Other than they're afraid of scratching their guns, is there any real advantage to synthetic stocks for hunting? I never see hunters on TV using wood anymore and I'm figuring that's more marketing and sponsorship than anything.

I opted for Syn for a knockabout rifle so as I wouldn't worry about marks, and to save bedding and free floating, re warpage.
Shoots so well I now worry about scratching the stock, (go figure as you yanks say.)
But they sure aren't much to look at.
John L>

Weather Weather and Weather. A synthetic stock can just take more than a wood stock. I have some very nice wood stocks I am slowly replacing them. Synthetics are just plain tougher. I can place my stainless synthetic stocked rifle in the rain and not worry about it. A blued wood stock one always has to worry about rust and the wood.

I agree with P Dog, weather resistance is the big advantage. A quality synthetic stock is about nine times stronger than wood, much more stable, far tougher, and far more weather resistant. It's just one more thing you don't have to worry about on the mountain. I've gone to synthetic stocks almost entirely for big game and varmint hunting, and I'm not looking back.

Not all synthetic stocks are created equal. Those injection-molded cheap, rubbery synthetic stocks that come on many factory rifles are absolute junk, and so are the chopped-fiberglass synthetic aftermarket stocks. Some of the poorer synthetic stocks ARE unstable, and will move and change.

But the top synthetics stocks, such as McMillan, are in a league of their own are are absolutely stable under all conditions. I've hunted with McMillan stocks in every sort of weather and temperature condition you can think of, from humid tropical to bake-oven desert, in rainstorms and snowstorms, from 20 degrees below zero to over 100 degrees in the shade, and I have NEVER suffered a point-of-impact change or any other problem. No worries!

Of course, they aren't as nice looking as wood, and they don't feel as good as wood. That's the downside. But it's amazing to me the number of synthetic-stocked rifles that increasingly show up in big game camps around the world any more. For the serious trophy hunter, its become the new standard......

AD

If I may presume to embellish on what Allen said, there are two classes of "tupperware" stocks out there.

The most common and far cheaper of the two is made of plastic, ususally by the injection moulded method. Their only advantage(s) over wood are found in reaction to moisture and cost. They frequently if not always require bedding, and in some cases are known to have shattered in response to very cold temperatures, and they seldom have a weight advantage over wood. Most factory guns are thus stocked these days.

The second is made by hand and involve the layup of fiberglas cloth over a core material(ususally foam), and is properly referred to as a COMPOSITE stock. With the exception of intrinsic beauty, or lack thereof, they are second to none in durability, stability and functionality. The two types should not be confused, nor grouped under the banner of "synthetic". One is good, one is cheaper for the manufacturer to produce, and not so good.

Another alternative is the laminated stock, and other than weight they have all the benefit of composite stocks regarding strength and durability.

for the same reasons rosanne is still around. some people just like things that are cold, ugly, and unfriendly. However take heart, because there are those of us who still appreciate beautiful women and walnut

As much as I like a rifle with a nice piece of wood, a good synthetic stock makes more sense to me in the field. For stability and lightness IMHO they seem to handle the recoil of magnums better than wood. On a stock Ruger .300 Win mag., I had the barrel lightened and a good quality fiberstock made and it is much more pleasurable to shoot plus a pound or so lighter to carry.
BJB

There is nothing that beats the beauty of a highly figured Walnut stock.. Nothing I tell you!!! ROTFLOL Well, only a beautiful woman, maybe????
Don

I understand the appeal of both, and both have their pros and cons. All embellishment aside, GOOD synthetic is more stable in any weather and can be painted, colored, whatever to make it look the way you want it to easily.

Wood will look better (again, just my opinion) but it will not be as stable. To make it as stable, it GENERALLY requires so much finish that even the wood becomes cold. The real upside to wood is that it can be made to exactly fit YOU better than synthetic. You can have cast on and off easier. I have small hands so I can make the grip smaller and the stock shorter. If I decide I want a schnabel, then I just reshape the wood and refinish.

Those are my opinions about why one or the other. BTW, I only have one synthetic rifle out of 10 or so...my "truck gun" and almost all of my shotguns are synthetic. Go figure.

Interesting debate. Last time I visied my local gun shop up in here in Alaska I bet at least 90% of the bolt rifles on the racks were syn stocked stainless steel.

quote:

Originally posted by Josywales:
Other than they're afraid of scratching their guns, is there any real advantage to synthetic stocks for hunting? I never see hunters on TV using wood anymore and I'm figuring that's more marketing and sponsorship than anything.

Synthetic and stainless are very popular in Alaska, maybe because it's often humid during the hunting seasons. Sometimes it rains for days during moose season, while other times it rains and snows. It could be clear and around 60 degrees during the day, and 30 degrees during the night. The temperature differences create lots of condensation on the metal, but a synthetic stock won't absorb water and swell like a wood stock would.

A properly treated wood stock does fine in moist environments, but it's much easier not having to worry about it by using a synthetic one.

Well, I can say with some certainty that the ULA stock on my Colt Light Rifle in 300 Winchester absorbes a lot more recoil than a wood stock of similar shape.

I think it either flexes or compresses in a manner that mitigates felt recoil substantially. In fact, when we all bought these rifles we were somewhat surprised at the low perceived recoil even with the cheaper factory stocks.

Interestingly, there is some data now that the noise/high frequency vibration transfer from the platic M-16 stock to the bones in the head is causing hearing loss separate from the muzzle blast. I guess it's all a matter of different trade-offs.

ditto to what Allen Day said.

Don't confuse Quality Syn. Stocks w/ the Rubber Maid POS stocks that most Factory rifles sport.

Reloader

Synthetics i.e. McMillan are very good in the rain and in high moisture areas, no point of impact changes. I must say that they are cold as heck on your hands when the temperature drops below freezing compared to good old walnut. I do not have any experience with the Tupperware stocks in cold weather.