stock, the best control is to replace that stock with what you would normally do. Scientifically, you did the right thing by replacing the stock in the control rifle.
I think doing a different change on one vs the other, like a trigger on the control gun in factory stock vs factory trigger and chassis on the other gun, since they are now shooting the same. This will highlight the priority of each upgrade.
You already have the targets as a reference for "control". Keep them the same to compare how upgrades could maybe perform differently on different rifles. Or do one upgrade to one and a different upgrade to the other and see the difference in improvement. Brake/tuner, trigger, true the action, maybe rebarrel vs stock barrel.
All great comments, ideas. I side with budget vs customized to compare cost/benefit, also to have stated end point/goal for customized ie: consistent 1/2 inch moa? Finally have a couple shooters from beginner to average (compared to top class like you two) skill level use both to see if it shows a significant difference.(as in biggest factor is the shooter once rifle/ammo is 'good enough') In different test series I'd like you to answer for those of us(less than 400yd, 1 to 2 MOA, 4 times a year ) that use Factory ammo (standard and/or match quality) can using a tuner bring the precision even close (1/2" group size difference)to what hand loading can?
This would be a perfect scenario for selling your tuner brake. Put the control back together on the modified stock. Put a tuner on the control rifle. Put a trigger on rifle 1. Compare the two rifles. I guess you could throw high dollar parts at rifle 1 and keep the control rifle as cheap as possible while improving it at the same time.
I have bedded several rifles with JB weld with great results. It helps to let it sit a little while to thicken up and not be so runny. Even my 416 Taylor improved was bedded with jb weld and 600 rounds later it’s still holding up great. I also like acra glass gel and pro bed 2000 I believe it’s called. Those tupper ware stocks like on the factory stocks really needs to be roughed up to get a good stick.
Great stock test,you guys are the best for advice and experience,the 6.5 Creedmore group drives me crazy,I have shot a lot of good shooting guns and calipers over the years that will do anything the creedmores will do,been doing a little precision long range shooting mainly to learn from the guys that do really good at this the 6mm dasher a popular one,but just works well for tuning and bullet protrusion and also suppressed. Dumping money in to gun doesn't always make it shoot well in a particular situation.
Keep the ‘control’ one-step behind the other freedom delivery machine, that will show the difference in progression or set back with each modification. I’d put a tuner brake and or trigger on the non-control gun next. one change at a time, if time allows. I don’t see the point in leaving the control “factory” its baseline has been established. continuing to test with the factory stock would be interesting. I wouldn’t get into multiple different triggers, different brakes, and chassis for now so we keep the testing methodology as simple and predictable as possible. I love this series! What is probably more helpful than anything is the approach you guys are taking, both of you having built extremely accurate rifles in your time, but coming into this with an open mind and almost no ‘plan’. That’s how I usually approach building a rifle, but that’s because I don’t know what the heck I’m doing. Hahaha!
Here is an idea for consideration. A new shooter on a BUDGET will get a stock rifle and use it as much as he can at the beginning and start replacing things as he needs or thinks would yield the greatest results quicker for cheaper. The comfort was the first issue and was resolved by replacing the stocks on both. Now some budget shooters will go the route of replacing the barrel and blueprinting the action as they have the cash. Others will use as much of the stock rifle as possible. Do spring kits, replace triggers and tuning the stock barrel etc. This might be an opportunity to show us what really yields the best results for the least amount of cash?
So I think the question was answered about the factory stock. It can be made to shoot as well, buy it takes more effort to shoot and isn't as comfortable so it probably won't be as consistent over multiple strings, especially once some fatigue sets in. I'd be interested to see both rifles with tuner brakes in either the same chassis to see if the tuner setting is the same, or two of the same chassis with the tuner brakes. Also, maybe lap the lugs on the factory bolt on one rifle (or both) to see what degree of change there is.
I like the idea of using the control stock to see what is possible on a bare bones budget...get a cheap kydex cheek riser to make it more comfortable then leave it be on the other hand the "control" aspect is out the door now so go nuts is another option
Yes-I would like to see that! Back to the stock with any kind of cheek riser-kydex or any of the Amazon type neoprene, ballistic nylon with different fillers and see what happens!!!
I'd like to see them keep the same barrel on the modified rifle, they can still mod the barrel by threading it and lapping it, pretty much anything without swapping it out for an aftermarket barrel. I think a barrel swap should be saved for the very last modification if they decide to go that far.
I was also thinking a kydex riser to make it comfortable. I still like the stock control gun idea cuz i have done the cheap mods like glass bed to all my rifles cuz i like to tinker. That classic stock design is more for offhand or sticks. Maybe ok for a fencepost or barricade. It is horrible for prone.
If you want to see the control results again go to the first video? I doubt they want to shoot the same stock rifle every time and get the same results as a week ago... stock baseline has been established an shooting the stock rifle is now literally a waste of ammo.
@@driaannel9090 well it was touted as a control situation...really appreciate your non suggestion/idea response...the rifle clearly shoots great with the factory stock...my suggestion was just to make it more comfortable to get a cheek weld
The point of a “control” specimen is to be able to compare the modified to the “control”. If you are going to continue to modify both, why even buy two rifles. You aren’t comparing modified to stock anymore, you are just competing two modified rifles against each other. If that’s your intent, carry on my friends. But I thought the intent was to take 2 identical rifles, use the best one as the “control” (which means do nothing to it at all the entire test) and then start building the other to see how good you can get it to shoot compared to where you started and if it’s worth the money spent to do that? Should have never modified the control rifle in my opinion. You could have just bought one rifle and shown how much better it shoots with each modification. Love the channel and the content though, and love my EC tuners.
YOU are exactly right Ben. Nailed it.
Return the control rifle to it's original stock... or put it in the test rifle's stock and then don't mess with it again. There's no need to shoot it and THAT is where you guys went awry. Modify the test rifle as much as possible, then and ONLY then, put them up against each other.
That's the way the scientific method works.
💯 your control is lost.
I agree with Ben, 100%.
keep any changes to the control to a total of $100 or less, or some other low value.
how good can you get the control to shoot on a budget, vs the big bucks upgrades on the other rifle when money is less of an object. then compare the improvements of each, and to each other.
Do a different modification to each and compare the change to each. I.e. will a trigger make more of an improvement than a muzzle brake. Then make both changes to both rifles, now they are the same again (returning a control because they are the same again) now make different change again to each I.e. springs to one or lapping to the other again comparing the change. This will demonstrate which change has the most impact and allows for a control as they are similar to each other after each series of modifications.
After you cut the threads for tuner brake, shoot groups before installing brake, to see what effect loosing that little bit of weight on the end of the barrel has on groups.
Thnx again!!
This is a good idea
MY VOTE: Stock stock + EC Tuner break V.S. Orix + EC Tuner break.
(changing the chassis didn't really do much, so leave it in stock stock. -- I want to see what's the cheapest way to keep em small.)
My vote for this as the next step too. I would love to know how good the control can group with simple upgrades. With tunerbreak can it go better then 0.5moa?
@@MJKulig I'd love to see it. If you can use the tuner to take 0.5moa off a group, I'll take of the designated suppressor off and turn my 500yard gun to an 800 yard gun (I require 4" groups for my applications.)
Leave the factory stock on the control and keep throwing money at the custom until the groups start to equal out. Polish the trigger on the control, put a cheek rest on it if comfort is so important. If the recoil is so bad on the control put a pull on pad on it. Leave the cheap one cheap and make the other match it. Don't make them the same. Stick to your guns on your original premise.
I think this is the best way to go.
How is a 6.5 CM such horrible recoil 🤷🏼♂️🤣
@@captainamer71 I think one of them said, I believe it was the shooter, said that the expectation of recoil throws the shot off. I've never shot a 6.5 Needmore but I've shot a 6.5 Swede and the recoil isn't much. They've now put a tuner brake on the custom, I think they should put one on the control rifle too and see if that brings accuracy up to where the custom rifle is now. Keep the cheap rifle cheap.
The best use of this series is to compare different mods to see where you get the most bang for your buck. You have already shown what you can do with a stock gun, so no need to keep doing the same thing. Try different mods on each and compare results. For example, put a Trigger in one and an EC tuner break on the other, and compare the results. Then bring them back to equal and try something else.
The "control" should keep the barrel and action stock, on the non-control you should add a brake, upgrade the trigger, change the bolt, etc. especially if they are shooting the same in the same Oryx stock. This way you can see what modifications are help the most and also rule out the difference being barrel break-in. Then after you have ruled out barrel break-in upgrade the control to the same point and see if you can duplicate the results.
I HIGHLY recommend that while your installing the tuner, put a 11 degree crown on the barrel and also lap the bolt lugs until there is equal contact on both lugs. The Remington crown is full of burrs and the lug contact causes irregular clamping. That will help a lot to produce sub-MOA groups.
Great job!
Most folks, who can own a rifle, can't afford much, but this wonderful series answers questions for your poorer fans!
How about doing the same upgrades to each rifle (stock, trigger, bipod, etc) but one gets a high quality model and the other gets a budget model? This way you can show the differences between going crazy on a build vs going very budget oriented. This would show what items are really worth spending money on and what isn't necessary?
Interesting series. Atleast you guys are keeping it fun to watch.
Thank you for sharing your research. As always very interesting and very informative.
For me personally, I would like to see one gun as close to a “budget” gun as possible with minor inexpensive modifications such as a trigger and simple muzzle break and maybe lastly a custom load work up
The second gun…go all out with modifications, giving no regard to expense to trigger, stock, EC Tuner, barrel etc and of course doing a custom load work up as well.
Doing the comparison of the two may give viewers a direction of what they may want to do with their own rifles and the expenses in which to do it with
I started laughing when you said J B weld because I've used it too. Heck it works good for me. Great vids
Jb weld really does work great. I’ve used it on several rifles myself.
Pillar bedding the tupperware stock was very encouraging. I’d like to see that configuration with and without a tuner brake.
Loving the testing but one five shot half MOA group from the modified stock doesn't prove anything(especially when all the previous groups were ~1moa). You should really be shooting at least 3 5 shot groups and taking an average if you want to approach statistical relevance. You've said yourself that one quarter minute group doesn't make it a quarter minute gun. Thanks for your efforts.
Where to go from here.
Suggestions: Check the bedding accuracy with a dial indicator. Attach a clamp to the barrel and put the indicator on the stock. Stand the rifle up and loosen and tighten the lug screws one at a time. If you have more than .003 run-out it will affect the accuracy. I have been doing custom pillar bedding since 1975. My bedding accuracy is around .0001 to .0004 when I am finished bedding a rifle.
Check the bolt lug contact by using a sharpie to ink up the back of the lugs on the bolt. Degrease both action and bolt lugs surfaces first. Work the bolt 3 to 5 times up and down. If you do not have good contact on both lugs it can again affect accuracy. Check both 6.5 rifles for bedding and bolt contact. If the bedding and bolt contact are acceptable then the Remington barrel might improve with a cryogenic treatment. (maybe) It worked for the Krieger 222 Remington Mag barrel I installed on my Cooper model 21.
You should have made no modifications to the control and just shoot exactly same number of rounds with it as with the test unit. This would have given you info on how the barrel changes and you would have been able to isolate the impact of the modifications.
Leave the original stock on the poor shooting gun that shot 1/2 moa. Take the "control" rifle and add brake tuner. Then you can see if major upgrades are worth "the juice" over just pillar bedding and free floating a stock rifle.
I have seen many rifles break the rules of accuracy. The last mass produced rifle I sighted in and developed a load for was a rush job for a friend that needed his rifle for the first weekend of deer season. The rifle was a Remington 700 in 270 Winchester with the black Tupperware plastic stock.
Had to scrape the action area of the stock for a high spot with a pocket knife because you would get rocking of the barreled action when you would tighten or loosen front and rear action screws. Did not have time to piller bed. Mount the scope, bore sighted , worked a latter loads of H4831 and 130 gr Sierra Boat tail soft points. Max load of 60gr. Of H4831 shot best 3/4 in group five shot from skinny factory barrel. Not only that . The bullet had About 1/8 inch jump to the land because of a long throat. Never obtain accuracy so fast with so little work. I repeated to test the following morning to make sure it was not a fluke. Shot 3 more 5 shot group with same results.
To everyone complaining about the modification of the “control” rifle. Eric explains they already have enough data points on its original configuration at the beginning of the video. That data is the constant. They can do whatever they want to the “control” rifle to see what improvements are. Now the major problem everyone has is the continued use of the word “control” regarding the rifle after its been modified.
Catch both barrels up to = rounds, same stocks, triggers, whatever y’all decide and then try to advance the weaker/less accurate one with tuner and bed job. Whatever y’all decide will make great content. It’s a win win
Outstanding Eric, keep enjoying your life! I'll take one.
At this point, you have a new control. The data from this rifle in all of the different stocks is your control. Stop shooting it. Start upgrading the other rifle and shooting it until the round counts match and then re-access your data. Depending on what happens with the other rifle, you may want to go back to the control rifle At THE END of the planned testing and only apply the modifications that showed noticeable improvement on the upgrade rifle. This will allow you to determine the minimum upgrades you need to maximize the accuracy of these rifles. Once you start cutting metal, you can't go back. This is a great series, btw. Thanks for doing it.
I agree with this assessment..
You are the precision guy! I like the apples vs apples. It will show a close production unexplained edge.
Thanks for trying different stocks, I was wondering if I should upgrade mine, at least I know what to consider now. As for the next upgrade I would do the trigger as this is a DIY upgrade rather than pay a gunsmith at this stage. You could try two different triggers one with a sear and a Triggetech, I noticed a significant improvement when I upgraded to the TT. Next would be the tuner break (My EC tuner is working wonders on my Vudoo, Thank you!) and finally you go the whole hog and true up the action and replace the barrel.
Great series guys, looking forward to the next instalment.
Very dope series
Do the same things to both, so you have a sample size of two instead of one. When you are done all the modifications, and have all the results, put them both back in the stock stock to see how much error came from the factory stock.
I think another video at some point you could make in this project is just re-verifying your test results by repeating a select few tests and just seeing if they're repeating in results as well
Really enjoying this series! Can't wait to see what the EC Tuner Brake does. Based on my experience, I'm expecting a sizable improvement in groups. I have an EC Tuner Brake on my 6.5 Needsmoor and am getting ready to order one for a 300 Win Mag. Thanks Eric & Jason!
Thank you 😊
Follow the natural progression of a beginning precision shooter. 1. Put off the shelf rifle in a chassis with entry level scope, Athlon, or similar. Use good factory ammo, like Federal GMM. 2. Upgrade scope from entry level to mid-level like Vortex or Bushnell or Burris. 3. Upgrade trigger. 4. Begin using hand loads. 5. Replace barrel with Brux, Krieger etc.
I feel the only way to really know what effect the changes are making is to start to reload your ammo. Berger factory ammo is good, but still factory ammo.
This is 100% but you don't reload at least try different manfacuters of ammo to see what they really like. IMHO
Great video!
The exact reason I haven't swapped out my tikka. Shoots a quarter moa in factory stock, no bedding or pillars. Great video guys.👍
The chassis test is a good one. Always wondered about that.
I like the idea of the control being a step behind
One suggestion is if you have the 2 rifles in oryx, try changing torque settings on each rifle. Torque tuning a smalllbore rimfire rifle can have drastically different effects. Let's see what it does on centerfire
Erik, another great video series! I’m watching some of your older reload videos and learning a lot about what makes an accurate load. I have my own personal rifle range and am obsessed with rifle accuracy with low recoil easy to buy calibers. I do not compete with anybody but myself. In your experience what is peak to near peak accuracy life of 223 and 6.5 creedmoor? Shooting a lot more 223 lately. All shooting is done with a cool barrel. All guns have cut rifle match barrels. My loads are mild and some factory match ammo.
You started with identical rifles with different accuracy. The upgrades made a major difference. I agree to make the same upgrades and start to determine if the accuracy is at the same ratio. By making the same upgrades to both rifles it should determine if the barrels are the reason or the difference. However, it is your efforts and content, and I am just the guy that enjoys your channel and the dynamic you have with each other. Thank you both for sharing.
Just bought a Tuner Brake! Thanks!
Great content and really enjoying the series! So many keyboard scientists commenting about losing the control, but there is already enough "control" data. I like the idea of keeping one rifle one step behind the other rifle. I would suggest upgrading the trigger before threading the barrel and adding a tuner brake. Here are some next step suggestions: trigger upgrade, thread barrel and add a tuner, develop a load for one rifle, blue print the action and upgrade to a match barrel, add a guided firing pin (for consistent ignition).
True the action on one of them.
I'd play with torque specs and also check each chassis for any unwanted tension. Also if a chassis fits well I belive the playing field is level as far as accuracy. The bipod is going to make a bigger difference than another chassis will. This is just what I've seen. Of course when you get into positional shooting you want the chassis to work with your body more.
Wow, this is really opening my eyes. I was thinking of putting my Savage 12FV into a chassis but I'm having second thoughts for the cost. With my 120gr handloads and good glass I started out at 1/2moa and long story short with load development, if I do my part that rifle has posted 5 shot groups at .360". Call it 3/8moa. Of course that is at 100 yards to minimize my mistakes but that rifle groups amazingly. The 12FV sits in an upgraded stock, still Tupperware but it's much stiffer than my Axis 270 and has a wider, flat bottom forend. Currently I'm only shooting at 300 yards that's why the 120's get loaded but 140's are in the works for ranges over that but at 300 I have seen a few 1moa groups. I'm very interested in this project and can't wait to see where it ends up. How about trying some simple handloads to see what better consistency will do for groups and what the rifles will do compared to off the shelf ammo ? Thanks.
Ammo used? But actually years ago I fiber glass epoxied the whole sythentic stock, I dremeled out the interior, glass bed the rifle, made the stock rigid with fiberglass and epoxy and did my own trigger job. it shoots like a dream. I don't get out enough because of costs lately, but for my first rifle that wasn't handed down and that I made modifications too, it shoots like a dream. I have no regrets even though an aftermarket stock would have been easier, I would have learned less and it would have cost a lot more. (oh, and I put a brake on it for fun), didn't need to, but I did.
The Remington700 is available in the Magpul stock out of the box. I have one in 260 with a threaded barrel. I have a lime saver rubber tuner on it now and it shoots great as a hunting rifle. My suggestion. Would be to continue movi forward with the control as a hunting rifle and the other as a competition rifle and compare costs as you go. I paid around $800 for mine plus shipping and all I've added is a $10 rubber vibration dampener. It is 1/2 MOA for under $1000. Full disclosure, I'm shooting handloads that I formed from 308 because factory 260 was not available at the time. I didn't do load development, it was a middle of the road load data from my Lyman 50 reloading manual. I literally looked at the minimum and maximum for the 140 grain SST, went to the midway charge and rounded off to the nearest even number. Which ended up being 40 grains of H 4350. I think my barrel is a heavier contour also, it was what ever came stock in the Magpul 700 configuration.
800$ for all that out the door is a great price actually.
I have done the same thing to two Ruger 7mm mags same results till I went to reloading for both. And to my surprise one gun wanted shorter oal and 1 grain less powder and the other wanted longer oal and 1 more grain of powder to get the same group.
Given a ‘control’…leave one in the stock-stock and see how it can be improved without changing the overall look of it. Guts…change away and swap out. As for the modified…see how crazy on can get on a budget…if it’s possible. Soooo many forks in the road…thanks for doing this video series, guys.
Here’s a thought… Run 40 more rounds thru #2 to get the count back to being even again, go ahead and put #1 in an Oryx, thread both barrels so you can put a tuner brake on both, clean both like you have been, BUT!!!! While you have the barrels off, inspect/ compare both side by side to see what differences you find. Chamber details, crown, bore scope to see how the bore is being polished, etc. If no real differences are found during inspection, during re-assembly you’re going to know for a fact that both are torqued identical- which they might not be exactly the same right now and could be effecting harmonics- and at that point you’ll know without a doubt that everything is as close to exactly the same as possible.
I'm sure yall know this but some may not. It's easier to measure inside to outside edges or outside to inside which always equal to center to center. Great videos.
One change at a time.
1. Trigger
2. Lap the bolt to the lugs
3. Tuner brake
Erik, see if you agree with my analysis of your stock change: If an action is attached to an infinitely large mass, the barrel harmonic vibration will be primarily a result of barrel movement. If you change the mounting of the action to an extremely flexible stock, the forces of the harmonic vibrations are now shared with the stock. If another stock is less flexible, it should also change the harmonic vibration distribution. You could probably put a movable weight in the stock and tune the rifle platform, much as you do with the movable weight on your turner brake. Your thoughts???
I also like the idea of making them the same. It would be interesting to see how the groups and velocity changes as the barrels speed up, settle in, break in, or whatever you want to call it.
Keep making these, so fun, keep a tally of total cost and compare it to off the shelf "good" guns at the end at similar price points.
I think adding a trigger next is the way to go. I think it might be a good idea to exhaust all modifications that can be done at home first without a gunsmith. Trigger is the last piece of that before you start with a brake/barrel/etc.
Changing to your comfort level works. If your shooting 3/4 MOA you are quite accurate. Even too a mile.
It's hard to justify the cost , when the factory stock bedded shoots the best. Comfort is great but for the cost the stocks don't offer enough of an improvement.
Let's see a trigger or tuner and if they are worth the cost/ benefit.
I agree, all I require of any rifle I buy is 1 MOA or better. Comfort is not that big a deal when you're only going to shoot a few deer per year with it.
Agree! I rather spend my money on a trigger upgrade above all.
Great test. Did you tried to put it back into the factory stock and repeat the same good result as you have started?
was thinking same!
Now try bedding the action in the chassis system and see what the difference is between bedded and unbedded
I’m wondering the same, at least around the recoil lug.
Put a tuner break on the controller and a trigger and leave it in the original stock
Mutton dressed up as lamb.
Just go all out step by step on 1, to show it's progress on each modification, at some point you are spending more money than its worth.
Keep #2 within a budget of your every day users capabilities of modifications eg: drop in or bolt on mods that can be down without the need for a smith, when you have achieved this, them possible move onto the ammo for #2 improving it again within the capabilities of your average user.
After all these NEED-MORE'S are not going to be brought by your average shooter with the intention of F Class.
I dont think you should do the same to both.
This is a good opportunity to compare a nice gun to a hyperfocused gun.
What I mean with that is this;
The gun that originally got the Oryx chassis, I'll call this gun 1, was found to be nicer (as a direct result of said chassis) than gun 2 (the control gun) with the bedded and free floated stock, but at roughly the same accuracy.
So, if you keep hyperfocusing gun 2 on accuracy, and forego all the niceties in favor of cost savings, while g1 gets upgraded with a nice but still good bang for buck parts, like the chassis, then you can see at the end of the ride where you end up in terms of how nice a gun is for a certain cost and accuracy.
So if next test is going to be, say, triggers, then the outcome might be that the nice triggers is much easier to shoot, but given enough practice the original trigger can shoot just as well. In that case, G2 gets to keep the original trigger, and G1 gets upgraded to a favored one. If trigger upgrades do make a difference, but various price classes still perform the same, then the cheapest goes into G2 and G1 gets the nicer one.
So the intention is to keep G1 and G2 equally accurate, but completely disregard the niceties on G2 in favor of cost savings.
Keeping the guns equal has some value in statistical analysis but honestly 2 still isnt much and you'll gain almost as much from just shooting twice the number of groups per gun. If that sort of statistical reliability is important to you at all, then it would be good to see how many groups were shot in each configuration, the minimum, maximum and average sizes and, given enough samples per configuration, the standard deviation of the group size, but that last one's going to start eating into the ammunition funds at that point and probably not quite necessary.
Drill holes through the webbing in the forearm of the factory stock. Then fill to the top of the webbing with a resin mixed with hardener. You may need to channel it out again to make sure the barrel is floated. This will add weight and help rigidity of the factory stock. Do that for the control, then do each upgrade for the other, one upgrade at a time. New chassis, trigger, tuner brake, hand load, etc…
After you upgrade the one and tune it to the best possible group size, then using the factory stock of the control start changing one item at a time, such as the trigger, then load ammo to find its best node, then add tuner brake.
Erik, In my experience every time you pull & replace an action in the stock it can (not always) change the POI. take it out and put it back in and it can change, tighten the screw different it can change. If the lug is a press fit or bedded it can be very repeatable as long as the torque is consistent.
We can all say whatever but its up to Eric regardless. But the control was off because they weren't shooting the same to begin with. This just show what some of us are faced with what to do with what we got. Experience is priceless and these guys have plenty of it. That factory stock can be improved with a cheek piece and some plumbers putty in the butt stock on the cheap in my mind. You can also add a bag rider on the rear stud another $100 total and you may have a tack driver. Jb weld has been proven for me on my bedding jobs and iv tried some . Great series gentlemen. Maybe needs a little more
Take the control, and shoot it thru all of the stocks. That should give you an idea about barrel superiority. It is also catches you're up on round count. Then you can take run both out of orix stocks and make changes. I really enjoy this series because, it shows a step by step progression in finding accuracy from what most people are capable of doing with something that they actually have. Keep this kind of content.
I have a bergara B14 that was 1 MOA and I bedded the stock with Devcon, added a triggertech special, lapped the bolt lugs and now I get 1/4 MOA even at 600 yards.
I love doing these kind of experiments, and i love it even more when i don't have to spend the money to get an answer (thanks guys). I'd like to see what it costs to turn one of these into a consistent 1 moa rifle at 1000yds
Ahhh... you two are killing me! :) The reason for the control is this: it CONTROLS for the external variables... like a bad batch of ammo, a windy day, or shooter being in a funk. The whole point is to compare shooting the new thing to the old thing on the same day at the same time with the same shooter. By doing so, you can remove all doubt about whether the change you made was responsible for the improvement, or the external circumstances were responsible. Do the WHOLE set of tests you intend to do with the control, then when you are done, go nuts on the control and see if you can improve it then. But don't do it now.
Their problem is the control out shot the modified rifle. There is nothing left to do if there mods wont shoot as well as the stock rifle.
@@CoyoteRegulator That's just it. There is no problem here. In science we call this "failing to reject the null hypothesis." What they've just proven is that their mods (so far) don't actually improve the accuracy of the gun. FULL STOP. If you can't come to that conclusion you aren't doing science, and you shouldn't use words like "control." You've got to be capable of coming to that conclusion, or else you're simply steering your experiment to fit your desired outcome.
By modifying the control now, they are LITERALLY saying they have no faith in their future mods either. If they DID have faith in their planned mods, they'd keep the control as-is to demonstrate that they do in fact improve the rifle over a stock one. What are you going to do if the control starts to shoot WORSE after the mods?
Also, mad respect to all veterans and especially to Jason for his service, but I'm shocked a trained sniper is turning out to be such a whiner. Sacrifices must be made to do good science. I know it's uncomfortable to shoot a crappy gun, but it must be done. Just like it's crappy that someone who needs a new medication still has to take the placebo. We do this to know FOR SURE the medicine works.
As I said before - finish the experiment the way it was designed, then afterword you can go hog wild on your control gun and see what it can do. We've all got plenty of time to see this through. What's the hurry?
JB weld some bad ass stuff!
You already know what the control does, you have the paper with holes in it. I say modify them both, but choose different options for each. A brake on one and a suppressor on the other. Brand X trigger on one, brand Y on the other and so on. The only valid thing for leaving the control as it is, is see how it shoots after the same amount of rounds. That will tell if the change is the barrel improving or the mods making a difference.
I vote for budget build vs extreme build!
I agree, start throwing more into it to see if that barrel is capable of consistency. Trigger, chassis. Maybe make a cheek rest if you’re going to use that Remington stock. And sell us on that tuner brake 😁
I’m a shooting hobbyist and educated scientist. I did the same thing by following a scientific method (with more discipline) on two 700s (both .308s). Came to the conclusion that being hunting rifles, they need hunting stocks. One now lives in a Magpul Hunter 700 and the other is in a B&C Medalist. Both shoot sub-MOA with Hornady American Whitetail ammo. Both hate Hornady Match ammo. After tuning up some hand loads, they both shoot sub-half MOA.
Eric & Jason 5enjoying the videos, here in N. Ireland. I have a question for you. I just changed my old 6.5x55 Swedish for a new Tikka T3x Varmint 6.5x55 Swedish 20" barrel. Been looking at an Oryx stock. However, my gun has recesses either side of the chassis mounting bolts. These would go into the stock & I think improve stability in the stock. I have noted that some after market stocks, you just set the action into the stock which just has mounting bolt holes, no recesses either side of the bolt holes. Finally the question: does this matter? I'm concerned that the rifle action isn't as well supported & will shift when firing. What's your thought on that??
Also can you glass bed the action in an Oryx style stock??
Thank you for reading this far.
Regards
Hugo Dale
Run the other rifle thru all 4 stocks, and get your 40 rounds caught up. Obviously they are still "breaking in". And, as I've said from the beginning, add the extra weight to the factory stock. I fill an Altoids tin with cast bullets and stick it in the stock, wrapped in a rag if it's loose, hammer down corners of tin if it's tight...adds about a pound of weight, made a HUGE differance on a couple of my rifles/ muzzleloader. Also helped with balance..
Take the spring out ,bed both original stocks , take out pressure points, new triggers ,and muzzle break one and compare.
Change triggers first, since that is probably the most common upgrade and then do the tuners. Following those you might consider blueprinting the actions and bolt mods. Great series, lots of info 👏.
Pete, same thing I was thinking
We have a factory baseline for both rifles and we have seen what modifying the chassis system will do put them both back in factory stocks with an upgraded trigger so we can isolate the improvement of each modification individually then cut the barrel add a tuner break then we can see which modifications gave the most improvement individually and then combine them all together to make the rifle as good as it can possibly be
I used the Mag Pul in .270 Remington long action. 1.7 MOA, I used KRG with a 6.5 Creedmoor,1.1 MOA.
Most important thing in my opinion is the fire control system. You've got shooter comfort, so after that fire control, trigger, and David Tubb’s Speed Lock system. The break would be dead last if this is a hunting application.
Since they are both basically the same then walk improvements up on each one at a time. As an example, add a EC tuner to one then compare, then add an EC tuner to the other and compare again. I would like to see the improvements you make with each mod. Love the videos by the way!
You are doing an experiment I have been wanting to do.. Build 2 identical base rifles, then go 2 different directions with the options.
For one try one the tuner brake, the other different store bought brakes. Different upgraded triggers or modded stock triggers. Eventually change scopes, etc.
Leaving the control alone definitely does provide benefit, even though you already have data for it...because as you already saw, it might shoot differently as break in occurs or some other reason. But if you bedded it, then there's no way to know if it's break-in, or bedding or combination of both.
I totally agree with Nicholas Flemming . Stock stock + EC Tuner break V.S. Orix + EC Tuner break. After that possible trigger upgrade.
Cool series...
Hi Erick, here is my humble opinion. The mass of people that shoot do not shoot in matches but watch your channel to be the best they can be. So here is my suggestion. Leave one in the stock formation (even though you already bedded it and it shoot sub MOA) then start with the other one and ad small updates (one at a time) like adding your tuner/brake so we can see the most bang for the buck. I realize the factory stock is uncomfortable but in the everyday application (not matches) the first shot is what counts (like hunting or bragging rights). So what I am saying is lets find out what improves the riffle the most in steps so we can see were we (your audiances) might want to. Thanks for asking, you have a great channel and I enjoy watching.
A control is not necessarily the absence of treatment. A control is doing what you would normally do, to compare that with whatever it is that you are evaluating. So if you normally would not keep the factory supplied stock, the best control is to replace that stock with what you would normally do. Scientifically, you did the right thing by replacing the stock in the control rifle.
I think doing a different change on one vs the other, like a trigger on the control gun in factory stock vs factory trigger and chassis on the other gun, since they are now shooting the same. This will highlight the priority of each upgrade.
You already have the targets as a reference for "control". Keep them the same to compare how upgrades could maybe perform differently on different rifles. Or do one upgrade to one and a different upgrade to the other and see the difference in improvement. Brake/tuner, trigger, true the action, maybe rebarrel vs stock barrel.
As for barrel break in, what process or methods do you recommend?
All great comments, ideas. I side with budget vs customized to compare cost/benefit, also to have stated end point/goal for customized ie: consistent 1/2 inch moa? Finally have a couple shooters from beginner to average (compared to top class like you two) skill level use both to see if it shows a significant difference.(as in biggest factor is the shooter once rifle/ammo is 'good enough')
In different test series I'd like you to answer for those of us(less than 400yd, 1 to 2 MOA, 4 times a year ) that use Factory ammo (standard and/or match quality) can using a tuner bring the precision even close (1/2" group size difference)to what hand loading can?
This would be a perfect scenario for selling your tuner brake. Put the control back together on the modified stock. Put a tuner on the control rifle. Put a trigger on rifle 1. Compare the two rifles. I guess you could throw high dollar parts at rifle 1 and keep the control rifle as cheap as possible while improving it at the same time.
I have bedded several rifles with JB weld with great results. It helps to let it sit a little while to thicken up and not be so runny. Even my 416 Taylor improved was bedded with jb weld and 600 rounds later it’s still holding up great. I also like acra glass gel and pro bed 2000 I believe it’s called. Those tupper ware stocks like on the factory stocks really needs to be roughed up to get a good stick.
Great stock test,you guys are the best for advice and experience,the 6.5 Creedmore group drives me crazy,I have shot a lot of good shooting guns and calipers over the years that will do anything the creedmores will do,been doing a little precision long range shooting mainly to learn from the guys that do really good at this the 6mm dasher a popular one,but just works well for tuning and bullet protrusion and also suppressed. Dumping money in to gun doesn't always make it shoot well in a particular situation.
What calibers whould those be?
Keep the ‘control’ one-step behind the other freedom delivery machine, that will show the difference in progression or set back with each modification. I’d put a tuner brake and or trigger on the non-control gun next. one change at a time, if time allows. I don’t see the point in leaving the control “factory” its baseline has been established. continuing to test with the factory stock would be interesting. I wouldn’t get into multiple different triggers, different brakes, and chassis for now so we keep the testing methodology as simple and predictable as possible. I love this series!
What is probably more helpful than anything is the approach you guys are taking, both of you having built extremely accurate rifles in your time, but coming into this with an open mind and almost no ‘plan’. That’s how I usually approach building a rifle, but that’s because I don’t know what the heck I’m doing. Hahaha!
Here is an idea for consideration.
A new shooter on a BUDGET will get a stock rifle and use it as much as he can at the beginning and start replacing things as he needs or thinks would yield the greatest results quicker for cheaper. The comfort was the first issue and was resolved by replacing the stocks on both. Now some budget shooters will go the route of replacing the barrel and blueprinting the action as they have the cash. Others will use as much of the stock rifle as possible. Do spring kits, replace triggers and tuning the stock barrel etc.
This might be an opportunity to show us what really yields the best results for the least amount of cash?
You could use an adjustable "Bradley's Cheek Rest" on the plastic stock. It would improve the confort and add a solid Stock to Check weld.
So I think the question was answered about the factory stock. It can be made to shoot as well, buy it takes more effort to shoot and isn't as comfortable so it probably won't be as consistent over multiple strings, especially once some fatigue sets in. I'd be interested to see both rifles with tuner brakes in either the same chassis to see if the tuner setting is the same, or two of the same chassis with the tuner brakes. Also, maybe lap the lugs on the factory bolt on one rifle (or both) to see what degree of change there is.