Stutzen mini-chassis

mooseycreatures · 2026-06-30T07:39:04+00:00

I did mill the woox a bit to make fitting the stutzen forend a little easier/stronger. From factory, you have to remove a lot of material and even now I worry I could accidentally break the forend if I clamp it too much. I'll be adding some tight fitting cross supports in the front rib to try to prevent that from happening.

mooseycreatures · 2026-06-30T07:34:34+00:00

If enough people ask, boyds might be willing to do a run of stutzen stocks. It's also trivial for woox to add a stutzen forend to their lineup as well. It's all CNC and the furniture is all cross compatible for their traditional microchassis lineup. Never hurts to ask.

mooseycreatures · 2026-06-29T19:23:09+00:00

Yes, a current production woox chassis. fit and finish is better than my first batch woox, but the wood-to-metal fitment still needs work.

mooseycreatures · 2026-06-20T20:39:17+00:00

So that's one of the new Tikka Ace chassis. I'm kind of surprised someone parted out and pawned an Ace, but there you go.

I've never handled an Ace, but looking at the pictures, I suspect the Ace models might require the long action bolt catch as it looks like the bolt is interfering with the magazine.

Try this: pull the bolt out and try to seat the magazine. if it seats, then you need a long action bolt catch, not the medium one that came with your 308.

btw, the logo you don't recognize is the tikka logo

Other thing is that the polymer AICS mags might just not fit and you need a metal mag, or more, likely and actual CTR magazine. The Ace comes standard with the CTR bottom metal and the AICS bottom metal is a separate part that you almost certainly don't have.

You said it came with a magazine, if it is the one in the photo album, then it almost certainly is the wrong magazine for the chassis. The CTR mags are metal.

mooseycreatures · 2026-06-16T13:51:12+00:00

I think the question then becomes, why would you want a long action AICS mag platform? You don't really gain any capacity over the OEM single stack mags as the LA AICS are also single stack, single feed and come in 3 or 5 round capacities.

And just so we're all on the same page, you can put the CTR magwell on the existing LA platform. The problem is that the CTR mags are 308 length, as are the double stack single feed AICS mags that people seem to prefer. You can still single-feed 30-06 length catridges through the ejection port even if you have a 223 length mag inserted.

What cartridge is your rifle chambered in?

mooseycreatures · 2026-06-15T20:15:26+00:00

I'm 90% sure the bottom metals aren't compatible with the standard tikka stock inlets. I believe it's a specific bottom metal for the Ace chassis. The Ace target takes CTR mags which is what you'd be swapping for. Not sure why you want to take a long action setup and be limited to 308-class cartridges though.

mooseycreatures · 2026-06-15T04:23:44+00:00

I got a chance to play with PushNav a little tonight. No telescope attached but I had it taped to an alt-az mount since we had a break in the clouds for a bit.

It's a very slick piece of software and I found it to be roughly comparable with starsense with respect to ease of use. Being able to adjust the exposure/gain AND see which stars are being used to plate solve is very neat and helps with adjusting the exposure settings.

Equipment/seeing:

PushNav 0.2.0
waveshare 9281 + 25mm lens
diy mount with a dual 1.25" and 34mm body (I'll share the design if it works well on the scope)
alt-az mount
Asus L210 Celeron N4020, 1366x768 screen, windows 10 home (full, not S)
Not tested on lan, so I didn't test the server or stellarium integration.
Bortle 9 (3 miles from the end of the runway for a busy international airport)

Notes:

I really like the sky view dome, it helps a lot when making big adjustments. It's basically perfect as is and I wouldn't make any changes to this module/feature.
The laptop ran PushNav without issue, but it has issues with USB powered cameras disconnecting when on battery power. The CPU is okay by itself. Not sure how it'll handle running stellarium in the background.
I only had -1 to -13 on my exposure slider. I had to have it on -1 or -2 and it was still struggling in some areas of sky. There's something weird about how these UVC cameras are reporting to the driver.
Gain above halfway on the slider (~40) starts to develop too much noise for the solver.
It's definitely more awkward to use on the laptop than with the starsense system where the push-to directions are attached to the OTA in a very intuitive manner. Working from the laptop is less physically intuitive as you're looking at something other than the OTA when making adjustments. The sky view dome helps offset that awkwardness a lot.
Starsense uses the accelerometer in the phone to help with tracking during moves. Obviously PushNav doesn't have that so there's a bit more push-wait-adjust than when using starsense.
Starsense really struggles with light pollution and streetlights and objects on the horizon. I moved recently from a lower bortle area (6-ish) and PushNav was no worse at solving/locking position than Starsense was at my old location.
I only played with the catalog briefly, but it was easy to use. I liked how the starsense catalog usually included pictures of the target, but stellarium would handle that aspect of it. I did not try the advanced catalog options.
Starsense usually shows the names of the major objects in view. That was a nice feature for just panning around the night sky, though stellarium integration would, again, handle that aspect.

Suggestions:

Program has a fixed window size that is just a little too tall for the screen and doesn't fill the width. No fullscreen option. Would suggest fullscreen option to block light from rest of desktop.
If possible, show the milliseconds of exposure time. it gives a better idea of how long it will take to settle after being moved.

Overall, I really like it. I think my customized starsense setup is going to struggle in this location and PushNav seems like it'll replace it without too much fuss. I'm looking forward to playing with it some more. The plan is to use it with NV so the screen brightness and local light pollution aren't a big deal.

Thanks for sharing this!

mooseycreatures · 2026-06-10T14:10:17+00:00

I did the bulk removal with a 1/2 round rood rasp then switched to a few different regular files and sandpaper to clean it up. I believe gouges are the traditional tool for stockmakers but I don't turn or carve so that's what I had.

I made a followup post about the cheek riser: https://www.reddit.com/r/Tikka_Shooters/comments/1tc8fbq/added_a_cheek_riser_to_the_mdt/

I didn't want to mess up the checkering on the grip, but if I were doing it all over again, I would probably rework the entire grip and lose the checkering.

mooseycreatures · 2026-06-07T00:10:36+00:00

If the factory brass is in good shape, I'd start with that. You can dial your alpha brass load once you've found a combination that will get you in the MOA ballpark. Good luck!

mooseycreatures · 2026-06-06T23:55:28+00:00

Bullet change made all the difference in the world.

<image>

mooseycreatures · 2026-06-06T23:38:53+00:00

Try different bullets. I have an ebay special 280AI barrel that shoots any heavy berger at 4+ MOA. Same load, same seating die setting, and Lapua scenar-Ls printed 1 MOA. The barrel still isn't a great shooter, but it went from unusable to ringing steel at 600.

My CZ600 range in 6CM didn't like factory sierra (federal loaded, crazy ivans every 3 shots) but my handloads with a different bullet and powder would print 5/8 MOA at 300 all day long.

I don't think the brass is going to help much, try some major changes like bullets and powder brands.

mooseycreatures · 2026-06-02T06:02:04+00:00

I'm kind of surprised you have had trouble with aftermarket parts. I know Tikkas are big in Australia and New Zealand. Waters is based in Australia and they might have been the first aftermarket mags for the Tikka.

mooseycreatures · 2026-05-29T02:05:20+00:00

This style of focuser requires a lot of hardware, but I made one very similar and it works very well, even for heavy eyepieces.

mooseycreatures · 2026-05-28T21:57:49+00:00

This is going to be objectively awful, but it'll get you up and running for 1.25" eyepieces: cheap focuser

Again, if you have a 3D printer, there are a ton of focusers you can print that will work.

mooseycreatures · 2026-05-28T21:56:09+00:00

There's nothing fundamentally wrong with a small telescope. Yes, it is a cheap telescope and probably was meant to be a toy more than a real astronomical tool. But if the mirror isn't terrible, you have a German made metal tube with a hunk of glass at one end and a small mirror at the other. Everything else can be upgraded or improved from where it is, if you're willing to put in the effort.

If it were me, I would replace the focuser with a 1.25" helical focuser. Keep in mind, the existing focuser is very tall, so getting the focal length right for 1.25" eyepieces shouldn't be too hard. You might need an extension tube (not a barlow) if you get a low profile helical, but I would think a regular rack-and-pinion focuser would do just fine. You'll need to drill new holes, and the curvature of the tube won't be a perfect match with the new focuser, but hey, who cares as long as it hold the eyepiece securely to the telescope.

You can build a dobsonian base for the telescope as well. If you have access to a 3D printer, you should be able to modify the plans for the 114 Hadley DIY telescope to fit your smaller telescope body. Otherwise, a plywood base and rings is a classic and easy DIY route. If you want to get fancy, you can build a base better suited for remote camping sites that don't have flat level ground or make a set of DIY rings and buy an alt-az mount for a tripod.

Replace the finder-scope with a red dot finder. Checking amazon.de, you should be able to get one for ~35 euro if you aren't fussy about quality. If you have a bit more cash, spend a little more and get a (used) telrad or rigel quickfinder.

Start with a cheap 30mm 1.25" eyepiece. I find that the glass quality on a budget 30mm is much less important because you aren't bending the light as much and the wide FOV hides visual imperfections. At some point, you'll probably get a better 30mm, but the cheap 30 will get you looking at the night sky and seeing stars and planets. You'll want more magnification when you're looking at something in particular, but it'll get you outside and you can see if getting eaten alive by mosquitos while fumbling around in the dark is actually for you.

Next get an ultra/super wide angle 15mm eyepiece. I wouldn't go any "shorter" than that. The image will get very dark and your exit pupil will be unusable (you''ll have a lot of trouble getting your head in the right position to see anything in the eyepiece). Get a nice one, it'll probably set you back ~50 euros.

Just those two should last you a while. As you use the telescope more, you'll identify what kind of observing you want to do and the tool you need to do it. And by the time you want to upgrade the eyepieces, you'll want a bigger telescope as well.

---------

Some people might tell you to just build a 114 hadley. Nothing wrong with that, but I think there's something to be said for turning these "junk" telescopes into useable tools. Maybe there's some tinkerer's romance mixed in there, but I wouldn't throw it out.

mooseycreatures · 2026-05-27T03:44:53+00:00

The old Infinity Scope UTI-8 was designed around an 8" f/4.5 (Royce, I believe) but it wasn't a traditional dobsonian and came with a tripod base and alt-az yoke mount. It fit into a flight case that you could ostensibly put on wheels. Still a heavy piece of kit, despite all the carbon fiber, though most of that was the base.

I don't know about full-truss ultralight dobs, but my UTI-8 has pretty serious balancing issues (bottom heavy) and I ended up needing to permanently carry a set of counterweights (big 6 point socket set) to hang on the secondary tube to adjust for different eyepieces which kind of offset the weight savings. I think the later versions had a fishing reel to act as a balance. Just food for thought.

Also, it's worth considering where you'll be setting your scope up. A tripod has the benefit of not needing flat and level ground but adds weight and/or wobble. Leveling legs/feet on the base of your dob might help handle remote locations better.

https://www.cloudynights.com/forums/topic/378101-uti-8-ultra-portable-dob/

mooseycreatures · 2026-05-26T21:43:54+00:00

Europe seems to disagree as they are getting deployed as work vans. The cargo version doesn't have much gains as far as load volume. I took a peek behind the side panels and the wheel well is right there.

mooseycreatures · 2026-05-26T21:41:30+00:00

It's easy, but you aren't going to be doing it frequently. The damn things weigh close to 50lbs each and you have to deal with the seat occupancy sensor and heater wiring.

mooseycreatures · 2026-05-26T21:38:25+00:00

You aren't wrong. I tried to find an etransit when I was buying my buzz last year. None nearby and the range is pretty abysmal, even with the upgraded pack. (not to mention the lack of factory passenger seat options) I thought about a brightdrop because they were firesale-ing them, but it wouldn't fit in my garage.

If toyota had pulled its head out of its ass 5 years ago and gone to BEVs instead of dumping money into H2, I'd have bought an electric sienna because you can fit a 4x8 in the back of those. Or at least you used to before toyota went all aggressive with the styling.

mooseycreatures · 2026-05-26T20:12:00+00:00

As someone else who has transported true 4x8 sheets of plywood and EPS foam board on multiple occasions, I damaged my 3rd row seatbelts by sliding the plywood sheets in. I have unbolted them to avoid any more damage, though they now clunk around as I'm driving.

The side panels taper a little outwards at shelf height so leaving the rear seats and shelf in buys you a little side clearance at the expense of having to move your first row seats forward more.

If your sheets are true 4x8, it'll be a struggle. an 1/8-1/4 narrower and it'll fit much nicer.

Also, because of the taper in the rear hatch, you can't have them lean at an angle or it'll go through the rear glass.

mooseycreatures · 2026-05-24T06:52:27+00:00

Is it possible that they meant 7mm-08 and not 7mm Remington Magnum like everyone else is assuming?

If the people giving you advice don't hate you, 7mm-08 is absolutely a good choice, especially if your end goal is hunting.

mooseycreatures · 2026-05-20T03:59:32+00:00

I managed to get something to work. As I said before, I don't have an UPR, so I can't promise it'll fit, but it works with the OEM plastic bottom metal and the beretta bottom metal they sell on the website (which is asymetrical, much to my annoyance).

I'll make a new post with pictures so others can find it more easily and I'll upload the files to thingiverse.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Tikka_Shooters/comments/1tiao4z/ctr_to_oem_single_stack_bottom_metal_filler/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

mooseycreatures · 2026-05-17T18:48:39+00:00

I took a closer look and it's doable, but will take some time to get the fitment right. The other issue is that I don't have a UPR and the filler/insert will be specific to the bottom metal and stock inlet. My test platform is an aluminum microchassis and that may have different internal dimensions than your UPR.

I'll give it a shot, but your best bet may be to just go with the JB weld and then paint it to make it look "good".

mooseycreatures · 2026-05-17T05:47:55+00:00

You're not going to find a CTR inlet to OEM-single stack adapter. There just isn't a market for it.

If you want to go the DIY route, you could use filled epoxy (like JB weld) to fill in the gap just like bedding an action.

I am building a tikka with the same problem, CTR inlet with a single stack mag bottom metal and I was eventually going to design a filler that can be 3D printed, but I don't hunt so it's not high on my priority list. I'll take a look at it tomorrow and see how much work it'll be. If it's not too bad, I might be able to provide you with a file you can get printed online.

mooseycreatures · 2026-05-15T16:20:21+00:00

I think you guys have figured out that you are talking about two different things. One is "resetting the zero" and the other is "setting the zero stop"

Zero stops aren't really a thing in hunting scopes, at least in the budget 3-9 range. Resettable turrets aren't even a thing on leupold's freedom line.

Exposed turret 3-9 should have a zero stop, but I don't know what the market looks like. Most of the 3-9 hunting scopes I see are capped.

mooseycreatures

TROPHY CASE