Richards Microfit Thumbhole grip issue & fix

xtriggerman · January 11, 2013, 07:36 PM

Hi folks, I thought I would post this about the Richards Microfit straight line style thumb hole stocks. The first one I built for a guy, I had a heck of a time getting them to send the right stock. After 2 stocks that were either cut for the wrong trigger guard or the thumb hole was hoged out way, way too much, months later I got a stock with no hole cut as requested. It turned out nice because now I could fit the grip to the guy's hand. This is that one.

Now a couple of years go by and I get another job fitting another straight line TH from them with the same rediculously hollowed out pistol grip. Iv never seen such a poor patterned thumb hole. It was like griping a broom stick handle in the web of your hand. I should have done a befor pic but didnt think of it. The guy didnt like the grip either but it took 7 months for them to cut this one for a CZ 572 so it was hump it up as best I could.

The peg added about 1/3rd diameter to the grip and alowed me to shape a nice uniformly tapered grip that put just the right amount of finger tip on the trigger. Otherwise, the Richards cut grip was terrible! Heres the finished grip,

Now dont get me wrong on Richards, Iv gotten some decent semi's from them that could not be beat for the price, but there are some stinkers to. In this particular case, I would ALWAYS order a straight line unit with no hole cut. Just sayin....

Scorch · January 12, 2013, 03:01 AM

That's funny, I always felt that the thumbhole on Richards stocks was way too small, any kind of recoil and it wil bruise your thumb joint. But I suppose that's why there are different interpretations by different smiths.

xtriggerman · January 13, 2013, 01:14 AM

Your absolutely right, I had to hog out the rear of the hole quite alot to clear the back of the thumb joint. And that I realy dont mind, its the adding wood thats down right idiotic!

**JohnKSa** · January 13, 2013, 07:46 AM

My single experience with a Richards microfit stock was poor. It was a decent fit for the gun, but the rest of the workmanship was unacceptable and the wood quality was such that I didn't feel it was worth trying to salvage. I threw it away and chalked it up as a lesson learned.

cooltouch · January 19, 2013, 01:33 PM

I ran across this thread and had to comment.

I've had one experience with a Richards Microfit stock and reading about y'all's experiences brought memories. I bought mine in about 1996. I ordered it for a Remington 700 BDL with a bull barrel.

It took months and several phone calls before the stock finally arrived. And yes, as coincidence will have it, mine is similar to the second one xtriggerman's dealing with, although I much prefer the shape of mine around and above the thumbhole. But at least the thumbhole was "ported" reasonably well on mine. I have no complaints about its size or placement.

But I was quite disappointed with the stock's other features. First of all, I realized the "microfit" was a joke. It was, at best, a rather severe exaggeration. "Microfit" implies that the 'smith will have very little fitment to do in order for the stock and barreled action to mate normally. Well, such was not the case. After waiting for months, my stock finally arrived with a standard barrel channel and not a bull barrel one. And the cut-outs for the receiver were just approximate as well. I had to use my Dremel tool to relieve several areas before the action would fit. And of course, I had to open up the barrel channel before the barrel would fit right as well.

The stock exterior was very rough and required a LOT of work with shaping files and rasps before I even started in on the stock with sandpaper. It ended up being a lot of work, but I must say that it is now one of the nicest looking stocks I own, and I get a lot of compliments on this gun. The last time I had it out at the gun range, the rangemaster walked up to me and told me it was THE prettiest rifles he'd ever seen. I was very surprised, considering the guy must see dozens of rifles every day.

In case you're wondering how it shoots, well, I floated the barrel and bedded the action using Brownell's AcraGlass bedding compound. It is a sub-MOA tack driver, which I guess shouldn't come as much of a surprise considering the gun's components and all.

Remington 700BDL, .243 Win., factory bull barrel, Burris Fullfield 6x18 scope, Leupold rings and mount, Richard's Microfit thumbhole stock

Would I order again from Richard's Microfit? I mean that's really the bottom line for me. And the answer is, knowing what I do now, I can prepare myself for the interminable wait, and I'll know in advance the amount of work involved, so knowing all this, yeah, I would order from Richard's again. But I think I'll try somebody else first.

January 11, 2013, 07:36 PM	#1
xtriggerman Member Join Date: January 4, 2012 Posts: 23	Richards Microfit Thumbhole grip issue & fix Hi folks, I thought I would post this about the Richards Microfit straight line style thumb hole stocks. The first one I built for a guy, I had a heck of a time getting them to send the right stock. After 2 stocks that were either cut for the wrong trigger guard or the thumb hole was hoged out way, way too much, months later I got a stock with no hole cut as requested. It turned out nice because now I could fit the grip to the guy's hand. This is that one. Now a couple of years go by and I get another job fitting another straight line TH from them with the same rediculously hollowed out pistol grip. Iv never seen such a poor patterned thumb hole. It was like griping a broom stick handle in the web of your hand. I should have done a befor pic but didnt think of it. The guy didnt like the grip either but it took 7 months for them to cut this one for a CZ 572 so it was hump it up as best I could. The peg added about 1/3rd diameter to the grip and alowed me to shape a nice uniformly tapered grip that put just the right amount of finger tip on the trigger. Otherwise, the Richards cut grip was terrible! Heres the finished grip, Now dont get me wrong on Richards, Iv gotten some decent semi's from them that could not be beat for the price, but there are some stinkers to. In this particular case, I would ALWAYS order a straight line unit with no hole cut. Just sayin.... Last edited by xtriggerman; January 11, 2013 at 07:48 PM.

January 12, 2013, 03:01 AM	#2
Scorch Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2006 Location: Washington state Posts: 11,031	That's funny, I always felt that the thumbhole on Richards stocks was way too small, any kind of recoil and it wil bruise your thumb joint. But I suppose that's why there are different interpretations by different smiths. __________________ Never try to educate someone who resists knowledge at all costs. But what do I know? Taylor Machine

January 13, 2013, 07:46 AM	#4
JohnKSa Staff Join Date: February 12, 2001 Location: DFW Area Posts: 16,760	My single experience with a Richards microfit stock was poor. It was a decent fit for the gun, but the rest of the workmanship was unacceptable and the wood quality was such that I didn't feel it was worth trying to salvage. I threw it away and chalked it up as a lesson learned. __________________ Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association? Check out Black Bear Flashlights.

January 13, 2013, 01:14 AM	#3
xtriggerman Member Join Date: January 4, 2012 Posts: 23	Your absolutely right, I had to hog out the rear of the hole quite alot to clear the back of the thumb joint. And that I realy dont mind, its the adding wood thats down right idiotic!

January 19, 2013, 01:33 PM	#5
cooltouch Junior Member Join Date: January 19, 2013 Posts: 1	I ran across this thread and had to comment. I've had one experience with a Richards Microfit stock and reading about y'all's experiences brought memories. I bought mine in about 1996. I ordered it for a Remington 700 BDL with a bull barrel. It took months and several phone calls before the stock finally arrived. And yes, as coincidence will have it, mine is similar to the second one xtriggerman's dealing with, although I much prefer the shape of mine around and above the thumbhole. But at least the thumbhole was "ported" reasonably well on mine. I have no complaints about its size or placement. But I was quite disappointed with the stock's other features. First of all, I realized the "microfit" was a joke. It was, at best, a rather severe exaggeration. "Microfit" implies that the 'smith will have very little fitment to do in order for the stock and barreled action to mate normally. Well, such was not the case. After waiting for months, my stock finally arrived with a standard barrel channel and not a bull barrel one. And the cut-outs for the receiver were just approximate as well. I had to use my Dremel tool to relieve several areas before the action would fit. And of course, I had to open up the barrel channel before the barrel would fit right as well. The stock exterior was very rough and required a LOT of work with shaping files and rasps before I even started in on the stock with sandpaper. It ended up being a lot of work, but I must say that it is now one of the nicest looking stocks I own, and I get a lot of compliments on this gun. The last time I had it out at the gun range, the rangemaster walked up to me and told me it was THE prettiest rifles he'd ever seen. I was very surprised, considering the guy must see dozens of rifles every day. In case you're wondering how it shoots, well, I floated the barrel and bedded the action using Brownell's AcraGlass bedding compound. It is a sub-MOA tack driver, which I guess shouldn't come as much of a surprise considering the gun's components and all. Remington 700BDL, .243 Win., factory bull barrel, Burris Fullfield 6x18 scope, Leupold rings and mount, Richard's Microfit thumbhole stock Would I order again from Richard's Microfit? I mean that's really the bottom line for me. And the answer is, knowing what I do now, I can prepare myself for the interminable wait, and I'll know in advance the amount of work involved, so knowing all this, yeah, I would order from Richard's again. But I think I'll try somebody else first.