Visit my website: erikcortina.com/ Sign up for my private forum to learn about reloading, wind reading, long range tactics, and more. www.shootsmall... Get my shirts here: www.shootsmall... #65creedmoor #testing #longrange
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
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!!
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.
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.
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???
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.
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..
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.
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.
I would hand lap one barrel and borescope them to show the difference. I would also just touch the crown a little with a cutter to make sure it's perfect.
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.
EC tuner break on one and both in the same chassis is my choice. Whichever is comfortable to the shooter so the shooter is consistent. It seems obvious they are very comparable guns so changing things just make it shooter friendly like trigger etc is just going to change both guns the same. Tuning the load or tuning a load for them is the only way you are going to see which one actually outshoots the other. Keep the control rifle stock except for the chassis to make shooter consistent. Shoot the control gun the same number of rounds as the other so you can see if it improves as it breaks in compared to the other one with modifications. Otherwise there is no reason to have two rifles, as Erik said it might just be getting better as it breaks in.
On your non control rifle, I would like to see all the things people do before spending a ton of cash on them. Lap, bore, lugs, touch up crown, adjust trigger down ( if possible on that gun) plus the pillar bedding/ barrel float, maybe add something to stiffen the barrel channel for the bipod. Then work your hand loading process. After that go to the tuner.
I've got 2 walnut stocks bedded with JB Weld because devcon was out of stock at a point and they have held up just as good as Devcon. It is a little runny but but I let it sit for 30 minutes before application to thicken a little. Even then it is still thinner than Devcon but being thin definitely helps fill down into voids better and I got no air pockets in the finished bedding. Don't knock it till you try it, both of my rifles have had 1000+ rounds and the JB is still holding strong.
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 👏.
If they are both shooting the same then start upgrading both of them but with different upgrades. Start with bolt on upgrades first like triggers and springs before you modify the rifle permanently by turning the barrel. Put a trigger in one and a spring in the other then compare to see what improves the rifle the best. Then undo the mods and test the next option. Once the bolt on upgrades are complete then install breaks and tuner breaks and compare. This way we can learn what each mods does to the rifle and what mods give you the best bang for the buck.
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.
After you add the tuner brake in the next step... then do triggers... then after that... replace the barrels with medium or heavy weight... one short, one long... then your transition to the dark side will be complete young padawan.
Add a brake on one, Change the trigger on the other. Try to find the cheapest path to accuracy. If you were to spend your own money, try your upgrades in this order.
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.
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.
The control is done. Try different things on each one them then compare the results to the other. Such as different triggers. Different muzzle treatments. Like a tuner on one and a tuner brake on the other.
Think the control shud have kept the Harris bipod on it for all tests. The foray into changong the stocks is fine, but, the bipod shud have been kept, not changed every time, even though it apparently doesn't really seem to make any difference. On a budget hunting or range gun, most folk I know of will opt for the Harris. Seeing as he shot one with a Thunderbeast, need to do others with that before a tuner brake, I'd even do the trigger before doing the tuner, but, after doing the brake test. Last change would be action work, then the spring.
Each test is its own course of evaluation. A control need only provide a baseline, updating the control to the new baseline is the correct methodology.
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.
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.
It's amazing how many are saying to leave the control-rifle alone, and then immediately after, they say something to do to it. HAHA! I've seen: "leave the control alone - but just: polish the trigger, add the tuner, add a brake, add a cheek-riser, bedding, change the trigger".....funny!! It's almost more interesting to see the difficult choices being mulled-over than it is the actual results. Both are intriguing, though.
Leave it in the oryx and do nothing further to it except shoot it along side the other to keep the round count equal. They may both start to shoot better with just more rounds down range. Then keep modifying the other gun to see how much better you can make it.
If you're going to keep them the same, I would suggest bedding both barreled actions in the Oryx. It's a minor step, but the only reason it shot better in the original stock is the bedding. Those actions aren't exactly precision on their outer dimensions. Both would shoot better imho. I would try a new trigger before the tuner/brake. Joe average can't just throw a brake on, but the trigger is a simple relacement.
now you going to have to put the air container tuner on it, I've been doing the plastic stocks scenario you've been talking about for years and it works without buying a 5 6 7 800 dollar chassis
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!
Keep No1 in original stock but thread in and suppress it or muzzle brake. Keep doing what a hunter wound do. No2 do what ever a competition shooter would do. Thats how i see this thing.
Assuming this rifle is the one that shot worst, I’d continue to modify it and compare its performance to the other one in its original configuration. That way, you show what improvements can be made to a Needsmore rifle. I’d go all the way to handloads in a match barrel.
This gets the accuracy to more than an acceptable level. Then by adding the stock you like you get it to the comfort level your looking for. At that point you can narrow it down as you see fit and it clearly defines the the levels of cost, based needs an wants.
Now that you have established a baseline, there is really no point to the control. turn number 2 into a modified factory hunting rifle by putting it into the Magpul and the other into a target rifle. Do the cheapest/easiest mods first to find the point of diminishing returns.
@@fentonpainter7907 I must have missed something. My understanding is that they only bedded and free floated upgrade rifle; the control rifles stock has not been touched up to this point. They keep stating that the original stocks are garbage and they achieved significant gains by bedding and free floating the upgrade rifle. My point is that if your trying to show the gains of making changes (ie: tuner, trigger, chassis, etc) the initial factory off the shelf rifles should have been repaired to make them accurate and consistent before beginning the upgrades to one of them. As if stands right now they are comparing the changes on the upgrade gun to a control gun that began the process with questionable consistency/accuracy baseline, so the lingering question through the entire processes will be is it the lousy factory stock fitting on the control gun or the upgrades that make the difference.
If you really wanted to get in depth with the after market stocks, you'd start at 20in/lbs on the action screws and add 5 in/lbs of torque until you find the sweet spot.
You really didn't need two rifles for what you're doing. Could have taken one and fired a "control group" for a basis. You're looking for what does/does not improve the rifle. Bed the OEM stock and try the aftermarket stocks. Go with what shoots best. Try different triggers and go with the best--if it makes a difference. Try different optics--go with the best. Try a tuner or tuner-brake. Go with the best setting. Then try different loads - bullets, powders, COLs, etc. Go with what shoots best. The object is to get the most out of an off-the-shelf rifle.
Is it possible that the action screw torque is different (lower perhaps) in the factory stock vs. the torque applied to the different chassis - resulting in smaller groups? 🤔
Not only since you pillar blocked and betted it with the few shots and the cleaning you done a break-in sequence on the barrel it would have been nice if you done a initial and a break in sequence and then started the testing cuz now you could just be getting into the barrels optimum condition not the stock and the upgrades
The purpose of a control gun is to have something to compare the modified gun to gentlemen. Modifying the control gun destroys the integrity of the test. Put it back in its factory stock then give it to Speedy for safe keeping since you guys can’t be trusted to not modify it 😎
So these are $500 rifles for hunting, as of this video you can take them out hunting and take game, you haven't mentioned the triggers, maybe replace the triggers, that will make a difference then maybe thread the barrels use a brake or tuner or try both..............
If you hadn't bedded the stock I would say leave it into the original stock. Then your test would show how much better you can make the rifle compared to how it came from the factory. Now that you can't go back, I say that you use the stock that feels the best to the shooter so that comfort or uncomfort doesn't sway the results. Now you're showing how good you can make a bad shooting factory rifle compared to a pretty good shooting factory rifle with very little 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.
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 "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.
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
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 OG stock we are using hte harris bipod due to the mounting stud. The Hunter stock we used the magpul bipod due to mounting. The KRG and Oryx we used the Accutac due to mounting.
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.
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.
Once you have the control data point I don’t see any reason to keep it stock. I do think the ‘control’ gun should be 40 rounds…or some unreasonably large group. After that…I’d actually like to see a round robin style comparison… Barrel and trigger Vs Trigger and brake Vs brake and stock Vs Stock and barrel Etc etc And then show which is the most bang for your buck…ie a $900 barrel might be the biggest improvement (say 0.4 MOA) but if the stock and trigger get you really close (say 0.5 MOA)…
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?
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
Wind / conditions changing ? = affecting group size ? Just because it shot sub .500 moa once doesn't mean it'll do it over and over. Maybe just luck / one off ? Barrels breaking in ?
Please add the Dollar/Price of the upgrades at each level as you go. That way we can determine, up to whitch point, it is the worth the effort to upgrade a stock rifle, or to build a custom rig from start. I know you mention what the stock cost, but as the build progress, please let us know how much the gun cost and where we stand now. --- THANK YOU for a wonderfull channel
If you are looking for stock capability why not eliminate variables. Start with shooting from a bench rest. Make sure bead is properly torqued. Are you using same loads? Powder, primer, seat from lands same?
Put rifle 2 back in the modified factory stock and shoot another group or two. I bet it doesn't shoot sub 1/2MOA every time... If it stays 3/4MOA like in the chassis; then why bother upgrading it anymore? This is a budget gun, just leave it a sub MOA budget gun while upgrading rifle 1 to the gills. I would like to see rifle 1 get to the point of re barreling after the tuner brake and see how it stacks up against 2 where it's at, and then try a tuner brake on 2. Just leave it step or two behind at least.
Another option I like is this... Upgrade the rifle that was put in the Oryx first. Leave the control alone until you're done with rifle 1. Then Upgrade the control later, but in a different order. Example. Rifle 1- Chassis, tuner, Barrel, Trigger, Custom Loads. Rifle 2- Custom Loads, EC Tuner with factory ammo, EC Tuner with custom loads, Chassis, Trigger, Barrel.
Depends how far you’re taking this. Why not just put a tuner on the control in factory stock and do NOTHING else to it and then to the #2 do anything you’re willing to do to it but no tuner Such as put a barrel on it in the chassis to see how much money and labor involved to get it to shoot as good as the factory control with just pillar bedding and a tuner!
it seems that the bedding made a huge difference, how about you guys try to improve the bedding-fitting of the stock on ONE of them ? I've always thot that bedding is the biggest improvement you can do , given the normal things like fixing the trigger and a tuner-brake.....
Why not do one that has an expensive need-more and the other an affordable need-more. For example, off the shelf affordable break and then the tuner break... etc.
I say you do poor man mods to the control and completely gucci out the other. Then you develop a load for the control to see if you can match the other rifle.
Remember..this test is for the average shooter … leave control gun on original stock - do what the average shooter would do - add-brake/tuner , add check piece .
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.
While I appreciate your effort to normalize testing between the stocks, there is a problem, in fact, I believe this really invalidates your test. You didn't clean the gun between every stock test. In order to test consistently each configuration you have to start from the same point just like in scientific testing. You must start every stock with the same baseline. Also, shooting two five round groups is a very small sampling. Thanks for sharing.
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
You know the control rifle is a .5 to 1 inch gun depending on the stock. The other rifle does not have a good barrel compared to the control rifle. Now is time to work on the #1 rifle to see what makes a difference and can you bring it to the same point as the control rifle or better.
