.

replacement stocks and recoil

This regarding the muzzle break post of a few days ago. I once had a Ruger MK I that I sold because it beat the $#!^ out of me. I swore at that point I would never own a Magnum again it was so bad. I finally broke down after having a lot of success with my custom 7x57 in accuracy that I wanted to go the next step and shoot a 7mm Mag. I was hesitant but went with the 7 WSM in a coyote. I haven't looked back as far as recoil with it. I also recently shot a friends CZ 550 in 7 Rem Mag and it was no where near as bad as what I remembered. Getting back to unbearable recoil, I purchased, about 1 1/2 yrs ago, a Mauser Model 96(made in '96) straight pull in 30-06. That is the worst kicking rifle I have ever owned to include the 7mm Ruger. Fun to shoot if you load it down.

My question is I'm looking to dig a little deeper in the stock design and why one stock pounds you when another one won't. I'm thinking the cheaper plastic stocks would have more recoil absorption than wood with their flexibility, albeit at the expense of accuracy. Anyhow, what is it exactly do you think it is that recoil is not transferred properly from Ruger stocks or any stock for that matter.

Comments

  • temblortemblor Member Posts: 2,153 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Those cheap injected molded stocks are bad for recoil and accuracy. I've seen tests where they have proved that the fiberglass/kelvar stocks soak up more recoil than the cheap ones even thou they are stiffer due to the materials. Also if you look at the shape of some stocks you'll find the very straight stocks will kick the bejeebers out of you. Sort of like someone holding a 2x4 to their shoulder and having someone hit the end of it with a sledge hammer.The lighter weight plays into it too. Heavier guns soak up some of the felt recoil just due to the weight. -- Look at the design of the Weatherby Mark IV stocks sometime with the high rollover cheekpiece. If you look closely you'll see that they have some drop at the comb and the cheekpiece is sloped so that when fired thay will pivot slightly like a fulcrum on your shoulder, allowing the bbl to rise rather than coming straight back to your shoulder and the cheekpiece rolls away from your face instead of slaping your cheek. They put alot of design work in these years ago due to the recoil problems associated with their magnum calibers at a time when most people were used to shooting 30.06, 270 Win., 7x57,etc. -- I had a friend that had a recent cheap model 70 Winchester chambered in 300 Win. Mag. with the cheap straight synthetic stock that was particularly evil to shoot. -- Sako stocks are good also, among others........ just my .02 cents...........
  • joesjoes Member Posts: 484 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    my .02 cents= plastic has been proven, time and time again, that it does not have properties to absorb recoil as well as other materials....but is more accurate than wood, because of the lack of warping involved, and can be produce (via injected molding processes) to exact fits to the action of the rifle ( which can not be done with wood, to those standards).

    Weight has everything to do felt recoil. If you look at a recoil chart, the recoilfor a 7 mm rem mag with 150 gr. is 19.2 energy the only thing between you and that energy is the weight of the stock.

    see artical and recoil chart below

    Rifle Recoil Table
    By Chuck Hawks
    For an expanded version of this table showing a great many more calibers and loads including British, European, wildcat, obsolescent American and proprietary calibers, see the "Expanded Rifle Recoil Table" on the Tables, Charts and Lists Page.
    For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction; that is one of the physical laws of our universe. This means that the momentum of a rifle's reaction will exactly equal the momentum of the bullet and powder gasses ejected from the barrel. In the shooting sports we call that reaction recoil or "kick." It can be measured or computed empirically, and has been for this recoil table.
    But perceived recoil, what the shooter feels, is a highly subjective matter. It is influenced by many factors. One of the most important of these is the fit and shape of the rifle stock. A good recoil pad can help soften the blow to the shooter's shoulder. Gas-operated semi-automatic actions reduce apparent recoil by spreading it over a longer period of time. These sorts of things cannot be accounted for in a recoil table. Also, please understand that there are dozens of loads for any given bullet weight in any cartridge that will produce the same velocity, but a different amount of recoil. So the figures in any recoil table should be taken as approximate. Never-the-less, the table below should give a reasonably accurate comparison of the recoil of most popular rifle cartridges.
    It is worth remembering that the majority of authorities agree that recoil of over twenty foot pounds will cause most shooters to develop a serous flinch, which is ruinous to bullet placement (the prime component of killing power). Fifteen foot pounds is probably about the maximum recoil energy most shooters feel reasonably comfortable with, particularly at the shooting range, where most serious marksmanship practice occurs.
    While recoil energy determines how hard the blow to the shoulder feels, recoil velocity determines how abrupt the blow to the shoulder feels. My subjective impression is that, with a well designed stock, recoil velocity above about 10 fps begins to feel like a sharp rap on the shoulder rather than an abrupt push.
    I estimate that fifteen foot pounds of free recoil energy and 10 fps of recoil velocity represent the approximate upper limit of the comfort level. Above that recoil becomes increasingly intrusive. Also, the effects of recoil are cumulative. The longer you shoot, and the harder the rifle kicks, the more likely you are to flinch. These are good things to remember when comparing rifle cartridges, and at the range.
    In the table below rifle weight is given in pounds, free recoil energy is given in foot pounds, and free recoil velocity is given in feet-per-second. All recoil values have been rounded off to one decimal place.
    The recoil energy and recoil velocity figures are taken from various sources including the recoil nomograph in the Handloader's Digest 8th Edition, various online recoil calculators, or calculated from the formula given in the Lyman Reloading Handbook, 43rd Edition. The formula is:
    E = 1/2 (Wr / 32) (Wb x MV + 4700 x Wp / 7000 x Wr)squared.
    Where E = recoil Energy in ft. lbs., Wr = Weight of rifle in pounds, Wb = Weight of bullet in grains, MV = Muzzle Velocity of bullet in feet-per-second, Wp = Weight of powder in grains.


    Cartridge ([email protected]) Rifle Weight Recoil energy Recoil velocity
    .17 HMR (17 at 2550) 7.5 0.2 n/a
    .204 Ruger (33 at 4225) 8.5 2.6 4.4
    .22 LR (40 at 1165) 4.0 0.2 n/a
    .22 WMR (40 at 1910) 6.75 0.4 n/a
    .22 Hornet (45 at 2800) 7.5 1.3 3.3
    .222 Rem. (50 at 3200) 7.5 3.0 5.1
    .223 Rem. (45 at 3500) 8.5 2.6 4.5
    .223 Rem. (55 at 3200) 8.0 3.2 5.1
    .22-250 Rem. (55 at 3600) 8.5 4.7 6.0
    .220 Swift (55 at 3800) 8.5 5.3 6.4
    .223 WSSM (55 at 3850) 7.5 6.4 7.4
    .243 Win. (75 at 3400) 8.5 7.2 7.4
    .243 Win. (100 at 2960) 7.5 8.8 8.7
    6mm Rem. (100 at 3100) 8.0 10.0 9.0
    .243 WSSM (100 at 3100) 7.5 10.1 9.3
    .240 Wby. Mag. (100 at 3406) 8.0 17.9 n/a
    .257 Roberts (117 at 2650) 8.0 9.0 n/a
    .25 WSSM (120 at 2990) 7.25 13.8 11.1
    .25-06 Rem. (120 at 3000) 8.0 12.5 10.0
    .257 Wby. Mag. (120 at 3300) 9.25 15.1 10.3
    6.5x55 Swede (140 at 2650) 9.0 10.6 8.7
    .260 Rem. (140 at 2750) 7.5 13.6 10.8
    6.5mm Rem. Mag. (120 at 3100) 8.0 13.1 10.3
    6.5x68 S (140 at 2990) 8.5 16.8 11.3
    .264 Win. Mag. (140 at 3200) 8.5 19.2 12.1
    .270 Win. (130 at 3140) 8.0 16.5 n/a
    .270 Win. (150 at 2900) 8.0 17.0 11.7
    .270 WSM (150 at 3000) 8.0 18.9 12.3
    .270 Wby. Mag. (150 at 3000) 9.25 17.8 11.1
    7x57 Mauser (139 at 2800) 8.0 14.0 10.6
    7mm-08 Rem. (140 at 2860) 8.0 12.6 10.1
    .280 Rem. (140 at 3000) 8.0 17.2 11.8
    7mm Rem. SAUM (160 at 2931) 8.0 21.5 13.2
    7mm WSM (160 at 3000) 8.0 21.9 13.3
    7mm Rem. Mag. (140 at 3150) 8.0 19.1 12.4
    7mm Rem. Mag. (150 at 3100) 8.5 19.2 12.1
    7mm Wby. Mag. (140 at 3300) 9.25 19.5 11.7
    7mm Ultra Mag. (160 at 3200) 8.5 29.4 n/a
    .30 Carbine (110 at 1990) 7.0 3.5 5.7
    .30-30 Win. (150 at 2400) 7.5 10.6 9.5
    .30-30 Win. (170 at 2200) 7.5 11.0 9.7
    .300 Sav. (150 at 2630) 7.5 14.8 n/a
    .308 Win. (150 at 2800) 7.5 15.8 11.7
    .308 Win. (180 at 2610) 8.0 17.5 11.9
    .30-06 Spfd. (150 at 2910) 8.0 17.6 11.9
    .30-06 Spfd. (180 at 2700) 8.0 20.3 12.8
    .300 Rem. SAUM (180 at 2960) 8.25 23.5 13.6
    .300 WSM (180 at 2970) 8.25 23.8 13.6
    .300 Win. Mag. (180 at 2960) 8.5 25.9 14.0
    .300 Wby. Mag. (150 at 3400) 9.25 24.6 13.1
    .300 Ultra Mag. (180 at 3230) 8.5 32.8 15.8
    7.62x39 Soviet (125 at 2350) 7.0 6.9 8.0
    .303 British (180 at 2420) 8.0 15.4 11.1
    .32 Spec. (170 at 2250) 7.0 12.2 10.6
    8x57 Mauser (170 at 2360) 8.0 12.9 n/a
    .325 WSM (200 at 2960) 8.0 32.8 16.2
    8x68 S (150 at 3300) 8.5 25.3 13.9
    .338-57 O'Connor (200 at 2400) 8.0 19.2 12.4
    .338 Win. Mag. (250 at 2700) 9.0 33.1 15.4
    .340 Wby. Mag. (200 at 3100) 10.0 29.6 13.8
    .338 Ultra Mag (250 at 2860) 8.5 43.1 n/a
    .357 Mag. (158 at 1650) 7.0 4.7 6.6
    .35 Rem. (200 at 2050) 7.5 13.5 10.8
    .35 Whelen (200 at 2675) 8.0 22.6 13.5
    .350 Rem. Mag. (200 at 2700) 8.5 22.3 13.0
    9.3x62 (270 at 2550) 8.5 33.3 n/a
    .375 H&H Mag. (270 at 2690) 9.0 36.1 16.1
    .375 Ultra Mag (300 at 2800) 8.75 53.2 n/a
    .378 Wby. Mag. (300 at 2900) 10.25 71.1 n/a
    .416 Rem. Mag. (400 at 2400) 10.0 52.9 18.5
    .416 Rigby (400 at 2400) 10.0 58.1 19.3
    .44 Rem. Mag. (240 at 1760) 7.5 11.2 9.8
    .444 Marlin (240 at 2400) 7.5 23.3 14.2
    .450 Marlin (350 at 2000) 7.0 37.2 18.5
    .45-70 (300 at 1800) 7.0 23.9 14.8
    .45-70 (405 at 1330) 7.5 18.7 12.7
    .458 Win. Mag. (500 at 2100) 9.0 62.3 21.1
    .460 Wby. Mag. (500 at 2600) 11.25 99.6 n/a

    Avg 25 grains per load/ 7000 grains in a pound. thats 280 loads per pound, which works out to a little under 4 pounds to load 1000.
  • keystone hog hunterkeystone hog hunter Member Posts: 1 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    have a 7mm ruger all weather that kicked like the hammers of hell.. installed a houge overmoulded rifle stock ..feels great,, shoots tighter groups,, and felt recoil is like my 223. am instaling them on several other rifles just for the way they feel.. next mountain hunt can restore original stock on ruger..funny did not notice recoil when shooytin at game???
  • Noah MercyNoah Mercy Member Posts: 43 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Drop at comb, shape and angle of butt, recoil pad area, and pad material all play a part in the recoil equation. IMHO, the finest synthetic stock design is by Melvin Forbes of Ultra Light Arms. His stocks weigh next to nothing but keep even heavy recoiling cartridges comfortable to shoot. (I fired one of his 6 1/2 pound 338 Win Mags [that includes sling, scope, and a full mag] and it wasn't as bad as a surplus Mauser in 8mm.[:0]) As Keystone Hog Hunter mentioned, the Hogue overmolded is also a fine design, especially considering the price. Also note that it can be had with either pillar bedding or a full-length aluminum bedding rail. It also has the virtue of being perhaps the quietest stock on the market. I have an old-style Ruger synthetic-stock on my 300 Win Mag...I keep it just to teach myself not to flinch. Don't laugh!...if you can rack off a couple boxes of ammo from the bench with this gun and still keep them under an inch, very few guns will bug you in the field, including big African cartridges. The new Ruger stocks are far superior to the old design, both wood and synthetic. The wood stocks were redesigned when the MKII was introduced. (A local fella' by the name of Leonard Brownell designed the new ones.)

    As for the cheap, flexible stocks being recoil-absorbing...that is a logical question but I'm sorry to say it doesn't work. I have a Savage 12FVSS (synthetic stock, stainless steel, fluted, heavy barrel) in 308. It has a "soft" synthetic stock. I also have a Winchester Heavy Varmint in 308 that came from the factory with a stiff HS Precision stock (same one that comes on the Remington bull-barreled guns). The rifles weigh within 2 ounces of one another. With identical loads, the recoil from the Savage feels noticeably stouter than that from the Model 70. Recoil energies are virtually identical, as are recoil velocities, but the superior design of the HSP stock makes all the difference in the world.

    [:D]
  • dljackodljacko Member Posts: 51 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Have just finished reading an article on recoil in a European magazine. The writer attests to the fact that timber absorbs more recoil than any synthetic production stock. I used to own exclusively BRNO Cz rifles but being left handed have slowly switched to Ruger. With a Pachmeyer Decelerator my blued timber 300Win mag and stainless laminated 7mm mag are quite reasonable to shoot. My mates Weatherby Vanguard Stainless Synthetic 30-06 is one hell of mule kicking rifle which I never want to fire again. The BRNO Cz rifles are guite heavy and have a good shape stock that is why the felt recoil is much less. I had one in 375H&H and bloddy near wore the barrel out because it was my favourite to shoot.
    Cheers.
Sign In or Register to comment.