Rifle stock - wood vs. plastic

I consider myself more to be on the old-school side of things, and rifles are no different. I'm aware that technology evolves and people come up with newer and different materials/technologies and then tell the consumer we need to have this particular item because... blah blah blah.

Most people here have dealt with rifles way longer than me, and I always appreciate real-life experience.

Besides weight and maybe price, is there a real advantage to choose plastic over wood?! Stability, longevity?

I'm set on wood but I'll listen to argument and perhaps consider plastic if there comes a true value with it.

Weather resistance and rough handling....which were never a consideration for the way that I used my rifles...not to mention that I'm a wood nut.

Cheaper for the manufacturer.

Fiberglass stocks don't warp in high humidity or heat, and usually maintain their zero better. I have had a couple of Remington 700's with the McMillon stocks and well pleased with them. But I have also had Remington 700's with wood factory stocks that shot wonderfully. As long as the barrel channel is properly relieved so when the barrel heats up it won't "walk" on you it probably won't make much of a difference unless you are a 300 yd benchrest shooter.

I am old school too. I like my nice wood in most cases. The exception would be making frequent use of a piece in constantly severe weather or a very unwelcoming environment. I am at the age now that I avoid both of the negative issues, so I do not need plastic. I have actually thought about putting some nice walnut on my AR. On a side note, many people who see a AR with wood furniture do not view it as an assault weapon platform..... interesting.

When you scratch up a plastic/synthetic/fiberglas stock, you don't tend to cry as much as you would when you scratch up a beautiful walnut stock.

I love wood, fancier the better, but I have to concede that artificial and laminated stocks are superior for maintaining stability and give an accuracy advantage. That being said, I'll choose wood when possible and sacrifice the advantages of composite for the great looks of wood for my uses. I don't shoot at targets for competition, nor varmints, so I don't need all that much accuracy.

For me
Wood is the better for appearance and value especially on classic firearms.

Synthetic is again imo the better choice for a rifle that will be a tool and used as such.

Easier and less expensive for the orm as well. Synthetics can be produced repeatedly and consistently on machines. Wood I would think requires more human intervention and finish therefore higher gun production costs.

My .02 YMMV.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

With a synthetic-stocked rifle, I have no worries about hunting in rainy or snowy conditions. Moisture can have far greater detrimental effects on wood-stocked rifles, the least of which is loss of finish. Carrying a wood-stocked rifle through heavy brush for only a short time can leave scratches that won't even show on many synthetic stocks.

I'm all for traditional hunting rifles stocked with walnut or other nice wood, but there are more practical stocks for use in inclement conditions, especially when you'll be out for twelve hours at a stretch, like on an elk hunt in the Rockies. Synthetic stocks also work very well on nice days.

However, there are good quality synthetic stocks and cheap synthetic stocks. Read up on the difference and avoid the latter.

Stainless steel and synthetic stocks in a damp environment will eliminate a lot of maintenance and aqgravation.

The major negative I was told about
fiberglass stocks is that they transmit
more vibration, possibly hurting a
shooter's ear resting against the comb.
That was 40 or so years ago.

However, it may not be true any more
if it were true at all what
with the improved synthetics of today.

Definitely wear from general use for me. I haven’t hunted in years but when I did, I’d be out in all kinds of weather and as much as I like the classic wood/steel look, I’m wasn’t taking it out in all of that. Weatherby Accumark fit my needs and stood up to everything.

Wood ! I'm a Remington 700 shooter and only a paper puncher. ADL, BDL, and laminated. I glass bed the action to the stock and free float the barrel. Since I reload, I can tune the load to barrel vibration/frequency.

I bought my grandson a new Henry .357 carbine.

There's just something about a heavy barreled, brass and wood rifle.

,

All legit points, thank you very much. Recently I bought my wife a rifle with wooden stock and I just bought myself one, wooden stock as well.

I might opt for a plastic stock in the future, but not sure. The ones I had were cheap and unsatisfactory... just trash (Ruger, Remington, Mossberg), so hopefully the more expensive ones are better and more balanced.

JJEH, when you say plastic stocks, what comes to mind is the injection molded hollow cavity stocks found on most of the lower level Remington 700s and Winchester Model 70s, not the composite/fiberglass stocks made by manufacturers such as H&S Precision or Bell & Carlson, usually coming with aluminium bedding blocks.

After a career of Junior and College level competitive smallbore matches, I partook in smallbore as an adult until I compressed my spine and smallbore prone matches became painful. I then moved into high power, eventually earning my Master classification with the Service Rifle. I am now shooting 600 and 1000 yard F class, with the hope of shooting sling prone this year. I prefer accurate rifles. All of my bolt guns wear either glass-bedded wood stocks or composite/fiberglass stocks with aluminium bedding blocks. I will not leave a rifle in an injection molded plastic stock, because they are not rigid and allow too much flexing when you sling in tight and during recoil. Except for my service rifles and my lever guns, everything else shoot under 1 minute of angle out to a thousand yards.

Not being a snob, I just like the challenge of competition!

I'd grab my Remington 66 before any of my .22s if I needed one for important .22 matters.

Light, Fast and don't need much cleaning.

I'm a sucker for nice walnut and blued steel. I can appreciate the advantages of the modern materials when it comes to stocks, metals and metal finishes but there is just something about traditional materials.

Plusses for wood: it is warm and once living thing. A nicely finished and checkered stock can be a pure thing of beauty.

Wood down falls are it was once a living thing. It degrades and changes with the weather. Those changes can move point of impact down range and that ain't good thing. Proper bedding can keep those changes to a minimum. Wood can be heavy, too.

Synthetic/ plastic/polymer/composite...what ever is stable. Those stocks can be light, extremely light. Honestly for a working gun they are sure hard to beat.

We're now seeing manufacturers guaranteeing accuracy from these plastic fantastic of 1/2" MOA with factory ammo. Us older wood and steel rifle shooters were once thrilled with a gun that would shoot 1 to 1 1/2 MOA. You would never part with a rifle that would do that day in and day out year to year. Now we are getting jaded and will send a rifle down the road if it doesn't stack one bullet on top of another.

Texas 40 is right, Synthetic is better choice for a rifle that will be a tool and used as such. I get it but Im still having a hard time loving rifles with synthetic stocks.

These are the last two big game rifle I'm bought. Neither is a tack driver; they shoot 1 to 1 1/2 MOA. I know I need to check zero before each hunt. Know from any hunting position I can hit a paper plate at 300 yards. If I can't get any closer than that to my intended game I really shouldn't be taking the shot. It is hunting not just hooting.

If the weather gets bad I know that they will require care at the end of the day. I like to think of scratches as memories. Sometimes painful at the moment but with time the pain subsides and each scratch tells a story of hunts passed.

At the end of the day some of shooting and hunting is ascetics. For me there must be beauty in what I do, how I do it and in the tools I use.

and that was my ramble for the day..carry on.

I do not hunt anymore.And hunting is,like all of us who have scrambled the woods enough know,where our guns will get nicked and scratched.
Of the 5 dozens of guns I own,3 of them saw the most use hunting.That burr in the walnut of my Wincherter 1200,that deep scratch in the butt of my 30-30 Trapper model 94 and the rock etching the blue of my 1978 Browning BBR as the strap broke when I got out of the canoe and,I can still hear the sound,my beloved tool hit the hard sharp corners of the gravel on the shore of that lake.
None of these would show on a plastic stocked and flat black barrel.But as much as I was mad at myself when it happened,as much it now brings back sweet memories of happy days long gone.
You want plastic black guns...fine.Just don't try to talk me out of my ''outdated''walnut stocked blued steel working tools.You won't win!

Wood is prettier for sure, but all my hunting guns have synthetic stocks if at all possible. They're normally more stable than wood and they don't chip and crack like wood can. I've fell in mud, snow, leaves, down hills, etc enough over the years that I appreciate a good synthetic stock.

Bill Bates said:

I'm a sucker for nice walnut and blued steel. I can appreciate the advantages of the modern materials when it comes to stocks, metals and metal finishes but there is just something about traditional materials.

Plusses for wood: it is warm and once living thing. A nicely finished and checkered stock can be a pure thing of beauty.

Wood down falls are it was once a living thing. It degrades and changes with the weather. Those changes can move point of impact down range and that ain't good thing. Proper bedding can keep those changes to a minimum. Wood can be heavy, too.

Synthetic/ plastic/polymer/composite...what ever is stable. Those stocks can be light, extremely light. Honestly for a working gun they are sure hard to beat.

We're now seeing manufacturers guaranteeing accuracy from these plastic fantastic of 1/2" MOA with factory ammo. Us older wood and steel rifle shooters were once thrilled with a gun that would shoot 1 to 1 1/2 MOA. You would never part with a rifle that would do that day in and day out year to year. Now we are getting jaded and will send a rifle down the road if it doesn't stack one bullet on top of another.

Texas 40 is right, Synthetic is better choice for a rifle that will be a tool and used as such. I get it but Im still having a hard time loving rifles with synthetic stocks.

These are the last two big game rifle I'm bought. Neither is a tack driver; they shoot 1 to 1 1/2 MOA. I know I need to check zero before each hunt. Know from any hunting position I can hit a paper plate at 300 yards. If I can't get any closer than that to my intended game I really shouldn't be taking the shot. It is hunting not just hooting.

If the weather gets bad I know that they will require care at the end of the day. I like to think of scratches as memories. Sometimes painful at the moment but with time the pain subsides and each scratch tells a story of hunts passed.

At the end of the day some of shooting and hunting is ascetics. For me there must be beauty in what I do, how I do it and in the tools I use.

and that was my ramble for the day..carry on.

Click to expand...

I 100% agree with you. I prefer wood, steel and leather over plastic but they do have their place, just like plastic pistols. I carry one every day for very specific reasons.

But I do like old school and like you said, aesthetics are important to me and you can't beat the look of a traditional bolt action rifle. A plastic stock will never look and feel beautiful, they look and feel okay, nice or tactical.

Here's a picture of what Wby's newest gun, the Backcountry Ti, is capable of.

Posted on Adam Weatherby's facebook:

This was shot with a 6.5 Wby RPM in our underground 300 yd range by one of our engineers with one of the first prototypes last spring. With these kind of results, we knew this new cartridge was gonna be a keeper!

Click to expand...

Yes, perfect lab conditions but come one... that's awesome performance right there.

I love that they implemented an underground range... just like Roy sr. did in his shop on Firestone Blvd shop in Long Beach, CA. But that was only a 100yd range.