Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Rifle Discussion' started by PanBaccha, Sep 22, 2011.
Just curious. Which is better ... wood or polymer stock?
There are a number of variables as too which is better. One of the biggest is what it's going to be used for. If for instance it's going to be used in combat a synthetic stock probably would be better due to it can withstand more abuse, damage, and is lighter generally. For hunting a wood stock might be better, because it'll be heavier so less recoil usually. Most of it is just personal preference. I personally like wood stocks more than synthetic, because they show more craftsman ships usually, give it a more appealing look, and so on. However if the field I might want a synthetic stock, but if I'm using a surplus firearm or an old firearm, like I usually do, then it doesn't matter much to me if the stock gets wear on it.
Yeah, what he said. Polymer is good for me, especially since I am 99% hunter. Most of my military style guns also wear polymer. Wood was and sometimes still is the best looking. Unfortunately, we have de-forested the living crap out of the entire US to the point of losing many older strands of great woodgrain that will never return.
Maple is great in certain shades for me, but expensive. European walnut is darker, and offers grain variations we aren't used to seeing in the US made stocks. Circassion is very pricey and damned ugly if it's not made from a good blank. Brazillian hardwoods are cheap and ugly. What may be the best alternative in the American market are the newer wood laminates offered by many companies. They are tough as nails, weatherproof, and still look great in many instances. Now. if we could just talk these people into taking enough care and time as to insert some rubber grip surfaces into the pistol grip and forearm areas, we may really have something to crow about.
Thanks for the response fellas!
You've never been to Oregon, Washington, Idaho, or Montana, have you...
I like both wood and Polymer / fiberglass stocks. It just depends on what rifle is sitting in it for me. For my M1A, Mini-14, multitude of shotguns, and the few other rifles that don't shoot sub MOA, the stocks have to be wood. I perfer the look of wood. For my percision rifles the stocks have to be weighted, gel coated fiberglass. The fiberglass stocks are more condusive to stability and repetitive constincy in accuracy and will last for many more rebed jobs as barrels have to be replaced.
personal preference IMO. depends on the function of the gun. i like both and to me, nothing is nicer than a piece of wood carved, shaped, sanded and finished to bring out all of the beautiful grain in it. now i like synthetics for their durability and simplicity, but looks, they just don't compare with a fine piece of wood. i have guns in both, and use them for different purposes. just my two cents worth.