[Deleted]

[Deleted User]

[Deleted by Admins]

[Wingbone]

It seems to me that, asside from the recoil pad, the heavier of the two would slow the recoil down. The heavier the gun, the slower the recoil.

[Rangerlab]

I wouldn' t worry about it to much. Both stocks will work just fine. If nothing else, just pick the one that looks the best to you. Last year I bought a Rem 700 Laminated Stainless Steel, over a synthetic stock simply because I prefered the way the laminated stock looked and felt. I would suggest going to a gun shop and comparing the two side by side.

Good choice with the Tikka, Ive got one and I love it!

[JagMagMan]

I' d go for the laminated stock. Synthetic stocks are usually just plastic.
A composite stock on the other hand, is a blend of kevlar, fiberglass and nylon.
Some companies call their stocks " composite" but in reality they are just plastic or nylon. That is why they are cheaper. A true composite stock is worth the extra money, so be sure of what you are getting.
As for recoil, as wingbone said the heavier stock will absorb more of the recoil.

[stubblejumper]

I myself find that my mcmillan stocks do seem to transmit less felt recoil to the shooter than any wood stock I have used .They are also more stable than any wood including laminates.

[TREEDOG]

Id go with the laminate.

[propmahn]

personally i like the laminates better for looks and thats about all that matters to me

[Huntin Rookie]

I just got a 700 Mountain Rifle in stainless with a beautiful laminate stock. It is much more rigid then a plastic stock. When you pick it up and shoulder it, it feels great. I do like the Kevlar stocks, strong and light but expensive.

[bearhuntr]

Personally, I would remove the crap factory stock and replace it with a quality McMillan stock. You' ll be impressed if you did. I was.

[whelen36]

the synthetic gets my nod , it' s more reliable , and durable , than any wood stock