Question on S/A Medalist Bell and Carlson or HS precision pro Rem 700

[bonecollector777]

Been Looking at these stocks pretty extensively. About $70 more for the HS. I'm having a gunsmith do the work on threading and chambering the barrel. Question I have is what length barrel shank is the perfect fit for either of these stocks? If anyone has one any way to measure it? I am getting a fairly lightweight barrel that comes with a 2.750" shank and want to know if I need to have the Smith cut a little off to make it fit just right or if just threading the blank as is will work. Thanks for the help.

[lancetkenyon]

Pretty easy to slightly open up the barrel channel to fit an aftermarket barrel. With that being said, the more recent B&C I have seen in the last 2 years or so, the QC has really started to slip. The HS is worth every penny extra you pay.

[bonecollector777]

Pretty easy to slightly open up the barrel channel to fit an aftermarket barrel. With that being said, the more recent B&C I have seen in the last 2 years or so, the QC has really started to slip. The HS is worth every penny extra you pay.

I've seen guys open up the barrel channel at the end but it's also fairly easy to open the area where it begins to taper down?

[bonecollector777]

Also since I trust your judgment after seeing the sweet rifles you make and shoot, on the HS stocks I've come down to the pss045 and the pss 094. Looking for lightweight and those are the lightest. My barrel is going to be .600 at 24 inches and the 045 is made for a .650 and the 094 is made for .590 at the muzzle. 045 is slightly heavier with a full length bedding block and 094 is about 4 oz lighter with a half length bedding block. Think the 4 oz is worth not having the bedding block into the forend? Or better to go for the stiffer stock?

[300RUM]

My partner had a Bell and Carlson. He fell on a hunt last year and broke it in half at the rear of the action. In looking at the failure the construction of that stock was less than impressive. I have to HS stocks and believe it is very likely they could have survived the fall.

[PRDATR]

My partner had a Bell and Carlson. He fell on a hunt last year and broke it in half at the rear of the action. In looking at the failure the construction of that stock was less than impressive. I have to HS stocks and believe it is very likely they could have survived the fall.

 

And that right there has me rethinking the B&C Alaskan in favor of an HS. The thumbhole I had many years ago was a great stock and it had some castoff which let my eye align perfect with the scope.

[bonecollector777]

I went with the HS. Got the lightweight one that's about 2 inches shorter overall length so hope it turns out nice.

[lancetkenyon]

Also since I trust your judgment after seeing the sweet rifles you make and shoot, on the HS stocks I've come down to the pss045 and the pss 094. Looking for lightweight and those are the lightest. My barrel is going to be .600 at 24 inches and the 045 is made for a .650 and the 094 is made for .590 at the muzzle. 045 is slightly heavier with a full length bedding block and 094 is about 4 oz lighter with a half length bedding block. Think the 4 oz is worth not having the bedding block into the forend? Or better to go for the stiffer stock?

.025" on each side of the barrel channel is about the thickness of 2 playing cards. Not too big of a free floated barrel channel. The full length aluminum bedding block is beneficial to stiffening up the stock in the grip and forend area, but the added 4 oz wiuld be up to you. You can lose 4 oz elsewhere if you really want to.

 

On the other hand, ounces=pounds, and pounds=pain. You can easy open up the PSS090 barrel channel to fit a slightly heavier contour.