Benefits of synthetic stocks

Between wood & synthetic I prefer the look of wood. Sometimes an all black bolt rifle with a synthetic stock looks cool, though, too. :D

2006-04-08_095758_Rem700Pa.jpg
 
ratherbefishin said:
where does the laminated stocks fit into this discussion as far as stability,esthetics ,weightand practicality,are concerned?
Click to expand...
Laminate is usually my stock of choice. Looks nicestest ;) Feels good, sturdy and weatherproof. Only downside is they tend to be heavy
 
being heavier may not necessarily be a bad thing-especially when soaking up recoil.I like Rugers 350 magnum ''all weather'' but would like it even better if they offered it in the laminate stock
 
mistahmojoryan said:
I wouldn't mind checking out some laminate stocks. Know any manufacturers?
Click to expand...

Boyd's is prettymuch the de-facto standard for Laminates. Good prices, too :D

A lot of manufacturers use Boyd's stocks in some of their premium lines
 
I prefer synthetics... then laminate.... then wood as a last resort.
The benefits are weight, strength and stiffness....
The cool factor is strictly a bonus.
 
Last edited:
.................good ol walnut for me.

......although my next rifle at the end of the month will be an all weather ruger.


................Laminate=glorified plywood. And whats with all those ### disco colours??:rolleyes: Firearms are manly, why ### them out???
 
Last edited:
Some will say its the most stable, I tend to agree down side its heavy
Click to expand...


Only those that refuse to accept reality say that.The reality is that although laminate is much more stable than a one piece wood blank,it is not as stable as a quality synthetic syock.
 
^ How so? A laminate stock is essentially just epoxy with wood fibres sandwitched between, like a fibreglass stock is essentially just epoxy with glass fibres sandwitched between. Difference would be negligable, at most I'd say.

As for wood, these are just downright ###Y:
custom_classic_big.jpg


west_classic_big.jpg
 
How so? A laminate stock is essentially just epoxy with wood fibres sandwitched between, like a fibreglass stock is essentially just epoxy with glass fibres sandwitched between. Difference would be negligable, at most I'd say.
Click to expand...

Those layers of wood will still absord a very small amount of moisture and swell slightly while the fiberglass won't.
 
Easy answer is that laminates still contain wood.

While the laminates employ alot of epoxy, it still has wood, which is not a perfectly stable material.

A laminate stil has the ability to absorb moisture, a synthetic cannot. Absorbtion of moisture is the #1 reason for a wooden stock to lose 'stabiity.'

Even when in extreme heat, a quality synthetic will not bend or flex (due to heat). The same is not true for injection molded stocks, which can move in heat, and even become quite brittle in extreme temperatures. (Or so I am told, as I have never experienced the latter)
 
theoretically, the wood laminate can absorb moisture-but in reality can it really absorb enough to distort the stock and affect accuracy?I would have thought the manufacturing process of an epoxy laminate would pretty much seal the cell structure of the wood,which is more effective than an sealing coat on the outside of a regular wood stock.
 
theoretically, the wood laminate can absorb moisture-but in reality can it really absorb enough to distort the stock and affect accuracy?I would have thought the manufacturing process of an epoxy laminate would pretty much seal the cell structure of the wood,which is more effective than an sealing coat on the outside of a regular wood stock.
Click to expand...
Got that right, also plastic stocks will move more under extreme temp. changes, more so than lamo, its been tested, could not find the link :rolleyes:
 
I think there is a diference between theory and practical application-it could certainly be true that if you boiled a laminate stock in water it would show more absorbtion than a synthetic stock-but unless you are planning on hunting in Yellowstone park and deliberately dropping your rifle in the hotsprings overnight,is there really any practical diference between a synthetic and a epoxy laminate-apart from the weight issue, which may or may not even be a disadvantage[it would be on a light mountain rifle-but equally an advantage for soaking up felt recoil]
 
The real advantage in a 300 sako 75 is weight, the wood stocks are quite heavy, you can probably shave close to a pound in overall weight. I sold my 7mm mag Sako 75 and bougth a Sako AV in 300 win, it is more than 1.5 lbs less. the barrel has a more slender profile and the stock is lighter(900 grams) same as a mcmillan, my sons wood 75 hunter stock is mroe like 42 oz.
 
I think the most important advantage of a synth stock is durability. Having hunted in Northern BC fall conditions for moose, etc., I have beat the s**t out of wood stocks and have virtually wrecked them in a span of 3 - 4 seasons. One rifle stock only lasted 2 seasons!:mad: Wet conditions, rough rock, ATV's, horses... you get the idea. Went to a syn stock-SS and have never looked back. ;)
 
I have hunted in extremely wet conditions with walnut stocked guns and have never experienced warping.

The problem is getting a properly treated wood stock in a new factory gun. Little effort goes into making wood stocks weatherproof.

Since the advent of synthetic stocks people don't give wood enough credit.

A properly sealed, glass and pillar bedded quality peice of walnut is a tough and durable thing and looks better than a synthetic IMO.:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom