Classic or Synthetic?

[B. Byrd]

Wood!

 

[HelluvaEngineer]

Definetly looks better in wood!

 

[timbgtm]

Wood

 

[stasher1]

Wood for looks, plastic for carry

This^^

Wood is fine if it's just going to sit in a rack and be drooled on, but synthetic stocks are more practical for guns that actually get used, imho.

 

[jsquared]

"Plastic crap" lol, give me a break. Dollars to donuts says most of the people in this thread have never fired an M1/M1A, let alone owned one.

 

[2001SportTJ]

I like the wood look better, but the synthetic is probably better for what you are going to use it for.

 

[HerkyBird]

I like the wood look better, but the synthetic is probably better for what you are going to use it for.

Exactly. I think the rifle looks much better in wood, but synthetic doesn't swell, is more durable, and lighter. It's just more practical all around. On the other hand, our soldiers used rifles with wooden stocks with great effectiveness in harsh environments for many years. I doubt I'll ever do anything as extreme as humping a rifle through the jungles of the South Pacific islands or through the Ardennes.

 

[whiskerz]

"Plastic crap" lol, give me a break. Dollars to donuts says most of the people in this thread have never fired an M1/M1A, let alone owned one.

Does 3 work? I own both stocks . 2 synthetic 1 match rifle in bedded walnut.