Favorite type rifle stock and why?

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Axis II

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2015
Messages
7,181
Gentlemen i need your opinions. I am getting ready to upgrade my plastic stock to a laminate stock and a little torn on what to purchase. This will be for a 22''-26'' varmint rifle shot off bench, bipod sitting and prone.

Classic style/strait comb=This is all i have experience with and seems the most comfortable.

McMillian type=I tried a few out at Cabelas on rifles and the palm swell and thumbs up is kind of awkward. Does feel like i could get a good grip on it and possibly make it inaccurate. Linked below

Thumbhole=I own an ambidextrous thumbhole and it feels okay but kind of a pain shooting off a bench.

Ultimate goal here is stability and accuracy.

What do you guys prefer and why?

Link to Mcmillian stock incase you don't know what it is=

https://www.bing.com/images/search?...08041812267828784&selectedIndex=19&ajaxhist=0
 
Stocks like the McMillan linked (or the Boyd's provarminter/tacticool) are gripped differently than a field stock. General you don't "grab" the grip hard with your thumb, it just rest over the back of the stock (or along side inline with a nontang safety), you use the large verical grip to pull the stock straight back into your shoulder.

I find these types of stock very easy to shoot accurately from a fixed position, as the added bulk over all, add bulk and increased weight, add stability. This also both helps reduce recoil and makes it easier to maintain consistent recoil control.

For free hand shooting or unsupported improvised, I don't care for them, which is why they won't end up on my normal hunting guns.

Thumbholes just don't appeal to me anymore. The non ambi ones feel alot better than the universal ones, but really the only advantage I've found over either a traditional stock is your right hand helps absorb and control the recoil better than other designs. This was really evident on my 7.5lb savage 300wm. That isn't to say they are a bad design, but for my use and personal preference I have little reason to chose them.

The traditional classic, and Montecarlos, are mostly dependent on how you like to hold your head. The functional difference is the recoil impulse is more direct from a near bore height straight comb stock, the stocks with more heel drop tend to have more muzzle rise.
Personally I prefer a Monte Carlo for most of my field shooting. The lower heel and raised comb line (I prefer a rear comb line above bore, tapering forward and down so you can get the bolt out) means the rifle sits higher comparatively when shouldered than a straight comb stock. I don't like bending my neck to get head down on stocks.

Something else that can change your stock design choices are the optics you plan on using.
The McMillan and tbumbhole styles usually have higher Combs which make using higher mounted scopes easier. So much so that if you run a scope in low rings you may have to press your head into the stock hard to get a decent sight picture.

Conversely lower comb stocks coupled with taller scopes means you need a comb riser of some sort, or an adjustable comb.

Honestly as your not real sure what you want, I'd suggest getting an @one as it offers lots of adjustability at a reasonable price.....this is of course if your ok with the sharp lines. I'm considering putting one on my 7mm with the understanding that I'll have to round some edges.
 
On my hunting rifles I'm a huge fan of McMillan Edge stocks made with kevlar instead of fiberglass. They do cost about $90 more than the standard weight stocks, but the roughly 1/2 lb weight reduction is worth it to me. They also come from the factory with pillars already installed. That plus the fact that kevlar is stiffer than fiberglass makes for a very accurate, and light stock.

This is my Winchester 70 EW in 308. It weighs 7 1/4 lbs in this photo. I've since added a larger, heavier scope so the current weight is about 7 1/2.

2013 cohutta 018.JPG




If I'm putting together a heavier varmint/tactical/target rig where weight isn't a factor I'd just as soon save the money and buy a Bell and Carlson. They are a rugged stiff stock with the aluminum chassis built into the stock. They sell for roughly 1/2 what a McMillan sells for, but are heavier, and chunkier than I'd want on a rifle I were carrying around all day.

If weight isn't a concern I'd go with something like this. FWIW, I'm not a fan of plywood stocks. This synthetic is tougher, lighter, and costs just a little more.

https://www.stockysstocks.com/stocks-by-brand/bell-carlson/varmint-tactical.html
 
LoonWulf said:
Stocks like the McMillan linked (or the Boyd's provarminter/tacticool) are gripped differently than a field stock. General you don't "grab" the grip hard with your thumb, it just rest over the back of the stock (or along side inline with a nontang safety), you use the large verical grip to pull the stock straight back into your shoulder.

I find these types of stock very easy to shoot accurately from a fixed position, as the added bulk over all, add bulk and increased weight, add stability. This also both helps reduce recoil and makes it easier to maintain consistent recoil control.

For free hand shooting or unsupported improvised, I don't care for them, which is why they won't end up on my normal hunting guns.

Thumbholes just don't appeal to me anymore. The non ambi ones feel alot better than the universal ones, but really the only advantage I've found over either a traditional stock is your right hand helps absorb and control the recoil better than other designs. This was really evident on my 7.5lb savage 300wm. That isn't to say they are a bad design, but for my use and personal preference I have little reason to chose them.

The traditional classic, and Montecarlos, are mostly dependent on how you like to hold your head. The functional difference is the recoil impulse is more direct from a near bore height straight comb stock, the stocks with more heel drop tend to have more muzzle rise.
Personally I prefer a Monte Carlo for most of my field shooting. The lower heel and raised comb line (I prefer a rear comb line above bore, tapering forward and down so you can get the bolt out) means the rifle sits higher comparatively when shouldered than a straight comb stock. I don't like bending my neck to get head down on stocks.

Something else that can change your stock design choices are the optics you plan on using.
The McMillan and tbumbhole styles usually have higher Combs which make using higher mounted scopes easier. So much so that if you run a scope in low rings you may have to press your head into the stock hard to get a decent sight picture.

Conversely lower comb stocks coupled with taller scopes means you need a comb riser of some sort, or an adjustable comb.

Honestly as your not real sure what you want, I'd suggest getting an @one as it offers lots of adjustability at a reasonable price.....this is of course if your ok with the sharp lines. I'm considering putting one on my 7mm with the understanding that I'll have to round some edges.
Click to expand...
Thanks wolf for the reply. I looked at the AT ONE a lot but i just don't care for the plastic all over it and another concern i had was the plastic forend holding up to bipod use. I tried a prairie hunter/monte carlo but also found that to be uncomfortable when shooting off bags and prone it had too much "heal" drop for me. On the bench with my Caldwell bags i found the heal to sit too far down and not completely in my shoulder so i would have to raise the stock up higher but i guess now that i have an adjustable front rest it might help a little better with that issue. I also took the MC stocked rifle on a few woodchuck hunts and sitting with the bipod felt okay but prone i had the same issue where i couldn't keep it into my shoulder.

In regards to the rings right now its wearing high rings because the old bases wouldn't allow the bolt to clear the scope but now that i have an MOA rail on it i can move the scope around a little bit so i will be trying a medium set here soon to see how it clears the bolt handle. My 223 doesn't have any recoil so no issue on that end.

You lost me on the sharp lines part?
 
Last edited:
jmr40 said:
On my hunting rifles I'm a huge fan of McMillan Edge stocks made with kevlar instead of fiberglass. They do cost about $90 more than the standard weight stocks, but the roughly 1/2 lb weight reduction is worth it to me. They also come from the factory with pillars already installed. That plus the fact that kevlar is stiffer than fiberglass makes for a very accurate, and light stock.

This is my Winchester 70 EW in 308. It weighs 7 1/4 lbs in this photo. I've since added a larger, heavier scope so the current weight is about 7 1/2.

View attachment 784011




If I'm putting together a heavier varmint/tactical/target rig where weight isn't a factor I'd just as soon save the money and buy a Bell and Carlson. They are a rugged stiff stock with the aluminum chassis built into the stock. They sell for roughly 1/2 what a McMillan sells for, but are heavier, and chunkier than I'd want on a rifle I were carrying around all day.

If weight isn't a concern I'd go with something like this. FWIW, I'm not a fan of plywood stocks. This synthetic is tougher, lighter, and costs just a little more.

https://www.stockysstocks.com/stocks-by-brand/bell-carlson/varmint-tactical.html
Click to expand...
Unfortunately i am limited to the laminate stock due to the rifle being a savage axis. :(
 
Yeah the Axis are harder to get stocks for. I have the same issue with my RAM, which is why I modified mine rather than just getting B&C like @jmr40 suggests. I waffle on the Boyd's as well, but if nothing else comes out in the next year or so I'm probably gonna end up with one (I dislike the grip shape on the RAM).

Anyway here are some pictures showing some of the differences I talked about with the stocks.
One thing I forgot to mention is that the McMillan style stock also has a flat, closer to parallel to bore bottom line. This also helps it ride a rear bag more consistently (and makes balancing it for pictures much easier!) IMG_20180402_090948996-2672x2004.jpg IMG_20180402_090955646-2004x2672.jpg IMG_20180402_091016418-2004x2672.jpg IMG_20180402_091037136-2004x2672.jpg IMG_20180402_091043099-2004x2672.jpg IMG_20180402_091144484-2004x2672.jpg IMG_20180402_091321116-2004x2672.jpg IMG_20180402_091448864-2672x2004.jpg IMG_20180402_091518981_HDR-2004x2672.jpg IMG_20180402_092044160-2004x2672.jpg
 
I'm not sure if/how this might be of use - but I'll pass along my "stock journey" over the last 1.5 yrs. The gun (Rem 700 in .243) I use only for target stuff - off the bench. I use a front rest, so I can't speak to bipod capabilities/issues for any of the stocks mentioned below. I do paper and steel plate shooting out to 1,000 yds.

When I first got the gun (1.5 yrs ago) I bought a Boyds laminate varmint thumbhole. I shot that for quite a while. It worked great. I liked the looks. It was slightly large for my hand. I always had to rotate my hand a bit forward to get a good solid purchase on the trigger. That always bugged me a little. At the time it had a standard Leupold Scope/Rings/Base setup - the bases mounted directly on the receiver (i.e. no rail).

I then decided to upgrade the scope (to a Vortex) and also put it on a 20 MOA rail. This meant higher rings....which meant the comb on the Boyds thumbhole was too low to get a good cheek weld.

So.....I bought an At One. I, too, kind of balked at the plastic. That, coupled with laminate, made me really hesitate. But I saw they offered it in solid walnut so I went that route. From a looks standpoint I thought it looked really good. The big (huge) problem was that the comb wouldn't adjust high enough. It only goes up something like 9/16". So for a couple of weeks I went down the path of fabricating my own comb out of scrap walnut I found. I got that to the point where I actually shot it that way, but the performance I got (grouping) was really bad. I figured I needed to work up new loads (I shoot handloads) given the new stock. But be that as it may, I had a bunch of fliers that seemed unattributable to bad form on my part.

A friend (a competitive F-class shooter) really encouraged me to get a Bell & Carlson, which I did. OMG I love that stock. It shoots really smoothly. The first (and only) time I've had it out I was shooting about 1/2-3/4 MOA - and those were the same loads I used when the At One was giving me fliers. The ONLY thing I changed from the the previous session to the most recent was the stock. All other parts of the system were the same. I hope to see accuracy improvement when I work up new loads using the new stock.

I got what B&C calls a Target/Competition stock. The grip feels REALLY good. It feels very natural to place the thumb on top of the grip - so the thumb is pointing toward the back of the bolt. The comb is solid as a rock. The comb posts have grooves machined into them so that included clips can be placed on those grooves so that, when the comb is removed for gun cleaning, you just put the comb back and tighten down to hold it secure. It always goes back to the same comb height.
https://www.bellandcarlson.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=category.display&category_ID=1118

Fit and finish on all three stocks were perfect - no sanding required. The dollar-bill test confirmed in each case no binding points between the barrel and barrel channel. Below are pics of the gun in both the At One and the B&C.

OR
 

Attachments

  • 20180208_194458.jpg
    20180208_194458.jpg
    207.1 KB · Views: 7
  • 20180323_134246.jpg
    20180323_134246.jpg
    225.4 KB · Views: 7
Last edited:
ohihunter2014 said:
Gentlemen i need your opinions. I am getting ready to upgrade my plastic stock to a laminate stock and a little torn on what to purchase. This will be for a 22''-26'' varmint rifle shot off bench, bipod sitting and prone.

Classic style/strait comb=This is all i have experience with and seems the most comfortable.

McMillian type=I tried a few out at Cabelas on rifles and the palm swell and thumbs up is kind of awkward. Does feel like i could get a good grip on it and possibly make it inaccurate. Linked below

Thumbhole=I own an ambidextrous thumbhole and it feels okay but kind of a pain shooting off a bench.

Ultimate goal here is stability and accuracy.

What do you guys prefer and why?

Link to Mcmillian stock incase you don't know what it is=

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=W5wm/RJ4&id=C93BF53951C43A25245B7C40A97939A8F8C3178E&thid=OIP.W5wm_RJ4sKDFw_oxNlvJNQHaCM&mediaurl=https://www.mcmillanusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/A5-Acu-Spectre-1000.jpg&exph=297&expw=1000&q=mcmillian+stock&simid=608041812267828784&selectedIndex=19&ajaxhist=0
Click to expand...


1. Adjustable length of pull: Why - because of various clothing you may be wearing (e.g. winter vs. summer)
2. Adjustable comb: Why: because of various optics you may be using (over the years)
3. Synthetic: Why: Stability vs moisture and temperature.
 
Any custom stock I order tends to have an adjustable comb. I have a high cheekbones, such my eye ends up low on almost any rifle I've ever fired. The adjustable comb usually doesn't ever get adjusted again unless I change optic diameter, but it gets me EXACTLY where I want to be.

The A5 isn't ideal for your 300yrd benchrest games, but it's not bad. Screw a bag rider to the forend, be sure your butt-hook stays on top of your bunny bag during recoil, and be merry. A guy can mount bag riders on any stock, front and back, but I personally think it's easier to add one to an A3 than an A5.

If I could have everything I wanted, it would be an A5-3, rather than either the A3 or A5. I want a wide, semi-round A5 forend, with an angled A3 buttstock for riding field bags. Which basically perfectly describes the Manners T2. I've come to be quite fond of the Game Warden on my new Seekins rifle, which is basically an A3 grip and buttstock tied to a narrow, rounded forend common to hunting rifles - although I do wish it were an adjustable comb. The T2 or the new PRS2 are fantastic, as are the A3 and A5 - I always wished they'd come out with an A5-3, instead of the A3-5...

I favor the vertical pistol grip angle of the A3/A5/Pro-Varmint/T2/AR/Etc. Wrist injuries after a couple decades riding bulls have left me pretty limited for ulnar deviation, so getting my hand around straight "English" stocks is a challenge. Cuddling up with a vertical pistol grip is infinitely more comfortable for me. When shooting off hand, I throw my thumb around the neck until I have my support hand in place, then I naturally slide out; no choking the rifle.

I don't recall, but I believe we've discussed - what will make for a good field rifle will limit your service as a bench rifle, and equally, the reverse. Personally, I like the A3/A5/T2/PRS2/Pro-Varmint/Game Warden type stocks as general use rifles - good enough at everything to be productive.

You may consider two stocks. Buy one for your bench games, then pull two screws and transplant it into a different stock for field use. A McMillan Edge or Tooley for bench rest games and a PRS2 would be my choices.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top