700 SPS Tac - Hunter 700 Accuracy

[Canonshooter]

I've owned this 700 SPS Tac in .308 for about three years. When I purchased it, the Hogue stock was replaced with a B&C and the trigger replaced with a Timney 510 before the first shot was fired with it. I had purchased a quantity of Federal GMM 168 ammo and up until this weekend, was all I have ever shot out of it.

In this configuration, the rifle shot under 1 MOA most of the time, typically .75 MOA or better. Here are the two best 5-shot groups (100 yards) that I had shot with it;

http://www.canonshooter.com/photos2/700target-3.jpg


http://www.canonshooter.com/photos2/700target-4.jpg


Recently I replaced the B&C with a Magpul Hunter 700 and their DBM and found that the accuracy had slipped a touch. The rifle would still shoot .75 MOA groups but I couldn't get it to do better than that. I experimented with different action screw torque settings but around .75 MOA was the best it would do.

This weekend I hit the range with some new loads to try: Hornady 168 A-MAX Match and 168 A-MAX Super Performance Match. Here are the results of four 5-shot groups at 100 yards with the rifle supported on a bench with bags;

Federal 168 GMM

0.977
1.16
1.22
1.39

Average = 1.186"
Each group seemed to have a single flyer, if removed the average would have been about .75"

Hornady A-MAX Target

0.312
.632
1.127 (0.677 with one flyer removed)
1.29 (0.817 with one flyer removed)

Average = 0.840"
If I remove the one flyer from each of the last two groups, average = 0.609"

The best two groups of the day;

http://www.canonshooter.com/photos2/700target-5.jpg


Hornady A-MAX Super Performance Target

0.772
0.920
0.960
1.400

Average = 1.01"
No pressure signs but the ammo did produce a bit more recoil as would be expected with the claimed higher velocity.

Conclusions

It's difficult to tell if the Magpul Hunter stock had an adverse effect on overall accuracy or if it simply changed the rifle's ammo preference. What is for certain is that while the Federal GMM load doesn't shoot quite as well as it used to, the Hornady 168 A-MAX target load shoots better than the GMM load ever did.

Looks like I have a new load to stock up on.

Full Rifle Specs

Remington 700 SPS Tac in .308, 20" barrel, 1:12 twist
Threaded 5/8" X 24 for VG6 Precision Gamma 762 brake
SWFA 10X42 HD scope
Seekins low rings
Leupold 15 MOA base
Timney 510
Magpul Hunter 700 with DBM

http://www.canonshooter.com/photos2/700-17.jpg

[atomic41]

Interesting, I just bought a M700 stock and I'm looking for a SPS to drop in it. It will be very close to yours. When I get it together and shoot it, I'll post my results to compare to.

[Canonshooter]

Interesting, I just bought a M700 stock and I'm looking for a SPS to drop in it. It will be very close to yours. When I get it together and shoot it, I'll post my results to compare to.

I look forward to reading about your results!

[maximus83]

Nice looking rig, thx for posting detailed results. I've been interested in this stock too for a new custom I'm having built to use as a lighter field and hunting rifle, but have been seeing mixed reports on it, some good, some less good. Just out of curiosity, does the barrel free float after you bolted in your action?

No firsthand experience with it, but I was talking to a custom rifle builder about precisely this stock recently. Really this is a good solid synthetic stock and well designed at its price point. He's shipped a few lower priced builds to customers using this stock. But there are a few caveats to anyone considering it. This is not a precision high-end stock like a Manners or some of the better metallic chassis systems. You might get "lucky" and get stellar accuracy results by just bolting your action into it and go. For those who have had such good results, that's awesome and I wish we could all be so fortunate as to buy a well designed $200 stock that improves accuracy and ergonomics without vastly increasing weight for a factory rifle. But you'll be more likely to get improved accuracy if you bed it or better yet, go to a higher end stock. I'll be really interested to hear if you can find something simple that (short of going to custom bedding) resolves it for you. There are a lot of things to like about this stock, not just price but the well thought out design with adjustable cheek height, LOP, and the integrated solution for using AICS compatible mags.

[Canonshooter]

maximus83, I think you summarized it well - for the money, the stock has a lot going for it. IMO, it's a well thought-out design and (again IMO) represents an unprecedented value in rifle stocks. For a general-purpose rifle that utilizes a stock barreled action, I think it is perfect. If I were going to invest in a custom build, then a high-end stock would no doubt give better results.

Yes, the barrel completely free floats from the recoil lug forward with room to spare.

In it's current state with Hornady 168 A-MAX Match ammo, it more than meets my expectations. I will tinker with it a bit more but with it being a solid sub-MOA performer with the capability to print a .312" C-to-C 5-shot group at 100 yards with factory ammo, I don't think I could ask for anything more from a mass-produced barreled action.

I think the next step is for me to hand load again, which I did for nearly 30 years with great results (we moved eight years ago and my old, well-used Rock Chucker press and some other items did not make the trip with us). I think with a hand load tailored for it, it will really shine.

[atomic41]

I look forward to reading about your results!


Ok I found a deal on a slightly used PSS barreled action in stainless cut to 22" so I got it instead of the SPS. I will still share my results after getting it going, but I won't have a baseline because I'm getting it minus a stock. So it won't be apples to apples sorry.

If you search around you will find discussions on this stock and the affects of the action screws torque. People are finding that they get different results depending on the torque of those screws. You might want to back them out and re torque on the lower end, try it, then go up in 5in/lb increments until you find the sweet spot.

I was sold on this stock back when it was reviewed on snipers hide. Frank Galli put in a GAPrecision barreled action that he already had lots of data on and found zero accuracy change with the Hunter700 stock. That guy will not BS about results.

[atomic41]

I'm picking it up today but I have to get a brake, base/rings, and my ammo order is delayed so I won't be shooting it for at least a week.

[eightmillimeter]

The stocks like this that have aluminum bedding blocks benefit greatly with a quick skim bed job.

[Canonshooter]

The stocks like this that have aluminum bedding blocks benefit greatly with a quick skim bed job.

I'm ready to give that a try but I've read conflicting info on whether skim bedding benefits v-blocks, which is used in the Magpul. Some say that bedding a v-block defeats the purpose of the v-block design and at least this test yielded no significant difference;

http://rifleshooter.com/2016/07/review-shooting-with-the-magpul-hunter-700-stock/

[maximus83]

I'm ready to give that a try but I've read conflicting info on whether skim bedding benefits v-blocks, which is used in the Magpul. Some say that bedding a v-block defeats the purpose of the v-block design and at least this test yielded no significant difference;

http://rifleshooter.com/2016/07/review-shooting-with-the-magpul-hunter-700-stock/

That is true, I've seen conflicting opinions on whether skim bedding is necessary with internal metal bedding blocks or v-blocks. I've dealt with this decision before as well, on a Manners stock that had their "mini chassis" which is basically a similar solution, a metal bedding system.

Here's the simple approach I take on this issue:
1. Why did you get a metal bedding block in the first place? One great reason is increased flexibility and reduced hassle. Using the v-block alone, the mess/hassle of traditional custom bedding is unnecessary. And about flexibility, if you avoid from custom bedding, you easily move and interchange multiple barreled actions of the same type of action (say, factory Rem 700 short actions) among different stocks. For instance, if you have Rem 700 in 308 and another in 6.5 creedmoor, you could switch them between a B&C stock with a v-block and a chassis system depending on how you want to use the rifles.
2. Given point (1), might as well start minimalist and simple, no skim bedding at first. It certainly won't hurt anything to try the v-block alone, and you can always add skim bedding later if you aren't getting the results you want. If you get a metal/v-block bedding system, start with just that and see if you get good accuracy results. Experiment with the torque values a bit if needed. A lot of folks whose opinions count, including Thomas Manners at Manners stocks, believe that for most shooters, the metallic system like the Manners dbm mini chassis is perfectly adequate and bedding it won't make a significant difference for most chooters.

[Canonshooter]

Experiment with the torque values a bit if needed. A lot of folks whose opinions count, including Thomas Manners at Manners stocks, believe that for most shooters, the metallic system like the Manners dbm mini chassis is perfectly adequate and bedding it won't make a significant difference for most shooters.

Yes, I'm in that camp of thought too.

Some more examination of details...

As we know, the Hunter 700 "bottom metal" is made of their "reinforced polymer" with steel bushings for the action screws pass through to create metal-on-metal-on-metal contact (receiver to block to steel bushings) when the action screws are tightened. Close examination of the bottom metal surface that contacts the block reveals that the top of the steel bushings are very slightly recessed and apparently don't touch the block when the screws are torqued down. Hmmm.....

Another observation - with a magazine inserted and the bolt closed, if the front action screw is removed with the rear still tight, the barrel lifts slightly (not good). With the magazine removed, either screw can be removed and the action remains motionless in the block (good). So, the magazine is placing some pressure on the bolt...

Using a file I took down the top of the bottom metal where it contacts the block so that the steel bushings are flush and come in direct contact. I could feel a difference when tightening the screws as there is no long any polymer that is being compressed as the screws are tightened, so they go from loose to tight with less rotation.

Next I created two shims out of small brass flat washers to serve as a spacer between the top of the bushings and the bottom of the block. With those in place, the lips of the magazine just clear the bolt but yet still feed rounds reliably. So now when either action screw is loosened, the action does not move in the stock with a magazine inserted on a closed bolt. The feedback you hear from Hunter 700 users saying the magazine is difficult to seat on a closed bolt is due to the issue - mine now seats just as easily on a closed bolt as when it's open. Of course, now the stock action screws are a touch too short so I have long versions on order from Brownells.

Finally, based on some specs for a Manners mini chassis, I'm going to try 60 inch/pounds on the front screw and 50 on the rear. Since the action is now (as far as I can tell) sitting in the block completely stress free, skim bedding seems unnecessary.

Will all of this tinkering make any difference? It seems it should but I won't know for sure until I hit the range again. I'll update with photos and range results.

[atomic41]

I assembled mine today. When torqued, I'm not having the magazine to bolt contact issue. I have a very thin gap but if I press up on the magazine, it makes contact. As soon as I let off the magazine, no contact. I can slide a sheet of paper between the bolt and magazine, I should try to get a feeler gauge in there to measure gap size. So far mine is looking ok.

[Canonshooter]

I assembled mine today. When torqued, I'm not having the magazine to bolt contact issue. I have a very thin gap but if I press up on the magazine, it makes contact. As soon as I let off the magazine, no contact. I can slide a sheet of paper between the bolt and magazine, I should try to get a feeler gauge in there to measure gap size. So far mine is looking ok.

The test is if the mag will lock in place on a closed bolt as easily as when the bolt is open (mine never did). Sounds like yours is good-to-go.

[atomic41]

Ok I promised a range report and I got it out today for the first time. I'm one of the lucky ones I guess because it shoots great. I used the same torque, 60 front, 50 rear. Magazine seats fine, no pressure on bolt, no issues at all. I was a little off today and kept getting flyers but I'm to blame not the rifle and pretty sure not ammo because I normally have great luck with the same ammo. FGMM, 168gr. Remember that I don't have a baseline but I'm pretty sure the factory stock would not perform better than what I'm seeing so far.

EDIT: Update...the rifle is averaging between 1/2 and 3/4 groups. Some better, some worse. I seem to shoot it better at 400 and 600 yards than at 100. I'm dry firing it daily and slowly getting the groups tighter. My goal is to get it to shoot 1/2 MOA more often than not but I'm not sure if it will with FGMM ammo so time will tell. But I still do not think that the factory stock would do better than this one.

[atomic41]

40952

[Mrpike]

Thanks for all the information Canon and others! I purchased a Magpul 700 stock for my LTR about one month ago and have a couple hundred rounds down range. I am currently using the factory BDL bottom metal and haven't purchased the DBM kit yet. Accuracy wise I've noticed no change from the original HS Precision stock. My rifle, going on 4700 rounds down the tube, is still capable of 5 shot groups in the 5/8 to 3/4 inch area. I shoot only factory ammo and mostly Hornady TAP 168 Amax. I really like the Magpul stock. It seems much easier to get behind and shoot in comparison to my HS Precision with the Triad stock pack. I found that the cheek riser that came with the stock is perfect for me with my Nightforce NXS 3.5-15 50 on a 20 MOA base. I have the sling mounted on the left side of the rifle using a flush cup in the M-LOK and the sling loop at the rear of the stock. The side mounted sling is the greatest improvement over the HS Precision stock IMO! So far the sling attachments have held up well (I did a 10 mile mountain bike ride with the rifle slung and have done some running with the rifle slung with no issues). That being said, I don't see any pull up torture tests coming soon with this set up. I've messed around with the action screw torque a bit and really haven't noticed much change (45/45 was the lowest I went). With that being said, I shot a really nice group with 60 inch pounds front, 45 inch pounds rear and just left it there for now.

[Pappabear]

Those are some cool cost effective stocks. I would bed it if you want to increase performance. It seems good enough but it's your call. Rarely does a great bedding make things worse.

Good luck with your nice rig.

PB

[Canonshooter]

40952

Sounds like you've got it dialed-in pretty well. Your group sizes are the same as mine with FGMM, and I'm seeing slightly better with Hornady 168 AMAX match (not the "super performance").

I need to get out with mine again, been spending too much time with the carbine...

[Mrpike]

I'm back to 45/45 on the action screw torque. Shot a one hole 3 round group and just under a 1/2 inch 5 round group w 168 grain Hornady TAP amax last week. My gun has shot most factory ammo well and in the past shot sub moa w the Barnes 150 ttsx, black hills gold 180 accubond, and federal 180 trophy tip. I did notice my groups open up a bit (1.5 ish) with the Barnes and black hills when running the front action screw at 60 inch pounds...I'm itching to try again at 45/45.