Post by mortensen on Oct 30, 2008 10:15:42 GMT -5
I've purchased a couple of the inexpensive synthetic mil-surp stocks for an SKS and a .303 Enfield. The only thing I can tell you is that they are a far more accurate shooter with the synthetic stock compared to a 50+ year old original stock.
I've always prefered a laminate or solid wood core stock and have heavy laminate stocks on my benchrest calibers. I have a Savage 10FP with a synthetic stock and I'm thankful that I do. When varmint hunting, I'm always climbing on or around rocky terrain and ocassionally will slide down a small hillside. A wood stock would be pretty beat up after a season of this type of abuse.
You've probably seen the inexpensive synthetic stocks for many of the vintage mil-surps, such as the SKS, Enfield, Mosin-Nagant, Springfield, and Mauser. This is the niche the inexpensive synthetic stock fills. After all, some of these rifles didn't cost more than 200.00.
A fair comparison between a wood stock and synthetic stock is when you would take a synthetic 'McMillan' stock (or comproble grade) and compare that to a laminate stock as both stocks would be simaliar in cost. Now were getting down to a personal choice and preference.
When purchasing a synthetic stock, there's usually some fine tuning that needs to be done. If you have cavity's, hollow sections or channels, especially in the fore-end of the stock, those I always fill in with resin. Also, I always try and float the barrel, however and whenever I can, or at least put a pillar about 2 to 3 inches from the end of the fore-end of the stock.
Another consideration is... when you hunt, weight is a consideration. If you strictly target shoot, then recoil is the issue. I have never heard a hunter complain about recoil even with some heavy 30 calibers.
mortensen
I've always prefered a laminate or solid wood core stock and have heavy laminate stocks on my benchrest calibers. I have a Savage 10FP with a synthetic stock and I'm thankful that I do. When varmint hunting, I'm always climbing on or around rocky terrain and ocassionally will slide down a small hillside. A wood stock would be pretty beat up after a season of this type of abuse.
You've probably seen the inexpensive synthetic stocks for many of the vintage mil-surps, such as the SKS, Enfield, Mosin-Nagant, Springfield, and Mauser. This is the niche the inexpensive synthetic stock fills. After all, some of these rifles didn't cost more than 200.00.
A fair comparison between a wood stock and synthetic stock is when you would take a synthetic 'McMillan' stock (or comproble grade) and compare that to a laminate stock as both stocks would be simaliar in cost. Now were getting down to a personal choice and preference.
When purchasing a synthetic stock, there's usually some fine tuning that needs to be done. If you have cavity's, hollow sections or channels, especially in the fore-end of the stock, those I always fill in with resin. Also, I always try and float the barrel, however and whenever I can, or at least put a pillar about 2 to 3 inches from the end of the fore-end of the stock.
Another consideration is... when you hunt, weight is a consideration. If you strictly target shoot, then recoil is the issue. I have never heard a hunter complain about recoil even with some heavy 30 calibers.
mortensen
