Synthetic stocks - I just can't do it!
Folks, I'm going to buy a new .243. I'm looking at bolt actions, beyond that I don't think the details are important.
It's primarily for coyotes and fox, although I want it to do double duty for open range whitetails. I'm not going on safari or "trip of a lifetime" pack-in hunts, so it won't be enduring extreme use. The gun won't be my primary gun for anything, although I'll probably run 500 rounds a year through it at yotes and pasture poodles. But as far as being out in bad conditions or the gun getting beaten like a rented mule, it won't happen.
So here's the thing. Everyone, it seems, is telling me to get the synthetic stock. And they all have their horror stories about broken stocks on the trip of a lifetime, grandpappy had his stock swell and he missed the whitetail of a lifetime, etc, etc.
But I can't freaking do it. I just cannot embrace all the perfectly logical points in favor of synthetic because I think they're freaking ugly. The only "pro" I can come up with for wood stocks is that in some rifles they are slightly lighter than the factory synthetic stock.
I don't have any other reason other than the fact that beyond the shooting characteristics of a rifle, I like to look at guns and synthetic stocks just don't look good to me.
Has anyone else had the same predicament when buying new?
Is this really a deal where I'm absolutely nuts for buying a wood stocked gun in this day an age?
If you think I'm nuts, give me the reasons beyond the fact that a horse can fall on your synthetic stock because this is for my needs per above, not yours.
Grouse