Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Stocks vs. Chassis
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Barrelnut" data-source="post: 2398268" data-attributes="member: 74902"><p>I think it has to due with the stiffness of a chassis. Metal stocks are very stiff, more stiff than fiberglass or carbon. This causes less flex under recoil. Add that to the fact that the action is basically bolted to the metal chassis and flex basically becomes a non issue. A lot of f-class shooters use laminated wood stocks these days because laminated wood flexes less that composites too. Plus you get the nice feel of wood on your hands and face instead of metal and plastic.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Barrelnut, post: 2398268, member: 74902"] I think it has to due with the stiffness of a chassis. Metal stocks are very stiff, more stiff than fiberglass or carbon. This causes less flex under recoil. Add that to the fact that the action is basically bolted to the metal chassis and flex basically becomes a non issue. A lot of f-class shooters use laminated wood stocks these days because laminated wood flexes less that composites too. Plus you get the nice feel of wood on your hands and face instead of metal and plastic. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Stocks vs. Chassis
Top