I'm curious, what's the difference between the Weatherby Mark V Synthetic and Mark V Fibermark? Look really similar to me, just was wondering why there's a few hundred dollars difference between the 2. Thanks for any help you guys can give me!

the synthetic has a cheap injection-molded stock, while the fibermark has a composite stock.

if there are any other differences, please fill me in.

I'll confirm what Steffen wrote. The sythetic is your basic tupperware stock whereas the fibermark is the same stock as the Accumark but is pillar bedded as compared to using an aluminum bedding plate as the Accumark does. Bottom line, it's a much better stock then the synthetic ...

Ken....

Heat,

I understand what the differences are now, but what exactly makes it better? Is it more durable, make the rifle more stable(?), both, or something completely different? Sorry if that sounds stupid, I don't know a whole lot about synthetic stocks and what goes into them (and what you get out of what you put into them).

Justin, the Fibermark stocks are much more rigid then the injection molded stocks... As it sounds, the synthetic is simply a molded plastic stock... The composite nature of the Fibermark and Accumark stocks also lead to better durability and they feel better in the hands... They are designed to improve rigidity and durability and accomplish that task VERY well....

Ken....

quote:

Originally posted by Heat:
Justin, the Fibermark stocks are much more rigid then the injection molded stocks... As it sounds, the synthetic is simply a molded plastic stock... The composite nature of the Fibermark and Accumark stocks also lead to better durability and they feel better in the hands... They are designed to improve rigidity and durability and accomplish that task VERY well....

Ken....

Absolutely dead right, I thought I'd just add that I had a 338/378 Synthetic that was very accurate in the tupperware stock.

quote:

Originally posted by MTM:

quote:

Originally posted by Heat:
Justin, the Fibermark stocks are much more rigid then the injection molded stocks... As it sounds, the synthetic is simply a molded plastic stock... The composite nature of the Fibermark and Accumark stocks also lead to better durability and they feel better in the hands... They are designed to improve rigidity and durability and accomplish that task VERY well....

Ken....

Absolutely dead right, I thought I'd just add that I had a 338/378 Synthetic that was very accurate in the tupperware stock.

I'll add that my .257 Weatherby Stainless Synthetic is just as accurate as my 30-378 Weatherby Accumark and both are capable of sub 1/2 MOA accuracy. I absolutely agree that the Accumark's stock feels better in the hands and looks better - more "finished" than that on the Synthetic.

Just a bit of trivia about the Fibermark:
It was the first factory synthetic-stocked rifle, in 1985. They used a black wrinkle-painted McMillan when they first came out. I have one from 1985, in 340 Wby, a Black Beauty still charming.

The last time I looked at Wby they seemed to be using the spider-web-painted B&C stock with aluminum bedding blocks on the higher end, and the tupperware on the lower price model. McMillan no more.
The Ultralights seem to be B&C too, have graphite and Kevlar and aluminum bedding, and those stocks weigh little more than a pound.

Those injection-moulded tupperware stocks have been very accurate, in my experience. Less aesthetic yes, but able to take harsher use, with any wear and tear just improving their beater-friendly looks. They seem to be here to stay, on the lower end factory rifles of most different brands.

Well said RIP... Yep, they're all Bell and Carlson stocks now days...

Ken....