Merits of a "switch stock" rifle


Mar 12, 2009
I'm a new poster, it looks like you guys have a nice forum here. First let me give you my background. I'm a hunter who enjoys shooting a lot. I've a 300 yard range at my home and 1000+ yards available on local farms. I'm wanting to build a long range hunter that doubles as a trusty stalking rifle. I may want to shoot whitetails at 800, long distance elk out west, and (the tricky part), a suitable mountain rifle as well. How you say? My thoughts are this.

7 Rem Mag firing 168 Bergers
Rem action or one of the custom clones
#4 fluted Rock barrel 24"
McMillan Classic in edge fill

With the optics and mounts I plan to use, which are 1000 yard capable, these specs will yield a rifle that's just under 8 lbs (including scope and mounts) with aluminum bottom metal and just over 8 lbs with steel bottom metal. I know this weight to be accurate and I'm very comfortable with this set up because that's exactly what I have now in a 300 Win Mag (before someone makes the obvious statement, I know I could make this plan work with the 300. I just don't want to). While not a featherweight, its not heavy either and I've carried it up and down the Rockys without complaint.

But I want a long range set up too. So I'm thinking a McMillan A3, maybe in heavy fill to add weight, pillar bedded for the barreled action as well. That'd put the weight around 10 lbs which would be my target weight for a long range hunter.

I'm also thinking that using the HS Precision bottom metal with detachable magazine box would make the transition of the barreled action from one stock to the other a snap because you wouldn't have to screw around with the free floating magazine box and the spring and follower inherent with the typcial BDL set up.

Any general thoughts or comments on this concept?

I've never handled the HS magazine system and would hate to build a rifle with two stocks around it then find out the HS system doesn't fit my taste so I need lots of input on the HS detachable mag system.

Thanks in advance.

Warning! This thread is more than 14 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.