How far forward to bed?

[amlevin]

There seems to be a lot of different ideas on how far forward, past the recoil lug, to bed a rifle action/barrel.

One "How to Blog" says "No matter what anyone says, always bed at least to the front of the chamber area" Another says "at least 2" ahead of he lug". Still more say no bedding ahead of the rear face of the recoil lug, sides and bottom free.

What say you all. The rifle is a Remington 700 action with a straight taper barrel, muzzle dia of .815". The stock is an HS Precision that originally had only the Aluminum Action Block. Risers were added at the action screw points and the action was bedded. Groups improved but are still lacking that last little "fraction". I welcome all ideas and comments.

 

[X Ring Accuracy]

For the heavier barreled rifles, we bed an inch in front of the lug. Sporters, we stop at the front of the lug.

 

[Preacher]

None of my 1.350 30" barrels are bedded in front of the recoil lug, and they seem to shoot OK ..........

 

[dbstallman]

Amlevin,
I recommend that you bed out one inch or so forward of the lug ... then if you do not get great results, it is easy to remove enough of the epoxy to free-float your barrel at the lug. Can't really go wrong that way.
Good luck . don stallman

 

[sparky123321]

I never bed in front of the recoil lug unless the barrel is over 28" and greater than 1" in diameter at the muzzle. A lot depends on your action though.

I'd probably spend a little time testing a few different bullets, powders, charges and OAL's to fine tune the load before rebedding the action/barrel.

Factory barrel? Caliber? Current 3 or 5 shot groups at 100 yards? What does the group look like?

 

[watercam]

I have done it both ways on several hunting and match rifles and can not tell the difference on the range. After several thousand rounds each through two match rifles without barrel bedding I have had no problems of any kind. Except my crappy hold and wind reading ability (or lack thereof)...

 

[amlevin]

I never bed in front of the recoil lug unless the barrel is over 28" and greater than 1" in diameter at the muzzle. A lot depends on your action though.

I'd probably spend a little time testing a few different bullets, powders, charges and OAL's to fine tune the load before rebedding the action/barrel.

Factory barrel? Caliber? Current 3 or 5 shot groups at 100 yards? What does the group look like?

To answer the questions first, it's a factory 24" barrel in .308 and 5 shot groups were not terrible but had a nasty tendency to string diagonally. As for powders, loads, and bullets, this rifle seems to like any combination with a 175 gr bullet that travels around 2550 fps or so. OK performance with 168 gr but the 175's are still the best. Twist is 1:11.25, supposedly "optimized" for the M-118 LR round.

Since the original post I went ahead and added bedding 2" ahead of the recoil lug.

The results were great. groups are now down as small as .190 for a 5 round group at 100 yards. Nice and round too, no more diagonal stringing. When the wind cooperates I can get groups at 300 yards that can be covered with a quarter.


It appears that for this rifle/barrel/stock combination it needed the extra 2". FWIW, I looked at a Les Baer rifle not long ago in .308. Had a "factory proof target" included with it. supposedly 10 rounds in a group that was less than 1/4". It was equipped with a McMillan A-5 stock and bedded to 2" ahead of the recoil lug. (unfortunately the bedding job looked like it was done with roofing tar).

Anyway, it appears I have solved my problem with the rifle. Thanks all that have offered comments and suggestions.

 

[BoydAllen]

The forends of those stocks are not noted for their rigidity. The benefit that you are seeing may not be so much about greater barrel support, but rather that you have considerably stiffened the forend, by reducing the length of the cantilever.

 

[amlevin]

The forends of those stocks are not noted for their rigidity. The benefit that you are seeing may not be so much about greater barrel support, but rather that you have considerably stiffened the forend, by reducing the length of the cantilever.

Totally agree with the lack of rigidity of this stock. Before some additional, and severe, inletting, I was able to squeeze the barrel against the forend without much effort. I noticed this right after buying the rifle. I relieved the barrel channel of an extra 1/8" so there was no chance of the two "meeting" while the rifle was being fired.

A new stock is definitely on my "to do" list. The next one will definitely be more rigid than this one.


BTW, what is your personal opinion on B&C Stocks? I'm considering one of these or possibly a McMillan. Both in the "A-5 style"

 

[BoydAllen]

I don't have any personal experience with B & C. McMillan is a known quantity, with a long record of performance and quality. Another well made stock comes from Manners. A friend has one that has proven itself to be very tough. The rifle that it is a part of survived being run over lengthwise with his PU, with no damage.