I'm buying a 3.03 Enfield, but I don't know whether to get the lighter synthetic model or the big wooden one. I think I want the light one for backpacking purposes, but the recoil on that thing is sure to be excessive, to say the least. Would the original wooden one ( I think it saw battle,) be a better buy, despite the extra weight I'd be toting around?
If you enjoyed reading about "Synthetic or wood?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
December 23, 2008, 07:30 PM
ati is the only company i know of that makes a synthetic stock for an enfield & its a $45 p.o.s. i'd my the one with original military wood & then buy the ati stock if you just had to have one.
December 23, 2008, 10:47 PM
December 23, 2008, 11:12 PM
I think with a gun like that I'd stick with the wood.
December 25, 2008, 03:35 AM
I was probably going to get the wood anyway but you put me over the top.
It's a first edition Enfield, and I've heard they're supposed to be really well made, and it's the same price, and it's really not that much heavier. Compared to a Mosin Nagant it's so light.
December 25, 2008, 07:41 AM
A light Enfield for backpacking?
December 25, 2008, 08:09 PM
Trust me....you don't want a lightweight Enfield when you're shooting regular .303Brit loads....all that wood helps a lot....and so does a good slip-on rubber recoil pad...in fact, I'm looking to put more weight on my sporterized #1Mk3*....
December 26, 2008, 08:14 AM
i think a 7 x 57 mauser in a plastic stock would be a better bet. especially if you ran it on some lighter comercial ammo in the 120 gr wieght bracket. recoil would be ok. nice and light, a great action as well. if it had to be a .303 enfield, how about one of the Jungle carbines?