Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  


Recommended Posts



Not sure about the rest of you but I’m becoming all ‘chassi’d out!


Be nice to see some innovation as opposed to basically the same thing, or is it like cars, unless you go for something different they all look the same?


Caveat - nothing wrong with chassis



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering an Accuracy International AX chassis system weighs in on its own at 6.5lbs and Retails in the USA for $1611 this rifle appears to be incredibly good value.


According to the details released from Christianson Arms the 16” barrelled Rifle weighs 6.9lbs and the 26” rifle weights 7.9lbs and the entire rifle retails at $2299.




There are a lot of chassis systems on the market and I for one like it. It makes the market competitive which in turn requires manufacturers to be more innovative. Let’s look at the Habu Chassis manufactured by KRG. This uses magnesium and carbon fibre in its construction achieves a weight of 3.6lbs and retails at $3700.


There is only so much you can do with solely using carbon fibre and resin. The only folding stock I know of in that method is by manners. With an adjustable cheek piece manners give a weight of 3.8lbs. I believe these stocks look pretty similar. There are limitations what you can do with the material.


Currently the only really different rifle I have seen on the market is The Fix by Q LLC. They have incorporated the stock around the action so it forms the chassis. It utilises a 45 degree bolt throw and rails instead of a tranditional round bolt design as per the Merkel KR1. Weighs in at 6.3lbs with a 16” all steel barrel.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally like a traditional bolt gun to look a bit more....errr...traditional, that is with a normal 1 piece style stock (some folders are ok, but unnecessary....especially given the added cost of something generally needless) ie, with a regular barrel channel, and not some tube surrounding the barrel, which really does nothing more than add a bit of weight, and force you to mount the scope higher, thus requiring an adjustable cheek piece.


I think the novelty has been worn off for a few years now, and that Christiensen version has no appeal at all.

It looks a bit pony, and can't even be classed as Tacticool with that non accessoriseable handguard

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Christensen Arms are aiming for the tactical market they specialise in lightweight rifles for high altitude hunting. Their early rifles were very hit and miss I don't know if they have upped their game in the last few years.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  



CALTON MOOR RANGE (2) (200x135).jpg

bradley1 200.jpg


Danny Trowsdale 200.png

safeshot 200.jpg

tacfire 200.jpg



valkyrie 200.jpg



dolphin button4 (200x100).jpg



tab 200.jpg


Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy