Alright, I've got a Remington VLS .308 that I'm looking to bed and float. I know on synthetic stocks Pillars are the way to go due to compression, and to a lesser extent on walnut, but does this apply to laminates?. Also, I've read that while pillars (2 contact pointa) are excelent on varmint calibers, on the bigger stuff you are better off with a standard full contact glass bedding setup. To add to the confusion, I've seen reports (not sure how reliable) that most highpower shooters are using standard glass bedding, with only a minority installing pillars. Which system would be best for my situation? Thanks.

in my opinion the stiffer the action the better the accuracy. If the action has been trued and is streight.
I use pillows front and rear then glass bed front recoil lug and rear tang with a skim bed in between also a couple inches of the barrel.
Dave

IMO the advantages of pillar bedding is vastly over stated. A decent glass bedding job will do anything one can accomplish with the addition of pillars.

It's not bad to pillar bed....just not as important as many think.

The idea of pillars is that they totally isolate the receiver from any vertical expansion, contraction or compression of the stock material by literally tying the receiver and bottom metal together fore and aft as a unit.

The difference in time, effort and cost between bedding and pillar bedding is so insignificant that it’s almost a non-issue to me.

I have never heard of, nor can I imagine, any problems resulting from using pillars, and nothing more than common sense will tell you that it provides a more stable platform for your barreled action than just a layer of epoxy on wood or fiberglass will.

cmb3366

The only experience I have had with laminated stocks were those cream and grey coloured stocks on the Rem stainless.

I bedded quite a few of them and they did compress at the front and of course the narrow Rem 700 floor plate up front does not help.

For pillars I used shell holders which were perfect as the small end of the shell holder is spot on for diameter. That ended the compression issue.

Personally, I am not a believer in the having the receiver resting on a pillar.

Mike

The big plus for pillar bedding is that it eliminates crushing the stock when torquing the action screws. More importaint on rifles with a little kick as they can compress the stock material and cause POA shifts.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike McGuire:
cmb3366

The only experience I have had with laminated stocks were those cream and grey coloured stocks on the Rem stainless.

I bedded quite a few of them and they did compress at the front and of course the narrow Rem 700 floor plate up front does not help.

For pillars I used shell holders which were perfect as the small end of the shell holder is spot on for diameter. That ended the compression issue.

Personally, I am not a believer in the having the receiver resting on a pillar.

Mike

So what do you believe the receiver should rest on for the best, most stable and most accurate positioning in the stock shot after shot? Wood?, fiberglass?, plastic?, or a layer of epoxy sitting on top of any of the above compressible materials?

just what vapodog said

You know, you guys are right. Pillar bedding is just another of those silly, nonsensical things dreamed up by greedy gunsmiths trying to bilk money from their customers.

Next thing you know they’re gonna be trying to convince us that we should use ammuntion that matches the caliber of our rifle. Bastards, I bet they all get kick backs from the ammo companies as well!

cmb,i have that same rifle and it shot even better before i glass bedded it.Check to see if the action moves in the stock.If it doesn't you might be better off leaving it the way it is before you start removeing mateial.

quote:

So what do you believe the receiver should rest on for the best, most stable and most accurate positioning in the stock shot after shot? Wood?, fiberglass?, plastic?, or a layer of epoxy sitting on top of any of the above compressible materials?

fyj,

If I use pillars, which I have only done with Rem 700s and the laminated stock....then I bed the rifle normally.

My experience with accuracy rifles in bigger calibres, number 5 contour barrels (about.72" at 26 inchs) is the rubber type stock that came on Rem 700s was the best for accuracy. Did a lot of testing with 358 STAs and that included McMillan fibreglass, HS Precision with bedding block (non bedded then bedded) and also and Aluminium bench style stock we use in Australia.

Did the aluminium bench stock as both a glue in and a bedded job.

With the glue in I did it 3 ways. First was to use the epoxy we normally use, which sets about like nylon in hardness...but has the glue line thicker then normal. That did not give top accuracy. Also did a glue in with an expoxy glue that sets extremely hard, much harder than Devcon. That also shot not so good. Lastly, did a glue in with the softer epoxy and put the stock right next to the electric heater which made for a very fine glue line. That shot the best of the glue ins. And the action had Jewell trigger.

Some of the benchrest blokes out here have also lapped the action to the alloy stocks.

Mike

Mike,

Are you saying the combination of the rubber type stock and the softer epoxy allowed the action to "float"?

Was the barrel bedded at all?

Cheers,

Buliwyf

Buliwyf

Full floating barrel.

With the Rem 700 rubber or tupperware stocks I don't know if the round action is forming part of the equation. I have a done a few M70s in their rubber stock but the barreled actions were not at the same level to give any meaningful results.

As a side note and using the alloy bench stock we tried HV taper in 338 Win, 340 Wby with both 10 and 12 twist and also 375 H&H. The 358 STA was best for accuracy...not so muhc in terms of the best load for each barrel but the average accuracy across a large range of loads.

The 358 STA barrels were all 1 in 14 twists and .357. Our version of your Pac-Nor, Hart etc has a basic belief that a barrel that is a thou or so under size is the best. Of course the individual JGS reamer for the 358 or perhaps the individual dies for the 358 may have been a contributing factor in its accuracy as compared to the 338, 340 and 375.

The problem with all this sort of stuff is that you probably need to do a 100 rifles to get truly meaningful results.

Mike

Thanks Mike,

I have been looking at some of the "rubber" stocks and found your earlier comments interesting. My understanding of benchrest rifles is that that actions are glued in, but I do not know if the glue technology applies to hunting rifles.

Happy Holidays,

B

B

I have done glue ins on both. Of course originally glue ins were because of hollow stocks.

My own experience on the hunting style rilfe is that glue in Vs bedding produces no difference (Or at least observable diffeence).....however, I would back a glue in against a bedding job if measured over the longer term. You can have a bedding job that is not quite right but the rifle will still shoot well on its first couple of outings.

I think most people forget that even a good bedding job still means a few points of contact...even though it does not look that way.

Note: 99.99% of my experience on accuracy rifles is with 270 Winchester and bigger. My observations have been that the 222, PPCs, 22/250s, 243s are a bit different.

Mike