Chassis analysis paralysis: Trybe ROCS vs Oryx

[Revoliver]

Apologies if this is the wrong sub forum first and foremost.

Had a so-so day at the range the other day (couldn't gong 600y reliably and shot like 2 moa after bringing it in to 100 on paper) with my 110 predator. Figured it was due to the heat, sweat and having already shot a ton through the day. Still disheartening for 'old reliable' to not be.

While cleaning all the guns yesterday, I decided to check screw torque and discovered the rearmost stock screw (technically for the trigger guard, not the action AFAIK) is stripped. This sent me down the chassis rabbit hole and I ordered the Trybe ROCS chassis (under $300 for the black one with mil discount) last night.

However, today I got cold feet on the Trybe and ordered the Oryx ($420 with 10% coupon for the OD one) as well (can't cancel the Trybe order as it's too far along the order process).

My reasoning for the cold feet is that the stock and especially the cheekrest of the Trybe chassis look really janky, whereas the Oryx chassis has a much better solid aluminum stock, more solid adjustable and locking cheekrest as well as more attachment options (barring the forend, I have no plans to hang a bunch of tactical crap off the sides of the forend). The Oryx chassis is also more of a straight back stock design like ARs and it also appears to be better compatible with more AR grips with beavertails (which I of course have extras of) as opposed to the Trybe, which doesn't appear to be able to accomodate them.

So, to try and come to some sort of point, anyone think I'm nuts for spending ~$135 more for the Oryx, which could be used instead towards now having to buy AICS mags?

Anyone have the Trybe ROCS and want to chime in? (I know the Oryx is well vetted at this point).

I know the trigger guard screw can be filled in and re drilled, but now I have lost some faith in the accustock and as time has marched on, I really don't like the accustock's grip. It needs to come down lower for me, my fingers slip off the bottom too easily.

[Dave Hoback]

I certainly don’t think you’re crazy. The Oryx is the best dollar for dollar to performance ratio of all Chassis. In the end, it’s preference though. When I first built this Savage 10, I went with the MDT TAC21. There were other more expensive options I liked as well, but I was very conscious of cost at the time. I rebuilt my bench rig over last Winter & this time I chose the Mirage URL Chassis. It was SOOO expensive! But at this point, I didn’t care. I wanted the Chassis I wanted! I first saw this Mirage about 2 years ago & immediately fell in love with it. And I’m so happy with my choice. If you are happy with it, you made the right choice. ;)

[CFJunkie]

I've got two Oryx chassis. I agree with Dave H. that the Oryx has great dollar for dollar performance and there are two threads on this site with data showing the performance with them on two different calibers.
As for the AICS mags, if you know the chamber depth of your rifle and load to get optimum jump, I would do some research to find an AICS mag that will allow you enough depth to allow the COAL that you will need to get the rounds into the mag. With my .223, the MDT mag allows 2.500 OAL so there is no problem, no matter how deep my chamber erodes.
With my 6.5mm CM, the MDT mag I bought first has a plastic lip and seriously restricted OAL when I wanted to seat the long match bullets out to get the jump I desired.
I bought a metal mag that allowed 2.895 OAL and that worked until 4000 rounds of shooting eroded the chamber enough to create problems getting the optimum rounds seated in the mag.

One thing that might help, the aluminum Oryx chassis doesn't have the drop of a regular Savage bolt action stock, so I needed to get higher rings to get the scope high enough to be able to comfortably and consistently get my eye into the optical plane of both my scopes (a NightForce Benchrest 8-32x56mm on my 6.5mm Creedmoor 12 FV and a Leupold 45X on my .223 12 FV).

I wouldn't hesitate to buy another Oryx chassis for a Savage and just might get another one for one of my Savage .308s if and when I rebarrel it.

[Revoliver]

I certainly don’t think you’re crazy. The Oryx is the best dollar for dollar to performance ratio of all Chassis. In the end, it’s preference though. When I first built this Savage 10, I went with the MDT TAC21. There were other more expensive options I liked as well, but I was very conscious of cost at the time. I rebuilt my bench rig over last Winter & this time I chose the Mirage URL Chassis. It was SOOO expensive! But at this point, I didn’t care. I wanted the Chassis I wanted! I first saw this Mirage about 2 years ago & immediately fell in love with it. And I’m so happy with my choice. If you are happy with it, you made the right choice. ;)

Thank you for the vote of confidence.
If the Trybe's stock and cheekrest at least looked more solid and there were more than two videos of it (neither of which address the stock or cheekrest in detail other than saying they're adjustable), I think it would help Trybe/Optics Planet immensely.

[Revoliver]

I've got two Oryx chassis. I agree with Dave H. that the Oryx has great dollar for dollar performance and there are two threads on this site with data showing the performance with them on two different calibers.
As for the AICS mags, if you know the chamber depth of your rifle and load to get optimum jump, I would do some research to find an AICS mag that will allow you enough depth to allow the COAL that you will need to get the rounds into the mag. With my .223, the MDT mag allows 2.500 OAL so there is no problem, no matter how deep my chamber erodes.
With my 6.5mm CM, the MDT mag I bought first has a plastic lip and seriously restricted OAL when I wanted to seat the long match bullets out to get the jump I desired.
I bought a metal mag that allowed 2.895 OAL and that worked until 4000 rounds of shooting eroded the chamber enough to create problems getting the optimum rounds seated in the mag.

One thing that might help, the aluminum Oryx chassis doesn't have the drop of a regular Savage bolt action stock, so I needed to get higher rings to get the scope high enough to be able to comfortably and consistently get my eye into the optical plane of both my scopes (a NightForce Benchrest 8-32x56mm on my 6.5mm Creedmoor 12 FV and a Leupold 45X on my .223 12 FV).

I wouldn't hesitate to buy another Oryx chassis for a Savage and just might get another one for one of my Savage .308s if and when I rebarrel it.

Thank you for another vote of confidence in choosing the Oryx.

I shoot factory 308 ammo, so I should be fine (if not looking specifically for) AICS mags with the legacy binder plate versions.

I actually like the lack of comb drop as it's more like my ARs and should produce better recoil control as well. Are your rings mounted on the action or a rail attachment? My rings are on an EGW rail, so that should help reduce the possibility of needing taller ones, but thank you for the heads up on a potential issue regardless.

[CFJunkie]

My rings are mounted on the action.
I used that approach on the original 12 FVs with the factory stocks which have a hidden magazine.
Using a rail attachment for mounting the rings would tend to block the available space needed to load the 12 FVs hidden mags with my old man's fingers.

Using a rail probably wouldn't matter on the Oryx, but I just dropped the 12 FV action into the Oryx chassis, found that the rings needed to be higher, switched to higher rings that I had in my stash, and went out to shoot.
Being impatient to try the Oryx chassis, I never considered buying a rail attachment and waiting for delivery.
Once I found that the Oryx Chassis mounted action was shooting more accurately than with the factory stock, I didn't want to mess up very accurate set ups on either of the rifles, so I am still shooting with the rings on the action.

I have a narrow face, so I have never had problems with getting a cheek weld and getting my eye in the center of the optical plane with a standard Savage stock with stock drop.
But I have had problems with AR recoil tubes and with the non-drop Oryx chassis unless I use high or extra-high rings.

I have had some experience with people with different shaped heads, especially those with large cheekbones, trying to use scopes.
But I shoot with high powered target scopes (32, 36 or 45 power) so the optical plane is extremely small.
If I was shooting 9-power scopes, I might not have the problem seeing, but I don't think I would be in the center of the optical plane and probably would not be shooting as accurately as with the high- powered target scopes. I am a believer in "Aim small, hit small". My aim-point is less than 1/10 of an inch at 100 yards.

One of my shooting buddies with a very wide face has real problems and has to use very-high rings and a rail to be able to consistently get in the center of the optical plane with his ARs.
Without them, he just couldn't get his set up comfortably and his group sizes showed it.

[Revoliver]

My rings are mounted on the action.
I used that approach on the original 12 FVs with the factory stocks which have a hidden magazine.
Using a rail attachment for mounting the rings would tend to block the available space needed to load the 12 FVs hidden mags with my old man's fingers.

Using a rail probably wouldn't matter on the Oryx, but I just dropped the 12 FV action into the Oryx chassis, found that the rings needed to be higher, switched to higher rings that I had in my stash, and went out to shoot.
Being impatient to try the Oryx chassis, I never considered buying a rail attachment and waiting for delivery.
Once I found that the Oryx Chassis mounted action was shooting more accurately than with the factory stock, I didn't want to mess up very accurate set ups on either of the rifles, so I am still shooting with the rings on the action.

I have a narrow face, so I have never had problems with getting a cheek weld and getting my eye in the center of the optical plane with a standard Savage stock with stock drop.
But I have had problems with AR recoil tubes and with the non-drop Oryx chassis unless I use high or extra-high rings.

I have had some experience with people with different shaped heads, especially those with large cheekbones, trying to use scopes.
But I shoot with high powered target scopes (32, 36 or 45 power) so the optical plane is extremely small.
If I was shooting 9-power scopes, I might not have the problem seeing, but I don't think I would be in the center of the optical plane and probably would not be shooting as accurately as with the high- powered target scopes. I am a believer in "Aim small, hit small". My aim-point is less than 1/10 of an inch at 100 yards.

One of my shooting buddies with a very wide face has real problems and has to use very-high rings and a rail to be able to consistently get in the center of the optical plane with his ARs.
Without them, he just couldn't get his set up comfortably and his group sizes showed it.

I don't blame you for not fixing what ain't broke.

I've got a Vortex PST Gen II 5-25x50 on it, and really only go past 20 to spot with.

I have a tall slender face and skull but high cheekbones, so I find higher slender stocks to be more comfortable. I can also use a lower stock as well no problem, but I cannot stand wide stocks, anything that forces my head to cant is undesirable for me.

However, I shoot more squared up than traditional bladed and also prefer a shorter LOP (currently at 13" with the accustock).

The scope in 1" height 30mm Burris xtr signature rings on top of the EGW rail come out to 2" optic centerline height over bore.

ETA: Forgot to add that I also use the second tallest cheekrest for the accustock as well.

[CFJunkie]

I, too, prefer to shoot more squared up without leaning over the stock and I like to be leaning forward a bit. I'm pretty light, so I get moved back a bit by recoil so I make it a point of resetting to keep from being stacked up instead of leaning forward.

I have long arms so I like 13.75 to 14 inch stock length. Shorter than that causes me to slide up on the scope and causes the POI to go high on the next shot.
I found that out when I had the A2 stock on my Les Baer Super Varmint .223. When I changed the stock, my vertical stringing was eliminated.
After years of shooting, I have found that setting up like that helps my accuracy, keeps me relaxed and keeps my set up consistent. My 'shooter induced variations' are reduced when I get my set up right.

[Dave Hoback]

Something I’ve noticed over the years instructing. One of the “bad habits” even in those who classify themselves as experienced, is a propensity to lean back while shooting. An auto-reflex attempt to bring one’s eye inline with the sights. It’s oddly fascinating as it’s common in shooters regardless of race, sex, background.. creed or doctrine. Much the same as all inexperienced pistol shooters and instinctively GRABBING the trigger upon picking up the firearm. What I’ve come to find, is it’s this this “leaning back” which gives many the perception they need more LOP. I’ve always been of the mindset that the shooter should mold the self to the platform rather than rely on that dredded term “Ergonomics”, BLAH!:neglected: Much the same as above, I’m a squared up shooter. I both always shot & taught Isosceles shooting stance, never Weaver. And I became a very compact shooter. I’m 6’4” with ape hangers giant mitts.. yet, even with the AR15, I always had the stock adjusted only 1 position longer than shortest. I remember my son, a few years ago, ordering an A2 stock, and an an extra 2” spacer!! Bringing LOP to something like 14.5”! I think he kept it about a week, LOL! On my model 10 bench gun, I’m quite comfortable with minimum LOP of my Chassis.

I got away, long ago, from the words “Shooting” & “Comfort” in the same sentence. In many instances, pistol grip for instance, if one’s grip is “comfortable”, it’s likely WRONG. Of course, it’s only these last 5-6 years that my shooting has turned to ultimate accuracy. In years past everything I did was from a Defensive point of view. It was about putting as many holes as possible, within a certain area, in the least amount of time. While grouping played a roll, bullet after bullet through one home was NOT the primary goal. As that would be ineffective of course. Even now I battle these two conscious efforts, wanting to be as accurate as possible, but lose the defensive mind mind I spent many years developing.

[Revoliver]

While I greatly appreciate everyone's continued input as to what shooting position(s) and stock lengths work them, I believe I may have inadvertantly started stearing the thread off course.

I'm really looking for more information on and experience with the Oryx that I may have missed or improperly assumed and I'm desperately looking for any more information on the Trybe ROCS chassis to try and insure that the Oryx is a better choice for me.

[Fuj']

While I greatly appreciate everyone's continued input as to what shooting position(s) and stock lengths work them, I believe I may have inadvertantly started stearing the thread off course.

I'm really looking for more information on and experience with the Oryx that I may have missed or improperly assumed and I'm desperately looking for any more information on the Trybe ROCS chassis to try and insure that the Oryx is a better choice for me.

I'm a competitive shooter. I shoot mainly builds on chassis stocks. I have a long history
with MDT so I may be a bit biased. I do shoot 2 Oryx stocks with Savage. One is my
Bench gun I compete with. I can only review the Trybe by what I have seen online, and
to me, I'd pass and go right for the Oryx. The Oryx could have been sold to the public
for way more then the current price. But MDT did a solid to the shooting community to get
more stocks into the guys starting out in PRS. If your worried about saving a few bucks,
maybe the Trybe will fit, but in the back of my mind, I would'nt pull the trigger on it, being
me......

[Steeltrap]

Just my $0.02 on the matter as I've been out of the "build" it game for awhile.....just life stuff....I'll return!!.....but from a quick search the TRYBE cost about $300, and the ORYX is about $475. As we all know our "wealth and income" (AKA budget for toys) is different for everyone.

I've looked at situations like this as....well, if I buy the one for $300, then I was only $175 away from getting the one I really want\prefer. So the "cost" of the item that I perceive as "better" is $175....not the $475 price tag.

You know.....buy once.....cry once.

[Dave Hoback]

While I greatly appreciate everyone's continued input as to what shooting position(s) and stock lengths work them, I believe I may have inadvertantly started stearing the thread off course.

I'm really looking for more information on and experience with the Oryx that I may have missed or improperly assumed and I'm desperately looking for any more information on the Trybe ROCS chassis to try and insure that the Oryx is a better choice for me.


LOL! Get used to that here Revoliver.:( Several of us are some question answering then tangent off topic SUM-IN-A-GUNS! LOL! What Fuj’ said is spot on. I’ve put some research into the Trybe.. nothing wrong it. I’ll say, for $300 it’s a good budget choice. The Oryx, while being “budget” price compared to other MDT Chassis, it is NOT budget quality! Like I said, it hits WAY above its class! My first MDT, the TAC21 cost me just over $600! And I STILL had to pay for a grip($25) and a stock($160), at the time. The Oryx wasn’t available then, otherwise I likely would have purchased it instead.

You seem torn still. I say this: if you are really on a budget and the Oryx is pushing you to uncomfortable limit, get the Trybe. I promise your reservations about the stock & cheekrest can be pretty easily remedied. I’d even be willing to make a new cheekrest for you in a situation like that. I have a ton of scrap Billet Aluminum & such, & would be happy to someone out that needs it. But as you already ordered the Oryx, and if it’s not pushing your budget over the edge, stick with the Oryx. Fuj’ said it man… MDT designing the Oryx with all its features & offering it for UNDER $500 is unheard of! Even though I’m no longer using an MDT, I was always pleased with their quality. I’m a big fan and will continue recommending them. (And they don’t even pay me to do so…just da TRUTH!)

[Revoliver]

Thank you all for the votes of confidence in the Oryx. It's more solid build (along with all the other features) is definately what lead me to purchase it after reservations of the Trybe's stock and cheekrest. I agree completely that if I got the Trybe, and didn't like the stock and cheekrest, it'd eat me up more than the money saved.

Speaking of money, I apologize if I came across as not being able to afford the difference. I mentioned the cost difference only because if the Trybe's stock and cheekrest aren't as janky as they appear, then maybe I'm unfairly judging it poorly from lack of information, and it'd be a fine purchase that would also accomodate a couple magazines with the price difference as icing on the cake.

At this point though, I'm going to keep the Oryx and return the Trybe (they should both be here Friday). The Oryx does everything I want at a fantastic price point with zero reservations of sturdiness.

If somehow anyone at Trybe/Optics Planet or anyone affilliated with them reads this, do yourselves a favor and put out more information about your chassis, don't just ship it to a couple youtube personalities and have them give a generic bullet point gloss over, as they both missed the cheekrest and stock nearly completely (how is the stock attached to the chassis? Is it just a slip on friction fit like the original AR pistol braces? How many different height cheekrests come with the chassis and how do they attach? Are they sturdy or malleable through use and/or heat?) and it's cost you at least this sale.

And Dave, thank you for the fabrication offer, I appreciate it, but I'm going to 'one and done' it.

[Steeltrap]

And Dave, thank you for the fabrication offer, I appreciate it, but I'm going to 'one and done' it.

WAIT...!!! Does this mean that Dave has a "one 'n done" free fab offer still out there waiting to be claimed??? :o:o:cool:

[Dave Hoback]

WAIT...!!! Does this mean that Dave has a "one 'n done" free fab offer still out there waiting to be claimed??? :o:o:cool:

LOL! I help members who need a hand in ways I’m able, Steeltrap.:smile-new:

[nathantc]

one of the absolute best upgrades for the ORYX, if you like the length of pull with 3 or 4 spacers installed, is an adjustable but-pad. My rifle is a bit larger being a custom inletted oryx attached to a 300 PRC. That being said i've not had the slightest regret in chassis selection.

https://www.tactical-evo.com/en/useful-accessories/86-adjustable-recoil-pad-universal.html

https://imgdump5.novarata.net/94itvb.jpg
https://imgdump5.novarata.net/1vcs2h.jpg
https://imgdump5.novarata.net/93jecb.jpg

[Revoliver]

one of the absolute best upgrades for the ORYX, if you like the length of pull with 3 or 4 spacers installed, is an adjustable but-pad. My rifle is a bit larger being a custom inletted oryx attached to a 300 PRC. That being said i've not had the slightest regret in chassis selection.

https://www.tactical-evo.com/en/useful-accessories/86-adjustable-recoil-pad-universal.html

https://imgdump5.novarata.net/94itvb.jpg
https://imgdump5.novarata.net/1vcs2h.jpg
https://imgdump5.novarata.net/93jecb.jpg
That's pretty slick. I don't believe I currently have a need for it, but there's definately a want now!

[Dave Hoback]

Where you been hidin’ Nate? LOL! You’re not still selling that rig are you? I hope not.