-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Why are Foundation stocks popular?
- Thread starter awcmon
- Start date
They are dense/heavy and have a unique feel in the hand. They are a logical choice for a game in which weight, the more weight the better, is your friend. They come ready to accept even more weight internally. The forend is a classic beavertail with a flat (like the Manners T2 GAP), and that's superbly usable in several different types of shooting. They are also made with outstanding attention to detail and they don't leave any performance on the table compared to a chassis.
They balance well, they are extremely dense and they are simple. There isn't 2 dozen fasteners to worry about.
Have you shot one?
I came from an XLR chassis to a Foundation and couldn’t be happier. I also have Manners as well.
The foundation just plain feels good and soaks up recoil. The annoying vibration and shock I got from chassis when firing doesn’t not exist in the foundation.
They also look old school and unique. Well at least they used to until now they are so popular at matches lol.
Not to mention the company itself. John-Kyle and Amy have built an incredible business and are doing amazing things for the sport, community, and the foundation family. When you buy from foundation you get personal communication and an experience.
I came from an XLR chassis to a Foundation and couldn’t be happier. I also have Manners as well.
The foundation just plain feels good and soaks up recoil. The annoying vibration and shock I got from chassis when firing doesn’t not exist in the foundation.
They also look old school and unique. Well at least they used to until now they are so popular at matches lol.
Not to mention the company itself. John-Kyle and Amy have built an incredible business and are doing amazing things for the sport, community, and the foundation family. When you buy from foundation you get personal communication and an experience.
Functional without gimmicks.
Simple.
Unique.
Sexy, especially if you like the look of a “stock” over a “chassis”.
Locally made by great people…I can’t think of who I’d rather buy from than Truitt, Streater and Stuteville.
They aren’t the only equipment that will work, as evidenced by the many trophies won with other equipment. Likewise, they aren’t perfect for all types of “precision shooting” so you need to define your terms a bit. They are one good option for PRS type competition.
Simple.
Unique.
Sexy, especially if you like the look of a “stock” over a “chassis”.
Locally made by great people…I can’t think of who I’d rather buy from than Truitt, Streater and Stuteville.
They aren’t the only equipment that will work, as evidenced by the many trophies won with other equipment. Likewise, they aren’t perfect for all types of “precision shooting” so you need to define your terms a bit. They are one good option for PRS type competition.
I’ve got a few chassis and a foundation. To me, they are different tools in my tool chest. While I don’t currently compete, I am thinking about it. If it is PRS, it will be with my Foundation. The ability to have 22lbs of shooting weight without hanging a bunch of weights on the outside of my chassis is more aesthetically pleasing. I have the internal weights in my foundation but the stock looks just the same as without. I use my MDT ACC for more adjustability. I like all the different ways I can fit it to me. If I only had it, I could probably live with hanging their weights all over it to get the desired results, but I’m just fortunate enough to have both I guess.
The last two rifles I've built were on McMillan stocks. As others have said, I prefer them because they soak up recoil far better than a chassis.
IMO the only thing that's held me back from trying a Foundation stock is that weight kits can be tough to get a hold of... there's no factory option so you've got to do a bit of searching (and be a little lucky) to find a weight kit. I've noticed that a lot of guys who run them have to put in a little effort to get them weighted and balanced right by running 28" barrels, truck-axle straight-taper profiles, and/or by leaving a brass Anarchy rail on the front full-time. But, especially when set up right, they have a really nice dead recoil impulse due to the micarta material they're made of.
I run a Manners TCS, and if you've got larger hands they're great too (the grip to trigger distance just doesn't work for everybody).
The longer I do this the less I like any of the chassis/stocks that have like a zillion screws to work loose, and I feel like sometimes too many options can distract guys from actually working on shooting skills while playing around with their fancy chassis and its infinite options.
If they made a Manners TCS/Foundation Centurion mash-up, I'd steal one if I had to.
I run a Manners TCS, and if you've got larger hands they're great too (the grip to trigger distance just doesn't work for everybody).
The longer I do this the less I like any of the chassis/stocks that have like a zillion screws to work loose, and I feel like sometimes too many options can distract guys from actually working on shooting skills while playing around with their fancy chassis and its infinite options.
If they made a Manners TCS/Foundation Centurion mash-up, I'd steal one if I had to.
Last edited:
If they made a hunting stock, I would buy it sight unseen. They are that good.
I’d imagine he’s mainly referring to LOP.
Personally I’ve also come to appreciate buttpad height and angle adjustment… when setup properly with LOP it gives a more natural/comfortable fit in my experience.
To a lesser degree, being able to slide the cheek rest side to side/front to back is also a nice to have.
Yes, they are that good.
I have tried to go away from them and none of the chassis are even close. The ACC Elite being the best of them but still suffers from all the normal chassis issues. Not too mention it's $2k-ish to get it all set up for comps. I liked the Matrix Pro that I had and I really liked the ACC Elite but I love the Foundation. It is simple, straight forward and they just work.
All that hardware is available for wood, fiberglass, and laminate stocks. The NRA sling crowd has had them on their rifles for decades.
Examples:
Bighorn TL3. Fit any round bottom 700 clone, just file the clearance needed on the ejection port if desired, bolt handle, and bolt stop or John-Kyle will do it if you ask.
The ACC Elite fits me better than my Centurion and I’m not butthurt over the cost difference, though I find both to be quite premium priced with more nickel and dime tactics from MDT.
Oh yeah 100%. Not saying it can’t be done, but certainly not an insignificant added cost.
Just context for the adjustability aspect people might like about chassis systems that you don’t get (at least from the factory) with a Foundation.
These are options (or even standards) Foundation and all other stock makers should add.
When I used to by stocks for my NRA comp rifles I went to Master Class Stocks and spec the hardware I wanted.
I kind of see the lack of options as a feature.
For me, as long as LOP, cheek-rest-height, and weight/balance can be adjusted, that's enough, and since owning a stock with solid KMW hardware, everything else seems kind of wimpy and cheap now.
I do think Manners' mini-chassis has an advantage over the Foundation's all being bespoke to a certain action (as far as the ability to change things up or for resale anyway).
For me, as long as LOP, cheek-rest-height, and weight/balance can be adjusted, that's enough, and since owning a stock with solid KMW hardware, everything else seems kind of wimpy and cheap now.
I do think Manners' mini-chassis has an advantage over the Foundation's all being bespoke to a certain action (as far as the ability to change things up or for resale anyway).
Somebody beat me to it, but mainly LOP/buttpad cant. NV bridge options would be great too. I think those are my main concerns.
Thanks for the list of adjustable buttpad options.
It all depends on what you want. For YEARS, like most of the years, rifles sold to the general consumer didn’t have any of the stuff a chassis provides. Only niche shooters paid for multiple angles applied to their buttpad, 4 axis comb adjustment, etc. As is evidenced by numerous shooters bringing home golden bullets with Foundations, fundamentals matters more, in a dynamic shooting environment, than infinite stock adjustability. The foundation isn’t designed for f class or nra high power or biathlon. Its a recoil absorbing material with just enough adjustment to meet the needs of a PRS shooter: LOP, comb height, weight. And frankly, it’s pretty much perfectly balanced with a 26” heavy barrel, brake and bipod.…exactly what it was designed for, no matter what mister “I don’t own one but” says above. There’s a reason JK doesn’t make a weight kit. So anyway, if your discipline needs super lightweight or quickly changeable LOP or a night vision bridge or your anatomy demands a tilted, canted, sloped butt pad, the Foundation probably isn’t for you. If you want to shoot PRS type competitions with non-vibrating stock that doesn’t rattle all of its own fasteners out, doesn’t try to fix your shit fundamentals with gadgets, doesn’t upwell you on everything it needs to function, and is not Freezing cold in winter, Foundation might be right for you.
and @308pirate I know you know this but yours was the easiest post to reply to.
I know a guy that is already milling parts to solve that problem. Cant say if Foundation will offer those as options on their site but a plug and play solution is close to being out there.
And it ll be real nice
Tomayto, tomahto.
IDK why John-Kyle doesn't make his own weight kits? He would surely sell loads of them. I always figured it was because he's too busy just trying to keep up with demand for his stocks while still having time to shoot matches and see his family now and then... It can't be because of lack of demand, or else the ~4-5+ other smaller shops that do make weights/rails for the Foundations wouldn't perennially be out of stock.
I've shot a bunch of them, and none of them were balanced right or really heavy enough for PRS without the owner having added some weights, other stuff, or all of the above. Most are ass-heavy without them, or some might balance right at the magwell (lame), but getting one to 20+ pounds where its balance point is ~4" in front of the magwell (center of a Gamechanger) without adding anything isn't really a thing.
Unless one is trying to build a rifle that is sort of too heavy for hunting, but not really heavy enough as compared to what most guys are running for PRS these days (including the guys with golden bullets who run them with weights), just throwing a heavy profile barrel onto a Foundation isn't going to be enough for most.
I plan to buy/run a Centurion later this year... I just need to score a weight kit first and am not quite over the sticker shock of what the tungsten one costs (the only one not sold out right now lol).
My Centurion balances at a touch under 4" in front of the magwell with a 28", 1.25" straight barrel and now weight kit.
That's the thing so many in this community don't understand. A Foundation (or any similar stock) can be made with rapid adjust hardware to fit the rifle to the shooter.
It isn't new. The HP sling crowd has been doing it for decades long before tube guns and chassis were a thing.
How to tell us you have no idea what you are talking about without saying it directly:
Yep. I remember seeing a shooter up here in the Great Lakes Region with a stock with adjustable length of pull and adjust butt pad height.
I had an near identical copy of this rifle for NRA position shooting back 20 years ago
He was shooting a Foundation.
I should have added that in my original reply to your post.
Maybe I should have said “probably isn’t for you unless you want to add aftermarket parts”. Anything can be made to be anything. My point was that if you shoot biathlon, you would do better starting off with something other than a Foundation. And yes, like anything, they COULD be made with more choices from the factory.
28" 1.25 straight taper... that's exactly what I meant by "and/or" with the weight kits and such. Seems like it's either run a barrel like yours, add weights, maybe an Anarchy rail, leave one's bipod attached all the time, or all of the above.
I like the convenience of running plebian Proof prefits (which are far from a skinny contour, but not a 28" truck-axle), so for someone like me, with a heavy 26", weights will be a must.
I get it.
Don't get me wrong either, I really dig the Foundations (well, only the black ones, the other ones are a little too "grandpa's rifle" for me lol). I prefer them to any of the chassis out there that let one adjust every little thing and let one bolt on the kitchen sink if they want to.
I just think that if one is looking to build one out into a 20+ pound heavy hunk of PRS artillery, they should be aware that it might take a little extra effort, whether that means a heavier barrel than usual or more.
IDK WTF you mean by this though? I'm pretty sure I balance my rifle the same as guys like Morgun King, Austin Orgain, etc balance theirs..?
Are you better than those guys, do you know more than they do?
Understood. Just illustrating that this hardware is not new.
I had a centurion, liked it! Shot well with it! I had a 28" hvy comp(same as proof comp) with a tunwr and brake at muzzle. Zco 527 in an arc mount. I installed all the weights in forend and an arca rail. Still was butt heavy. I'd you want to balance in the center of a shmedium, you'll need a 26" 1.25 straight minimum, or hollow out the buttstock. I wasn't a fan of the minimum LOP being 13.5", would have preferred 13" as a minimum and multiple spacers for a guys desired spec. The dead harmonics claim, yeah they're dead. I loved the way the inlet was perfectly machined to the Lone Peak fuzion action, as it's not a round bottom like most. However the one that was inlet for my archimedes fit poorly. I never got consistent accuracy with that rifle till I put it into a different chassis, and then it shot great. I was assured the mausingfield inlet would work, my results were contrary.
There’s this “guy” at a match this year that ended up borrowing one of the match sponsors’ foundation based rifles (because he left his bolt on the cleaning table the night before…long story). this “guy” had been shooting on a earlier-designed popular chassis, but he is new at PRS and sucks on any rifle…but he said quantitatively, he sucked less on day 1 than on day 2 when I…I mean “he” shot his own rifle (there were other issues). The question is if it was the stock (which felt great) or the overall ~10lb+ differential in total weight along with a muzzle break that drew some dirty looks from shooters on either side (need to get one of those). Suffice to say, it would be nice to try a few more of these and other stocks out before dropping more cash. But a foundation is now on the short list.
If the Foundation rifle weight 10lbs more and had a brake.....that's going to be a much larger reason he shot better than the actual stock.
Foundation makes great stocks, but between the two, that much more weight on a rifle is going to have a much larger influence.
Really want one of these guys but hate to spend the coin on something that specific without knowing the exact specs and model I’d like best.
Meh. I’ve had MPA, XLR, KRG, and Foundation and never once had to A) bed a chassis B) take an action out to change a barrel or C) do anything other than comply with manufacturer’s instructions for action screw torque to secure the action.
Yeah, the foundation is a nice fit but it doesn’t do anything, with regards to holding on to the action, that any other high quality equipment doesn’t do,
I ran a Centurion for 1 season and really liked it. I wish I hadn't swapped it for the Manners TCS as I did not care for it. I really do like my Manners PRS1 and now have a couple of them. I will probably purchase another Centurion with the lite cut in the but stock to remove some of the rear weight.
