I'm curious to hear some thoughts on this subject. I'm not particularly well-versed on stocks, but would like to learn, so please bear with my rather crude attempts at communicating these thoughts.

The "Modern American Style" (that's the best way I can describe it) has a very straight comb (some even have a "negative drop"). This style is reputed to be the best for scope use and handling recoil. I guess I've always boght that line of reasoning, though I've recently had my doubts.

Of course stocks with some drop in the comb are supposed to work better with iron sights. I suppose an example of a stock with a small amount of drop would be the current Ruger M77. The pre-64 Win 70 had even more drop. Funny, while all I own are Win 70's, the Ruger stock has always felt "best" to me. I understand this is a very personal thing, but those darn stocks fit and feel better to me (right off the shelf) than any current Winchester 70 stock, Miller's design included. It's not just LOP either. I use a 13.5" LOP (which the Ruger has), but even when I've shortened Winchester's to 13.5" they still don't fit me as well as the Ruger.

I also wonder whether a completely "straight" stock really does handle heavy recol best. Wouldn't a certain amount of drop in the comb facilitate some of the rcoil forces "upward" rather than "backward" to the shoulder? I suppose more "cheek-slap" results from this arrangement though.

OK, what am I not seeing?

Brad

Brad,
When you drop the pivot point in the stock (Heel of the stock) aka the old weatherby's, you create a moment arm and the stock swings up as you said. The rearward force is still there coming straight back. the sting you feel in your cheek is from the upward movement. You will not get away from all of that but it can be reduced. My .338/06 is built for open sights and the dimensions are 5/8" and 3/4" about what you would find on a scoped rifle and it lines up perfectly. The stocks of today will fit you for open sights pretty well. The old ones requred some lift to see them properly. At least with my face they do.

Chic

Brad, the straight, or negative drop comb is by far the best for minimizing the effects of recoil. I recently tested one of Weatherby's lightweight rifles in .280 Remington, complete with Weatherby's signature Monte Carlo stock. That rifle was very light, so it kicked a bit, but the first thing you noticed when you fired it from the bench was a considerable amount of muzzle jump.

In contrast, I have a lightweight Echols-built .270 with a straight, thick comb, a bit of cast-off, and a pistol grip that allows you to control the rifle with your shooting hand, which is as it should be. This rifle comes straight back, and there's almost no muzzle jump. This .270 only weights about a half-pound more than the Weatherby .280, but when you shoot the two, it's like one is chambered in .243 and the other in .338-06. The difference is that dramatic.

Another example of a super-hard kicker, way out of proportion to the caliber, was a German-made Vore Titan in .300 Winchester I tested a number of years ago. It came complete with Vore's interpretation of a Weatherby Mark V stock, only with even more drop at heel and with skinnier over-all dimensions. This was the most miserable, hard-kicking rifle that I've ever had the displeasure of shooting, and about ten rounds was all I wanted.

In contrast, my old .300 Winchester built on a Model 70 Super Grade pattern stock, my now-sold Miller in the same caliber, and especially my pet Echols .300 Winchester are all extremely confortable to shoot, plus the recoil comes straight back. A long-time hunting partner of mine has a .300 Winchester built on a Pacific Research (Jim Cloward designed) stock that is also extremely comfortable to shoot.

AD

To add to all of this I will note that the current CZ "Humpback stock with the bavarian cheekpeice absolutely handles recoil the worst. I had a Safari Mag 550 in 375H&H and my friend who I let shoot it said it was much worse in regards to "felt" recoil than his Interarms Mark X in 416 Rigby. The muzzle jump for very high on this rifle. I sold that rifle over a year ago and don't miss it one bit. Looking back I wish I would have sold the stock and kept the barreled action to stock. Oh well #*#t happens.

[This message has been edited by alvinmack5 (edited 05-10-2002).]

Folks,

Can someone explain what cast-off is? I see this term used frequently, but don't have a good handle as to exactly what this is. Is this an angulation of the stock towards or away from the shooter?

Wayne E.

Allen, I'm going to order a couple of Pacific Research stocks this week (now, Borden... I think you read my mind!)... I knew the entire line was designed by Jim Cloward. I've handled them and really like the design though I've never fired a rifle with them installed... what was your impression?

They do seem "thick" in the butt, but they also have a little "drop" in the comb (not totally straight)... at least on those made for the Model 70. Thier grip, though a farily "tight" radius, fits my hand well... guess I'm a bit nervous as it's a lot of money to fork-out "un-tested!"

BA

Brad, that tight grip on the Cloward/Pacific Research/ now Borden stock is the right concept. I'd have installed that very stock on a few of my rifles, but my hands are too big to manage that grip properly. The beefier Echols and Miller grips suite my hand better. In reality, Cloward's stock design is a lot like Al Biesen's, Dave Miller's, or Dale Goens', but the grip is somewhat smaller. All of these stocks are tailor-made for use with scopes, and are of the true American Classic school - my favorite!

AD

[This message has been edited by allen day (edited 05-10-2002).]

Brad,

Several years ago, I had a pair of 7mm R Mags built for my kids with Mark X actions on Rimrock - pre-Borden - stocks. With the lighter weight of the stock and a barrel contour slightly heavier than typical factory stuff, they balance perfectly and weigh about 7 1/2 pounds scoped. Recoil, shooting maximum loads and 175 grain bullets, is less than my Ruger 77 Mk II target rifle in .243, which weighs about 11 pounds. The stocks have about 3/8" cast off and mount and point perfectly.

I have the highest regard for these stocks. My current .330 Dakota project is getting a Rimrock. If it performs well, we'll try something in .458.

You can specify length of pull when you order. The stock material gave my gunsmith fits on final inletting, requiring touching up the inletting tools about every other stroke. I'd suggest using a milling machine or letting Borden do that step.