I wanted this concept to be rugged and bomb proof as well, hence the bonded interface and still using the normal AI pistol grip and buttstock. To me, just because it’s a competition oriented chassis doesn’t mean it should give up what makes an AI and AI.
The current 13” forend length was chosen very carefully to allow the user to install and hand tighten 16” barrels. Any longer and it would start to impede that ability, which would restrict users to 18”+ barrels only. Not that I think any competition shooters use barrels that short, but a lot of AI customers have shorty 308 barrels and I didn’t want to exclude them. A longer forend certainly could be designed, but to what benefit I’m not entirely sure. As it is, the chassis forend is 13” long from the action face, and 15” long from the front of the magwell. That is longer than the current MPA chassis by 3”, and shorter than the ACC by 3”. The spigot I have designed extends that reach by 3” and is 1/2” closer to the bore axis. The spigot could also be designed to continue the RRS dovetail those 3”, rather than stepping up to be closer to the bore.
I looked at 7075 vs 6061, and I don’t believe for this application it’s worth the cost increase. Yes, 7075 is stronger in terms of yield and ultimate tensile strength, but the chassis is unlikely to ever be used in any way that would test even the yield strength. Where it does matter, the stiffness (Young’s Modulus), 7075 is practically the same as 6061. So you’d be paying more for a chassis that was almost identically stiff. This was proven out with FEA as well.
