Armory Sponsor
Posted: 3/6/2011 5:06:37 PM EDT
|
I realize that black plastic looks oh so tacticool but I suspect the main reason that shotguns come with black plastic stocks is because this furniture is cheaper to produce than wood stocks. Plastic stocks make some sense on a rifle where a swelling wood stock could put pressure on a barrel and produce a shift of POI, but I see little advantage to plastic on a shotgun. Sure, they're more weather resistant than wood, but the steel of the gun is still prone to rust so it doesn't seem like a plastic stock accomplishes anything. Plastic, being lighter, doesn't absorb recoil as well as a heavier wooden stock. The plastic stocks are also harder to shorten to adjust LOP.
I'm an admitted fan of old school shotguns with wood stocks, but inform me. Why would anyone replace a wooden stock on a shotgun with plastic? |
|
Quoted:
Why would you want a wood stock when you can have a plastic stock? More mass absorbs recoil better, doesn't it? A bit more weight in the butt produces better balance. Also a wooden stock feels better in the hands and against the cheek. Wood can be refinished. Wooden stocks can be shortened easier than hollow plastic. Wood has character and looks cool. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why would you want a wood stock when you can have a plastic stock? More mass absorbs recoil better, doesn't it? A bit more weight in the butt produces better balance. Also a wooden stock feels better in the hands and against the cheek. Wood can be refinished. Wooden stocks can be shortened easier than hollow plastic. Wood has character and looks cool. Weight is a trade-off. Plastic stocked shotgun is more comfortable to carry long term. The weight is lighter in the front and the back. Still has great balance; "better" is subjective, and is changes from one person to another. The stock fit? See my comments about "better" above. Also, polymer stocks allow for replaceable combs and buttpads, allowing for the manufacturer to include several choices standard with the shotgun to allow for personal preference in adjusting the stock. Wood can be refinished. However, wood needs to be. Polymer (or plastic, if you prefer) stocks are weatherproof and resist damage better ("better" in this circumstance is objective, not subjective). Oh, and cheaper to replace if needed. True, you can take a saw to wook better than polymer. You got me with that one. If I want a shorter stock, I just have to buy a new one. Character? Looks cool? Totally subjective. "One man's junk is another man's treasure." Personally, my shotgun is not for character or cool looks. Along with modern finishes, polymer equiped shotguns are less expensive and more resistant to the effects of the enviroment. All that being said, if you prefer wood, stick with wood. You don't need to justify your choice or try to rationalize your choices to other people to convince them. Your arguments, though, were pretty weak. |
|
Take a 11-87 premier and place a condom on the barrel ,and do the same to a special purpose and place them out in a rain storm for three days or more . Then see which one gets wet wood !
The Metal will clean up nicely the wood (no matter how well sealed ) will have problems! Thats why the sin stocks are liked! Bob |
|
Quoted: Take a 11-87 premier and place a condom on the barrel ,and do the same to a special purpose and place them out in a rain storm for three days or more . Then see which one gets wet wood ! The Metal will clean up nicely the wood (no matter how well sealed ) will have problems! Thats why the sin stocks are liked! Bob I always love your posts.  |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why would you want a wood stock when you can have a plastic stock? More mass absorbs recoil better, doesn't it? A bit more weight in the butt produces better balance. Also a wooden stock feels better in the hands and against the cheek. Wood can be refinished. Wooden stocks can be shortened easier than hollow plastic. Wood has character and looks cool. Weight is a trade-off. Plastic stocked shotgun is more comfortable to carry long term. The weight is lighter in the front and the back. Still has great balance; "better" is subjective, and is changes from one person to another. The stock fit? See my comments about "better" above. Also, polymer stocks allow for replaceable combs and buttpads, allowing for the manufacturer to include several choices standard with the shotgun to allow for personal preference in adjusting the stock. Wood can be refinished. However, wood needs to be. Polymer (or plastic, if you prefer) stocks are weatherproof and resist damage better ("better" in this circumstance is objective, not subjective). Oh, and cheaper to replace if needed. True, you can take a saw to wook better than polymer. You got me with that one. If I want a shorter stock, I just have to buy a new one. Character? Looks cool? Totally subjective. "One man's junk is another man's treasure." Personally, my shotgun is not for character or cool looks. Along with modern finishes, polymer equiped shotguns are less expensive and more resistant to the effects of the enviroment. All that being said, if you prefer wood, stick with wood. You don't need to justify your choice or try to rationalize your choices to other people to convince them. Your arguments, though, were pretty weak. FWIW, I'm not trying to justify anything. I'm just questioning the conventional wisdom that plastic represents progress. I believe it's just cheaper. I do appreciate your presentation of the argument, though. |
|
Quoted:
Because plastic doesn't break, crack, chip, swell, or warp as easily as wood. I like a nice wood stock as much as the next man but plastic is a no-brainer if your gun is going to be used hard. This. Proper fit and form negate the need for heavier stock sets to absorb recoil. If you want a gun that looks nice, you'll probably want wood. If you want a gun that you don't have to carefully preserve, you'll probably want synthetic. For a duty/defensive gun, I see no need to stay with wood stock sets. |
|
all of my wood stocked guns, are safe queens. the synthetic stocked guns get used for all of the reason listed in previous posts. i LOVE the look of a wood stock on a firearm, but i hate tearing them up when i use them so i don't use them.
well, except for my 870 youth 20ga..now that is one rugged,handy little bugger. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why would you want a wood stock when you can have a plastic stock? 1. More mass absorbs recoil better, doesn't it? 2. A bit more weight in the butt produces better balance. 3. Also a wooden stock feels better in the hands and against the cheek. 4. Wood can be refinished. 5. Wooden stocks can be shortened easier than hollow plastic. 6. Wood has character and looks cool. 1. Technically, yes, but lighter weight means it can be handled faster and more nimble. It's a tradeoff and the trick is to find the right balance for you which may be different from others... 2. refer to reply above. Also, a little bit of weight in the front helps reduce recoil and helps target acquisition... 3. not necessarily true for all folks. Wood tends to need more care and maintenance. Wood that needs refinishing feels worse than synthetic... 4. refer to reply above. Although wood can be refinished, that can be a good thing or a bad thing as it requires maintenance. Synthetic can be viewed as more trouble-free, and more consistent. 5. That's a matter of opinion. You need to worry about refinishing the wood to match once you start modifying it. Synthetic is actually fairly easy, escpeically with something like a sander/dremel... 6. yes, it does, but so does synthetic. It's just a matter of opinion And for the record, I like both wood and synthetic....They each have a place in terms of form and function.... |
| The synthetic stocks are just more durable no need to finish it. If it's the duck boat and gets knocked around as most shotguns do I don't care as much because I know it won't damage the synthetic stock. The last thing is when my motor dies, and the oar either breaks or I forget it, I don't feel so bad when I have to use my 11-87 as an oar, when I know the synthetic stock won't swell. |
|
Quoted:
I'm an admitted fan of old school shotguns with wood stocks, but inform me. Why would anyone replace a wooden stock on a shotgun with plastic? I have had 2 Mossberg 500 wooden stocks and 1 Remington 870 stock split at the wrist. Because of the mounting bolt the wood is fairly week. For field use (upland game) I really prefer wood, but for a home defense gun I'll use a composite stock every time. For a duck gun where it's going to get beat to death in the mud and wet, I'd pick plastic as well. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm an admitted fan of old school shotguns with wood stocks, but inform me. Why would anyone replace a wooden stock on a shotgun with plastic? I have had 2 Mossberg 500 wooden stocks and 1 Remington 870 stock split at the wrist. Because of the mounting bolt the wood is fairly week. For field use (upland game) I really prefer wood, but for a home defense gun I'll use a composite stock every time. For a duck gun where it's going to get beat to death in the mud and wet, I'd pick plastic as well. That's a very common problem with the 870s. IIRC, that's why they have the metal plate that goes between the reciever and the stock(I want to say it's called a stock bearing plate, but I can't really remember right now). |
Armory Sponsor