Thats why they offer the xray and whiskey 3. The bravo is cheap.
KRG Bravo Chassis
- Thread starter southerngolfer
- Start date
I like the concept on those BRAVO is much closer to my fav stocks like manner and mcmillan..im not really fan of those chassis or closer config to an AR15/10 rifles...
I would pay another 100 for a kmw mechanism on BRAVO
I must have got one with the perfect alignment of tolerances, because mine is solid with no noticeable movement. I was actually somewhat worried about that aspect when ordering but very relieved when I got to play around with mine. Thought I was going to need to order a Wiebad mini stock pack as well, but the Bravo piece is pretty damn comfortable for me.
I must have lucked out.
Is it possible that the shafts are loose in the cheek piece? If so, you can unscrew them a bit, and then smack them on a hard surface. You’ll see 2 plugs raise up on the top of the cheek piece. Remove these, and you’ll see 2 Allen screws. Remove them, add blue loc-tite, and re-install in reverse order.
As for repeatable height after removing the cheek piece, I use a small o-ring on each of the shafts. Set the height to where I want it, push the o-rings down until they just touch the lock piece, and I’m good to go.
My bravo cheek piece looks and feels cheap ... BUT it locks down 100% and has zero movement when I'm shooting with the weight of my head on it. I am surprised, but data is data. It works in the field. I can adjust it ... tool less .. in the field .. .and it has never moved after being locked down ... and I have about 400 live fires with it as of now.
Hecque to me, the AIAX chassis cheek piece also feels cheap (though does not LOOK cheap ) ... but it also does not move when locked down. The McRee cheek pieces are metal and so they look and feel less cheap and they have moved when locked down, though once I started torquing them to 65 i/p they have not moved. But the McRee are not tool-less, the bravo and the AIAX are.
Hecque to me, the AIAX chassis cheek piece also feels cheap (though does not LOOK cheap
) ... but it also does not move when locked down. The McRee cheek pieces are metal and so they look and feel less cheap and they have moved when locked down, though once I started torquing them to 65 i/p they have not moved. But the McRee are not tool-less, the bravo and the AIAX are.
She needs more go-fast parts, but I'm in love with this rifle.
Just received my Bravo for my Tac A1 and so far so good. I’m going to run the moe pic rail up front until spigots are back in stock. I will post pics soon.
@Massoud
So had some issues with the installation...long story short, the Bravo chassis is out of spec. Something was binding against the trigger safety linkage and preventing it from fully going forward and selecting fire. The Tac A1 action is completely brand new and unfired, and every time I removed the action (at least 10 times) from the Bravo, the trigger functioned flawlessly. I had to back out the safety linkage set screw on the trigger housing slightly, hopefully this works.
Attachments
Last edited:
Did you remove the factory mag retention spring on the trigger screw that holds it to the receiver?
Have to say i'm enjoying this thing. Far more than i thought i would. I ran an X-ray for sometime and liked it but never felt that stable prone when doing load development. Idk why but even with the spigot mount it just wasn't for me. Loved the recoil impulse though. Jumped on a bravo and man it's wonderful. I'm not sure if anything changed between now and then but the polymer is downright impressive and the chassis/stock is super comfortable.
That’s not required on the Tac A1 trigger...it doesn’t have the clip attached. The chassis is binding against the safety linkage that runs alongside the trigger housing with a set screw. It was preventing the safety from going all the way forward, and causing the trigger pull to increase up to 4 lbs. from 2 lbs I had adjusted it to.
FYI: NRA show is going on right now; Justin may be a little delayed in responding (maybe send him a PM directly?)...
What are the torque settings for the polymer handguard for the Bravo? I did 15in/lbs.
So after swapping everything back to my Tac A1 chassis and inspecting the Bravo, I see where it is out of spec. In the pics, you can see where the safety linkage is rubbing inside the trigger casing (see circled). I will be calling KRG and sending them back the chassis and see what they have to say.
@Massoud
@Massoud
Attachments
Quality wise how is the KRG bravo? I'm not opposed to spending for a different stock/chassis but really like the looks of the bravo. That said I dont want it to be like the luth-ar where it flexes and feels flimsy.
I'm SUPER picky and will NOT deal with junk, and I was super impressed with my Bravo and even more impressed after I installed the spigot and Harris adapter. You can't go wrong, and the good part is if you don't like it you can sell it on the px for $20 less than what you gave for it.
It’s excellent, very rigid and has a really nice lop and cheek adjustment. I’m bummed about mine being out of spec, because I’m sending it back. My guess is that since the Tac A1 uses a different trigger than the T3 models, the Bravo is not designed for use with the Tac A1 action. Their website doesn’t even list the Tac A1 as being compatible, it only lists the T3, T3x.
Here’s the email from KRG, confirming the Bravo is not compatible with the Tac A1 and requires modifications. They need to update their site and installation instructions to give a heads up to future customers. They instructed me to just return it to Brownells.
Attachments
Last edited:
It is pretty impressive honestly. I wasn't a fan of the X-ray. Could never steady the thing. But the Bravo is GTG and i vastly prefer manners/mcmillan to most anything. For the money the Bravo is unbeatable though.
The Bravo is impressive regardless of price, not in spite of. KRG could easily get $500 for the Bravo.
Seriously? Looks like 30 seconds in a mill to fix (or a dremel tool if you're handy). I doubt I'd be sending it back for a simple relief cut to allow the safety to move freely. Maybe I'm just too pragmatic here....
Perhaps, but it is not just the safety engagement, it impacts the trigger pull as well. I guess my point is that the Bravo is advertised as a direct drop in for the Tac A1, but having to make relief cuts with a dremel to the trigger housing is not a “drop in” and should be outlined in the instructions and on the KRG site. YMMV
So you take a dremel to your Bravo and you’re still having issues because the chassis is not designed to fit the Tac A1. Then what? KRG told me to contact Brownells for the return....can you guarantee Brownells will accept a chassis that was hacked on with a dremel?
So you take a dremel to your Bravo and you’re still having issues because the chassis is not designed to fit the Tac A1. Then what? KRG told me to contact Brownells for the return....can you guarantee Brownells will accept a chassis that was hacked on with a dremel?
Absolutely, Brownells gives no fucks about returns so hack at it. It's a small problem with a simple fix, and if you think you won't run into fitment issues again... well I got some bad news for you...
Yep, every time someone comes out with a new trigger, there's at least one or more stocks/chassis that have "fitment issues". Nothing is ever universal.
Wanted to throw my Bravo build up, initially I thought the palm swell was a bit much but after dry firing and actually getting out to shoot... I really like it. I plan to run it till I find a stock or chassis I really like but honestly I might not change it. If you're on the fence this is a great option and from what I can tell resale is good.
The Bravo, like the rest of our chassis, was not designed for the Tac A1. They all were designed well before the Tac A1 came out.
Tikka added a feature for the Tac A1 so that you could momentarily release the safety/firing pin block to open the bolt. That part they added interferes slightly with the trigger guard. Given that few people are paying the big $$ for the Tac A1 version then pulling the chassis, it's probably not something we're going to accommodate in the future as it's a mold change. For others reading this in the future, you'll be better served with a standard T3 heavy barrel, then pull the action, add our Midas 2-Stage Trigger or the Timney, then drop it in a Bravo and hit the range.
We will fix any KRG caused issues with the chassis for as long as we're around regardless of if someone does some mods. That's been our policy from the beginning. In the above case the chassis is not out of spec and we don't claim that any of our chassis fit the Tac A1 although they will with a bit of work on that trigger area.
Thanks guys for your business.
Justin
Tikka added a feature for the Tac A1 so that you could momentarily release the safety/firing pin block to open the bolt. That part they added interferes slightly with the trigger guard. Given that few people are paying the big $$ for the Tac A1 version then pulling the chassis, it's probably not something we're going to accommodate in the future as it's a mold change. For others reading this in the future, you'll be better served with a standard T3 heavy barrel, then pull the action, add our Midas 2-Stage Trigger or the Timney, then drop it in a Bravo and hit the range.
We will fix any KRG caused issues with the chassis for as long as we're around regardless of if someone does some mods. That's been our policy from the beginning. In the above case the chassis is not out of spec and we don't claim that any of our chassis fit the Tac A1 although they will with a bit of work on that trigger area.
Thanks guys for your business.
Justin
Last edited:
Interesting that you said that you don’t claim any of your systems fit the Tac A1 because I have email documentation stating otherwise (see below). The reason some would want to swap into a lighter chassis like the Bravo is because they might not want a folding stock, can sell the Tac A1 chassis for $500-700$ on the PX, and end up saving a couple hundred in the process with a better trigger. There was a used Tac A1 for sale on the Snide for $1350 that would be a perfect example of doing this. If it’s not worth it for your company to make accommodations via added instructions and tec help online, then it’s not worth it to me to purchase your products and dremel them in hopes it functions.
@Massoud
Attachments
Last edited:
I went back to my Tac A1 oem chassis. It’s heavy and I’m not crazy about the folding stock but it will be fine for now. I really wanted to like the Bravo, but now seeing how KRG operates their business, they won’t see another dime from me. YMMV
You know, you're starting to sound like you have an axe to grind. He just admitted that the A1 doesn't fit, but would require some modifications. You chose not to modify, and sent the chassis back.
What's the issue here; that somebody made a mistake? Or that you didn't get what you wanted?
If it's because you didn't get what you wanted (a no work required solution), hey, stuff happens when you're running unique/low volume stuff, and you just have adapt and overcome (which is kind of the point of the forum; the passing of knowledge).
If it's because somebody made a mistake. Well, if you think no one will ever make a mistake, or that by obsessing over it or calling them out publicly for a mistake, it'll somehow make it better, I got to tell you: You're going to live a miserable life.
Let it go and move on...
There is no issue, and I have repeatedly stated that I like the Bravo chassis and KRG products (several posts above commenting about what an exceptional product it is, if you actually read this page). I never once said anything that was out of line or disrespectful, and have kept things civil and pragmatic. But at the end of the day, companies need to be held accountable, that’s basic capitalism and checks and balances. Is there something wrong with me posting about my experiences so that potential customers are given a heads up?
Timeline of events:
1. Contacted KRG and they confirmed the Tac A1 will drop into their chassis systems (see email above).
2. Place order through Brownells.
3. Read through instructions and installed chassis. Safety and trigger aren’t functioning, spend the better part of 5 hours troubleshooting.
4. Send email to KRG about issues, and post in here to see if anyone had some insight or advice (not once did I troll, flame, disrespect).
5. Receive email from KRG explaining they are busy on the road, but that the Tac A1 trigger system requires a modification to the Bravo trigger housing. They also informed me that if I had issues, I was to return the chassis to Brownells instead of KRG.
6. KRG posts about how they never stated the Tac A1 was compatible, and how that would require more time, molds, etc that they aren’t interested in.
7. I post the emails documenting otherwise, and that essentially KRG was in the wrong. I’m sure they weren’t counting on me posting their emails.
8. Receive email from KRG admitting they were wrong, and that if I paid for shipping, they would modify the trigger housing and reimburse me.
9. Sent Chassis back to Brownells.
So they admitted that they made a mistake, apologized, and offered to modify your chassis for you, and you wouldn’t just chalk it up to miscommunication or just a simple mistake on their part and take their offer?
It does kinda seem like you’re tryin to nuke em because of a mistake that they made, even though they offered to make things right. ?
It does kinda seem like you’re tryin to nuke em because of a mistake that they made, even though they offered to make things right. ?
Meanwhile the rest of us will continue to enjoy our Bravo's.
I believe they advertise for the T-3 fitting, not specifically the A1. Admittedly, they made a mistake, thinking it would fit an A1. They were wrong.
That being said, claiming they "advertised as a direct drop in for the Tac A1" is a bit of a stretch IMHO.
But whatever...I think most here see what's going on...
