I’ve been thinking that it would be nice, but not necessary, to have a detachable magazine for my A1. I’m thinking it was the A5 that brought that in to the pipeline in the form of the Badger M5. Does anyone know if it would be possible to have that bottom metal trimmed/filed/Dremeled to fit into the Model 70 triggerguard/floorplate inlet or are there Issues beyond metal removal? I’m a couple days from being able to handle the A1 so I can’t look at it to compare it to the Badger inlet template/drawing from their site. Thanks in advance.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
M40A1 bottom metal: upgrade possible without stock mods?
- Thread starter blcouch
- Start date
I think the OP is asking if it’s possible to modify the Badger M5 or other DBM to fit an existing M40A1 modified Win 70 bottom metal inlet.
The short answer is no. Pretty much any DBM requires an inlet that is larger and deeper than the M40A1 trigger guard and floor plate inlet to work properly.
The short answer is no. Pretty much any DBM requires an inlet that is larger and deeper than the M40A1 trigger guard and floor plate inlet to work properly.
Yes, that is exactly what I was asking. Short answer is good enough. I’ll have to think this over. I may go so far as to get another stock done with DBM and have one for historical accuracy purposes. Thanks!
I see there is one for sale in the PX...
www.snipershide.com
Accessories - R700 HTG w/Badger m5 (sold)
Mcmillan HTG already bedded for R700 SA with Badger enhanced bottom metal. Bedding job is Flawless. no longer available.
www.snipershide.com
The tack welded box seems to be an issue of.......lengthy discussion at M40rifle.com. It seems it was done both ways at different times. That isn’t an issue in my book. The rifle is spec, except I have a USO rather than an Unertl, I have a Bradley strap-on cheekpiece instead of duct tape and foam and I had the spacer system installed by MCM because the MST wouldn’t go back far enough to account for the length of pull that the HTG has and I wasn’t going to go the T-10 route. Besides that, I’m spec
.
Last edited:
I read all those posts about those arguing that all A1s had welded boxes and those arguing that all A1s did not have welded boxes. I wasn’t in the armory when they built them all so I don’t know. I’m not going back and re-read them all. Thank you for your help.First, I presume you are not talking about a vintage USMC 'take-off/ or M40A1 'return stock', and that you have a commercial HTG stock on your build. Modifying a generic, commercial HTG stock is one thing, but cutting up/modifying a vintage take-off USMC 'return stock for a DBM - that is not okay. My 2cts.
If I had a take-off stock, I wouldn’t be in here discussing this. At any rate, people modify things for their use. That’s their choice. Some look at return stocks as holy grails. Some see them as milsurp in sometimes questionable condition.
My choice was to do an “as-issued” build circa mid-90s, which is what I have. I don’t need dbm since I don’t do gun games. It was a thought-experiment. I may buy another stock to swap out if need be. Again, it was a thought. Thanks for the input, though a pm would have sufficed if you were concerned about a return stock being further damaged.Glad to hear my assumption was correct. I have seen one real take-off stock that had a DBM added it to....which was a real shame, IMO. I actually know a Navy guy who years ago apparently did a DBM on a old M40A1 return stock for his brother, as he got the stock for free, and I guess he saw no collector value in it at the time (probably early 2000s)...Big opps in my opinion. Anyhow, since you have an MST-100 scope, preserving the classic lines would be my vote.
True story about 'questionable condition': I finally talked another collector out of one of his return M40A1 stocks a while ago. (He had amassed 4 of them, and only one loose stock was left that was not built into a rifle). The wife of this collector from which I got my return stock looked at it, and joked when I bought the stock that is looked "kind-of schizophrenic" (her exact words). She didn't care for the bald spot in the old camo paint on the buttstock and forend that showed the original forest camo pattern underneath. I on the other hand kind-of liked that bit of patina, and mine even has the odd-ball black buttpad that was put on a few of them in the mid-1990s. A retired Marine that I shoot with immediately noted that bald spot on forend was from being painted on an M15 tripod back in the day. I did restore the improvised cheek pad as its helps in the ergonomics, but I didn't modify the stock in that process. Anyhow, good luck with what ever you decide.
Attachments
I used the legacy sports drop in unit.
It is NOT AICS compatible, but I got the polymer bottom "metal" and the 5 round magazine for around 120 bucks.
I did it for my HS precision stocked .308, as the bdl wasn't feeding worth a shit.
The damn thing worked just fine and feeds very well. They are even cheaper now.
www.brownells.com
It is NOT AICS compatible, but I got the polymer bottom "metal" and the 5 round magazine for around 120 bucks.
I did it for my HS precision stocked .308, as the bdl wasn't feeding worth a shit.
The damn thing worked just fine and feeds very well. They are even cheaper now.
LEGACY SPORTS INTERNATIONAL REMINGTON 700 DETACHABLE MAGAZINE DROP-IN KITS | Brownells
The Ammo Boost Detachable Magazine Drop-In Kit for the Remington 700 BDL from Legacy Sports International contains everything you need to boost your 700's magazine capacity. At the same time, you'll also get the speed and convenience of a detachab...
www.brownells.com
