From: bartb@hpfcla.fc.hp.com (Bart Bobbitt)
Subject: Re: Pre '64 Win M70 actions
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site

S.J. Orth wrote this comparison between rifles:

:          Remington 700VS                 Winchester Heavy Varmint

: Barrel:  24" heavy Chrome Moly           26" heavy Stainless Steel
:          Remington muzzle diameter is .805 in, Winchester's is larger
:          Both barrels are free floated

Having handled rifles of both makes/models and checked 'em out for free
floating barrels, very few have such things.  Most of 'em have irregular
barrel contact with the stock's forend.  If either claim free-floating,
they need to look up the definition of the word.......it means nothing,
absolutely nothing, not even a bedding pad an inch or so in front of the
reciever, had better touch the barrel; except for the face of the receiver
where the barrel tenon shoulder butts up against it.

: Another posting in this group speaks of the lack of need for glass bedding
: a rifle with an aluminum bedding block.
: The bedding block and the
: bottom of the action are not machined to tight enough tolerances to provide
: a perfect fit (would be very difficult to do on a production rifle).

An excellent observation indeed.  I'm convinced factories have tried to
short-cut proper receiver fit to the stock by mass producing aluminum
blocks.  Some of the top highpower shooters tried aluminum bedding of
receivers near 25 years ago.  The only way it worked was to use a spot
tracer milling machine that cut the block to an exact, zero-tolerance
fit to the reciever.  It ended up costing more than, but equal in performance
to, conventional epoxy bedding.  I just about croaked when Remington
came out with this scheme.  To the unknowing, it appears absolutely great;
to the knowledgable, it appears absolutely grungy.

: However, if Winchester chooses to use the
: post '68 action on the $700+ dollar Heavy Varmint and on the $1650+
: Sharpshooter, there must be some reason.  .....  you decide.

The primary reason is the Model 70 receiver is about 2.5 times as stiff
as its nearest competitor for a box magazine action.  If they werent, they
would not have the unequalled track record of winning matches and setting
records in highppower competition since 1937.  Besides, its reliability
and ease of maintenance has yet to be equalled for similar actions.

Regarding the Model 70 stiff receiver, some tests are in progress that will
provide real data on how much various receivers bend when subjected to
the same force.  Upon completition of tests and organizing data, it will
be published for all to see.

BB

From: bartb@hpfcla.fc.hp.com (Bart Bobbitt)
Subject: Re: Pillar bedding - how hard is it?
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site

Pillar bedding seems to be the latest `in thing' regarding bolt guns.  It
is typically done in conjunction with epoxy bedding the receiver.

It consists of making two round tubes about 3 times the diameter of the
stock screw with a hole inside for the stock screw to fit in.  The length
of the tube, or `pillar,' is equal to the distance from the part of the
receiver the stock screws thread into to the part of the trigger guard or
floorplate at the top of it.  An example:

                __________________        Bottom of receiver
                   |  | |  |
                   |P | | P|              P = Pillar
                   |  |S|  |              S = Stock screw
                   |  | |  |
                ------| |--------         Top of trigger guard/floorplate
                      ---
                     /
               stock screw

Pillars are made of aluminum or steel.  They are usually epoxied into the
stock.  Their ends are typically shaped to fit the receiver or trigger
guard, respectively.  Sometimes they are threaded or grooved on the outside
to provide a better hold in the stock.  A hole equal to their diameter
needs to be drilled in the stock centered on the stock screws.

Some folks think they are great.  Others think otherwise as the receiver is
held solidly at only two points atop the pillars and isn't held solidly
in the epoxy bedding around the receiver.  I think they are more widely
used in benchrest competition rifles.  In highpower competition rifles,
the pillar-bedded rifles haven't shot as good as the conventionaly bedded
ones as far as I've been able to detect and several others have noted.

Pillar bedding is about fifth on the priority list of getting a rifle to
shoot accurately, in my opinion.

BB

From: bartb@hpfcla.fc.hp.com (Bart Bobbitt)
Subject: Re: Aluminum Bedding Blocks
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site

S.J. Orth (den.mmc.com) wrote regarding Remington bedding blocks:

: Why couldn't they just put in pillars?

Pillar bedding requires quite a bit of time.  That's something that costs
the factory money and would no doubt be cause to increase the price.  They
could conventionally epoxy bed the receiver for about half the cost anyway.

But pillar bedding has not proved itself worthy of the best accuracy
anyway.  I'm not sure who first did it, but having seen hundreds of rifles
so bedded and shot in competition, they perform no better than conventional
bedding.

A conventionally bedded receiver has full pressure contact on all parts
pulled downward by the stock screws.  It solidly rests in a near vise-like
grip by the stock.  It therefore is in exactly the same place from shot
to shot.  If the stock compresses somewhat over time (typically only a
very few thousandths of an inch) the same pressure points will remain
in place.  If the stock shrinks a tad in cold, or exapands a tad in warm,
weather that is, the relative uniformity of full-contact bedding stays
intact.

A pillar bedded receiver is held in place by only two points; one at the
top of the front and back pillar.  The theory is those two points are
all that's needed.  And the stock won't compress from pressure caused by
stock screws, nor effect receiver contact pressure due to thermal
expansion or contraction.  And all this is probably true.

My point is, pillar bedding does not consistantly produce better accuracy
than conventional bedding.  If it did, then pillar bedded ones would most
often produce the best highpower scores.  Benchrest rifles may very
well shoot better pillar bedded, but remember they are mild-recoiling jobs
that don't put much stress at all on a receiver or stock in the first
place.  When the cartridge's boiler room starts burning over 40 grains of
powder in 3 milliseconds, the energy imparted is at higher levels; some of
it goes into the stock's bedding and bends the receiver in a vertical axis.

Since pillar bedding first appeared years ago, I've watch the scoreboard
and mentally noted which bedding system was used to produce those scores.
Conventionally bedded receivers shoot the best scores by a factor of about
20 to 1 on highpower rifles.

BB

From: toby@stein3.u.washington.edu (Toby Bradshaw)
Subject: Re: Aluminum Bedding Blocks
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <CHC38z.Bx4@fc.hp.com>, Bart Bobbitt <bartb@hpfcla.fc.hp.com> wrote:
#S.J. Orth (den.mmc.com) wrote regarding Remington bedding blocks:
#
#: Why couldn't they just put in pillars?
#
#Pillar bedding requires quite a bit of time.

Only if you do it right :)  For my rifles, it takes 3 bedding pours,
with 24-48 hours between pours.

#That's something that costs
#the factory money and would no doubt be cause to increase the price.  They
#could conventionally epoxy bed the receiver for about half the cost anyway.
#
#But pillar bedding has not proved itself worthy of the best accuracy
#anyway.  I'm not sure who first did it,

I believe Dave Hall and Marlin Bassett are credited with its development.
Dave Hall set a slew of world records in benchrest with his pillar-bedded
rifles, which is why it became so popular.  Now glue-ins have become the
most common bedding in varmint class rifles.

#but having seen hundreds of rifles
#so bedded and shot in competition, they perform no better than conventional
#bedding.
#
#A conventionally bedded receiver has full pressure contact on all parts
#pulled downward by the stock screws.  It solidly rests in a near vise-like
#grip by the stock.  It therefore is in exactly the same place from shot
#to shot.  If the stock compresses somewhat over time (typically only a
#very few thousandths of an inch) the same pressure points will remain
#in place.  If the stock shrinks a tad in cold, or exapands a tad in warm,
#weather that is, the relative uniformity of full-contact bedding stays
#intact.
#
#A pillar bedded receiver is held in place by only two points; one at the
#top of the front and back pillar.  The theory is those two points are
#all that's needed.  And the stock won't compress from pressure caused by
#stock screws, nor effect receiver contact pressure due to thermal
#expansion or contraction.  And all this is probably true.

Actually, the "Dave Hall" pillar bedding method has full receiver contact
with the bedding, just like conventional bedding.  Here's how I do it
myself:

On a wood-stocked Rem 700, I take about 1/4" of wood out of the receiver
and tang areas, leaving "locator pads" around the receiver screw holes to
keep the action at the right height (this will be removed later when I
drill for the pillars, leaving no wood near the action).  Then I "rough
bed" with Steel-Bed or Devcon F.  A day or so later, the action is removed
from the stock and the holes for the pillars are drilled from the bottom
of the stock.  A piloted counterbore (37/64 counterbore with a 1/4" pilot)
does a good job of keeping the hole aligned with the existing action screw
holes, and doesn't require any kind of jig or drill press.  I bore the
hole until the aluminum pillars (9/16" x 1" for the tang and 9/16" x 1/2"
for the front) will protrude about 0.010 - 0.020" below the stock wood,
making sure that the pillar holes have removed all the existing wood and
are well into the first bedding pour.  The action has two headless
stockmaker's screws installed to insure that the pillars will be aligned
with the action screws (very often the action screws are not perpendicular
to the stock) and a Dremel tool is used to provide any needed clearance.
Then the pillars are epoxied in place with Steel-Bed or Devcon, using the
action and guide screws to keep everything lined up.  I have the I.D. of
the pillars drilled with an "F" letter drill to provide a close fit on the
guide screws.  After the pillars are set, I face them off if necessary
with the piloted counterbore to keep them from sticking up too far.  Then,
a very thin, watery coat of Acraglas is painted onto the "rough" bedding
(after lightly sanding the surface to remove any release agent) and the
action and guide screws are eased in.  The finish bedding is allowed to
set for a couple of days, then the action is very carefully removed.  The
fit from the two-pour (three pours counting the pillars) bedding is very
close, and the shrinkage of Acraglas is not a problem because the finish
layer is <0.010" anyhow.  On a Remington, I pour all the way around the
recoil lug (after all, the sides of the recoil lug are the only good
anti-torque surface on the whole action), but leave the bottom of the lug
free.  The barrel can be bedded for a couple of inches if you like (it
doesn't seem to hurt in the light BR cartridges).  A good pillar bedding
job isn't necessarily any better than a "plain" bedding job, just more
forgiving on tightness of the action screws.  In any event, the less wood
and the more epoxy, the better.  Bob Pease has a good publication on the
method, although he uses "poured pillars" of Devcon instead of aluminum.
I don't like the shrinkage of tall poured pillars, so I use aluminum.
Next to gluing the action in, pillar bedding is the most maintenance-
free system I've used.  Since glue-ins are a major hassle with anything
but a custom action (try removing the trigger on a glued-in Rem action!),
pillar bedding is pretty popular among savvy varmint hunters.  It can
be combined with a single-shot loading ramp to make the lousy-feeding
Remington 700 action mimic a 40X.  Some have even epoxied the ramp to
the action, then bedded the whole works as a "poor man's 40X".  If
I thought I could get away with it in the facory BR class, I would
do this.  It increases the bedding surface several fold, which would be
a plus on factory actions with short tangs.

The same pillar sizes and general methods will work on the Win 70
varmint rifles, BTW, but the tang pillar is a close fit for length.

-Toby Bradshaw
toby@u.washington.edu

From: toby@stein.u.washington.edu (Toby Bradshaw)
Subject: Re: Pillar bedding - how hard is it?
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <C5uC5w.ALp@fc.hp.com> bartb@hpfcla.fc.hp.com (Bart Bobbitt) writes:
#Pillars are made of aluminum or steel.  They are usually epoxied into the
#stock.

Many pillar-bedded rifles have "poured pillars" of epoxy, as well.

#I think they are more widely used in benchrest competition rifles.

Most winning rifles in the non-rail classes of benchrest have
glued-in actions.  I've heard that a conventionally-bedded
(including pillar-bedded) rifle can shoot with a glue-in, but
I've never seen one do it myself.  I think glue-ins are inherently
easier to get right than conventional bedding, making the average
glue-in shoot better than the average bolt-in.

Toby Bradshaw
Department of Biochemistry and College of Forest Resources
University of Washington, Seattle
toby@u.washington.edu

"A well-educated electorate being necessary to the prosperity of
a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall
not be infringed."  Do you think that banning legal possession of
easily-concealed novels will stop criminals from reading?

From: toby@stein.u.washington.edu (Toby Bradshaw)
Subject: Re: Pillar bedding - how hard is it?
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <C5wyyC.6An@fc.hp.com> bartb@hpfcla.fc.hp.com (Bart Bobbitt) writes:
#Ah yes; the old glue job.  They are probably the best as the receiver
#is held in place permanently and bedding pressure isn't an issue.
#The pins that hold the trigger in the receiver are typically capable
#of being pushed out through holes in the stock.

All the custom BR actions I've seen (Stolle, Hall, Wichita) have
trigger brackets removable from the bottom, usually with one or
two screws.  The action and stock of a glue-in are essentially
one piece in a good BR rifle.  All smithing, from a simple trigger
replacement to barrel fitting, is done with the action in the
stock (at least after the original glue-in is done).

Toby Bradshaw
Department of Biochemistry and College of Forest Resources
University of Washington, Seattle
toby@u.washington.edu

"A well-educated electorate being necessary to the prosperity of
a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall
not be infringed."  Do you believe that all "inflammatory" books should be
stored in libraries, since no honest person needs such a book at home
where a child might read it?

Subject: "Pillar Bedding" part 1
From: Kelly McMillan <kelly@mcmfamily.com>
Date: Apr 17 1997
Newsgroups: rec.guns

I would like to start an informative thread that might help some to
learn a little about rifles, stocks and accuracy.  It's been my
experiance in the group that I tend to lose interest in very long posts
and though there is a lot of info I can pass on about my first subject I
have choosen to do this in multiple post.  If any  group member has an
opinion about me continuing this thread feel free to e-mail me to
express your support or rejection of the fundamental idea.  Questions on
topic of course will be encouraged.

Part 1
In the firearms industry it seems there is always a "trend" that is
accepted as the state of the art for a period of time, and then
something else will come along and replace it.  Right now aluminum
bedding blocks seem to be the "trend".  I recently posted our views on
the ABB so I won't get into that today but there is a related trend I
think needs to be addressed.
"Pillar Bedding" or bedding using aluminum pillars.  First a little
history:

Many years ago when wood stocks ruled the world there was very few
things that would improve the accuracy of a rifle as much as "glass
bedding" would.  Almost no factory guns came bedded and most shot barely
acceptably.  Glass bedding usually enhanced the accuracy as well as
increasing the dependability by limiting the effects of humidity and
weather which played havoc with point of impact (POI).  By using an
epoxy based product that was reinforced with some fiberglass (thus the
term glass bedding) one could form a much better mating surface between
the stock and the receiver.  By reducing or eliminating any stresses
cause by poorly match surfaces it allowed the rifle to shoot more
consistantly.
In the benchrest community they found that by torquing both guard screws
with a torque wrench they could actually tune the way the gun would
shoot.  They were constantly checking the torque, between matches and
even between groups, and most found that the more they shot the rifle,
the more the amount of torque would decrease.  They reasoned that the
stocks must be compressing some due to the pressure and stress
associated with shooting.  As a result they drilled out the holes around
the guard screws to the next larger size (usually from 5/16 to 3/8 or
1/2 inch.)  When bedding the action they would allow these larges holes
to fill up with bedding material.  After removing the screws (of course
they waxed them first) they would then drill out the screw hole to
5/16th for some clearance, but that would in effect leave a pillar of
1/16 to 3/16" wall thickness of bedding material.  The bedding material
was dense and rigid so it made a nice pillar that would keep the stock
from compressing under the pressure of 40-60lb or torque, plus the
stress of firing the rifle.

to be continued

-- 
McMillan Fiberglass Stocks Inc. "Molding the Way America Shoots"
21421 N. 14th Ave Suite B  Phoenix, Arizona 85027
(602)582-9635 http://www.mcmfamily.com/mfsinc_n/mc_test.htm

Subject: Pillar Bedding Part II
From: Kelly McMillan <kelly@mcmfamily.com>
Date: Apr 20 1997
Newsgroups: rec.guns

Not long after the pillar bedding process was developed, fiberglass
stocks came onto the scene.  While benchrest shooters were convinced
that pillar bedding had a positive effect on the accuracy of their
rifles they assumed that the same process would help to improve accuracy
of a fiberglass stocked rifle.  The process quickly adapted itself to
"glass" stocks.

When Chet Brown and Lee Six first introduced fiberglass stocks to the
competitive world in the late '60's, they used a process that left the
stock with a "foam' core.  The stocks were made of fiberglass cloth
outer shells with the action area and barrel channels actually molded
during the intial process.  They would use a low density urethane foam
to expand the material from the inside and force it out against the
walls of the mold  to form the gunstock.  As a result between the
receiver area and the bottom of the stock (where the guard screws are)
there was a foam core.  The foam was light weight to keep the weight of
the stock within reason and when cured was rigid (unlike polystyrene of
foam rubber) but had very little compression strength.  In short order
it was found that pillars were absolutely required in order to keep from
compressing the stock when tightening the guard screws.

As a general rule, the same proceedure was used to make the pillars as
was used with  wood stocks.  Simply drill the guard screw holes over
size and fill them up with bedding material.  The draw back to this
technique was that occassionally there would be some excessive shrinkage
in the bedding material due to the volume of bedding compound that
flowed down around the screws.   Though this resulted in a less than
perfect job from a cosmetic stand point, it had no adverse effect on the
perfomance of the bedding.  When guys like my father and Wally Hart and
Fred Sinclair started to take on this type of work for their fellow
competitors they felt a nedd to produce a better looking job and the use
of precut aluminum pillars was introduced. ( I'll get back to the
technical info on aluminum pillars in part III.)

When Gale McMillan introduced his fiberglass stocks in 1973 they were
made in pretty much the same manner as the Brown Stocks.  Urethane foam
was a major component and thus pillar bedding was a main ingrediant in
all benchrest stocks he made.(Gale made only benchrest stocks for the
first 2 years he was in business)  Due to the weight limitations in
benchrest, light stocks were a must and the materials used where not
nearly as strong as they could have been in a stock weighing much more. 
Pillar bedding was one way to make up for their lack of strength in the
receiver area.

to be continued 4/28.  I'll be in Fla. for the Chevy Truck Challenge
Nationals all next week.


-- 
McMillan Fiberglass Stocks Inc. "Molding the Way America Shoots"
21421 N. 14th Ave Suite B  Phoenix, Arizona 85027
(602)582-9635 http://www.mcmfamily.com/mfsinc_n/mc_test.htm

Subject: Pillar Bedding Part III
From: Kelly McMillan <kelly@mcmfamily.com>
Date: Apr 28 1997
Newsgroups: rec.guns

When pillar bedding as was described in the earlier parts gained
acceptance, there wasn't much arguement about how to to it right.  It
seemed almost everyone in the competitive arena used pretty much the
same technique. Upon the introduction of precut aluminum pillars experts
began to disagree on what was the proper way to install the pillars.  As
with standard pillars, the function was the same.  That was to insure
that the action area of the stock would not compress when tightening
down the guard screws.  How to best accomplish this became the topic of
debate.
I won't suggest that the way we install our pillars is the only right
way to do it, though it is our belief that it is the best right way.  To
be perfectly honest the difference in performance of the different types
of techniques used is probably unmeasurable.  But, we believe that
whether or not you can prove your ideas to be the best, it is important
to use the technique which you believe produces the best results.
When installing aluminum pillars we measure the depth from the bottom of
the receiver to the bottom of the stock where the pillars are to be
installed.  We then cut our pillars about .035 shorter than this
measurement.  We apply the bedding materials to the stock and the
receiver to insure uniform nonporous surface finish, filling the pillar
holes with bedding material. We then place the pillars (with the screws
inside of them) in the stock from the bottom of the stock. Holding the
barreled action in the vise we bring the stock up to the barreled action
and start the screws.  We tighten each of the screws a half turn at a
time cleaning off the excess material as we go.  By placing the pillars
in from the bottom, along with the fact that the pillars are shorter
than the distance between the bottom of the stock and the action, we
create a small space between the top of the pillar and the action.  This
.035 gap between the pillar and the action is filled with bedding
material.  By using this technique we have created a completely uniform
bedding surface that is 100% consistant.
One of the objectives of glass bedding is to produce a stress free union
between the action and the stock.  By bedding the entire receiver area
(as opposed to the recoil lug and rear tang) we have effectively created
the only "perfectly stress free" union possible.  By not allowing the
aluminum pillar to come in contact with the receiver we have eliminated
one possible source for unwanted stress.  While some use other
techniques, we believe ours to create the perfect relationship between
stock and action.

(Part IV, other techniques used with aluminum pillars)
-- 
McMillan Fiberglass Stocks Inc. "Molding the Way America Shoots"
21421 N. 14th Ave Suite B  Phoenix, Arizona 85027
(602)582-9635 http://www.mcmfamily.com

From: Kelly McMillan <kelly@mcmfamily.com>
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Pillar Bedding Part IV
Date: 5 May 1997 16:23:16 -0400

A number of well respected, very succesful gunsmiths and gun builders
use other techniques than the one I described in Part III.  As I said
they are very succesful, the guns they build are very accurate and no
one can say that there technique doesn't work.  As I stated we "believe"
that ours is the best way but realize that having choices is always a
good thing, so I'll discribe the other technique most widely used.

Kenny Jarrett of Jarrett Rifles in Jackson South Carolina is one of the
most respected gun builder in the south.  He specializes in high dollar
hunting rifles that perform like benchrest rifles.  As a matter of fact
he uses "benchrest" techniques for building all his rifles.  His pillar
bedding differs from ours in that he allows the pillar to come in
contact with the receiver.  As a matter of fact he countours the top of
a 1" diameter aluminum pillar to match the radius of the receiver (that
is of course allowing that the receiver is round, he uses almost
exclusively Remington 700's for actions).  He had a special tool ground
to cut a 1.365 radius so that he could precut his pillars so that they
fit a Remington 700.  The rest of his technique is very much like ours,
but he ends up with this large shiney aluminum piece embedded in the
action of the stock.  It is very visable when you take the barreled
action out of the stock.  In the case of ours, we have had customers
question whether or not we even put pillars in because with .035 of
bedding materials covering the top of the pillar you have to look really
close to be able to see it.
There are basically two things we don't like about this method.  As I
stated the top of the pillar is contoured to cut a 1.365 radius.
Remington receivers are put through a process where they are actually
polished by hand.  Becuase each is done independantly not all actions
are exactly 1.365.  They may very as much as .005.  I know that doesn't
sound like much, and probably has little or no effect on accuaracy, but
the purpose of glass bedding is to make a "perfect" union between stock
and action.  If you were to allow for at least the smallest amount of
bedding material to cover the pillar, it would compensate for any
irregularities in action diameter and come closer to making that perfect
fit.
Secondly, remember what the pillar is designed to accomplish.  It's only
function is to eliminate any compression of the stock material under the
receiver.  Why use a 1" pillar when 3/8" is enough and 1/2" is plenty.
In our stocks we prefer not to remove too much of the material from the
stock.  Remember the front screw is always near the recoil lug, (in some
actions it's screws into it) so having as much material in tact is
important.  Though pillars give the stock compressive strength they
don't offer much in the way of shear strength which is whats needed
around the recoil lug.

One last item on pillar bedding.  I'm often asked by customers who would
like to bed their own stock but lack the confidence to try "pillar"
bedding, "Do you need pillars?"  Because of the construction techniques
and materials we use in making our stocks it is not necessary to use
pillars.  With the exception of benchrest stocks which are almost always
glued in and use a lighter fill in the action area than all other
stocks,
pillars are unnecessary.  Test have proven that the materials we use to
fill the action area of of stocks have less than 1% compression at 100lb
psi.  What that means is that there is not way you are going to be able
to torque your guards screws tight enough to compress the material under
the action.  Why do we put them in every bedding job we do when
installing our stocks? Because it's state of the art.  It's what has
become the excepted way to do things.  It's not a fad.  It is a valuable
technique that is necessary when bedding stocks that use a different
method of construction (which almost all other synthetic manufacturers
do). It's just that with ours it is not really necessary.

This ends the series on pillar bedding.  If there are any specific
questions that I did not cover please e-mail me.  If there are any
subjects in which you may feel I can contribute in another series,
please let me know.  I also encourage any others who may have additional
info to share on the subject to tag on to the series.  David Tooley, I
know you're out there.  Thanks    Kelly


McMillan Fiberglass Stocks Inc. "Molding the Way America Shoots"
21421 N. 14th Ave Suite B  Phoenix, Arizona 85027
(602)582-9635 http://www.mcmfamily.com

From: Kelly McMillan <kelly@mcmfamily.com>
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: 700 PSS, Remington...Comments ?
Date: 11 Feb 1997 09:47:32 -0500

Gunslinger wrote:
# 
# Does anyone have any comments on the Remington 700 PSS in .308 ?
# 
# Any problems or flaws with the rifle -or- stock. Also, what groups will
# it show ?

# 
# Thanks

Well, you asked the right question.  "stock" .  Though we make several
stocks for Remington, all of which are used on custom shop rifles, the
PSS is not one of them.  The problem with the stock on the PSS is
the..... okay I'm going to say it now so hold on.....the...the.... the
aluminum bedding block.    Okay there I've said it.  I know it sounds
like sopur grapes because we don't use a bedding block in our stocks,
but it's not because we can't, we just don't believe in the system.  And
with our stocks at least, metal to metal bedding is definitely a
detriment as far as accuracy is concerned.  As a matter of fact, my
father put aluminum bedding blocks in wood benchrest stocks back in the
60's in an effort to combat the problem trhat arrise due to swelling
from changes in humidity.  The detraction in the accuarcy department was
compensated for by the consistance in point of aim.  It was a give and
take scenario.  With fiberglass stocks the warping is a non issue so to
give up any in accuracy would be a losing situation.
Now I know Remington and the maker of the stock used on the PSS have
done a tremendous marketing job with the ABB, but we just don't feel
like it's the way to go.  It offers nothing that one of our stocks
doesn't do without it.                               Kelly
-- 
McMillan Fiberglass Stocks Inc. "Molding the Way America Shoots"
21421 N. 14th Ave Suite B  Phoenix, Arizona 85027
(602)582-9635      http://mcmfamily.com