# Synthetic stocks and felt recoil?



## blackbear (Dec 4, 2014)

Can the felt recoil be less with a synthetic stock instead of walnut shooting hard kickers like 375,338,300mags.,etc.


----------



## tim scott (Dec 4, 2014)

yes, they definitely do have less felt recoil.... the synthetic gun stocks have a certainly amount of give and flex to them that the wood stocks don't. however you listed two medium bore and a small bore caliber none of which have much in the way of recoil unless the .375 your talking about is a .378 weatherby... man up a little... I've had sexy little 120 pound girl friends and wife that shot and hunted with those calibers and never complained. wait till you try a large bore rifle..... besides life is too short to hunt with a ugly gun and your talking about butt ugly. imagine having your pic taken posing with a great trophy animal, you holding such an ugly thing.... I'd need a paper bag to put over my head.
tim


----------



## 7Mag Hunter (Dec 4, 2014)

Most quality synthetic stocks have a better recoil pad, so there
is not big a difference..imo..

I put a syn stock on my Rem 30-06 auto rifle, and advantage to
me was reduced weight, protecting the original Rem Monte Carlo
wood stock and improving overall hunt-ability  of my rifle..
Recoil change played no role in my decision....


----------



## nickdh4594 (Dec 4, 2014)

id have to disagree with everything said above, i have shot many different magnum cartridges, but it doesn't just have to do with magnums 30-06 and .308 can be enough recoil for some. a .300 win mag will kill any game animal on the north american continent so lets talk about that one. 

I have shot the .300 win mag with wood stock and synthetic. the synthetic is a lightweight option that serves as no barrier between the recoil and your shoulder. the lighter the stock the more felt recoil. that goes with any gun i personally won't shoot my dads synthetic stock 30-06 much more than 25 times. My wood stock 30-06 i can shoot easily 50-60 times before fatigue sets in.

also regarding the above statements i think choosing a gun based on looks is not the way to choose a rifle. Fit, Feel, Accuracy and Reliability are what you need to consider when buying a rifle. The Super Deluxe model with all the bells and whistles isn't worth a crap if the rifle doesn't feel right in the hands and effects the way you shoot. Hunting in north america you won't ever need over a .30 cal magnum like the .300 win mag, .300 RUM, .300 wby mag, or the short mags; weatherby puts the .378 mag cartridge in the big n. american game like moose,grizzlies. and also in the african game like rhino, cape buffalo, lion. so unless you plan on hunting those id opt for something less.


----------



## blackbear (Dec 5, 2014)

I have never owned  a synthetic stock,,a friend told me they absorbed more recoil than wood and that guns would have less felt recoil...I didn't know if this is true or false.... figured you guys would know the real truth.


----------



## nickdh4594 (Dec 5, 2014)

blackbear said:


> I have never owned  a synthetic stock,,a friend told me they absorbed more recoil than wood and that guns would have less felt recoil...I didn't know if this is true or false.... figured you guys would know the real truth.



I have owned rifles of exact model and caliber in sythetic and wood and everytime whichever stock is heavier that will be the rifle that has less recoil.


----------



## badger (Dec 12, 2014)

Stock design IMO has more bearing on felt recoil than the material it's made from, assuming equal weight. A McMillan Edge, for example, just "feels" a lot softer when compared with a Remington Tupperware stock on the same rifle to me, and the Edge will often weigh less too.


----------



## lonewolf247 (Dec 14, 2014)

It's hard to base the recoil from a rifle on just wood vs synthetic. Weight, design, fit, caliber, recoil pad, and other factors, can really change a lot on the recoil felt to the shooter.

The worst recoil felt rifle, I ever owned, was a Winchester M70 Lightwieght 30-06 in wood grain, followed by a close second, from a Smith &Wesson M1500 .270, in wood. Now I dont own any large magnum rifles like the ones you mentioned, but I have a .35 whelen that's not as bad as the other two rifles I mentioned.


----------



## coolbreezeroho (Jan 20, 2015)

The heavier the rifle the less felt recoil.

     Weight can be added to the hollow synthetic stocks. Remove the recoil pad and fill the hollow out area with the  clear gel sealant. It adds some weight to the stock and the gel helps to absorb the recoil. Leave room to reinstall your recoil pad. You may need to stand the rifle up to give the gel some setting up time. 

     On a wood stock you could drill the butt stock and install some mercury recoil reducers. 

     A lower grain bullet will make a great difference also. If your shooting a 180 grain bullet try shooting a 150 grain bullet.  Hopefully the lower weight bullet will shoot like you like it to.....Big difference in the amount of recoil 

CBR


----------



## Barry Duggan (Jan 28, 2015)

Stock design and weight are the major players in this game.


----------



## Big7 (Jan 28, 2015)

blackbear said:


> I have never owned  a synthetic stock,,a friend told me they absorbed more recoil than wood and that guns would have less felt recoil...I didn't know if this is true or false.... figured you guys would know the real truth.



Ok then.

The stock has ZERO bearing on recoil.
(Except weight, that same is true for either)
The bore line in relationship to the butt stock
is what tells the tail.

Synthetics are generally better technically.
That's why they are on the "black rifles" the military uses.

They absorb negligible water and not affected
as much by heat or cold, as compared to wood..


----------



## dawg2 (Jan 28, 2015)

nickdh4594 said:


> I have owned rifles of exact model and caliber in sythetic and wood and everytime whichever stock is heavier that will be the rifle that has less recoil.



This is what I noticed.  I changed out from a nice wooden stock on a REM 700 in 30-06 to a REM synthetic (lighter).  The recoil is more noticeable with the synthetic.  But recoil for me is not a deciding factor for a firearm.


----------



## Barry Duggan (Jan 31, 2015)

Big7 said:


> Ok then.
> 
> The stock has ZERO bearing on recoil.
> (Except weight, that same is true for either)
> ...



I tend to disagree on the zero bearing as it relates to felt recoil. A stock, either wood or synthetic, with a well designed check piece, helps with felt recoil.


----------



## Bambi (Feb 11, 2015)

The word "synthetic" says it all for me. Synthetic stocks are lighter, but that's the only thing I get out of it, but regardless of weight I do not want a plastic stock. They just feel fragile. 

I wouldn't base a gun choice on the amount of recoil. When I'm hunting I feel nothing but adrenaline anyway. I've never heard anybody complain about the quality and durability of a well taken care of wood grain in my life.


----------



## Sargent (Feb 12, 2015)

Weight is the biggest abatement to recoil.  It is just a physics problem.

Free recoil = .5MVsquared  (mass, velocity) 

Basically, it is Newton's 3rd law of physics (for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction). 

As far as "flex" of a composite stock vs. wooden stock- every solid flexes to some point.  I don't think the amount of flex would be great enough as to affect velocity to the point of free recoil.

So, there are trade-offs:  Light and synthetic means easier to carry and care for, but greater recoil.  Conversely, heavy and wooden means harder to carry and care for, but less recoil.

Free recoil is what has to be absorbed into your body, starting at the shoulder.  A good recoil pad acts as a shock absorber, lessening the "felt recoil".

Recoil pad technology in the last few years has lessened the gap of felt recoil of all firearms.  So, lighter rifles with premium recoil pads are much more practical in the field.


----------



## Marlin_444 (Feb 15, 2015)

I just swapped out wood stocks on my Browning Hunter Abolt for synthetic it was more for look and feel than recoil...

•••


----------

