Krg bravo likes and dislikes?

[eicas]

I posted this in another thread, but will comment here as well.

I have (had) two separate Bravos. I purchased them when they first came out. The SA was first. I put this on a Rem700 5R MilSpec in .308. The second, which was on a TAC300 action in .300wm was also purchased immediately when they were released. Prior to this, both rifles had HS Precision stocks. The .308 had the factory green spiderweb, and the TAC had an M24 style stock.

I was happy with both stocks. I decked them out with all the doo-dads...adjustable butt plate, spigot mount, bag stops...and they indeed did work well for me. No issues besides action screws backing out a few times on the winmag. That problem solved itself after two occurrences never to return. The thing that grew on me, and that I did not like was the weight. Both of them were pretty damn heavy. I don’t hunt with them (recreational use, steel shooting etc) but even to tote them around the pasture was a chore. I never weighed them, but they were pretty damn heavy. Casing them was an issue too. Together, they wouldn’t fit in the cases I previously had for them. In addition to the weight, the chassis add considerable bulk and size.

They are certainly comfortable to shoot. I haven’t been disappointed in quality nor customer support from KRG. I had an “issue” with the LA accepting mags and a few quick calls to them solved that and got me on my way. I just couldn’t get past what they turned the rifles “into”. Between the guns and the support gear, I needed to hire a Sherpa to get around. I put the SA back onto it’s green stock and shot it a bit. I found it more enjoyable. I recently swapped the winmag as well.

I would sit and think about what you are truly looking for. They aren’t cheap (well maybe less expensive in the crazy world of chassis) and in the end it is a bit of coin for certain. I wouldn’t hesitate to buy another if that was what I was looking for, but for what I decided my goal was in the end...they didn’t fit.

 

[slickalaus12]

I posted this in another thread, but will comment here as well.

I have (had) two separate Bravos. I purchased them when they first came out. The SA was first. I put this on a Rem700 5R MilSpec in .308. The second, which was on a TAC300 action in .300wm was also purchased immediately when they were released. Prior to this, both rifles had HS Precision stocks. The .308 had the factory green spiderweb, and the TAC had an M24 style stock.

I was happy with both stocks. I decked them out with all the doo-dads...adjustable butt plate, spigot mount, bag stops...and they indeed did work well for me. No issues besides action screws backing out a few times on the winmag. That problem solved itself after two occurrences never to return. The thing that grew on me, and that I did not like was the weight. Both of them were pretty damn heavy. I don’t hunt with them (recreational use, steel shooting etc) but even to tote them around the pasture was a chore. I never weighed them, but they were pretty damn heavy. Casing them was an issue too. Together, they wouldn’t fit in the cases I previously had for them. In addition to the weight, the chassis add considerable bulk and size.

They are certainly comfortable to shoot. I haven’t been disappointed in quality nor customer support from KRG. I had an “issue” with the LA accepting mags and a few quick calls to them solved that and got me on my way. I just couldn’t get past what they turned the rifles “into”. Between the guns and the support gear, I needed to hire a Sherpa to get around. I put the SA back onto it’s green stock and shot it a bit. I found it more enjoyable. I recently swapped the winmag as well.

I would sit and think about what you are truly looking for. They aren’t cheap (well maybe less expensive in the crazy world of chassis) and in the end it is a bit of coin for certain. I wouldn’t hesitate to buy another if that was what I was looking for, but for what I decided my goal was in the end...they didn’t fit.

I appreciate the detailed response. I can resonate with your thought process. I think a part of shooting for me is always wanting to try different setups and upgrading. That ends up being an expensive process and to your point the results aren't always what you had hoped for.

Interesting to hear you ended up throwing both rifles back into stock. My T1x is already about 8.5 lbs and adding another 1.5 at least in chassis weight will mean that gun is fairly heavy to be lugging around the field or shooting off-hand. I have never liked the Tikka synthetic stocks but I have a decent setup going right now that works.

Again, I appreciate the honest response. I am going to hold off and continue to practice with my current setup, as I think it's a "best of both worlds" scenario for now.

 

[eicas]

You’re very welcome. Again, the stock is a great product...not bashing them.

A few weeks back, I had the .308 out in the pasture dinging steel at a bit over 1000yds. The factory supplied stock wasn’t a hinderance, and when I was done, decided to flip the winmag back over too. There’s something to be said for simplicity.

 

[mike e]

Just brought the SA one for my SAUM. If I like it then may replace the XLR Evolution on my 300Norm Mag as I just can't get comfortable shooting it

 

[cobus13]

I like my Bravo but... the things I don't like about it is the lack of customization. I'm running a GLR action, this causes there to be a lip under my action and where the magazine meets. Which results in constant feeding issues. I have pulled this thing apart multiple times and other than me cutting into the feed ramp the only other thing i have found that works is running a binder plate.

 

[DMP]

I like my Bravo but... the things I don't like about it is the lack of customization. I'm running a GLR action, this causes there to be a lip under my action and where the magazine meets. Which results in constant feeding issues. I have pulled this thing apart multiple times and other than me cutting into the feed ramp the only other thing i have found that works is running a binder plate.

Lack of customization?

Binder plates a problem?

Wow?

 

[DIBBS]

Today hopefully I will be picking up a used Bighorn SR3 in a KRG at the local gunshop. Rifle is going to be used initially for target shooting and banging steel and pock marking rocks way da fawque out there.
I will eventually add a barrel or two to the Bighorn and pack afield as a HOPEFULLY moderate weight hunting rifle. Would a EH series manners w/mini chassis at , if I recall, 28-32 ounces, maybe a few more, shave a little bit of weight off the KRG chassis? I do like the feel of the Manners...unknown about the KRG but time will tell.

 

[308pirate]

I like my Bravo but... the things I don't like about it is the lack of customization. I'm running a GLR action, this causes there to be a lip under my action and where the magazine meets. Which results in constant feeding issues. I have pulled this thing apart multiple times and other than me cutting into the feed ramp the only other thing i have found that works is running a binder plate.

Lack of customization for KRG chassis? LOLOLOLOLOL...……..

Your action's lack of AICS magazine feed clearance is no fault of KRG

 

[spife7980]

Lack of customization for KRG chassis? LOLOLOLOLOL...……..

Your action's lack of AICS magazine feed clearance is no fault of KRG

Or just using a binder plate mag

also, just dremel that feed ramp out and fix your problem for ever

 

[trob]

I would change the length of the fore end. Ideally it would be 3-4 inches longer.
also, I have one that takes CTR magazines and they seem to get hung up in the front towards the top of the magwell if I don’t pull the mag backwards and compress the mag latch spring

other than that, I really like it.

 

[EN2722]

Everyone knows you can adjust the space in the magazine well on your Bravo by loosening the screw that’s under your action on the trigger housing.

You can move it forward and back to adjust the tightness of your magazine in the well...

Edit: added the image from KRG email

 

[Killswitch Engage]

I wreck a lot of shit with my bravo and have zero wish for it to be heavier. That’s what my whiskey is for.

 

[Smokin7s]

I wreck a lot of shit with my bravo and have zero wish for it to be heavier. That’s what my whiskey is for. View attachment 7489120

I feel like my whiskey 3 is very light

 

[BoilerUP]

I like my Bravo quite a bit, especially considering the price point. I definitely wouldn't call it heavy and have zero desire for it to be markedly so.

Picking nits, I'm in the 'marginally longer fore end' camp for my 700SA.

Biggest complaint I have is the 10/22 Bravo hasn't been released yet and there don't appear to be any plans for a Ruger American Rimfire Bravo.

 

[srt-4_uk]

The enclosed forend is longer.

 

[ToddM]

There are things I'd like to see on the Bravo, but I admit at the price point I don't expect them to be added. Just my own brain would like to see the AL spine go all the way to the butt plate instead of just being polymer after the grip, but in reality it doesn't seem like it impacts how any of them shoot, the x-ray model doesn't even have this, no one complains about it being an issue, and it probably offers a significant weight/cost savings.

I really think the bravo offers an amazing package. You get a solid chassis, the option for tooless adjustable height/cant buttplate for less than $70, stock hook options, spigot mount options, etc.

If you want to shoot PRS with it, I can see wanting to make it a lot heavier for a gamer gun, but honestly I think most PRS shooters are going to be spending way more for a chassis with more features anyway. Heck some guys are spending more on chassis weights as they are a bravo chassis in our sport of ridiculously priced add-ons. That said I'm biased, I think it's ridiculous we are in 2020 and the focus is trying to make 25lb 6mm guns to hide poor fundamentals instead of using technology to make lighter rigs that demand better shooting skills, but that's what the games encourage.

The thing is, if they added all that stuff, it would double the price and we wouldn't have a $350 chassis, it would be a $700 chassis and then people would complain it doesn't stack up to the Whiskey3 at $900. That's the compromise with these cheaper options, it's like the Oryx chassis, great chassis for $400, but there's no option for a cant/height adjustable buttplate and almost no accessories period.

 

[trob]

Everyone knows you can adjust the space in the magazine well on your Bravo by loosening the screw that’s under your action on the trigger housing.

You can move it forward and back to adjust the tightness of your magazine in the well...

Edit: added the image from KRG email

I know. I messed with it a bunch when I got the stock and couldn’t get it any better than how it currently sits. It seems like the front edge on top of the magazine hits a ledge in the action or something.

 

[6gunner]

KRG manufactures awesome stuff. I have a Whiskey on my 308 and Bravo on my T1. If I didn’t already have my 10-22’s in Titan stocks, I would order the 10-22 Bravo stock.

 

[mikehill85]

I got one for a Tikka CTR in 6.5 Creedmoor and I ended up returning it. There were a number of things I really disliked about it.

1. The M-Lok slots are polymer (i.e. plastic) and they even send you a polymer (i.e. plastic) section of picatinny rail in the box. I honestly couldn't believe they think it's acceptable to mount a bipod to a plastic rail. This isn't airsoft.

2. There is no way to switch the side the cheek riser adjustment screw is on. I'm left handed and if I use the adjustment knob that came with the stock it recoils directly into my face every time I shoot. I had to use a button head screw (which requires I carry a screwdriver around whenever I want to adjust or remove the cheek riser).

3. The cheek riser must be removed to remove or insert the bolt. This became very annoying in my case because I'm left handed and had to switch the cheek riser adjustment knob with a normal screw. This means I have to break out the screw driver before going to the range to remove the bolt and after getting to the range to reinsert the bolt.

4. The magazine release is made of cheap plastic and actually flexes whenever you push on it. IMO his part will definitely break at some point with repeated use, but don't worry, for $30 KRG will sell you a metal mag release. The mushy flex I felt whenever operating the mag release really made this stock feel cheap.

5. There stock is in two pieces with no metal connection between the rear stock and the forend. The only piece of metal in the stock seems to be the top of the forend directly under the barrel (i.e. the barrel channel area). In other words, you can have a bunch of flex in between the stock and forend in the grip because there is nothing but polymer between them.

6. IMHO, you basically need to buy the spigot mount and a metal pic rail to use the gun with a bipod. I personally don't trust a plastic pic rail inserted into plastic M-Lok slots to last, so I bought the minimalist spigot mount ($75) and metal pic rail ($31). I thought this would provide a solid base for my bipod (because it is attached directly to the metal in the forend) but when I got to the range I could see that pre-loading the bipod caused the spigot mount to visibly flex and the barrel moved with respect to the forend. So, there is a ton of flex and it still isn't stable.

7. The thing weighs a lot (3.1 lbs without a magazine).

8. Despite weighing a lot more than the CTR stock that came with my rifle, my gun shoots considerably worse in the KRG Bravo (~0.25 MOA larger 5-shot groups).

In summary, the thing weighs a lot but also manages to be unstable/flexible/not rigid by putting polymer in the wrong places. Some of the problems with the stock can be "fixed" by paying KRG more money but by the time you've bought a metal mag release, a spigot mount, and a metal pic rail you're into the stock for nearly $600 and the thing is still unstable.

I will give the stock style points. It does look cool but that's really the only good thing I can say about it. Anyway, I'm just glad KRG have a 90 day return policy.

 

[Tx_Aggie]

I got one for a Tikka CTR in 6.5 Creedmoor and I ended up returning it. There were a number of things I really disliked about it.

1. The M-Lok slots are polymer (i.e. plastic) and they even send you a polymer (i.e. plastic) section of picatinny rail in the box. I honestly couldn't believe they think it's acceptable to mount a bipod to a plastic rail. This isn't airsoft.

2. There is no way to switch the side the cheek riser adjustment screw is on. I'm left handed and if I use the adjustment knob that came with the stock it recoils directly into my face every time I shoot. I had to use a button head screw (which requires I carry a screwdriver around whenever I want to adjust or remove the cheek riser).

3. The cheek riser must be removed to remove or insert the bolt. This became very annoying in my case because I'm left handed and had to switch the cheek riser adjustment knob with a normal screw. This means I have to break out the screw driver before going to the range to remove the bolt and after getting to the range to reinsert the bolt.

4. The magazine release is made of cheap plastic and actually flexes whenever you push on it. IMO his part will definitely break at some point with repeated use, but don't worry, for $30 KRG will sell you a metal mag release. The mushy flex I felt whenever operating the mag release really made this stock feel cheap.

5. There stock is in two pieces with no metal connection between the rear stock and the forend. The only piece of metal in the stock seems to be the top of the forend directly under the barrel (i.e. the barrel channel area). In other words, you can have a bunch of flex in between the stock and forend in the grip because there is nothing but polymer between them.

6. IMHO, you basically need to buy the spigot mount and a metal pic rail to use the gun with a bipod. I personally don't trust a plastic pic rail inserted into plastic M-Lok slots to last, so I bought the minimalist spigot mount ($75) and metal pic rail ($31). I thought this would provide a solid base for my bipod (because it is attached directly to the metal in the forend) but when I got to the range I could see that pre-loading the bipod caused the spigot mount to visibly flex and the barrel moved with respect to the forend. So, there is a ton of flex and it still isn't stable.

7. The thing weighs a lot (3.1 lbs without a magazine).

8. Despite weighing a lot more than the CTR stock that came with my rifle, my gun shoots considerably worse in the KRG Bravo (~0.25 MOA larger 5-shot groups).

In summary, the thing weighs a lot but also manages to be unstable/flexible/not rigid by putting polymer in the wrong places. Some of the problems with the stock can be "fixed" by paying KRG more money but by the time you've bought a metal mag release, a spigot mount, and a metal pic rail you're into the stock for nearly $600 and the thing is still unstable.

I will give the stock style points. It does look cool but that's really the only good thing I can say about it. Anyway, I'm just glad KRG have a 90 day return policy.

This honestly seems like more of an issue with your expectations than the product itself, especially considering a lot of the gripes are things that are pretty clear from KRG's page for the chassis (like the polymer components of the chassis).

I'm curious where you expect to find a chassis that's all metal, left handed or ambi, weighs less than 3lbs, and costs anything near the $400 price point of the Bravo?

 

[mikehill85]

This honestly seems like more of an issue with your expectations than the product itself, especially considering a lot of the gripes are things that are pretty clear from KRG's page for the chassis (like the polymer components of the chassis).

I'm curious where you expect to find a chassis that's all metal, left handed or ambi, weighs less than 3lbs, and costs anything near the $400 price point of the Bravo?

Yes, maybe it is a problem with my expectations. Anyway, I just wanted to add to this discussion about the pros and cons of the KRG Bravo.