Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/4/2010 1:40:54 PM EDT
I have always wondered how much a telescoping stock effects accuracy due to the fact that it's not a solid structure.

for example if i were to take my AR15 that is currently shooting less than 2 MOA out to 300 yards with a 4X optic, and telescoping stock...and replace it with an A2 stock; would I see any even the slightest improvement in accuracy?

Thanks!
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 1:44:27 PM EDT
No you wont
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 2:06:52 PM EDT
not a sales pitch, but there are quite a few adj. stocks
that lock into place very well. Best of both worlds.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 2:10:57 PM EDT
The sights are aligned with the barrel. So long as you don't mount the rear sight to the stock you should be fine.

Frankly, I think a lot more is made of this than should be. For the kind of rifle that will typically have an adjustable stock, you shouldn't notice it at all. I have a gun with a lot of play in the stock, until I actually try to use it, then I don't notice it at all.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 2:30:47 PM EDT
stock has 0 affect on accuracy.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 3:23:07 PM EDT
Does the tailgate have any effect on the turning radius of your truck?
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 4:13:24 PM EDT
Actually, the stock CAN and WILL affect accuracy, and will become more noticable the farther out you are shooting.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 4:18:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2010 5:10:43 PM EDT by RePp]
Originally Posted By Balforin:
Actually, the stock CAN and WILL affect accuracy, and will become more noticable the farther out you are shooting.


the stock has no affect on mechanical accuracy
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 4:26:16 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SouthCaliRep:
Does the tailgate have any effect on the turning radius of your truck?


Originally Posted By RePp:
the sock has no affect on mechanical accuracy


how did the topic switch to tailgates and socks
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 4:29:44 PM EDT
The stock is attached to the lower receiver. The sights and barrel are attached to the upper receiver. The upper receiver is where the accuracy comes from.

There shouldn't be any noticable effect on accuracy with a stock with a lot of play.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 4:30:38 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RePp:
Originally Posted By Balforin:
Actually, the stock CAN and WILL affect accuracy, and will become more noticable the farther out you are shooting.


the sock has no affect on mechanical accuracy


tube, crew, or thigh highs?

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 4:31:42 PM EDT
Mechanically the stock does zero for accuracy.. mechanically its not even needed –– just the buffer tube.

However, a different stock may help ergonomics which may reduce human error..
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 4:33:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2010 4:57:23 PM EDT by BSWilson]
Originally Posted By RePp:
Originally Posted By Balforin:
Actually, the stock CAN and WILL affect accuracy, and will become more noticable the farther out you are shooting.


the sock has no affect on mechanical accuracy


Actually...

The buffer system has an affect on the consistency of the rifle. A rifle spring & buffer has more consistent travel & carrier velocity than a carbine spring & buffer, and thus will be more accurate to some degree.

Just how much can be debated, but the difference is there. Hell, consider how off a precision semi-auto's first shot can be. This is often due to the different carrier velocity on the round being chambered, rather than entirely due to the cold bore.

This can be tested by shooting the same upper & ammo on two full auto uppers and measuring the rounds-per-minute. The carbine lower will have a much wider variance in RPM's than a rifle lower.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 4:47:32 PM EDT

play in lower to upper dont affect accuracy
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 4:55:10 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RePp:
stock has 0 affect on accuracy.


This is true.

The stock only is providing a good rest for the shooter. I guess an uncomfortable stock or one that doesn't fit the shooter could affect accuracy but that should be more on the shooter than the stock itself.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 5:10:32 PM EDT
So, as another example, you guys are saying that an AK with a loose underfolder, is going to be just as accurate as one with a fixed stock?

Just trying to get my mind around what some of you guys are saying, as everything I've ever been taught about shooting has been that any kind play between your shoulder and the end of the barrel is not a good thing.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 5:13:15 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Balforin:
So, as another example, you guys are saying that an AK with a loose underfolder, is going to be just as accurate as one with a fixed stock?

Just trying to get my mind around what some of you guys are saying, as everything I've ever been taught about shooting has been that any kind play between your shoulder and the end of the barrel is not a good thing.


We are talking AR15s not AK47s. AR15s all that matters as far as mechanical accuracy is concerned is the upper.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 5:25:12 PM EDT
The gun itself is just as accurate with a loose stock. You, on the other hand, are probably not.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 5:28:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2010 5:37:22 PM EDT by BSWilson]
Originally Posted By RePp:
Originally Posted By Balforin:
So, as another example, you guys are saying that an AK with a loose underfolder, is going to be just as accurate as one with a fixed stock?

Just trying to get my mind around what some of you guys are saying, as everything I've ever been taught about shooting has been that any kind play between your shoulder and the end of the barrel is not a good thing.


We are talking AR15s not AK47s. AR15s all that matters as far as mechanical accuracy is concerned is the upper.


As explained above, this is technically incorrect.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 5:38:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2010 5:38:41 PM EDT by Marksman14]
Originally Posted By BSWilson:
Originally Posted By RePp:
Originally Posted By Balforin:
So, as another example, you guys are saying that an AK with a loose underfolder, is going to be just as accurate as one with a fixed stock?

Just trying to get my mind around what some of you guys are saying, as everything I've ever been taught about shooting has been that any kind play between your shoulder and the end of the barrel is not a good thing.


We are talking AR15s not AK47s. AR15s all that matters as far as mechanical accuracy is concerned is the upper.


As mentioned above, this is incorrect.


Prove it.

What test did you conduct that showed you a carbine length spring/tube and the proper buffer for the gas system is any less consistent than a rifle length tube/spring/buffer?

The accuracy is in the upper.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 5:48:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2010 5:52:31 PM EDT by BSWilson]
You must have missed that part where I explained how it can be tested. Just take my word for it that the carrier velocity of a rifle system is more consistent than a carbine, especially when dealing with extra variables such as inconsistent ammo, variable magazine spring tension, location & orientation of magazine, loose uppers, misaligned receiver extension, etc.

Accuracy is in consistency.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 6:05:00 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Marksman14:
Originally Posted By BSWilson:
Originally Posted By RePp:
Originally Posted By Balforin:
So, as another example, you guys are saying that an AK with a loose underfolder, is going to be just as accurate as one with a fixed stock?

Just trying to get my mind around what some of you guys are saying, as everything I've ever been taught about shooting has been that any kind play between your shoulder and the end of the barrel is not a good thing.


We are talking AR15s not AK47s. AR15s all that matters as far as mechanical accuracy is concerned is the upper.


As mentioned above, this is incorrect.


Prove it.

What test did you conduct that showed you a carbine length spring/tube and the proper buffer for the gas system is any less consistent than a rifle length tube/spring/buffer?

The accuracy is in the upper.


Only if you want to ignore a great many mechanical attributes of the system.
Magazine friction on the carrier
interference between carrier and ID of buffer tube (this is made worse with a loose upper/lower fit)
inconsistent seating of the bullet or case as a round is chambered (the round seats differently when the carrier is dropped from lock vs. when fired)
Slight variance in neck tensions round-to-round

The list goes on. Mechanical accuracy has much more to do with "the sights and barrel are together".

Consistent buffer systems help to seat each round closer to the same each time. This is usually done with a longer spring, as shorter springs have higher "rates" that can contribute to more induced mechanical variance shot-to-shot as a result of inconsistent powder loads. Blame the ammo if you will, but there are (were?) published tests that backed up a dramatic RPM consistency difference with nothing but a spring/buffer/tube change.

Accuracy is not the sum of the parts of the rifle, its how well each of those parts seats, and how consistently they seat round-to-round. The list of variables is HUGE.

To the OP, a 'loose' collapsible stock CAN have an impact on accuracy. It can cause an inconsistent cheek-weld, or at very worse, can cause a slight shift in POA prior to the bullet exiting the barrel as recoil takes up the slop.

If you think that 'the bullet is too fast to be affected by recoil', your targets are too close, or too large :P
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 6:40:27 PM EDT
Trigger replacement will improve accuracy better than stock replacement.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 6:58:49 PM EDT
Originally Posted By expopo:
Trigger replacement will improve accuracy better than stock replacement.


Agreed, the level at which a stock comes into play, is at the very high end of accuracy shooting. A good trigger has nothing to do with mechanical accuracy, but makes it MUCH easier (possible) to attain the maximum mechanical accuracy. Or at least, get closer to it.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 7:39:43 PM EDT
Well damn, the accuracy must be in the sights/barrel/receiver for my M1 garand aswell. No need to shim or bed my stock, as a loose fit obviously doesn't hurt accuracy. Must be the same for my bolt actions–– glass bedding is over-rated.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 9:17:46 PM EDT
Originally Posted By LedZeppelin:
Well damn, the accuracy must be in the sights/barrel/receiver for my M1 garand aswell. No need to shim or bed my stock, as a loose fit obviously doesn't hurt accuracy. Must be the same for my bolt actions–– glass bedding is over-rated.


Those are full length stocks the put inconsistant pressure on the barrel/action. A stock on a AR15 is only on the buffertube and comes no where close to the barrel. A wobble in a ar stock and bedding a bolt gun reciver is a completly diffrent concept
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 9:32:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By BSWilson:
You must have missed that part where I explained how it can be tested. Just take my word for it that the carrier velocity of a rifle system is more consistent than a carbine, especially when dealing with extra variables such as inconsistent ammo, variable magazine spring tension, location & orientation of magazine, loose uppers, misaligned receiver extension, etc.

Accuracy is in consistency.


Sigh. This has been debated here in the past––you should pay the little bit of cash so you can peruse the archives.

There will be no change in accuracy between a carbine system and a rifle system.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 10:19:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2010 10:20:03 PM EDT by Forgetfull]

Originally Posted By LedZeppelin:
Well damn, the accuracy must be in the sights/barrel/receiver for my M1 garand aswell. No need to shim or bed my stock, as a loose fit obviously doesn't hurt accuracy. Must be the same for my bolt actions–– glass bedding is over-rated.

L.O.L.

Traditional wood stock firearms are completely different, the wood touching the barrel affects harmonics, barrel droop, and torque on the barrel.

Think of the stocks on your wooden guns and bolt actions as the hand guards on a AR. Standard hand guards that attach to the barrel will affect accuracy since they touch the barrel and you can apply force to the barrel by grabbing the handguards. With Free Float hand guards the hand guards only contact the upper receiver and not the barrel. Free float AR almost serves the same purpose as glass beading a rifle with a full stock, Or you can get free floating bolt actions.


Hell Mechanical rests that shoot better than any human being are just the barrel and receiver.


Pic courteous of this thread by Molon-
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=279218&light=

Link Posted: 9/5/2010 4:33:15 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2010 5:11:16 AM EDT by RePp]
Originally Posted By LedZeppelin:
Well damn, the accuracy must be in the sights/barrel/receiver for my M1 garand aswell. No need to shim or bed my stock, as a loose fit obviously doesn't hurt accuracy. Must be the same for my bolt actions–– glass bedding is over-rated.


Thats pathetic you cant tell the difference between a AR15 and a M1 garand.
Link Posted: 9/5/2010 6:26:59 AM EDT
my 2 cents:

When the stock is pressed into your shoulder, there is almost no 'slop' left in it. Safe your weapon and mount it to your shoulder. Have a friend grab the forend and move it around. Do you feel any 'slop' in the stock?

That said, any extraneous movement of the entire system will add to inconsistencies in point of impact. So there might be a slight bit of accuracy added by non-adjustable stocks, regardless of buffer system length. The problem is, you will likely never actually see an improvement, because there are SO many other factors causing point of impact inconsistencies that they cast a large shadow over the stock. Think of it this way: getting in to your car and bringing 10 pounds worth of stuff with you. Techinically, that 10 pounds will cause a performance loss in your car. But trying to quantify the exact loss is near impossible. Things like, weather conditions, tire wear, quality/type of gasoline, etc....and your physical handling of the car.... have a far greater effect on adding or subtracting a tenth of a second from your lap or quarter mile times.
Ammo selection, weather, how well the parts inside the rifle are moving etc all have a much greater effect on accuracy than the stock. If you could make ALL those other things consistent....including you (impossible since we are all human).... EVERY time, then stock selection would be important.

A semi-auto will NEVER be as accurate at long distance as a comparably built bolt gun, simply because the only things that move any great distance on a bolt gun, are the trigger, firing pin, and the round. Semi-autos have bolts and springs and cams moving around before the round leaves the barrel, all affecting consistency. The stock is like a moth hitting your windshield at 50mph. I dont think its going to slow you down much.
Link Posted: 9/5/2010 6:37:33 AM EDT
One could argue that an adjustable stock will actually increase a shooters accuracy by giving the shooter a more custom LOP.
Link Posted: 9/5/2010 7:16:10 AM EDT
But wouldn't there be a difference if that 10 lb weight were secured in the trunk compared to a bowling ball running around loose in the truck?
Link Posted: 9/5/2010 8:00:04 AM EDT
Stocks can make the SHOOTER more accurate capable, they do not make the RIFLE more accurate.

Link Posted: 9/5/2010 11:41:53 AM EDT
wow, didn't mean to stir up so much debate.

I just added a 1-4x scope to my AR, and felt that the rifle was too front heavy. switched the telescoping stock to an A2 stock and liked the balance alot better. I was just wondering if there were any other benefits.

So friday i was shooting the rifle at 200 yards and was consistantly shooting less than 2 MOA with the telescoping stock (not much slop). Last night i changed the stock to an A2...and this morning it was really windy and I was shooting 2.5 MOA at worst.

you know what though? it seemed like the A2 stock on my AR had less recoil vs telescoping stock, or am i just imagining it?
is it because of the weight, length, or different buffer & spring?
Link Posted: 9/5/2010 11:43:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By M4A1bushmaster:
Stocks can make the SHOOTER more accurate capable, they do not make the RIFLE more accurate.



for my particular AR setup, distance i am shooting at, and my shooting skill level...I am going to agree with this statement.
Link Posted: 9/5/2010 1:05:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Unicron:
wow, didn't mean to stir up so much debate.

I just added a 1-4x scope to my AR, and felt that the rifle was too front heavy. switched the telescoping stock to an A2 stock and liked the balance alot better. I was just wondering if there were any other benefits.

So friday i was shooting the rifle at 200 yards and was consistantly shooting less than 2 MOA with the telescoping stock (not much slop). Last night i changed the stock to an A2...and this morning it was really windy and I was shooting 2.5 MOA at worst.

you know what though? it seemed like the A2 stock on my AR had less recoil vs telescoping stock, or am i just imagining it?
is it because of the weight, length, or different buffer & spring?

Buffer and buffer spring have a lot to do with it. The A2 buffer spring is weaker and the buffer weighs ~5.15 oz while a carbine buffer weighs 2.9 oz.
Top Top