Recoil and Stock Design
02-04-2005, 11:08 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 74
Recoil and Stock Design
Just wondering if anyone has any comments, or insight into an observation I have concerning recoil management.
I have a Savage 110 in 7mm Mag with an aftermarket, Bishop, stock. This gun is an honest to goodness dream to shoot. I believe the stock design has drastically reduced the felt recoil in shooting this gun. I have chrono'd velocity, it is doing what it should. I also have a Win 70 7mm Mag with BOSS. The Win 70 with BOSS has more felt recoil, IMO. I have no idea how I would measure recoil other than impression, and shooting comparisons at the range.
Even comparing it to other calibers I have, my 6mm in Rem 788, with no recoil pad, has more felt recoil than the Savage. This may not be a good comparison, as the hard plastic butt piece may be the contributing factor. The recoil has a much different feel. Still, my shoulder will get sore much sooner with the 6mm.
So this all leads me to, is there a way to chose an after market stock that reduces felt recoil? I stumbled on my situation very much by mistake, but would like to replicate on purpose. I have made a step into owning a very heavy recoil caliber (338 RUM), and anticipate I will be looking for ways to manage recoil. I don't really want to go the direction of muzzlebreak unless it becomes absolutely necessary. I haven't shot the gun yet, so this is all in anticipation.
Any thoughts?
I have a Savage 110 in 7mm Mag with an aftermarket, Bishop, stock. This gun is an honest to goodness dream to shoot. I believe the stock design has drastically reduced the felt recoil in shooting this gun. I have chrono'd velocity, it is doing what it should. I also have a Win 70 7mm Mag with BOSS. The Win 70 with BOSS has more felt recoil, IMO. I have no idea how I would measure recoil other than impression, and shooting comparisons at the range.
Even comparing it to other calibers I have, my 6mm in Rem 788, with no recoil pad, has more felt recoil than the Savage. This may not be a good comparison, as the hard plastic butt piece may be the contributing factor. The recoil has a much different feel. Still, my shoulder will get sore much sooner with the 6mm.
So this all leads me to, is there a way to chose an after market stock that reduces felt recoil? I stumbled on my situation very much by mistake, but would like to replicate on purpose. I have made a step into owning a very heavy recoil caliber (338 RUM), and anticipate I will be looking for ways to manage recoil. I don't really want to go the direction of muzzlebreak unless it becomes absolutely necessary. I haven't shot the gun yet, so this is all in anticipation.
Any thoughts?
02-04-2005, 12:24 PM
#2
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Crescent Valley, NV
Posts: 2,271
RE: Recoil and Stock Design
I don't think it is really the stock "design" per se, but how the stock fits you. That stock may reduce the recoil for you, but could be much worse recoil wise for me. If you find one that you can shoot comfortably, and that fits you good, that is probably the most important factor.
02-04-2005, 12:30 PM
#3
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SW Virginia
Posts: 776
RE: Recoil and Stock Design
Felt/percieved recoil is very much influenced by stock design, and also by construction.
Many rifles with fiberglass stocks seem to have less recoil. The stock seems to "absorb"
some of the energy.
However, I think the biggest influence is the design. The straighter or classic style of stock definitely has less recoil. I found this out, also by accident, years ago. I had had a Rem.700 BDL 308Win. with its' MonteCarlo style stock, and after selling it I got a Ruger 77 in 308Win. The Ruger was a lot nicer to shoot. Heck, a friend of mine once had a Savage in 338Win.Mag., and with its' straighter stock it felt better than that old Rem.700BDL.
I've since learned to check stock figures. The less drop at comb & heel, the better.
My favorites are the Ruger 77, Winchester Featherweight, and the Remington Mountain
Rifles (I have one in 270Win., a Rem.700 LSS Mtn. Rifle).
Many rifles with fiberglass stocks seem to have less recoil. The stock seems to "absorb"
some of the energy.
However, I think the biggest influence is the design. The straighter or classic style of stock definitely has less recoil. I found this out, also by accident, years ago. I had had a Rem.700 BDL 308Win. with its' MonteCarlo style stock, and after selling it I got a Ruger 77 in 308Win. The Ruger was a lot nicer to shoot. Heck, a friend of mine once had a Savage in 338Win.Mag., and with its' straighter stock it felt better than that old Rem.700BDL.
I've since learned to check stock figures. The less drop at comb & heel, the better.
My favorites are the Ruger 77, Winchester Featherweight, and the Remington Mountain
Rifles (I have one in 270Win., a Rem.700 LSS Mtn. Rifle).
02-04-2005, 11:22 PM
#4
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Rocky Top Tennessee
Posts: 683
RE: Recoil and Stock Design
A stock should have just enough drop at the comb to clear the bolt when it is fully withdrawn, and no more drop at heel. After that you are into personal measurments, lenght of pull, dieameter of pistol grip, pitch, etc.
