Synthetic Vs. Wood Stock
 

When considering long gun stocks, it appears that I have always leand toward the wooden variety. Typically these have been preferrable for a variety of reasons, including cosmetics.

Yet as of late I find myself appreciating the synthetic models increasingly. What I used to consider ugly or simply "not a nice gun", I am now finding interesting! It is getting to the point that I am seriously considering the purchase of a firearm that features one.

I am aware of the potential cost aspects, weather resistance features and other typical selling points of one over the other. There may be more to this...

While thinking I came up with a couple simple questions that bear consideration -

What are some aspects that are perhaps not widely known that may have an impact on your stock decisions?

How do you feel about wood Vs Synthetic stocks on your rifle or shotgun? Does this matter to you?

No matter how nice of a gun whether a cooper or a Remington in a wood stock you are going to scratch it or Mark it, synthetic stocks dos scratch as easily.

Most of my shotguns have wooden stocks, but I prefer synthetic stocks on my hunting rifles.

a fine piece of wood on a rifle is like a fine prost I mean woman on your arm. nice to look at and feel good. with a bedded action and enouph clearance on a free floated barrel, I don't think accuracy is compromised imo. they do get scratched up and dented but that just adds character

Ill take wood while a Fiberglas or Kevlar maybe more stable most plastic stocks are just a cost cutting measure with terrible reactions to weather contacting and expanding as you take them in and out your truck orblind in the winter and plus a piece of walnut can make any gun look good:fighting0074:

I bought an Xbolt White Gold Medallion. The wood is spectacular. However, I ended up putting a Dura Touch synthetic stock on it so the wood wouldn't get dinger up in the bush. Wood looks great until it gets a big cut,dent,or scratch.
:angry3:

Wood on both shoguns and rifles.
Cat

I prefer wood stocks, dinged up or not. I just prefer the feel of them.




(Really gotta be careful how one words a reply to this subject! :lol:)

I bought a Laminate Stainless. I tried so hard to keep it looking beautiful. Didnt last long before the first scratch, then a gouge and many more ouches. After I got over it I kind of like the character. I must say I think I prefer wood.

I like the look of wood but the durability of synthetic. All my centerfire rifles are synthetic with the exception of my 45-70.

I feel the same way about a rifle gaining character. Scratches and dents in the wood stock can remind you of past hunts.
Plus a wood stocked rifle feels warmer in your hand and is quiet in the woods.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

X2!!

I have a Winchester featherweight with a wood stock I didn't want to scratch so I bought a Cooper with a synthetic stock to strap to the rack of my quad. Wood stocks are nice to look at, but I buy my guns to use. If there was a decent synthetic stock available when I bought my featherweight I might have bought one then. For a hunting gun I prefer synthetic now a days, higher end synthetic tho.

:sign0087:

My collection of firearms is small (compared to most), but it includes both wood and synthetic stocks.

On an aesthetic level, I much prefer 'wood', hands down. For me, that's the way a firearm should look, and historically it's been that way for hundreds of years. A good example is my Ruger #1 .45-70 ... I will never part with it, and they can bury me with it.

But on a 'practical/utilitarian' level, I have learned to appreciate synthetic stocks for all the obvious reasons. You'll get no argument from me ... compared to good quality wooden stocks, they are ugly as hell ... but their real-world advantages are hard to argue with.

In the end, it's your call. Govern yourself accordingly.

Good Hunting!

Mac

Wood for me... I just love the look and feel of fine finished hardwood.. Synthetic just feel cheap and light for me... But for my friends that hunt up north they are exactly the opposite..

For me, I like stainless. but.. either blued or stainless will do.

As for stock.. i prefer wood until the snow flies. just like the warm feel of the wood. Never used to be that way. Hated walnut...now i love it, especially a nice figured black walnut.

Some people look at guns as tools and what the stock is made of isn't important as long as it WORKS. For them synthetic is stronger, less sensitive to changes in humidity and temperature, and takes more abuse without showing every little bump.

Some people like the way the wood looks and to them beauty is more important than function.

I prefer the way wood stocks look on old guns and classic designs but if i'm buying a modern semiauto shotgun (for instance) I'd buy synthetic for sure - the wood stock actually looks out of place in that application.

Hmmm
 

I wonder why they haven't made a synthetic stock which looks like wood? They always make just black or drab colours. The wood look would be durable and please some of the traditionalists. Maybe :D

Lemonz

The cheap synthetics, the one some folks refer to as "tupperware", have too much flex in them for good accuracy in a rifle. You need to upgrade a bit into the better composites before you have something worthwhile.
For the most part, I'm a wood guy though.

x2 wood stocks are pretty, but synthetics are less maintenance and usually (not always) cheaper.

Not true at all. Tikkas have some of the cheapest synthetic stocks out there and look how they shoot.

Tikka are one of the better injection moulded stocks, they actually put some fibre in with the injection mix. They are a little stiffer than the simple injection moulded plastic stocks you find on Rem sps, savage and stevens, vanguards, etc, floppy noodle type stocks. That said they are also a bit more brittle, have seen the forend sling stud break out on them when used with a bipod that's overtightened.

I appreciate the info, and with that in mind, any of those examples (Remington, Savage, Vanguard etc) shoot very well even with their cheaper injection molded stocks in comparison to their wood stock brethren.

Synthetic with soul. And wood would be a pound heavier.

http://i330.photobucket.com/albums/l...ps746f67e2.jpg
http://i330.photobucket.com/albums/l...psa7e6b78f.jpg

There are the McWoodies from McMillan...I may put one on my new 30-06 vs the regular black.

http://precisionrifle.files.wordpres....jpg?w=1000&h=

I can update that...I have changed my McMillan order to a McWoody like above....

Have always been a fan of wood stocks. That doesn't mean they are always better than synthetics, its just my preference.

I am a far bigger fan of wood stock as well...I have a Super Grade M70...but I picked up this 30-06 and figured it would look good in that synthetic stock.

That McSwirly in browns & black looks pretty unique. I usually order my McMillans in plain black, because it's so easy to touch up scratches, however for my new custom, I chose a McSwirly with the molded in colors. Since I am not trying to make it look like wood, I chose mostly green and black for colors.

I have never broken a synthetic stock.... Can't say that about a wood one.