Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Torque Value on a 1992 McMillan Fiberglass Stock, (No pillars)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ian M" data-source="post: 61466" data-attributes="member: 25"><p>I suggest starting at 45 in/pounds. I was tightening a McMillan stocked Rem. 700 to 65 and was not happy with the accuracy even tho the stock was bedded. Went to 45 and the rifle shoots great. I expect that 65 is the optimum for the big tactical stocks with pillars, plus it happens to be the same torque value suggested for the side nuts on Badgers and MK4 rings. Might be why 65 is suggested so commonly.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ian M, post: 61466, member: 25"] I suggest starting at 45 in/pounds. I was tightening a McMillan stocked Rem. 700 to 65 and was not happy with the accuracy even tho the stock was bedded. Went to 45 and the rifle shoots great. I expect that 65 is the optimum for the big tactical stocks with pillars, plus it happens to be the same torque value suggested for the side nuts on Badgers and MK4 rings. Might be why 65 is suggested so commonly. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Torque Value on a 1992 McMillan Fiberglass Stock, (No pillars)
Top