Hello,
Looking to either get into an ARC action (MF or Nucleus) with either a KRG Bravo or XRAY
OR
An AIAT
Weight is the only noticeable difference I see, and a light palma barreled AT would bring that gap closer.
Both are roughly the same price as I add it up with the AI being only about $500 more. That said, I’ve never played with an AI to know if the chassis works for me. Only experience is firing 5 rounds from a bench with one, and no one can tell if they like a stock without playing with it. Handled a Sako TRG and that stock felt good (seems similar to a Bravo by looks, thought I’d feel it out). Zero experience with the Xray.
Basically, I need to know if the ergonomics of these chassis agree with me, and if a 60*, 72*, or 90* bolt throw suits me best.
Biggest negative I see about the AT is that it is made in England while the ARC is made here. I know its a petty thing, but I’m weird. Only negative to the ARC is whether a Huber or CG two stage trigger is as reliable as an AIAT trigger.
Anyways, before I drop 4k on a bare rifle, I’d enjoy the oppurtunity to handle an AT rifle and a Bravo and Xray chassis before I make a final decision. Was wanting to know if anyone within a 60 mile radius of McCalla or Tuscaloosa, AL had anything I could look at, will pay for a box or two of ammo if need be. Off days are Sundays (after 10:00 AM) and Mondays.
I appreciate it, and PLEASE give any advise possible.
Edit to add:
ARC build is with a 20” 1-10” .308 PVA chambered light palma barrel, KRG stock, CG/Huber 2-stage trigger, SS/NF/S&B glass (basic Mil reticles), ARC rings/SPUR mount, Atlas bipod, PVA Jet Blast, and a decent pair of palma sights.
Now this would be the same for the AIAT except for the barrel, trigger, and stock obviously.
Why iron sights? Because I like them and I know there is no logical reason to shoot with them besides that I enjoy it. Nevertheless, I will have the capability to have them on my rifle.
Thank you,
- Preston B. Walsh
Looking to either get into an ARC action (MF or Nucleus) with either a KRG Bravo or XRAY
OR
An AIAT
Weight is the only noticeable difference I see, and a light palma barreled AT would bring that gap closer.
Both are roughly the same price as I add it up with the AI being only about $500 more. That said, I’ve never played with an AI to know if the chassis works for me. Only experience is firing 5 rounds from a bench with one, and no one can tell if they like a stock without playing with it. Handled a Sako TRG and that stock felt good (seems similar to a Bravo by looks, thought I’d feel it out). Zero experience with the Xray.
Basically, I need to know if the ergonomics of these chassis agree with me, and if a 60*, 72*, or 90* bolt throw suits me best.
Biggest negative I see about the AT is that it is made in England while the ARC is made here. I know its a petty thing, but I’m weird. Only negative to the ARC is whether a Huber or CG two stage trigger is as reliable as an AIAT trigger.
Anyways, before I drop 4k on a bare rifle, I’d enjoy the oppurtunity to handle an AT rifle and a Bravo and Xray chassis before I make a final decision. Was wanting to know if anyone within a 60 mile radius of McCalla or Tuscaloosa, AL had anything I could look at, will pay for a box or two of ammo if need be. Off days are Sundays (after 10:00 AM) and Mondays.
I appreciate it, and PLEASE give any advise possible.
Edit to add:
ARC build is with a 20” 1-10” .308 PVA chambered light palma barrel, KRG stock, CG/Huber 2-stage trigger, SS/NF/S&B glass (basic Mil reticles), ARC rings/SPUR mount, Atlas bipod, PVA Jet Blast, and a decent pair of palma sights.
Now this would be the same for the AIAT except for the barrel, trigger, and stock obviously.
Why iron sights? Because I like them and I know there is no logical reason to shoot with them besides that I enjoy it. Nevertheless, I will have the capability to have them on my rifle.
Thank you,
- Preston B. Walsh
Last edited:
