Most comfortable stock in your opinion

[Amikee]

Hello there mighty hunters and shooters

Here is another question and at the same time invitation to post some gun porn. Hope and wish you all to have a great discussion.

In your opinion, what is the most comfortable style rifle to shoot/hunt with?

I've come across few different styles of rifles. 5 to be exact: Virginia, Lancaster, Bedford, Ohio and finally Tennessee and handled these as well. I wasn't really uncomfortable with neither of them. But couldn't shoot all of them.

Some people say the more straight stocks absorb more recoil and aren't as cheek slappy, others say it's a matter of technique.

Let's hear some opinions and perchaps see some goodies.

 

[Rifleman1776]

My preference is for shotgun styled buttplates. Such as are found in Brown Besses, Rev. period transitionals, Jaegers, many other smoothbores, etc. They are comfortable on the shoulder and do not hang up on clothes. The deep curve styles look great and have that 'kentucky rifle' nostalgia to them but, for me, are impractical. The bicep fit never has worked for me.

 

[Vaino]

Certain "schools" or styles are more comfortable to shoot, eg....Lancaster and others w/ straight combs and thick, flat buttplates. This style has continued on into modern arms design.

Some styles have moderately curved comblines and also can be shot comfortably if designed correctly.

The later rifles w/ skinny butts, excessive drop or incorrectly designed curved comblines can be uncomfortable to shoot, especially w/ big loads.

Hawken type rifles w/ their deeply dished, narrow buttplates require an upper arm mount and if shot from a chest hold, will be painful...even though they have a straight combline. I for one wouldn't own a rifle which requires me to mount in a way that's contrary to good shooting practices....although some do.

Many of the "more unique" LR styles were short lived and in fact were fads......Fred

 

[Vaino]

A Lancaster....



A Bucks County w/ a slightly curved combline...


A Hawken w/ a "moon shaped" buttplate....

 

[gunmaker43]

Generally speaking a rifle that has the top line of the buttstock comb close to parallel to the barrel line & a flat plate will give less perceived recoil. Study the rifles of J.P.Beck for example. No modern guns are made with a deep crescent butt plate....... Tom

 

[Paul_R]

I prefer the Hawken style. Even on my modern 45-70 cartridge guns I prefer that crescent style butt. For me, they shoulder exactly where they belong every time but shooting comfort is very dependent on proper shouldering, as in outboard past the shoulder joint. Get it wrong and you'll know it.... :wink:

 

[Vaino]

You're so correct in your assessment....in flush type wing shooting, there's no time to "fiddle w/ the mount"...it's immediately a "go". Grew up hunting ruffed grouse and soon realized that the most efficient shotgun had a straight combline w/ the proper drops and didn't require adjustments once mounted. These are also the criteria I use w/ rifles.

W/ rifles, usually the shot isn't that time constraining, but the mount shouldn't need physical adjustment to bring the eye into the sights....in other words, one shouldn't have to "crane" one's neck or crawl the stock. Also grew up "jump shooting deer" and again, the rifle had to be "there" w/o physical, time consuming contortions.

A MLer rifle can be built w/o compromising an excellent fit along w/ shooting comfort...it's just that certain styles of LRs are more conducive to achieving these attributes.....Fred

 

[hoochiepapa]

most comfy to shoot ? my builds.

 

[Rifleman1776]

You're so correct in your assessment....in flush type wing shooting, there's no time to "fiddle w/ the mount"...it's immediately a "go". Grew up hunting ruffed grouse and soon realized that the most efficient shotgun had a straight combline w/ the proper drops and didn't require adjustments once mounted. These are also the criteria I use w/ rifles.

W/ rifles, usually the shot isn't that time constraining, but the mount shouldn't need physical adjustment to bring the eye into the sights....in other words, one shouldn't have to "crane" one's neck or crawl the stock. Also grew up "jump shooting deer" and again, the rifle had to be "there" w/o physical, time consuming contortions.

A MLer rifle can be built w/o compromising an excellent fit along w/ shooting comfort...it's just that certain styles of LRs are more conducive to achieving these attributes.....Fred

I often compare quail hunting and deer hunting in the Ozarks as being very similar. In the Ozark forests deer are often seen only for an instant. Taking time to aim at a standing still deer is very rare.
When wearing heavy warm clothes a hooked buttplate catches. The smooth 'shotgun' stock slides into place even with heavy clothes. And, if using a big caliber and heavy loads the broader plate is far more comfortable. Asethically, that is a different matter. I believe many of the old styles are very beautiful and works of art.

 

[Lonegun1894]

I happen to actually like the curved buttplates on rifles. For example, my .54 GPR is one of the most comfortable rifles I have. I also have a modern .45-70 (H&R Buffalo Classic, which is a light weight) with a steel curved buttplate and it handles very well and recoil is not a problem. Now that is for guns that I take deliberate aim with. But the guys above have a point in that a flat buttplate has advantages at times. I will stick with my curved ones though anytime I'm given the choice.

 

[Col. Batguano]

To shoot; a Schutzen. The deeply hooked and dropped toe really stays put.

When time to mount it and weight is an issue, then any with the flatter broader butts. The English Sporting Rifle and German Jaegers are strong candidates, but not really a traditional LR's.

Best looking and worst shooting; Lehighs.

 

[Snakebite]

I happen to actually like the curved buttplates on rifles. For example, my .54 GPR is one of the most comfortable rifles I have. I also have a modern .45-70 (H&R Buffalo Classic, which is a light weight) with a steel curved buttplate and it handles very well and recoil is not a problem. Now that is for guns that I take deliberate aim with. But the guys above have a point in that a flat buttplate has advantages at times. I will stick with my curved ones though anytime I'm given the choice.

I'm with you. Both my custom Hawken and S. Mnt Rifle fit me great with their cresent buttplates.

 

[Capt. Jas.]

The most comfortable stock is one made to fit by someone who knows how to fit it, one that does not have exaggerated features for style that create havoc on fit.
Speaking in the most generic sense of modern production terminology monikers that many use here, fitted versions (at the least being drop at cheek, cast, pitch, LOP) of an "early Lancaster" usually will be a safe bet.

 

[hanshi]

The early Lancasters, Virginia rifles and York styles seem very comfortable.

 

[Lonegun1894]

I'll take it a step further, with the crescent buttplates. My most used smoothbore is a smoothrifle cobbled together using a GPR stock along with a GM .54 smoothbore barrel. Works great and it is still more than fast enough for my needs.

 

[Tommy Bruce]

I like the earlier guns with wider butt plates such as the Christian's Spring school.

 

[gunnar26]

I'm with rifleman and flehto on this. A wide, flat buttplate and straightish comb. Comfortable and easy to pull up and instinctively lock on target. I am curious about the feel of a more French influenced stock like an FDC with a lot of drop. That's one I have yet to handle or shoot. Don't care for hawken style at all, looks or feel.

 

[wattlebuster]

I like the flat wide buttplates of the styles of the early 1740/1770 rifles :hatsoff:

 

[MFordney]

Another vote for the early Lancaster here. :thumbsup:

 

[Stumpkiller]

The most comfortable stock is one made to fit by someone who knows how to fit it, one that does not have exaggerated features for style that create havoc on fit.
Speaking in the most generic sense of modern production terminology monikers that many use here, fitted versions (at the least being drop at cheek, cast, pitch, LOP) of an "early Lancaster" usually will be a safe bet.

I agree. A well fit Lehigh will be more omfortable than a poorly fit Lancaster, but "off the rack" the Lancaster has forgiving architecture.