Does the Accustock eliminate the need to piller and/or glass bed?

[deermaster]

I am looking for a rifle that requires the least amount of smithing to shoot good, and am looking at the Accustocked Savages. Does the aluminum block in the stock, or bedding blocks in general, eliminate the need to piller and glass bed an action? Thanks, as you all can tell, I am new to this and appreciate the help.

[J E Custom]

Originally Posted by deermaster

I am looking for a rifle that requires the least amount of smithing to shoot good, and am looking at the Accustocked Savages. Does the aluminum block in the stock, or bedding blocks in general, eliminate the need to piller and glass bed an action? Thanks, as you all can tell, I am new to this and appreciate the help.

Action Inserts,V blocks, bedding blocks are good but do not eliminate the need for a good skim bed
or a full bedding job.

Some of the bedding block already have the pillars as part of the system. But you have to look
at them to make they go all the way through the stock to the bottom metal. If they don't you will
need to shim (Washers) until they contact the bottom metal for a metal to metal fit.

I like to bed all inserted stocks and pillar them if they don't have proper pillars.

Some will say bedding is not nessary, But I have never seen a case that bedding over a bedding
block hurt the accuracy. In most cases it improved the accuracy and the consistency.

There is no doubt that some sort of bedding block is better than none but they do not guarantee
accuracy.

J E CUSTOM

[sinarms]

The accustock does nothing for me, I would swap the stock out in a heart beat if it was me. And yes still bed the rifle.

[Cthemfly25]

Deermaster--like you I am looking closely at savage because of the accustock. The "physics" seem sound from everything I've read. Other than the general brand preferences, and savage would not necessarily be mine, what are any particular problems or concerns with the accustock. Thx

[Nomosendero]

Originally Posted by Cthemfly25

Deermaster--like you I am looking closely at savage because of the accustock. The "physics" seem sound from everything I've read. Other than the general brand preferences, and savage would not necessarily be mine, what are any particular problems or concerns with the accustock. Thx

There WAS a problem. The Accustock HAD a "wedge" which required a certain method to replace the stock as far as torque & sequence of tightening. The new Accustock does not have the wedge. If they thought they needed the wedge before, I don't know what they did to compensate for that.

I have been looking at buying a Precision Carbine, but I want to watch it all unfold a little longer.
I do agree with the above posters that it is likely a skim bed will help most any alum. bedded rifle, I don't know how receptive the new Accustock is to this. Kirby skim bedded my Sendero & I sure do advise that for any HS or B&C type stock, probably choate too.

[dwm]

My understanding is the action is pulled down into the Accustock and the Accustock flexes a bit in the sides as the action seats. It does not just sit on top like there is a block or pillars under it.

I am not sure what would happen if you skin bedded it. If what they advertise is true, the skim bed may not make it through the flexing of the Accustock bedding system.

Either that or the skim bedding may defeat what Savage was trying to achieve by having the action be pulled down into the Accustock cradle.

I am going by what Savage has provided in the marketing of the Accustock though as my basis ...

[backwoods83]

Nomosendero makes the best point they have 2 versions of the accustock and the one with the (wedge) is by far the better version, that wedge pushes tension against the recoil lug, the closest your gonna get to skim bedding under the lug. The solid block with no pillars which is the newer design is just about useless!