PDA

View Full Version : Standard stock or folding?


Homerboy
April 13, 2006, 04:35 PM
I am about to buy a Remington 870. The standard synthetic stock is $320 and the folding one is $350. Is there a difference in the felt recoil of the two? I am leaning towards the standard, since I doubt I'll ever shoot the gun from the hip with the stock folded, but I guess it would be cool to have the option. What's most important is the comfort of shooting the two. Does the standard stock feel better, or is there a felt difference?

Dfariswheel
April 13, 2006, 04:37 PM
Full stocks have less felt recoil than folders, shoot better and usually faster.

While things have changed with newer types of folding and collapsing stocks, folders typically give the shooter a real beating.

Homerboy
April 13, 2006, 04:42 PM
That's what I figured. Besides, I wanna put a sling on it anyway, and the full stock already has the lug for it.

bgoldhunter
April 13, 2006, 05:02 PM
I agree with the full stock, however I have shot a few with nice collapsing stocks, and they were not much worse.

deanadell
April 13, 2006, 05:36 PM
Shooting from the hip with a folding stock is for the Movies. Get the full standard stock.

Incidentally, a standard stock is much better for bashing in a bad guys face than a folding stock....IF the need ever arises..LOL..:D :D :p

Homerboy
April 13, 2006, 05:40 PM
Or for smashing in a window!! (Been there-done that).

Yeah, Hollywood has an influence on gun purchases. I should have known better than to let myself be pulled it!

hoghunting
April 13, 2006, 10:33 PM
My vote is also for the full stock. Unless you are using it solely for defensive purposes, I would use the full stock.