I am wondering if there is viable info out there on if a synthetic stock absorbs more recoil than say a traditional wood stock, or vice versa. Does a laminate stock absorb more or less then either of the two? I am looking at a new Savage rifle, and up until I acutally held one, I was sold on the synthetic 111. And then I held the 114 American Classic, and it sortof talked to me. However, I don't like the iron sights on it. Not sure where I want this new info to take me, but maybe I am looking for reasons to take me away from the syntetic stock or something like this, I dunno. I guess I am just wondering if there is a difference. The only synthetic stock rifle I own is a .17HMR, so there is really no recoil comparison there to anything. What say you masters?
Which stock absorbs more recoil?
- Thread starter CHALK22
- Start date
- Status
TurtlePhish
Member
It's pretty much a question of which one's heavier and which one has a better recoil pad. Synthetic might flex a little bit, but I doubt it's enough to influence felt recoil.
More weight is less felt recoil. Better pad reduces felt recoil.
More weight is less felt recoil. Better pad reduces felt recoil.
Dr T
Member
It depends on the stock. My Sako TRG 300 Wthby Mag synthetic stock does an excellent job. The synthetic stock on my Winchester Model 70 ("pre-64" action, SS, Syn. stock) 375 H&H is not quite as good (even after making allowances for weight and cartridge).
I agree with the last two comments to the greatest extent. Another factor is the stock shape. There has been a dramatic difference in "felt" recoil between my old Savage 110 and Remington, Winchester, and Weatherby MK IV stocks that are straighter and direct recoil better.
My old 110 didn't have the Monte-Carlo stock and it kicked like a mule. After fitting a Bishop stock that was re-contoured to mimic the Weatherby, it was fantastic!!!
My old 110 didn't have the Monte-Carlo stock and it kicked like a mule. After fitting a Bishop stock that was re-contoured to mimic the Weatherby, it was fantastic!!!
There is no simple answer. You can measure the guns actual recoil by punching in data and doing the math.
http://www.handloads.com/calc/recoil.asp
By the numbers a heavier gun will always have less actual recoil everything else being equal.
Don't bet on the synthetic being lighter than wood. A laminated stock will be quite heavy, but 99% of the factory synthetics out there weigh exactly the same, or often more than the wood stocked versions. There is a reason Savage's lightweight hunter comes in wood only. The cheap plastic stocks are heavier than solid wood. You can get a lightweight aftermarket synthetic, but prices start at around $600 and go up from there, and that is just for the stock.
Felt recoil is far more complicated. Recoil pads and stock shape are more important than weight. Guns that have lots of drop like lever actons tend to roll during recoil and give you more muzzle rise. The comb of the stocks hit your cheek and are often more painful to shoot than guns that have more actual recoil.
Rifles with less drop recoil straight back and are usually more comfortable. Rifles with small buttplates concentrate the recoil in a small area and seem to recoil more than a gun with a larger buttplate.
With many very lightweight synthetics the entire stock flexes a bit under recoil and the good ones have much less felt recoil than many heavier stocks.
You have to also consider your own build and how you hold a rifle. Depending on your arm length, facial features, and build, a rifle that recoils worse to you may not bother another person.
Of those I'd say the laminated will be the softest recoiling. The plastic will probably be next, because I'd bet it weighs at least as much as the walnut and maybe more. You also get the benefit of the entire stock flexing a bit. The walnut will probably recoil the most because it is most likely the lightest,and will have less flex during recoil. Since they are all from the same manufacturer the stock shape is pretty close to the same.
http://www.handloads.com/calc/recoil.asp
By the numbers a heavier gun will always have less actual recoil everything else being equal.
Don't bet on the synthetic being lighter than wood. A laminated stock will be quite heavy, but 99% of the factory synthetics out there weigh exactly the same, or often more than the wood stocked versions. There is a reason Savage's lightweight hunter comes in wood only. The cheap plastic stocks are heavier than solid wood. You can get a lightweight aftermarket synthetic, but prices start at around $600 and go up from there, and that is just for the stock.
Felt recoil is far more complicated. Recoil pads and stock shape are more important than weight. Guns that have lots of drop like lever actons tend to roll during recoil and give you more muzzle rise. The comb of the stocks hit your cheek and are often more painful to shoot than guns that have more actual recoil.
Rifles with less drop recoil straight back and are usually more comfortable. Rifles with small buttplates concentrate the recoil in a small area and seem to recoil more than a gun with a larger buttplate.
With many very lightweight synthetics the entire stock flexes a bit under recoil and the good ones have much less felt recoil than many heavier stocks.
You have to also consider your own build and how you hold a rifle. Depending on your arm length, facial features, and build, a rifle that recoils worse to you may not bother another person.
Of those I'd say the laminated will be the softest recoiling. The plastic will probably be next, because I'd bet it weighs at least as much as the walnut and maybe more. You also get the benefit of the entire stock flexing a bit. The walnut will probably recoil the most because it is most likely the lightest,and will have less flex during recoil. Since they are all from the same manufacturer the stock shape is pretty close to the same.
- Status
