The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: General

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 17, 2017, 02:46 PM   #1
Don Fischer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2017
Posts: 533
Wood stocks and heavier rifles

Anybody on here that never fired a rifle with a wood stock? My Mossberg Partiot came with a plastic stock And getting home with it I immediately ordered a wood replacement from Mossberg. Shot the rifle a few time's before getting the wood stock and swapped immediately. It's a 243 so recoil is low with either stock but the feel with a plastic stock leaves a lot to be desired in my opinion. My hardest recoiling rifle is my 30-06 with 180gr bullet's which in it, is the one I want. It weight's just right at 8# with the scope and sling on it. I shot it a few day's ago in just a t-shirt, boy, da*n near brought tears to my eyes. Before I've always had a much heavier shirt on or a jacket an for the past year was shooting cast bullet's. Im certain by taking it off the bench that will change in fact, I'm simply gonna wear a heavy coat next time.

But these days it seem's like you can't buy a rifle without a plastic stock that weight's closer to 6# than to 8#. Take that plastic stock off and put on a wood stock and right way the weight goes up. Heavier weight equal's lighter recoil. Heavier weight also aids the ability to hold the rifle steady. I think where so many people got away from wood is because they were sure that if they had a wood stock, it would warp on them. Maybe they not only don't take care of it but leave it in the boat all week in the rain when out hunting. I have never, repeat never had a wood stock warp, never! I float the barrel's and solid bed the action and, very important, seal all the bare wood with a finish. If there's a recoil pad, or a cap on the pistol grip, they are removed and sealed under. If you take care of the wood stock, it won't warp.

I have a 700 ADL in 243 that came with a plastic stock, gift from a girl friend, had to let her go! Well recently I found a 700 ADL short action wood stock and replaced it. Suddenly I like shooting the rifle. Before I kept it where I didn't have to look at it! Wood stock, 100% improvement!
Don Fischer is offline  
Old June 17, 2017, 04:40 PM   #2
Scorch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2006
Location: Washington state
Posts: 12,827
In addition to adding weight, wood dampens the recoil vibration, plastic just sends it on through. And wood is prettier, too!

I used to have a Ruger 77 Mk II in 243 that had the "boat paddle" stock on it, and I do believe that was the sharpest kicking 243 I have ever fired. Not hard kicking, just sharp and somewhat painful to shoot. I traded it off, even though it was one of the most accurate rifles I owned. To this day, I don't own a plastic-stocked rifle of any kind except my 22 mag.
__________________
Never try to educate someone who resists knowledge at all costs.
But what do I know?
Summit Arms Services
Taylor Machine
Scorch is offline  
Old June 17, 2017, 07:07 PM   #3
jmr40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 8,491
Recoil is mostly between the ears. If you think a gun recoils more it will. You'd be surprised if you actually put some guns on some scales and weigh them. MOST factory synthetic stocks weigh the same or in many cases MORE than comparable wood stocks.

Two 870's of mine. Photo was taken with the same barrel on each shotgun. Only difference is wood vs factory synthetic.




There are a few exceptions, but even then none that I've weighed were more than 2-3 oz lighter. To get a truly lightweight stock you have to get into the $600 Kevlar stocks made by McMillan, Brown precision and others. You're now looking at 1/2 to 1 full pound lighter and there are plenty of folks who spend the cash to get a rifle considerably lighter Even the high end fiberglass stocks are no lighter than wood.

I've carried an 8 lb plus rifle for many a mile. I can still do it, but choose not to. Lugging around 8 lbs when 6 lbs works just as well makes as much sense as taping a brick to your barrel and hunting with it.

__________________
"If you're still doing things the same way you were doing them 10 years ago, you're doing it wrong"

Winston Churchill
jmr40 is offline  
Old June 18, 2017, 10:44 AM   #4
Rifletom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 11, 2011
Location: Diamond Bar, Ca.
Posts: 394
jmr40, that is as simple and good an explanation as needed. Well done.
Rifletom is offline  
Old June 18, 2017, 11:20 AM   #5
flashhole
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2005
Location: Owego, NY
Posts: 1,822
The brick is free floating. I'm throwing the BS flag until I see it taped on.

You want to add weight to your gun. Outfit it with a laminate stock. The glue/resin they use is really heavy. Not sure if the density of the wood in a laminate stock is greater/heavier than a monolithic wood stock but the finished product is by a wide margin.

I replaced the plastic stock om my Rem 700 Light Varmint Stainless Fluted rifle with a Boyd's Thumbhole Laminate. The word light was completely removed from the equation. Much more accurate with the solid/rigid stock even though it tips the scale a bit more.
__________________
,,, stupidity comes to some people very easily. 8/22/2017 Pat Lengyel (my wife) in a discussion about Liberals.
flashhole is offline  
Old June 18, 2017, 12:28 PM   #6
Pathfinder45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 7, 2008
Posts: 2,209
I just can't abide with a plastic stock. A plywood stock is better, but Walnut is preferred.
Pathfinder45 is offline  
Old June 18, 2017, 03:44 PM   #7
old roper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 11, 2007
Posts: 1,486
I have Win 70 30-06 and has McMillan stock and 26" barrel and weights 9 1/4lbs and stock was order heavy.

I have hard time understanding how OP orders plastic stock 243 when he can buy rifle with Walnut stock.

http://www.mossberg.com/product/moss...-walnut-27835/
__________________
Semper Fi
Vietnam 1965
VFW Life member
NRA Life Member
old roper is offline  
Old June 18, 2017, 05:10 PM   #8
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,152
Quote:
Recoil is mostly between the ears. If you think a gun recoils more it will.
I agree with that. I couldn't begin to count the times I've fired a hot loaded 30-06 with a steel butt plate off a bench with nothing between me and it but a lightweight t shirt. I much prefer wood. One of the heaviest stocks I have is my only synthetic stock.
Hawg is offline  
Old June 18, 2017, 09:57 PM   #9
Sure Shot Mc Gee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,195
I don't think the purchasing of wood over a composite stock makes a whole lot of difference in some others thinking that reduction of bruising recoil hinges on stock preference or a shade more overall firearms weight due to a choice of wood and exterior hardware mounted verses a composite stock and the same mounted hardware.
What would have made a difference for such individual/s would have been a better choice of caliber for the primary intended purpose. 30-06 is far from being a universally accepted {harvest everything & anything} Big Game cartridge.
__________________
"JUST A OLD DEPLORABLE THAT'S IRREDEMABLE."
Sure Shot Mc Gee is offline  
Old June 19, 2017, 09:35 AM   #10
ShootistPRS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2017
Posts: 1,356
I like wood stocks better than plastic but plastic stocks have a place. They are completely weather resistant and they can do a better job of absorbing the recoil than wood. Just try driving a 1 inch dowel into a steel plate and then do the same thing with a plastic rod the same size.
Recoil is not in the mind. It is a measurable force that has energy and velocity. Felt recoil is something else. There are people more and less sensitive to recoil even with the same load in the same gun but the recoil doesn't change just because somebody else is shooting the gun.
Stocks can help with both the recoil and the felt recoil. Added weight will reduce recoil velocity which reduces the recoil energy. Stocks can be configured to move recoil more vertical or more horizontal. Typically more muzzle rise is "felt" less at the shoulder but noticed more by the shooter. Stocks can be beautiful works of art that enhance the value of a gun or plain Jane utilitarian devices to hold the action. The same action can have vastly different values depending on the stock it is bolted to. Wood or plastic is a choice for each of us.
ShootistPRS is online now  
Old June 19, 2017, 04:02 PM   #11
Don Fischer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2017
Posts: 533
Old Roper, it's simple. Not a lot of places around here to get Mossberg's, in fact, not that many place's to get guns period. 75 mi trip one way to the only place that has the Mossberg's. The only Patriot in 243 they had was a plastic stock one and they had no idea when another would come in. Answer to the problem foe me was to get that one and order a new wood stock. Glad I did, turn's out to be one of the best rifle's I've ever had right out of the box!
Don Fischer is offline  
Old June 19, 2017, 05:00 PM   #12
math teacher
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 5, 2012
Location: Southwest WA Coast
Posts: 524
Despite that I love wood stocks, I live where the normal rainfall each year exceeds 100 inches, most of which seems to fall during hunting season. No matter how well a wood stock is finished, it seems to swell which causes the point of impact to change. Synthetic stocks seem to stop that problem.
math teacher is offline  
Old June 19, 2017, 07:28 PM   #13
pete2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 15, 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,499
The only plastic I own is Hillary(AR-15). I've hunted off and on for 50 plus years, Never had the zero change enough to miss a buck, NEVER. Very rarely had to adjust a scope from year to year. Plastic is cheaper than Walnut and that's the advantage unless you use a gun for a boat paddle as some do.
pete2 is offline  
Old June 20, 2017, 09:03 PM   #14
math teacher
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 5, 2012
Location: Southwest WA Coast
Posts: 524
Pete, I guess it boils down to where you hunt. If I lived in Texas I would chose wood too.
math teacher is offline  
Old June 20, 2017, 09:19 PM   #15
old roper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 11, 2007
Posts: 1,486
Don Fischer, It was your choice on getting plastic stock vs wood stock. If you post that to start it won't of been big deal as you made it out to be.
__________________
Semper Fi
Vietnam 1965
VFW Life member
NRA Life Member
old roper is offline  
Old June 21, 2017, 08:06 AM   #16
Don Fischer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2017
Posts: 533
Guess you don't understand. Didn't intend to make a big deal of it. I just don't get the direction guns are going in. If I hadn't got the plastic stock rifle and ordered a new wood stock right away, I wouldn't have the rifle at all now.
Don Fischer is offline  
Old June 21, 2017, 09:49 AM   #17
reinert
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2008
Posts: 277
This post was interesting enough to me that I weighed two rifles I have, both '06s. They are both set up the same way, same scope mounts, and both with scopes I figure must nearly weigh the same. This is what I found:

My Wood stocked M700 ADL has Leupold once piece mounts with a fixed power 6X42mm Leupold scope, factory barrel sights still mounted, and with a sling I made to what I need in the field. This rifle is 100% as from the factory; no bedding material, no wood removed from the stock for floating purposes. This rifle weighs 8 pounds, 4.5 ounces.

The second one I own is a syn-stocked M700 ADL with the same scope mounts as above, with a fixed 4X38mm Leupold scope. The factory barrel sights have been removed on this one, and it has a sling I made as I have on my wood-stocked rifle. This rifle weighs 8 pounds, 5.5 ounces.

Until now, I never thought much about the weight of either rifle, but I guess I would've guessed the syn-stocked gun would've weighed less that the woodie. Both are '06s, both very comfortable to shoot, and both quite accurate. The only thing I would say about the syn-stocked rifle is that it has a hollow sound when handling. I got over that a long time ago though; proof's in the field use, and both guns perform very well. Wouldn't care to shoot either of them much with just a T-shirt on, either. But when the game is on, with game in the cross-hairs, recoil isn't a factor at all.
reinert is offline  
Old June 21, 2017, 04:43 PM   #18
Chris_B
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2007
Posts: 3,091
Personally 8, 9 pounds...I don't give a hoot. I'm not humping the thing 25 miles in a rainstorm at night in a jungle, so I go with what pleases me most.

Chris_B is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2016 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.16267 seconds with 9 queries