When I use the word "classic" stock, I'm referring to an American classic, not the Euro or German classics. The stock shape that comes to mind for me is some version of the Ruger, the CZ American, Boyds JRS, and McMillan has a classic style for the Mauser, which is a copy of the Sako American classic. Now Mcmillan offers the same stock for Rugers, Mausers, and others. Fajen used to make a classic. Another "classic" style that fits very well is the ugly plastic Butler Creek stock. Ugly but it works. I'm mostly talking about shape and style, rather than the material the stock is made of.

So, I have been fond of the Monte Carlo design for years, because it fits me. Best example is the old Sako Hunter. But lately, I began noticing that slight differences in the classic design make a big difference in fit. I know my old McMillan on an FN Mauser has always fit great. So, I bought some of those Boyds JRS stocks that Midway had a closeout on. Also, just a few days ago, I got a rifle that has a real custom classic stock on it. When I put that custom stock to my shoulder, WOW. And it's not just because it's beautiful either. That thing really fits, and the legnth of the butt stock is just right for my shoulder.

So I did some close comparisons. The thing I noticed immediately is that the top of the butt section settles down on my shoulder, without hardly any of the beefy portion sticking up. That has been my biggest complaint of most "classic" designs. The Boyds JRS for example I believe the heal is higher than the comb just behind the wrist. It rises up, where the custom classic I just got has a little drop at the heal, and naturally in proportion, the toe of the butt is lower too.

The custom and the JRS and the Butler Creek and the McMillan too, all have a little cast off, and they have good cheek pieces, but the JRS butt does not fall into place as well for me as the other three.

Where can a guy get a simi finished wood blank that has the correct amount of drop at the heal in a classic design? Now I know there are some with pronounced drop, best suited for iron sights, but that's not what I'm asking about. I know the monte carlo design supports the cheek, and face, while putting the butt in the correct place on the shoulder, but this classic design now has my attention.

So we have the same mental image, I'll say that if I could copy the Mcmillan classic or Butler Creek (forget the reverse checkering) in a nice piece of walnut, I think that would be pretty close to a stock that would fit me.

So, as an addendum question, is it practical to just buy a nice blank, and have someone use a Butler Creek or my MCmillan Classic as a pattern to copy from? Or is there another practical option. The Boyds JRS would be good if the comb sloped down a little drop at the heal.

Thanks,
KB

They might not have exactly what you need, but a telephone call should be able to confirm it:

http://www.gunstocks.com/Stockstyles.html#5

I would talk to Shane Thompson. He has some beautiful patterns and should have what you need.


Another option is the "science project" approach. This one I think is called the "Gary Goudy classic" style from GAG. I can only imagine what Gary has to say about it, but what the hell, there it is. It pretty much sums up what an American classic should have. This one came out of the garbage bin section of GAG websight. You should be able to get a pattern grade stock cut pretty cheap then fit it, shape it and glass it in. Then get a real duplicator to duplicate it for you.

Terry



Gary Goudy classic

KB

Have to say that the Sako fit me very well too. I had an old BSA with a low english style stock and concave cheakpiece that also fit very well. I traced the two stock on top of each other and guess what .. the heel and toe were in the exact same place. The BSA had a more "heads up" hold to use the scope but it was only a 30/06.

Good Luck

Rich


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Best example is the old Sako Hunter.

I have a couple of Hogue overmolded stocks that fit me very well. I have read parts of the open vs closed grip discussion but I am not educated enough on stocks to understand why one or the other. I think there has to be more to it than classic looks? Didn't mean to hijack the thread, I hope this fits as part of it. What grip angle is considered classic?