Perfect Union banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Question regarding bedding.

If I go to Gundoc he will do an excellent job bedding the mini.

If I go to Accuracy Systems they too will do an excellent job bedding it.

My question is this however.

Accuracy Systems does a three point bedding job. Is this a better way to bed the mini? To see what I am referring to go to this page and scroll down just a bit http://www.ruger-mini-14-firearms.com/mini_14_30_accessories.php

Or does it really matter?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
Other people may chime in here, but I'm not sure it has really been determined which method works better. You can probably find both advantages and disadvantages with each method. And, as an engineer I'm not sure I could come up with a reasonable (in time and price) non-destructive way of testing/comparing the two methods to determine a preference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,162 Posts
Glass bedding needs to be redone several times over the life of a rifle. The wood eventually starts compressing, so you need to rebed. This happens a lot with M1As that have to get rebedded every 2-3000 rounds. The Accuracy Systems is more money up front, but you won't need to do anything again unless you screw up the pillars the screws go into.

Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
Glass bedding needs to be redone several times over the life of a rifle. The wood eventually starts compressing, so you need to rebed. This happens a lot with M1As that have to get rebedded every 2-3000 rounds. The Accuracy Systems is more money up front, but you won't need to do anything again unless you screw up the pillars the screws go into.

Jim
That's interesting. The post system, where the posts are set vertically in the stock, doesn't suffer from compression and eventually loosen up? I would think the constant backward hammering on the posts as the rifle is fired would eventually loosen them up as well. The contact area between the posts and the stock is significantly smaller than that between the stock reinforcement assembly and the stock, and as such, would have to withstand a much greater load per unit area. Has the vertical post system also been used on the M1Asl?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,484 Posts
Add a smaller gas port and that will reduce the hammering recoil. 223 is mild round anyway but its amazing how well you can keep on target with muzzle brake and smaller bushings. There is a lot of great tips on here to make a great shooter.;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,162 Posts
That's interesting. The post system, where the posts are set vertically in the stock, doesn't suffer from compression and eventually loosen up? I would think the constant backward hammering on the posts as the rifle is fired would eventually loosen them up as well. The contact area between the posts and the stock is significantly smaller than that between the stock reinforcement assembly and the stock, and as such, would have to withstand a much greater load per unit area. Has the vertical post system also been used on the M1Asl?
I'm not sure, this is info from a guy who shoots a lot of target matches with an M1A. The post system is a lot more stable as it is across the grain as opposed to with the grain of the wood like regular bedding. The military is moving M-14 actions into EBR stocks to make them more stable and consistent, I believe they are aluminum bedded into composite/metal stocks so there's not as big an issue with it.

Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
665 Posts
Tri-70 has given a good place to start. As you no doubt have noticed there are many ways, in this case, to improve stock fit.

My choice was to use a set of 3/16" steel dowel pins fitted into the top of the stock, set flush. I used four pins, two on each side; the end touching the receiver was polished, the end epoxied into stock was ground with a notch to better grab the epoxy. Used a vertical end mill to cut a precise bore hole into the stock. Coated the receiver base with release agent, put epoxy into the hole, placed the pins into position, then locked the receiver into position.

The idea is to have the receiver rest on these dowel pins as well as the stock. The wood of the stock can't compress or wear. This is a combination between the other two methods; there is no epoxy bed to crack, or threaded pillars to strip out. It remains easy to remove the stock for cleaning or service.

I then added a fifth 1/16" pin, which is for alignment of the receiver to the stock. It fits into a hole drilled into the receiver, and prevents any movement between the two.

Somewhere, in the past, I posted photos of this method here. To date this has worked very nicely, and has contributed the Mini's accuracy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
I'm not sure, this is info from a guy who shoots a lot of target matches with an M1A. The post system is a lot more stable as it is across the grain as opposed to with the grain of the wood like regular bedding. The military is moving M-14 actions into EBR stocks to make them more stable and consistent, I believe they are aluminum bedded into composite/metal stocks so there's not as big an issue with it.

Jim
Thanks... guess I need to do some more research.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top