MDT HS3 vs LSS-XL Gen2

[Phil3]

For those that have either the MDT HS3 or LSS-XL Gen2, could you share any pros and cons that you have experienced with either? I will be using a Howa action with a heavy barrel in 6.5 x 47, perhaps with a barrel nut.

The chassis will be used for shooting off the bench, normally a bipod or front bag, along with a soft rear bag. For load development I have a heavy rear benchrest type rear bag and a front mechanical co-axial front rest. I do not compete (might consider F-Class), don't care about total weight, and chassis needs room for a barrel nut (if I use).

I have considered the XLR Element and KRG Bravo, but keep returning to the MDT HS3, but that is NOT based on actual handling, since I have no access to see these in person. Just photos, reviews, and of course, people's comments. Thank you for yours.

 

[adamjma]

I've owned the LSS-XL (Gen 1) and presently have the HS3. The Gen 2 LSS-XL has some very nice enhancements like the thumb shelf and MLOK, so if you are thinking of modular attachments it's the better way to go. I believe they will both clear most barrel nut setups, but @MDT_Josh would be the guy to confirm that for you.

I still rock the HS3 because the flat bottom is useful to me for positional shooting (vs the more tubular LSS-XL models) and I have actually mounted a cheap ARCA rail to the bottom and can now position my bipod anywhere on the forend.

You might also look into the new Oryx chassis. There is a pretty thorough thread on that one. Not sure it's shipping yet.

 

[MDT_Josh]

Thanks for the tag @adamjma and you're right, both the XL Gen2 and the HS3 will be fine with barrel nuts.

Between the two chassis there are definitely pro's and con's either way, but if your goal is to shoot precisely off of the bench, either would work just fine.
Key Features of the XL Gen2:
- M-Lok compatible for attaching exterior forend weights, bag rider or any other accessory you'd want
- Ambidextrous thumb shelf, allowing for a more open grip when handling the rifle
- Fixed or carbine interface for attaching a wide variety of buttstocks
- Ambidextrous magazine release and flared magazine well for easier magazine changes without having to disturb the rifle

Key Features of the HS3:
- Long, wide forend for better interfacing with a front rest
- Polymer side panels/skins to reduce cold interfaces when shooting in the winter, or hot interfaces in the summer
- MagPul rail spec holes drilled and tapped directly into the chassis to mount accessories anywhere onto the forend

Let me know if you have any specific questions about either of them

 

[Phil3]

Josh,

Thank you for comparing the XL Gen2 and HS3 for my bench shooting purposes. While a single shot, dedicated bench rifle is fine for that, I want a rifle with a mag that is a portable shooting system (light rear bag and bipod (or front bag rest). But, most shooting is tight groups off the bench. Other than a bipod, I doubt I would attach anything to the forend. A few questions.

The XL has a thumbshelf whereas the HS3 does not. For bench shooting, which grip do you think makes most sense? I will be using for a front rest, a Harris bipod, an F-Class bipod, and at times a mechanical heavy rest (load development).

I presume the skeleton fixed length stock is secure with a clamp bolt arrangement on the mini-buffer tube. I just wonder how secure that really is.

Is your vertical grip suitable for the HS3? I am not sure what grip I would like, so thought I would ask about fitment.

It looks to me like the HS3 can take pretty much any size barrel. I was considering the MTU profile or M24.

The cheek piece does slide left and right, horizontally, correct? I find my sight picture slightly off because of a lack of this adjustability.

It is not clear to me why regular metal AICS mags will not work with the Howa (your polymer one will). I watched a MDT video on this, but I did not really grasp the issue being explained. Not a biggee, since the MDT mags are better priced than most metal ones.

I will be using a Howa action and am pleased MDT supports these. Some stock/chassis makers do not (or are quite limited). Out of six centerfire MDT chassis systems, five support a Howa, including the new ACC. I like the choices!

Thank you.

Phil

 

[MDT_Josh]

Josh,

Thank you for comparing the XL Gen2 and HS3 for my bench shooting purposes. While a single shot, dedicated bench rifle is fine for that, I want a rifle with a mag that is a portable shooting system (light rear bag and bipod (or front bag rest). But, most shooting is tight groups off the bench. Other than a bipod, I doubt I would attach anything to the forend. A few questions.

The XL has a thumbshelf whereas the HS3 does not. For bench shooting, which grip do you think makes most sense? I will be using for a front rest, a Harris bipod, an F-Class bipod, and at times a mechanical heavy rest (load development).

I presume the skeleton fixed length stock is secure with a clamp bolt arrangement on the mini-buffer tube. I just wonder how secure that really is.

Is your vertical grip suitable for the HS3? I am not sure what grip I would like, so thought I would ask about fitment.

It looks to me like the HS3 can take pretty much any size barrel. I was considering the MTU profile or M24.

The cheek piece does slide left and right, horizontally, correct? I find my sight picture slightly off because of a lack of this adjustability.

It is not clear to me why regular metal AICS mags will not work with the Howa (your polymer one will). I watched a MDT video on this, but I did not really grasp the issue being explained. Not a biggee, since the MDT mags are better priced than most metal ones.

I will be using a Howa action and am pleased MDT supports these. Some stock/chassis makers do not (or are quite limited). Out of six centerfire MDT chassis systems, five support a Howa, including the new ACC. I like the choices!

Thank you.

Phil

Hi Phil, I am super excited on your interest in our chassis and will do my best to answer you questions below.

- For primarily bench and prone shooting, I wouldn't say that the thumbshelf is necessary. The only time I find myself noticing the thumbshelf is when shooting unsupported off a tripod or barricade of sorts.

- We used to design the Skeleton Rifle Stocks with a cross bolt style clamp to the mini buffer tube (SRS V2) but have since replaced that system by directly bolting the SRS to the mini buffer tube with a 1/4-28 button head screw. I can tell you from firsthand experience that it a very solid and rigid interface, than when loctited (with green or blue loctite) should never loosen up on you.

- We have had a few guys use the vertical grip on the HS3 with mixed results. The grip was designed and optimised around our newer chassis (ACC, ESS and LSS-XL Gen2) but is still compatible with our older chassis and other mfg's offerings. For what you're doing, I would probably recommend that you have a look at our standard, overmolded grip as it will give you a more natural grip and not force your wrist vertical.

- Yep, pretty much all of our chassis will support barrels with up to 1.250" at the muzzle, so a MTU/M40/M24 contour should be no issue in wither chassis.

- All of our new cheek pieces on the ESS/ESS folder and SRS V5 have the ability to be shifted left and right, as well as canted

- The reason that the metal magazine doesn't work with the Howa 1500 in all of our chassis (except for the ACC) is that we have optimised it for the polymer variant. With the Howa and how it's setup, you can either make polymer magazines work, or metal, not both unless you want to chop up your metal magazine. If you were to order the HS3 or XL Gen2 and wanted to just use our metal magazines, email the support team ([email protected]) and they will send you the correct hardware and instructions on how to install everything!

Again, I am happy that you are interested in our products and we love supporting inlets of all shapes and sizes! The Howa's are really an awesome factory action, it's just a pity (to me) that they don't make a lefty lol!

- Josh

 

[Phil3]

Josh,

Thank you for prompt reply. Your comments are helpful.

I feel better about the button screw in the stock. I presume that is an Allen, since the stock ribbing would seemingly make access otherwise impossible. I appreciate your candor on the use of the vertical grip on the HS3. I do like the other grip you have. I want to be sure the grip is right, since I find that fairly critical to getting the rifle to deliver its best. I found the Sierra AR grip worked very well for me on an AR-15, but my hand does not seem to be that picky. The surface is hard, the only thing I don't like, and not sure it would fit MDT chassis (see right side raised edge).

I did not know about the cant capability on the cheekrest. Nice. I was looking at XLR stocks, because they can do that. Nice to know yours can too.

No worry on the metal mags for the Howa. I like the polymer, so the fact the Howa is optimized for them is a good thing.

Weight of the chassis is of no consequence to me and fact is, the heavier it is, the less recoil, so which one is heavier, the XL Gen 2 or HS3?

I may be changing out from an F-Class style bipod (Anschutz rail), to a Harris, to a bag rider plate. I am not sure if using the LSS - XL M-Lok system or the HS3 threaded holes are best for this. I am still trying to figure out the different mounting designs, adapters, etc. so I can pick the best chassis. I am still drawn to the HS3 though!

Thanks for your answers Josh, it is much appreciated.

Phil

 

[hoop12]

Phil, just from personal experience I love my LSS XL Gen 2. I’ve got a Howa .308 sitting in mine and I’m using the polymer mags as well, and I love it. I haven’t even finished my rifle yet, took a stock off one of my ARs and just slapped a random scope on just to go squeeze a couple rounds off, and I absolutely love the feel of it. My Howa has the 20” heavy barrel and it balances pretty well.

 

[308pirate]

Weight of the chassis is of no consequence to me

It better be if you ever want to shoot any F class match and stay within the rules. There is a rifle weight limit to deal with.

 

[Hawk in WY]

Josh,

" The reason that the metal magazine doesn't work with the Howa 1500 in all of our chassis (except for the ACC) is that we have optimised it for the polymer variant. With the Howa and how it's setup, you can either make polymer magazines work, or metal, not both unless you want to chop up your metal magazine. If you were to order the HS3 or XL Gen2 and wanted to just use our metal magazines, email the support team ([email protected]) and they will send you the correct hardware and instructions on how to install everything! "

Not sure I understand this.

I have two metal MDT magazines, with and without the binder plate with the front edge of the magazines ground down which work just fine with my two ESS chassis and Howa heavy barrel 6.5 CM's. I'm guessing this is what you mean by "unless you want to chop up your metal magazine. Since no modification of the chassis is required, the polymer magazines work just fine.

Questions for Josh: Why not sell modified metal magazines which I know fit the Howa action in at least your ESS chassis and probably others? Does your "except for the ACC" comment above mean the ACC chassis will accommodate both polymer and metal magazines?

Having options is important at least to me since I want to be able to optimize COAL with different barrels with different distances to lands. I have two 6.5 CM 1500 actions in ESS chassis. In one, the modified MDT metal magazine with the binder plate works fine. In the other, I need the modified magazine without the binder plate because that barrel has a longer jump to the lands. Optimal COAL is too long in both for use of the polymer magazine.

Thank you for your contributions to this forum.

 

[MDT_Josh]

Josh,

Thank you for prompt reply. Your comments are helpful.

I feel better about the button screw in the stock. I presume that is an Allen, since the stock ribbing would seemingly make access otherwise impossible. I appreciate your candor on the use of the vertical grip on the HS3. I do like the other grip you have. I want to be sure the grip is right, since I find that fairly critical to getting the rifle to deliver its best. I found the Sierra AR grip worked very well for me on an AR-15, but my hand does not seem to be that picky. The surface is hard, the only thing I don't like, and not sure it would fit MDT chassis (see right side raised edge). View attachment 6984605

I did not know about the cant capability on the cheekrest. Nice. I was looking at XLR stocks, because they can do that. Nice to know yours can too.

No worry on the metal mags for the Howa. I like the polymer, so the fact the Howa is optimized for them is a good thing.

Weight of the chassis is of no consequence to me and fact is, the heavier it is, the less recoil, so which one is heavier, the XL Gen 2 or HS3?

I may be changing out from an F-Class style bipod (Anschutz rail), to a Harris, to a bag rider plate. I am not sure if using the LSS - XL M-Lok system or the HS3 threaded holes are best for this. I am still trying to figure out the different mounting designs, adapters, etc. so I can pick the best chassis. I am still drawn to the HS3 though!

Thanks for your answers Josh, it is much appreciated.

Phil

No worries and I am happy to answer them

- Yes, the button head screw that we use to attach the SRS V5 to the mini buffer tube is hex drive (allen) which makes it much easier to tighten. We recommend the use of a ball end allen key (5/32" I believe) for easier tightening.

- Looking at the pictures, I would have to say that the Sierra grip above should work on either of the chassis that you are interested in, but it may require just a little modification to the right side (as you pointed out) to ensure a snug fit.

- We are going to have to put out a better explanation of some of the "hidden features" of our chassis/buttstocks. Working on it

- The HS3 will definitely be heavier than the XL Gen2. In saying that, the XL had the ability to mount the m-lok weights to and more accessories (like a m-lok front bag rider) to the forend. The HS3 does have a slightly longer forend (if memory serves me) so keep that in mind too. @308pirate is also correct that you should keep overall wright in mind when completing this build if you ever intend to compete in an F-Class event.

Hope these answer some more of the questions you have and it's always great to see customers doing all their research before just jumping in

 

[rgv]

Josh,

Thank you for prompt reply. Your comments are helpful.

I feel better about the button screw in the stock. I presume that is an Allen, since the stock ribbing would seemingly make access otherwise impossible. I appreciate your candor on the use of the vertical grip on the HS3. I do like the other grip you have. I want to be sure the grip is right, since I find that fairly critical to getting the rifle to deliver its best. I found the Sierra AR grip worked very well for me on an AR-15, but my hand does not seem to be that picky. The surface is hard, the only thing I don't like, and not sure it would fit MDT chassis (see right side raised edge). View attachment 6984605

I did not know about the cant capability on the cheekrest. Nice. I was looking at XLR stocks, because they can do that. Nice to know yours can too.

No worry on the metal mags for the Howa. I like the polymer, so the fact the Howa is optimized for them is a good thing.

Weight of the chassis is of no consequence to me and fact is, the heavier it is, the less recoil, so which one is heavier, the XL Gen 2 or HS3?

I may be changing out from an F-Class style bipod (Anschutz rail), to a Harris, to a bag rider plate. I am not sure if using the LSS - XL M-Lok system or the HS3 threaded holes are best for this. I am still trying to figure out the different mounting designs, adapters, etc. so I can pick the best chassis. I am still drawn to the HS3 though!

Thanks for your answers Josh, it is much appreciated.

Phil

If you are particular about grip to trigger relationship, skip the HS3 and go straight to the ESS or the ACC.

The reason is that the HS3 and the LSS-XL with the teardrop shaped AR buttstock interface pushes the grip mounting interface down 3/8" of an inch or so. This is largely why the adjustable vertical grip doesnt really work well with the Gen1 stuff.

If you look at side view pictures you will see what I mean. The LSS-XL Gen2 with the carbine buffer tube interface is another option that does not have the low pistol grip issue.

 

[308pirate]

So @MDT_Josh , if we Howa users grind off this tab shown below, can any steel AICS mag work with the 1500 in all MDT chassis? That tab needs to be removed for AICS mags to work with the Howa 1500 in the Roedale chassis as well as with most DBMs meant for wood and fiberglass stocks.

KRG products do not need the bottom of the action to be modified in any way for AICS mags to work.

 

[rgv]

So @MDT_Josh , if we Howa users grind off this tab shown below, can any steel AICS mag work with the 1500 in all MDT chassis? That tab needs to be removed for AICS mags to work with the Howa 1500 in the Roedale chassis as well as with most DBMs meant for wood and fiberglass stocks.

KRG products do not need the bottom of the action to be modified in any way for AICS mags to work.

View attachment 6984917

This will work, as will filing down the top of the magazine spine till it latches.

It is better to file down the concave radius at the front because it raises the bullet point rather than raising the base.

Either is better than shortening the magazine latch which lowers both front and rear.

 

[MDT_Josh]

Josh,

" The reason that the metal magazine doesn't work with the Howa 1500 in all of our chassis (except for the ACC) is that we have optimised it for the polymer variant. With the Howa and how it's setup, you can either make polymer magazines work, or metal, not both unless you want to chop up your metal magazine. If you were to order the HS3 or XL Gen2 and wanted to just use our metal magazines, email the support team ([email protected]) and they will send you the correct hardware and instructions on how to install everything! "

Not sure I understand this.

I have two metal MDT magazines, with and without the binder plate with the front edge of the magazines ground down which work just fine with my two ESS chassis and Howa heavy barrel 6.5 CM's. I'm guessing this is what you mean by "unless you want to chop up your metal magazine. Since no modification of the chassis is required, the polymer magazines work just fine.

Questions for Josh: Why not sell modified metal magazines which I know fit the Howa action in at least your ESS chassis and probably others? Does your "except for the ACC" comment above mean the ACC chassis will accommodate both polymer and metal magazines?

Having options is important at least to me since I want to be able to optimize COAL with different barrels with different distances to lands. I have two 6.5 CM 1500 actions in ESS chassis. In one, the modified MDT metal magazine with the binder plate works fine. In the other, I need the modified magazine without the binder plate because that barrel has a longer jump to the lands. Optimal COAL is too long in both for use of the polymer magazine.

Thank you for your contributions to this forum.

Some of this has been answered here by @rgv and @308pirate but as a summary, the whole situation with our polymer/metal magazines can be brought back to magazine position relative to the action and magazine height. As you have filed off the radius on your metal magazines to get them to work, you understand how to get them up high enough to allow consistent function.

"Why not sell modified metal magazines which I know fit the Howa action in at least your ESS chassis and probably others?"
- As of right now we do not have enough demand to do a specific Howa 1500 SA magazine. The Howa is definitely one of the most popular actions that we support, and if anything, we would probably move the mag well rather than supporting a proprietary mag.

The ACC has a shifted magwell (different from all of our other chassis) and a lower (IIRC) mag latch to allow the metal mags to work flawlessly. The polymer magazines will latch into this configuration, but will not get the rounds up high enough to ensure consistent feeding.

Hope this helps and feel free to reach out to me if that made it more confusing lol

- Josh

 

[Hawk in WY]

The metal mags working is a really good reason to buy the ACC next order.

You keep all the good stuff secret.

Thank you for clearing this up.

 

[greybeard]

MDT josh, how is MDT involved with the ORYX stock?
availiable now?

 

[MDT_Josh]

MDT josh, how is MDT involved with the ORYX stock?
availiable now?

Oryx is a sub-brand of MDT and as such, shares a lot of similarities in design and manufacturing. We're accepting pre-orders now and will be shipping them soon! Check them out at oryxchassis.com

 

[FishDr]

If you are particular about grip to trigger relationship, skip the HS3 and go straight to the ESS or the ACC.

The reason is that the HS3 and the LSS-XL with the teardrop shaped AR buttstock interface pushes the grip mounting interface down 3/8" of an inch or so. This is largely why the adjustable vertical grip doesnt really work well with the Gen1 stuff.

If you look at side view pictures you will see what I mean. The LSS-XL Gen2 with the carbine buffer tube interface is another option that does not have the low pistol grip issue.

Old thread, but it came up in a search when looking for information. Having played around with both, and bein a bit sensitive to hand placement issues … I prefer the fixed stock version. The carbine version was a bit too high for me (with the standard overmold grip) and made me feel like I was contorting my wrist downward to reach trigger. No issue with the fixed stock version.