Solid vs. fixed tele-stock for AR


PDA






dukefan70
December 13, 2009, 02:53 PM
First, living in the Communist Commonwealth of MA we aren't allowed to have telescoping stocks on anything. What they do sell are the tele- style stock in a fixed position on ARs, etc. I've handled but not fired an AR with the fixed tele-stock and have NOT handled a solid stock AR. Looking to buy an AR.

Question: For those who have shot ARs both with and w/out a tele-stock (fixed or not), which did you like better for the weight difference and the feel?

If you enjoyed reading about "Solid vs. fixed tele-stock for AR" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
R.W.Dale
December 13, 2009, 02:56 PM
There is no conceivable reason to buy a fixed telescoping stock unless YOU got to choose where it was fixed.


I personalty don't like em even unfixed, but I can see their place with shooters of diffrent size

Quentin
December 13, 2009, 02:59 PM
It's hard to pick a favorite, it depends on the balance of the rifle in the first place (carbine, rifle, HBar, pencil, etc.) On a carbine I like either the telestock or A1 fixed stock, preferring the former if it's not pinned. The A2 stock is too long for me.

janobles14
December 13, 2009, 03:08 PM
i like the feel of the fixed stocks. however, i do enjoy the lightness of the telescopic stocks. now i dont think i would ever have a need for a fixed position tele type stock. it might be the same light weight but would take away the other advantages.

dukefan70
December 13, 2009, 03:11 PM
good point bout the type...shoulda mentioned that. Hbar is kinda doubtful unless ordered since colts are pre ban (1994) in MA. Also flash suppressors are illegal here too but I've been told that .223 burns out in 14 in. anyway so I might just go for the carbine. I have a shotty for HD but I guess if anybody wants to throw around some good middle of the road barrel lengths for range or HD or all practical purposes I'm all ears.

Eaglecreekbrewer
December 13, 2009, 03:14 PM
The pro and cons of the fixed vs. telescopic stocks are pretty much eliminated when it doesn't move. You have better support and cheek weld on a fixed standard stock. Why subject yourself to the cons when you can't experience the pro's?

highorder
December 13, 2009, 03:16 PM
I swapped a tele-stock for an A2 stock today.

Cheekweld is the name of the game.

fungusmunkey
December 13, 2009, 03:30 PM
I prefer fixed over Tele's myself.

I like the ACE ARFX series.

rcmodel
December 13, 2009, 03:36 PM
Fixed A2 stock for shooting because of way better cheek-weld..

Tele's for looking Tackycool, unless you wear body armor a lot.
Then the adjustble length is a big plus.

rc

Zach S
December 13, 2009, 03:43 PM
I like the M4 stocks because an A2 is too long, entry stocks are too short, and sully stocks are expensive. My 5.56 hasn't moved in years since my wife didn't shoot it. She did mess with the 9mm and .22 stocks, but I doubt they'll get moved much since she's gone.

There is no conceivable reason to buy a fixed telescoping stock unless YOU got to choose where it was fixed.
CMMG does this, I dont know of anyone else does.

TexasRifleman
December 13, 2009, 03:55 PM
I have to say the longer I shoot and take classes with ARs the less need I find I have for telescoping stocks.

I notice that I tend to set them to one length and never mess with it again.

My SBR has a CAR-15 short stock on it and I love it. Took off a Magpul M93 and put the shorty stock on about a year ago.

ETA: Picture

taliv
December 13, 2009, 04:10 PM
i agree with texas. i have collapsible stocks on all of my ARs except for my HP/CMP Service Rifle, and all of the stocks are 1 or 2 positions from fully-collapsed. i leave them there and don't mess with them. i kinda wish they were fixed at that position.

that m93 is a collector item... you should hang on to it

W.E.G.
December 13, 2009, 04:22 PM
It depends entirely on what you are using it for.

For competition and precision shooting, I prefer the fixed stock.

For transit in close quarters, and for getting in-and-out of vehicles, or for shooting under conditions requiring heavy clothing and/or pack-straps, the collapsible stock is very much superior.

Substitute a shorter barrel for even more portability, and less weight.

alemonkey
December 13, 2009, 08:43 PM
Interesting discussion, I'm thinking of building an AR next year and I'm trying to decide what kind of stock to use. Does anyone have experience with the Ace ARFX fixed stock? I really like the looks of that one.

briansmithwins
December 13, 2009, 09:12 PM
Fixed A1 stocks for me.

Fits better than the A2 and fewer parts to go wrong. BSW

Z-Michigan
December 13, 2009, 09:49 PM
I would definitely choose a fixed A2 stock over a fixed telestock.

However, I would, and have, chosen an ACE ARFX over an A2 or telestock, and really prefer it to either. If that were not an option I would also take an A1 buttstock over an A2.

YaNi
December 13, 2009, 10:07 PM
If you go with a telescopic stock make sure you get a stock that doesn't rattle. The telescopic stock and hang guard that came on my Bushy M4gery rattled and made the gun feel like a cheap toy. I replaced them with a Magpul CTR stock and DPMS free float hand guard and all is well. Apparently its a crapshoot if you go with the M4 stock as to whether you get a good one or not.

Mags
December 13, 2009, 10:10 PM
If I lhad to live in a communist regime like yourself I would get this (http://www.magpul.com/catalog/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=70_72&products_id=187). My understanding is that it is a fixed "adjustable" stock. Please correct me if your regime I mean state does not allow it I would not know since I live in a state that doesn't care about my length of pull.

Maverick223
December 13, 2009, 10:32 PM
Mags, I think you are wrong about the Magpul, but living in a free state (well somewhat) I am not positive. OTOH I think the Magpul PRS should be fine as it only adjusts about an inch. It would be my choice as it can be fitted to the shooter.

:)

Tirod
December 14, 2009, 12:37 AM
Adjustable length of pull is pretty moot for the civilian shooter. Other than winter vs. summer, lenth of pull doesn't vary much. Shooting with armor and battle gear on is a rare situation.

As far as use of a weapon in vehicles, a short stock is nice for military/LEO, but again, civilians have little need other than patrolling their own acreage on a ranch, etc. What a soldier needs to do on the streets of Kandahar isn't recommended in the parking lot of McD's.

The Sully runs about $125, which some find expensive. In a world of $150 SOPMOD stocks, not so much. It's a good length, extremely durable, gives a good cheek weld, won't make noise, and follows the principle of KISS. Very few weekend shooters need 6 position stocks with battery storage or multiple sling mounts. They just want them for looks.

Avoid the psuedo look and just use a fixed.

dukefan70
December 14, 2009, 03:29 AM
Thanks all...and Mags, I honestly couldn't tell you if the Magpul UBR is legal in my regime, er, state. It's hard enough to get a straight answer from the local PD on specific carry laws in the state, and I live in a town with firearms friendly police. Why? B/c even they don't know. Why? B/c you'd have to do enough research for an encyclopedia set to know the MA gun laws inside and out. They're so fluid even old hands have trouble keeping up...bloody hell.:fire::cuss::banghead:

Brian Dale
December 14, 2009, 04:23 AM
Fixed A2 stock for myself; tele stock for my Mom, but only for the shorter length of pull that it permits. She doesn't wear body armor or climb in and out of vehicles with a rifle, either.

I guess if anybody wants to throw around some good middle of the road barrel lengths for range or HD or all practical purposes I'm all ears.I use a normal A2 configuration AR (20" barrel) for service rifle matches. I'd also like an all-around carbine with a 16" barrel and a mid-length gas system.

taliv
December 14, 2009, 08:17 AM
dunno if mags gave you the wrong link or just isn't familiar with magpul stocks :) but i assume he meant the PRS, not the UBR.

Adjustable length of pull is pretty moot for the civilian shooter. Other than winter vs. summer, lenth of pull doesn't vary much. Shooting with armor and battle gear on is a rare situation.

while technically i don't need adjustable LOP, I do need a very short LOP (I'm 6'5") that's much shorter than i've ever found on a fixed stock, so collapsible stocks are a must. how you hold the gun also makes a difference, not just clothing and armor.

nyresq
December 14, 2009, 09:04 AM
My AR with afixed stock wears a magpul PRS. For a fixed stock there aren't any that are as comfortable to my face. I tried using the standard A2 with a cheek pad, but the PRS is still more comfortable.

Tirod
December 14, 2009, 10:52 AM
I'm 5'6" with a 30" sleeve, I've shot conventional stocks for years simply because there was no other choice. The issue 6 position stock is relatively cheap and will fit a lot of shooters - but frankly, it's a finesse point. There is no data to quantify a percent improvement in accuracy - it's all heresay.

That's not ignoring sniper/olympic practice -just that the average 2 MOA milspec shooter isn't going to suddenly tighten up just because the stock is one position shorter. Shooter skill is much more the controlling factor, and of that, sight picture and trigger squeeze are undoubtedly a major contribution.

Back to back, installing an adjustable stock won't immediately improve scores, and some adjustable stocks can actually be a detriment with poor cheek weld, sloppy fit, etc. They are given more credence to justify their purchase than they actually provide.

Mags
December 14, 2009, 10:56 AM
I meant the UBR because I thought it attached like an A2 stock and the adjustment is made on the stock not by sliding on the buffer tube. However I am not familiar with the UBR I have never seen one in person but the PRS probably would be better.

Brian Dale
December 14, 2009, 11:36 AM
Tirod, just a moment:The issue 6 position stock is relatively cheap and will fit a lot of shooters - but frankly, it's a finesse point. There is no data to quantify a percent improvement in accuracy - it's all heresay.Well, if that's the case (and I'm not convinced that it is), you've precluded the statements in the rest of that post.

That's not ignoring sniper/olympic practice -just that the average 2 MOA milspec shooter isn't going to suddenly tighten up just because the stock is one position shorter. Shooter skill is much more the controlling factor, and of that, sight picture and trigger squeeze are undoubtedly a major contribution.

Back to back, installing an adjustable stock won't immediately improve scores, and some adjustable stocks can actually be a detriment with poor cheek weld, sloppy fit, etc. They are given more credence to justify their purchase than they actually provide."There are no data" is an a priori disproof of the assertion that "it makes no difference." Not having any data means, quite specifically, that we do not know whether there is a difference or not.

How 'bout we let people get the best fit they can, since the rifle's made to be tweakable? It's a LEGO set; use that characteristic in your favor. Then, of course, go out and practice a lot. Get instruction and so forth. We can't buy skill by adding gadgets to rifles, but that's a separate issue.

The OP asked, "which did you like better for the weight difference and the feel?" My answer: gun fit matters, it's easy to set up an AR to suit your preferences, and my own preferences are as I've stated above.

Digitalage03
December 21, 2009, 11:08 AM
If you want a stock for a ar, it is usless to get a fixed collapsable stock, they are uncomfortable and useless, the purpose of one is to be able to collapse it, get a MagPul PRS stock, they are sweet and very functional. not to mention its a lot more comfortable and better looking than a postban M4 stock. I also have a M93B stock and handled the UBR stock, The UBR is the best you can get IMHO but they are in excess of $300.00 then again a PRS is not that far behind and the UBR is a collapseble anyways so it puts you back to square one.

taliv
December 21, 2009, 11:15 AM
digital, welcome to THR, but your info is a bit off

PRS is not collapsible
UBR can be had for $250 just about anywhere
PRS can be had for $207

but mostly, i think the point wasn't that we wanted a pinned collapsible stock like the sort used in ban states where they want the look of the m4 but aren't allowed to have a collapsible stock so they pin it to the fully extended position.

the point was that many of us put our collapsible stocks in a position we like and leave them there because we don't have any reason to further collapse or extend them.

RockyMtnTactical
December 21, 2009, 03:43 PM
The best reasons to have an adjustable stock is for sharing the rifle with people of various statures, as well as using body armor. Also, if you like the stock being shorter than the A1/A2 type stocks, they are good because it is hard to find the right length in a fixed position.

Downside is they may be less durable... but flexibility is a pretty big upside IMO.

If you enjoyed reading about "Solid vs. fixed tele-stock for AR" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!