Show off your Manners PRS-TCS Stocks

#501
CK1.0 said:
Hey @RobertB , any word on the release of the steel “max rail” for the TCS?

I bought the front stabilizer thingy and a couple/few sets of the new square weights ~2 months ago and they’ve been sitting on my bench while I wait for the max rail to get released so I can put them to use (under the stabilizer description it said it’d be “a few weeks” on the max rail, not 8+ lol).
Click to expand...
They are working on them now. I just spoke to Tom and they are working to get those done. With the huge success of the front stabilizer production of the Max got behind.

Feel free to shoot me a DM if you want me to dig further in it. Happy to help anyway I can.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MattK1 and CK1.0
#502
RobertB said:
They are working on them now. I just spoke to Tom and they are working to get those done. With the huge success of the front stabilizer production of the Max got behind.

Feel free to shoot me a DM if you want me to dig further in it. Happy to help anyway I can.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info, I’ll keep my eyes open for it. Appreciate youz!
 
  • Like
Reactions: RobertB
#503
Been waiting on manners to release a light weight adjustable recoil pad. Well, i decided not to wait any longer. Ordered a piece of carbon fiber plate, and some 3/8” carbon rod and made my own. Unfortunately it isnt wicked adjustable like the manners version, but i only make mild adjustments anyway. If one knew how much cant then needed, you could easily drill and tap the correct locations to add the cant you need.

No idea how well it will hold up, but it’s worth a shot.


IMG_1033.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1034.jpeg
    IMG_1034.jpeg
    347.4 KB · Views: 47
  • IMG_1039.jpeg
    IMG_1039.jpeg
    388.3 KB · Views: 48
  • IMG_1038.jpeg
    IMG_1038.jpeg
    388 KB · Views: 46
  • Like
Reactions: sgtsmmiii, CK1.0 and oldrifleman
#508
I don't have the Sikes clutch and wouldn't use it if I did.

I bought a Sikes knob to try out (just using the regular QD cup all TCS' come with) and then tried it on other guys' rigs who had the rail to see what I thought and connecting my support-hand to the rifle like that adds a lot of movement into the glass on the "bang" and fucks up how the gun tracks for me under recoil while on the bag, making it harder to spot splash/impacts.

Different strokes for different folks, but when shooting positionally I prefer to grab the bag and let the gun ride along the side of my support-hand thumb whenever I can (~90% of the time), it's far easier for me to spot my impacts/splash that way letting the gun do what it's going to do. If it's a tighter position I do the hand on top of scope/diving-board thing (while I press the gun down into the bag), which also works well (but I usually find it less natural, YMMV).

It doesn't matter if one is stronger than Andre the Giant, no one can stop what the gun wants to do under recoil, we can only try to control it. Attaching one's self to the rifle usually just makes things worse without a mechanical advantage (like being on top of the scope), it's physics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: msstate56
#509
CK1.0 said:
I don't have the Sikes clutch and wouldn't use it if I did.

I bought a Sikes knob to try out (just using the regular QD cup all TCS' come with) and then tried it on other guys' rigs who had the rail to see what I thought and connecting my support-hand to the rifle like that adds a lot of movement into the glass on the "bang" and fucks up how the gun tracks for me under recoil while on the bag, making it harder to spot splash/impacts.

Different strokes for different folks, but when shooting positionally I prefer to grab the bag and let the gun ride along the side of my support-hand thumb whenever I can (~90% of the time), it's far easier for me to spot my impacts/splash that way letting the gun do what it's going to do. If it's a tighter position I do the hand on top of scope/diving-board thing (while I press the gun down into the bag), which also works well (but I usually find it less natural, YMMV).

It doesn't matter if one is stronger than Andre the Giant, no one can stop what the gun wants to do under recoil, we can only try to control it. Attaching one's self to the rifle usually just makes things worse without a mechanical advantage (like being on top of the scope), it's physics.
Click to expand...
That was my experience as well, I had a much steadier hold with my off hand further back.
 
#510
I use a cheap 3d printed clutch with the standard QD cup and it makes a noticeable difference for me. In addition to improving my recoil control it, and this may be just because I've shot with one for awhile, also helps me settle on target much quicker than without. I can make any cant adjustments to the rifle very quickly. I haven't tried a sikes rail on a TCS but the next TCS I get I'd like the rail just to see if the ability to move the clutch around makes a difference. Spotting impacts while using one is easier than without. Also it may be important to note that I don't free recoil rifles.
 
#511
AirgunnerPCP said:
I use a cheap 3d printed clutch with the standard QD cup and it makes a noticeable difference for me. In addition to improving my recoil control it, and this may be just because I've shot with one for awhile, it also helps me settle on target much quicker than without. I can make any cant adjustments to tbe rifle very quickly. I haven't tried a sikes rail on a TCS but the next one I get I'd like the rail just to see if the ability to move the clutch around makes a difference. Spotting impacts while using one is easier than without. I also don't free recoil rifles.
Click to expand...

I can see why the clutch might make it easier to settle the gun for some... but like I said earlier, seems like more than 90% of the guys who run TCS' are using the rear weight and running a gun that's balanced wonky (way ass-heavy).

TBH, IDK why Manners even ships the TCS with the rear buttstock weight? ...since it's probably responsible for a lot of guys running them "wrong" and then selling them after a while to switch to something else so they can get something that's easier to setup with the balance point more front-biased ~4-5" in front of the magwell (which does a lot more than any little knob for controlling recoil).
 
#512
CK1.0 said:
It doesn't matter if one is stronger than Andre the Giant, no one can stop what the gun wants to do under recoil, we can only try to control it. Attaching one's self to the rifle usually just makes things worse without a mechanical advantage (like being on top of the scope), it's physics.
Click to expand...

What mechanical advantage are you getting from holding the top of the optic? Are you firmly grasping it or applying light pressure? Whenever I have to go over top of the optic I find I get more vertical movement during recoil unless I use a very light pressure.
 
#513
CK1.0 said:
I can see why the clutch might make it easier to settle the gun for some... but like I said earlier, seems like more than 90% of the guys who run TCS' are using the rear weight and running a gun that's balanced wonky (way ass-heavy).

TBH, IDK why Manners even ships the TCS with the rear buttstock weight? ...since it's probably responsible for a lot of guys running them "wrong" and then selling them after a while to switch to something else so they can get something that's easier to setup with the balance point more front-biased ~4-5" in front of the magwell (which does a lot more than any little knob for controlling recoil).
Click to expand...

Lol we must have our rifles set up very differently. I have at least one rear weight on mine depending on the barrel I have on at the time. Balance point is 3-4in in front of the magwell.
 
#514
AirgunnerPCP said:
What mechanical advantage are you getting from holding the top of the optic? Are you firmly grasping it or applying light pressure? Whenever I have to go over top of the optic I find I get more vertical movement during recoil unless I use a very light pressure.
Click to expand...

Recoil makes the gun want to jump up, being over the top of the gun does seem to make it easier to hold down. When I go over the top, I press down firm to settle the gun/wobble, and then throttle it back to light pressure when I take the shot, YMMV.
 
#515
AirgunnerPCP said:
Lol we must have our rifles set up very differently. I have at least one rear weight on mine depending on the barrel I have on at the time. Balance point is 3-4in in front of the magwell.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't even consider using the rear buttstock weight unless I was running something like a 28-29" straight-taper, and probably not even then unless it had all the weights installed out front and/or a big can hanging off.

I like my gun to be pretty obviously front-biased, a legit ~4.5-5" in front of the magwell so I can set it down on a Gamechanger bag and it'll stay there on its own without any help... setup that way helps a ton with recoil too.

A lighter gun that's more front-biased will move less than a heavier gun that's balanced more at the middle, rear-weight-biased blows donkey dick lol.
 
#516
CK1.0 said:
Recoil makes the gun want to jump up, being over the top of the gun does seem to make it easier to hold down. When I go over the top, I press down firm to settle the gun/wobble, and then throttle it back to light pressure when I take the shot, YMMV.
Click to expand...

Yeah we must have a significant difference in rifle setup and shooting technique. I don't experience the rifle trying to jump up under recoil. It tracks straight back with just a bit of reticle movement.
 
#517
AirgunnerPCP said:
Yeah we must have a significant difference in rifle setup and shooting technique. I don't experience the rifle trying to jump up under recoil. It tracks straight back with just a bit of reticle movement.
Click to expand...

Not saying I'm right or anything (much smarter/better guys figured it out long before I did), but next time you hit the range pull off the rear weight and see what you think? You might dig it and it'll cost you nothing.

I really do think that's one of the weird quirks with the TCS, it's ass-heavy without the rear weight, using it doesn't help the situation (IMHO).

The TCS can be hard to get enough weight out front IMO (that's why I was bugging @RobertB about the new MAX rail).
 
#518
CK1.0 said:
I wouldn't even consider using the rear buttstock weight unless I was running something like a 28-29" straight-taper, and probably not even then unless it had all the weights installed out front and/or a big can hanging off.

I like my gun to be pretty obviously front-biased, a legit ~4.5-5" in front of the magwell so I can set it down on a Gamechanger bag and it'll stay there on its own without any help... setup that way helps a ton with recoil too.

A lighter gun that's more front-biased will move less than a heavier gun that's balanced more at the middle, rear-weight-biased blows donkey dick lol.
Click to expand...

Not a straight contour but I do use 28" heavy varmint barrels with a R30 can on the end. So I do have a decent amount of weight out front. Mine sits in a gamechanger without issue and I don't fight the balance of the rifle at all.

CK1.0 said:
Not saying I'm right or anything (much smarter/better guys figured it out long before I did), but next time you hit the range pull off the rear weight and see what you think? You might dig it and it'll cost you nothing.
Click to expand...

I've tried with a couple configurations of weights and have landed on a rear weight and the 360 precision arca rail instead of the factory MCS one. The rail seemed to help the balance a bit but it wasn't dramatic. Mostly just to get more weight on the rifle.

Additionally I still see an improvement using the clutch even with a relatively light, semi balanced, 18" 308 bolt gun. Granted I've shot with it for so long I just may be used to it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CK1.0
#519
AirgunnerPCP said:
Not a straight contour but I do use 28" heavy varmint barrels with a R30 can on the end. So I do have a decent amount of weight out front. Mine sits in a gamechanger without issue and I don't fight the balance of the rifle at all.



I've tried with a couple configurations of weights and have landed on a rear weight and the 360 precision arca rail instead of the factory MCS one. The rail seemed to help the balance a bit but it wasn't dramatic. Mostly just to get more weight on the rifle.
Click to expand...

See, in that configuration, I can see maybe why you use the rear weight, now I get it.

And it's funny you mention the 360 rail... IMO the TCS is a completely different animal depending on what rail one has bolted on...

I have the earliest release OG steel rail and like the ones that come with those. I also like the newer stocks with an added 360 Precision rail (very similar to the OG rail I have and know).

But IMO the current new rail with the square aluminum weights and the prior A419 sawtooth rail with the brass weights are just too light to get setup right for PRS-style shooting (especially with the rear weight installed). I don't like either of them and wouldn't run either one because you can't get enough weight out front (without immediately pulling either of those rails off and adding the steel 360 Precision rail).

I've had two friends buy TCS stocks because they liked shooting mine, only to sell them almost immediately because both hated theirs that came with the lighter rail that Manners is shipping with them now.

I run 26" Proof SS Competition Countour barrels (fairly stout), and even with the heavier OG steel rail, it's just enough... a smaller/lighter contour and it would be crappy and I'd end up looking for something else.
 
#521
King_beardsly said:
Now I wonder if I order my TCS in the next few weeks if I’ll have a chance to get the new max rail added to it or still have the light weight rail.
Click to expand...

I’d say call them and ask, and if you can’t get the max rail, see if you can order it without a rail (just drilled and with hardware so you can add a 360 Precision rail).

I’m no product genius, but there’s probably only a few guys who appreciate being able to make a TCS lighter for hunting or whatever. But I’ve been seeing less and less of them at matches, because lots of guys have had trouble getting them balanced right and as heavy as the competition for PRS for a couple of years now…
 
#522
I also fun a long heavy barrel ( heavy varmint at 26”). I don’t run a rear weight and my TCS weights in at 21lb and balances right at 4 inches forward of the magwell. I never have the muzzle jump up. I run an ATS brake and it moves pretty much straight back.
 
#523
CK1.0 said:
I’d say call them and ask, and if you can’t get the max rail, see if you can order it without a rail (just drilled and with hardware so you can add a 360 Precision rail).

I’m no product genius, but there’s probably only a few guys who appreciate being able to make a TCS lighter for hunting or whatever. But I’ve been seeing less and less of them at matches, because lots of guys have had trouble getting them balanced right and as heavy as the competition for PRS for a couple of years now…
Click to expand...
That’s the problem I’m having now, my PRS1 is just to light for my 308 in tac division currently. It worked fine with a dasher, but whipping 169smk at like 2750 isn’t exactly the same deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CK1.0
#524
CK1.0 said:
I’m no product genius, but there’s probably only a few guys who appreciate being able to make a TCS lighter for hunting or whatever. But I’ve been seeing less and less of them at matches, because lots of guys have had trouble getting them balanced right and as heavy as the competition for PRS for a couple of years now…
Click to expand...

Funny you mention that, I have a MPA Vanquish on order to try out. The TCS has great ergonomics and I like not having to the pinging of a metallic chassis. However it's lacking the optimization for PRS matches now. Needs a longer fore end, better weight system and a bridge system in my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CK1.0
#525
Yeah 308s are tougher to run if not balanced. My main gun is a 308, 175 OTM at 2765, it is much different than my daughters which is the same as mine except in 6 Creedmoor. The 6 slides straight but with even less recoil.
 
#527
At least with the heavy varmit barrel I have not had to add too much weight to the rail. I am building a 223 toy right now ( same action, barrel, scope) but dropping it in a Foundation Centurion ( PX special). It is heavier and seems longer even without weights. Not sure I like the ergonomics as well though ( will keep it anyway as it is a toy).
 
#528
If I can pick up a some weight while keeping it balanced, I’ll be happy but now I’ve got to weigh my current stock to see what I’ll gain. I found the order form to notice it’s heavy fill which I asked manners about and it was the predecessor to double dead.
 
#530
I see you put a butt spacer under the cheek rest e-clip to get it higher... Just an FYI but KMW makes tall cheek rest columns, and the TCS is deep enough the cheek rest will still go all the way down flush with the stock even with the taller columns installed. The taller columns leave a full length of the column in the clamp bar when you run the cheek rest that high.

www.kmwlrs.com

Extra Long Column set for LoggerHead ACP hardware | kmwlrs

Extra Long Column set for KMW LoggerHead ACP hardware is a direct replacement for the standard length legs. Easily installed with 5/16" Hex Drive. This set allows 0.560" higher maximum adjustment range for your cheekpiece position. ** NOTE: Once installed, cheekpiece will not be able to...
www.kmwlrs.com www.kmwlrs.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: Turbwhistle
#534
A bit more complicated to set up, but now that it is set, i think it is pretty good. It is smaller than the send it, and rechargeable. Also cheaper. I hope they come out with some more mounts though. I have to modify the mount to get it where i want it.
 
#535
RobertB said:
They are working on them now. I just spoke to Tom and they are working to get those done. With the huge success of the front stabilizer production of the Max got behind.

Feel free to shoot me a DM if you want me to dig further in it. Happy to help anyway I can.
Click to expand...
How’s that new max rail coming along, I’m currently holding off ordering my TCS till I know more about the magical steel rail and if I’ll be able to add it to my stock instead of the aluminum one.
 
#536
King_beardsly said:
How’s that new max rail coming along, I’m currently holding off ordering my TCS till I know more about the magical steel rail and if I’ll be able to add it to my stock instead of the aluminum one.
Click to expand...
You can def order your stock and have it come with it. They all use the same mounting holes so that makes it easy. TCS orders take a bit so I would say get in-line if you're interested in getting a TCS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rob01
#537
RobertB said:
You can def order your stock and have it come with it. They all use the same mounting holes so that makes it easy. TCS orders take a bit so I would say get in-line if you're interested in getting a TCS.
Click to expand...
Just submitted my order a couple hours ago, so I’ll confirm everything once I get the email and start the process of waiting. I think Jim said it’s looking around 6 months give or take a little which is fine since I know it’ll be worth it.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Rob01 and RobertB
#538
My 6ARC Manners Back in Black build. Some small tweaks I'm going to make are switching to an SP-6001 for the Spuhr mount to drop the scope height a bit I think, putting a 360 precision steel arca rail to get a little more weight upfront and I'm going to drill and tap for a GrovTec flush cup (wasn't a custom order and didn't come with the flush cup up front). Other than that very happy with this setup (y)

manners-6ARC.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: HMRamateur, JonKleman, King_beardsly and 2 others
#541
CollarChoke said:
My 6ARC Manners Back in Black build. Some small tweaks I'm going to make are switching to an SP-6001 for the Spuhr mount to drop the scope height a bit I think, putting a 360 precision steel arca rail to get a little more weight upfront and I'm going to drill and tap for a GrovTec flush cup (wasn't a custom order and didn't come with the flush cup up front). Other than that very happy with this setup (y)

View attachment 8505812
Click to expand...
Not going to lie, this makes me rethink the choose to get one done in midnight tac instead of back in black
 
#542
Side note: just got that 360 steel arca rail in for the TCS and that definitely hits the sweet spot if you're looking for some real weight up front. Mine is perfectly balanced right in front of the mag-well now even with the shorter barrel (y)
 
  • Like
Reactions: R_A_W
#543
CollarChoke said:
Side note: just got that 360 steel arca rail in for the TCS and that definitely hits the sweet spot if you're looking for some real weight up front. Mine is perfectly balanced right in front of the mag-well now even with the shorter barrel (y)
Click to expand...

I have the original manners steel rail with full weights on my first and older TCS, and the 360 steel rail is on my early 2023 production TCS that came with the smooth aluminum rail. The old manners steel rail with full weights is within 2oz of the 360 steel rail, so it's pretty much a wash... wish Manners never did away with the original steel rail, the aluminum rail was a step backwards in terms of balance IMO. It's not a bad option if you want a lighter overall build though.

I have another 360 steel rail here waiting for when TCS #3 arrives... order was placed first week of April so I hope I'm getting closer, but I probably still have a ways to go as another user here just received shipping notice for their TCS ordered in early January.

CollarChoke said:
My 6ARC Manners Back in Black build. Some small tweaks I'm going to make are switching to an SP-6001 for the Spuhr mount to drop the scope height a bit I think, putting a 360 precision steel arca rail to get a little more weight upfront and I'm going to drill and tap for a GrovTec flush cup (wasn't a custom order and didn't come with the flush cup up front). Other than that very happy with this setup (y)
Click to expand...

Regarding scope height, I run 1.5" tall mounts on both my current TCS builds with the taller cheekrest columns available from KMW (the design of TCS is actually deep enough you can push the cheek rest all the way down flush with the stock even with the tall KMW columns installed.) I tried 1.25" high scope mounts with the cheekrest lower, and while the 1.25" scope mounts with the cheekrest sitting lower looked better (looks are important, right? lol) I found I preferred the recoil impulse and head/neck position with the taller 1.5" mounts... so my cheekrests are still raised way up and looking somewhat goofy. Everyone is different though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CollarChoke, CK1.0 and Magsz18
#544
Kiba said:
Regarding scope height, I run 1.5" tall mounts on both my current TCS builds with the taller cheekrest columns available from KMW (the design of TCS is actually deep enough you can push the cheek rest all the way down flush with the stock even with the tall KMW columns installed.) I tried 1.25" high scope mounts with the cheekrest lower, and while the 1.25" scope mounts with the cheekrest sitting lower looked better (looks are important, right? lol) I found I preferred the recoil impulse and head/neck position with the taller 1.5" mounts... so my cheekrests are still raised way up and looking somewhat goofy. Everyone is different though.
Click to expand...
I might go back to the 1.5" at some point but would definitely want some more adjustability on the riser. Unfortunately the taller KMW hardware is out of stock currently. With the 1.18" Spuhr on there it definitely feels a little less topsy turvy for me and it drops me into a normal range of adjustment on the riser. Both were plenty comfortable, just sitting it higher was almost chin-weld city and it felt a little top heavy moving it around on the bipod and whatnot. It feels nicely balanced now.

It's currently apart waiting for the 9/16-18 bottoming tap (that I could have sworn I already had) to arrive so I can finish this darn flush cup install.

manners-cup-install.jpg
 
#546
CollarChoke said:
I might go back to the 1.5" at some point but would definitely want some more adjustability on the riser. Unfortunately the taller KMW hardware is out of stock currently. With the 1.18" Spuhr on there it definitely feels a little less topsy turvy for me and it drops me into a normal range of adjustment on the riser. Both were plenty comfortable, just sitting it higher was almost chin-weld city and it felt a little top heavy moving it around on the bipod and whatnot. It feels nicely balanced now.
Click to expand...

I tried a 1.5" high mount and felt it was too top-heavy as well (at least with a fat Razor, a lighter scope might be better). I didn't like the way the gun sat and tracked on a bag under recoil with the taller mount.

For me, mounts at 1.25/1.26" feel best on the TCS. YMMV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CollarChoke and Rob01
#547
Just got my TCS yesterday. Ordered Feb 12th. Well worth the wait! Stock is amazing and got it in the black and blue matte finish. The only beef I have is the adjustable knob for the cheek rest. When I replace the allen bolt with the knob, the knob pretty much bottoms out and I can't give enough leverage to tighten the cheek rest. Anyone else having this issue? Also, anyone's mag have a lot of play and wobble once clicked in? I'm using the 10rd metal AICS mags from MDT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rob01
#548
Weird, I don't have that issue on either of my TCS and I have the manners knobs on both the butt hardware and cheek rest... they all hold tight. Is the shoulder on the knob interfering in your stock somehow and not contacting the clamp bar?

The other option if you want to stay hex key free is these really cool knobs with flip out levers for extra torque...

stewartrifles.com

Cheek Piece Knob for Loggerhead Clamp Bar Style Cheek Piece

Loggerhead Clamp Bar Style Cheek Piece 1/4-28 Leverage Cheek Piece Knob allows users to tighten their cheekpiece clamp with leverage. A helpful upgrade for working rifles. Part # KM1428
stewartrifles.com
 
#549
Kiba said:
Weird, I don't have that issue on either of my TCS and I have the manners knobs on both the butt hardware and cheek rest... they all hold tight. Is the shoulder on the knob interfering in your stock somehow and not contacting the clamp bar?

The other option if you want to stay hex key free is these really cool knobs with flip out levers for extra torque...

stewartrifles.com

Cheek Piece Knob for Loggerhead Clamp Bar Style Cheek Piece

Loggerhead Clamp Bar Style Cheek Piece 1/4-28 Leverage Cheek Piece Knob allows users to tighten their cheekpiece clamp with leverage. A helpful upgrade for working rifles. Part # KM1428
stewartrifles.com
Click to expand...
I agree that it is weird, I have stocks that were delivered with the knobs and they work great. That said I have bought extras for stocks that did not come with them and have encountered the exact issue voiced above. I am not sure what I am missing and have always felt I must be the only one stupid enough to not be able to make this work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mark_Dorman
Manners TCS vs Foundation stock
Replies
22
Views
729
BassNbrass
B
jmcarrol
SOLD Manners PRS-TCS
Replies
14
Views
1K
jmcarrol
jmcarrol
kCHIKS
SOLD SOLD - Manner PRS-TCS
Replies
1
Views
172
kCHIKS
kCHIKS
Mozak
SOLD Manners PRS-TCS stock REMINGTON 700 SA Right Hand GAP MOLDED
Replies
0
Views
310
Mozak
Mozak
E. Bryant
Accessories Manners PRS-TCS Rem 700 SA RH stocks
Replies
10
Views
1K
bmoul2
B
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts