I have both. The 2 rifles I shoot the most are both stocked in monte carlos with raised cheek pieces, that is how they were when I got them. I shoot them both very well and never thought much of it. Recently I had a rifle stocked in a classic style stock with a raised cheek piece and will tell you that when you shoulder it, it just fits from the git go. Good cheek weld, eye alignment and shoulder contact. Its got me thinking I might be more of a classic fit than I knew. Honestly I never thought much of it until know.
So I'd like to hear yalls thoughts on this as I know very little on and about stock "fitment"

Perry

quote:

I shoot them both very well and never thought much of it

If it is not broke don't fix.

both are good .. and a "classic" may be as high to the bore line as an MC ..

shoot!

Have someone take a photo from the back when you mount the 'classic' stock with a scope. I've seen people who generally know their way around rifles do that - they think it fits fine but the heel of the butt is often sticking out above their shoulders.

Therefore, generally I prefer a Monte Carlo with a scope and one with a forward slope is less likely to bruise your cheek.

Right.
For you young guys, before Weatherby came out with the Monte Carlo, (not sure why the name other than they were already in California, and I give Roy the credit), we only had, classic stocks made for iron sights. Everyone made them work with scopes, and as stated above, some of the cheek welds were sub-optimal at best.
Anyway, we had mostly the MC patterns until Ruger came out with the straight comb, albeit with little or no drop at the heel in 1968. Or so.
Anyway, now we think the MC looks weird, and they do, but they are effective.
So, in the end it don't matter; shoot what you can, and like.

I believe the Monte Carlo stock was originally designed for live bird and trap shooters, who generally shoot targets on the rise, and the name "Monte Carlo" refers to the center of European live bird and clay pigeon competition, which was located there.

Heads up shooting. I tend to NOT choke up on a stock unless the stock is a monte carlo type. The factory Sako stock on an L579 fits me quite well. It is a Monte Carlo.



The low stock on a BSA majestic also fits quite well. It is a low stock with a concave cheek piece.

This could be debated forever, but as has been pointed out, some folks with long necks, just gotta have the buttplate positioned lower.

I believe the trade off is more recoil to the cheek since the fulcrum is lower in relation to the bore...so...now you try sloping comb.

Now..the trend it to mounting spotting scope size optics, so getting cheek weld of any kind becomes an impossibility

To oversimplify, if you shoot irons you don't want a raised comb of any flavor. If you want a scope you will need a higher comb. And, something most people don't know, if the stock has cast (offset to one or other side) that will have the same effect as more drop; and vice versa. If you want to shoot both irons and scope on the same weapon you are going to have to go with the iron sight setup and then lift your face off the stock to shoot scope.

For these reasons you sometimes see an adjustable comb.

I prefer the Mark V Wby stock over all others and especially for big recoil.

Progressive lenses change a lot of stuff! I like my scope mount high and stocks low. Most irons are out of the question for me. My checks are not fat but I had to carve a divot out of my 1187 to get the eye alignment right! You will shoot better if the stock fits you. Rather than try to fit the stock to you!

quote:

Originally posted by Russ Gould:
To oversimplify, if you shoot irons you don't want a raised comb of any flavor. If you want a scope you will need a higher comb. And, something most people don't know, if the stock has cast (offset to one or other side) that will have the same effect as more drop; and vice versa. If you want to shoot both irons and scope on the same weapon you are going to have to go with the iron sight setup and then lift your face off the stock to shoot scope.

For these reasons you sometimes see an adjustable comb.

Cast equals more recoil...Ain't buying into that a bit..unless carried to some foolish extreme.... like a cross over stock

I like a Monte Carlo stock better maybe because I'm tall with a long neck. It's just comes into place more naturally for me. Monte Carlo's do predate Weatherby by the way.

But there's no denying a straight comb stock looks nicer. Sambarman's right about people shooting one with a fair amount of the butt sticking out above their shoulder.

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:
Have someone take a photo from the back when you mount the 'classic' stock with a scope. I've seen people who generally know their way around rifles do that - they think it fits fine but the heel of the butt is often sticking out above their shoulders.

Therefore, generally I prefer a Monte Carlo with a scope and one with a forward slope is less likely to bruise your cheek.

If I snap one of those classic and real straight stocks to my shoulder about half the butt will miss my shoulder.

To me a Wby stock is like one of those old English stocks with the cheek piece added. I reckon the amount of drop would be similar, that is, the distance beteen the bore and the centre of the butt.

So it sounds like it comes down to body style not preference. Taller folks with longer necks are going to need to have a higher comb.
It also sounds like you guys are saying the butt plate should rest completely on your shoulder not above it at all.
So, with that said I assume I should mount stock to my shoulder first THEN look through the scope. That method will determine straight comb classic verses monte carlo.

Perry

Yes.
And another reason they went to straight stocks instead of the two inch drop at the heel, besides the wide use of scopes, is that they require a much smaller piece of wood to make. A valid consideration when you are making thousands of them and profit margins are small. Of course, the new $3 plastic stocks still have straight combs.
Shoot what you like and what fits you.

If the rifle points like a shotgun don't worry about looks.

Dave

Perry is describing the way a shooing instructor told me to do it decades ago. Most modern gunstocks for bolt guns are made so the cocking piece just clears the comb nose.

That will be the limiting factor for comb nose height, whether straight or MC.

The MC style simply lowers the butt plate for shooters unable to shoulder properly AND get something like a cheek weld.

Here's where stock fitting finds it's niche

Cookie cutter "patterns" don't always work well and almost can never be modified to fit an individual looking for optimal shooting comfort/pointability

Dpcd has been working on a CZ Euro stock for my wife in 7x57. She has a shorter neck so it will work well for her especially with a 1" tube scope.

Our daughter, on the other hand, is newly turned 11 and is more like my mother was with a long neck. We've begun gathering parts for a nice 1909 Mauser build as a present for her when she is slightly older again in 7x57. Her neck length will obviously be of consideration.

If it points like a shotgun, it will definitely have more drop at the heel, and as DW said, the MC makes your cheek come up to the scope LOS. Maybe.

quote:

If it points like a shotgun, it will definitely have more drop at the heel,

I should have said when rapidly mounting the rifle, your sights are on the target. My scoped hunting rifle with half an inch drop achieves this for me.

Dave

In addition to the height of the line of sight, one has to take into account the type of shooting. For shooting offhand, most will prefer more drop at the butt, in combination with a high comb. Look at the stocks as used by silhouette shooters; they are only shot offhand and the design reflects this. The rules limit how high the comb can be and how much drop the stock can have and most stocks push these limits.
On the other end of the spectrum, we have stocks which are intended for shooting prone. They will have minimal drop at the heel and a high comb.
Of course, the shooter's body and shooting style will also have some influence and I often see shooters who are shooting in spite of the design of their stock.
Another aspect of stock design which may be infuenced by shooting position and style is the angle of the grip. In general, if the shooter likes to shoot with his elbow high, he will prefer a more open grip. If he shoots with his elbow lower, a more vertical grip might work better. Again, different positions suggest different dimensions.
If a stockmaker is building a stock to fit particular shooter or discipline, he then has to try and make these dimensions aesthetically acceptable as well. I reckon the good guys do that well. I know some superb stockmakers though, who make everything the way they think it should be and let the shooter adapt. Given their workload, their customers are OK with this. Regards, Bill.

Bill Leeper is right...We usually strive to make the stock fir for the offhand position on a hunting rifle.

From my experience, I've seldom been able to use the prone when hunting. Sitting, kneeling will still work OK for a stock built for offhand

Whole new all game when making a stock for one position only. Fact is, I've never had a LR shooter even approach me for a custom stock..and I long ago quit the trap gun guys....they are back every Monday wanting some dimensional change

"they are back every Monday wanting some dimensional change", ain't that the truth!

I like the Bavarian or “hog back” stock if irons and scope will both be used. I generally creep forward with the irons and stay back with the scope.

re: CAST ON or CAST OFF... This is really intended to allow the shooter to point/aim the gun/rifle with the head upright and the eyes level on the same plane... as opposed to bending their neck and placing their head over the top of the stock to allow the aiming eye to be inline with the sights.

A good stockmaker will do a fitting (hopefully with a try stock) to assure the customer and himself that all will go well after the gun/rifle is delivered.

I have always wondered that the factories managed to come up with their “average man” stocks, each a little different from the others! I guess “average” is in the eye of the beholder.

They do seem to fit pretty much everybody pretty much well enough - albeit some better than others, depending on each particular rifle and each man’s physique.

It’s only when you get one fit more or less properly that you notice the difference.

this is the oldest argument in the world of gundome..

Frankly I like a low combed iron sighted rifle and I will scope it with QD rings ands shoot it with a scope, on many ocassions without any trouble either way, but I was raised on mod. 54s and 70s, they were all low combed early on....As far as Im concerned if I can put the cross hairs on the animal and pull the trigger, that's all that's required. ..Guess I was lucky to not hear the koolaide, since Ive hunted with low comb guns for many years, and shot as much game as anyone else I know of...I know that all that's holy to some..Lots of folks have never shot a low combed rifle with a scope yet still make wild claims about the 3 point hold...Im sure some must have that and that's fine if it works, but its not imparitive nor required..LOts of fine English rifles are low combed, been d&T'd and killing DG and PG..Lots of Savage 99 EGs insaddle scabbards with a handy 3X scope on them..Thats my story and Im sticking to it..

I will just say this.

I have multiple “dual purpose“ stocks with straight buttstocks that work with both scopes and iron sights.

The trick is that the comb has to be high enough to work with a decent cheek weld for purposes of looking through a scope. That’s it.

It is much easier to scrunch down hard on the cheekbone to look through a somewhat high set of iron sights than it is to raise your head up on your chin to look through a scope.

I have no use for a Monte Carlo cheek piece. They’re a solution to a non-existent problem in my view, and worse, they even create new ones!

Cast in a stock accomplishes one very simple thing.

Physically, you have to "adjust" to line up your shoulder pocket, eye and sights..all in a straight line.


Moving the butt in or out simply moves the the muzzle R or L to allow the eye and sights to acquire a more natural "straight line" to the target.

Physique will determine if there should be more cast at the toe to find a comfortable shoulder pocket.

Almost all shooters will benefit from cast

Crunching my cheek down of a 375 to a 505 Gibbs is not a healthy habit to get into if you value your face at all, and your nervous system is working...A DG big bore should be set up for irons, and it can work with a scope just fine..

Set up for a scope you cannot get down on your irons...

In a custom rifle there is a happy medium but it leans more to a lower cut of the comb IMO..and yest it depends on the build of the shooter I suppose and his shooting background..most PH rifles Ive seen are low combed and have the option of scope or irons, same for double rifles and Ive never seen a double stock with a high comb, all are set up for iron sights and many are used with a scope for some reason I fail to understand.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Crunching my cheek down of a 375 to a 505 Gibbs is not a healthy habit to get into if you value your face at all, and your nervous system is working...

No problem at all with a straight buttstock.

Unlike a low combed buttstock, which pushes recoil up into your face and causes increased muzzle flip, a straight buttstock pushes recoil directly back into your shoulder pocket and reduces muzzle flip.

I do need and appreciate some cast off in the stock.

I think..Jack O'Connor popularized to a great extent the perfectly straight stock.

Surprises me a little, Jack was a pretty big guy with a fairly long neck, but he could extend his cheek bone down, still keep the butt in the shoulder pocket with apparent ease.

Most will find a more comfortable fit with a bit of drop at the heel...even a 1/2" makes a great difference. Personally, I prefer a bit more and even on my 500 Jeff, never noticed a "bite" to my face

A few other guys shot that gun and again, no facial discomfort...These guys ranged from 180lbs to 230, 5-8 to 6-2. The rifle has 1/8 heel and 1/4" toe cast off

Bottom line is that I think a well fitted, comfortable stock minimizes recoil.