# Fiberglass Stocks



## Polar Bear (Mar 5, 2009)

Do you like them or not? Pros, Cons


----------



## The91Bravo (Mar 5, 2009)

PB,

I think they have a place.  But with the advancement in composites, and alloys for bedding, I would consider them a second choice.

It also depends on what your mission/desire is.

If you want a great heirloom piece, then a beautiful wood stock would be it.  
If you want low weight and cost then a fiber or cheap composite stock would be the cat's ass.
If you do not have a budget, or can afford one.  The composite stocks are leightweight and rigid.

If you had asked this question 10 years ago, I would say there are none better for tactical use.  But now, there is.

My .02


----------



## Polar Bear (Mar 5, 2009)

I am looking at the Scout M1A and the Standard M1A. I want to upgrade in the future. Price is really not the issue there is only a 100 to a 200 dollar diff in price from wood to fiberglass


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Mar 5, 2009)

Wood!

This weapon is made of iron and wood! ;)


----------



## 8'Duece (Mar 5, 2009)

Here are two that I recommend for the M1A/M14. 

http://www.vltor.com/socom.htm    This is drop in type system. 

http://www.fulton-armory.com/     Complete rifles available or the chassis system.

First pic is the Fulton Armory SOCOM composite chassis system. 

Second is the Vltor composite chassis system.


----------



## pardus (Mar 5, 2009)

If you're looking at those two rifles i'd go wood, not as durable but it's original, it's better for butt stroking, I'm sure it's heavier so better for recoil and it's just damn cool :cool:

I'm old school and biased.

FG would be fine though, particularly if you are going to beat it up a bit.


----------



## The91Bravo (Mar 5, 2009)

Troy has an absolutely sick stock set for that rifle too.

http://troyind.com/productsM14.html


----------



## 08steeda (Mar 6, 2009)

I have the Springfield Super Match with the Fiberglass McMillan Stock and it is way heavier than wood!!! It shoots better than I do and I have embarrassed plenty of weekend warriors with their bolt guns!

91Bravo is right on! 10 years ago the Fiberglass was the way to go. Varying temps, humidity, etc did not effect the weapon as much as it did with a wood stock. 

However unless you are looking for turning it into the absolute best tack driver a semi-auto can be, then get the composites as they are really amazing!

I assume since your looking at the Scout your not looking to make it the Ultimate Reach Out and Touch someone Semi-Auto. So go composite.

Just MHO!


----------



## pardus (Mar 6, 2009)

08steeda said:


> I have the Springfield Super Match with the Fiberglass McMillan Stock and it is way heavier than wood!!! It shoots better than I do and I have embarrassed plenty of weekend warriors with their bolt guns!
> 
> 91Bravo is right on! 10 years ago the Fiberglass was the way to go. Varying temps, humidity, etc did not effect the weapon as much as it did with a wood stock.
> 
> ...




That is interesting! Good to know!


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Mar 6, 2009)

My M14 NM is wood and I would not have it any other way, the old stuff just feels better with a wood stock to me. But yeah if you are looking for a space rifle, those two 82nd posted look cool...


----------



## 08steeda (Mar 6, 2009)

Yeah that Walnut Stock is pretty!!! Lot more character and uniqueness due to the varying grain and tone's.

They are beautiful weapons!


----------



## HOLLiS (Mar 6, 2009)

Really depends on what you want, what look.  

I really like wood.  The claim wood does not last as long is kind of....  well say,  wood will out last all the members on this forum.  My oldest wooden stock rifled musket was made in 1818 (still shoots).  

I had a scout, it is ok, though I prefer my Stock M1A1.  Maybe because it was the one I was potty trained on.


----------

