Hogue or wood for a rifle stock?

What's the plans for the rifle, the hogues I've used were fine tho not much better then the cheap synthetic stocks.

bummer7 said:

Would appreciate your input, opinion, experiece, criticism, or thoughts on a Hogue synthetic stock or using a wooc stock.
I havve been working on assembling a Rem 700 SA for a few years now. Will soon be at the point where i need to find a stock for the barrelled action. I'm attracted to a synthentic because they are lighter than a wood stock. But i also want stability and fit is important too.
Thanks in advance.
-s

Click to expand...

You need to spend the money on a good quality synthetic to actually better a factory take off, if going that route.

Personally for "cheap" stocks my first and last stop is boyds. If im willing to work for it Richards Microfit rough stock would alsk be an option.

For inexpensive, every time and twice on sunday go with the magpul over... well, anything else. They also seem to just /work/ for everyone.

https://magpul.com/firearm-accessories/stocks/remington-700.html

I wouldnt call the Magpull inexpensive, but at 200-260ish the magpul hunter IS a pretty decent stock upgrade over a normal synthetic, if your comfortable with the Added weight.

I’ve never been impressed by the Hogue stocks. Bell & Carlson are the least of synthetic stocks I would buy.

Saving a bit more for a McMillan is my happy place. The Game Warden has grown on me for my hunting uses.

The hogues I have handled are kind of heavy, flexy, and I don't like the sticky feel. If you can swing it, I too prefer the Boyd's or the bell and Carlson. I did t like the shape of the Magpul.

IMO, with the Hogue it's not worth it unless you get the fully alumimum bedded stock, which is about $100 more than the pillar bedded stock normally. I got one at the price of the pillar bedded ones due to a pricing error on Amazon, and for THAT price it was definitely worth it. Much stiffer than pretty much all OEM stocks, though noticeably heavier too.

The texture is definitely different on them, not your typical polymer. It's like a rubberized coating. I wouldn't quite call it sticky, but it is kind of like the material used on Sticky brand or Remora brand holsters if you've ever had one. I haven't had it out in hot weather yet, so can't say anything in that regard.

I'll echo the recommendation for Boyd's as far as laminate stocks. IMO by the time you're paying the normal price for a fully bedded hogue (around $250) you might as well foot the little extra for a Bell and Carlson.

What is intended use....hunting,bench gun a lot rides on what you will use it for.

bummer7 said:

My inclination is for a budget hunting rifle for now. Right now, it is a barreled action and something I want to shoot to see if it has potential before I move on to the next step. I mention Hogue only because I see used stocks for sale in my area for what I think is quite reasonable prices. I think of a synthetic stock as my other rifles are all wood stock. I don't have any idea on how a synthetic stock compares in feel, balance, heft, recoil, etc., to a wood stocked rifle.


Can you describe "sticky"? Is it rough on the "cheek"? Or how the stock feels in hot or cold weather?

Thanks to everyone for their comments, opinions, and thoughts. I really appreciate the help.
-s

Click to expand...

If you can get a hogue for 20-50 bucks, its not a bad alternative to a factory take off, which will also set you back 20-50 bucks from ebay, and maybe available cheaper locally. After that, hard pass unless its the aluminum blocked one for 100ish

Have you handled a Smith and Wesson revolver with synthetic grips? Those are hogues. They're great grips, but I hate them on a whole gun.

bummer7 said:

I was told this Hogue stock came from a new rifle. While it is not a full aluminum block model. It does have aluminum pillars for the screws. I admit I like the lighter weight of a synthetic stock. Do people epoxy bed these stocks? Or just torque the action into it and call it a day?

Click to expand...

My personal opinion... if you're going to go through the trouble of epoxy bedding, I'd just pay for the full aluminum bedded version or a Bell & Carlson at that rate.

As far as the pillar bedded stock, it is better than nothing but without epoxy bedding you're going to have a pretty flexible forend and you'll have to worry more about barrel contact in all likelihood.

All of that being said, though, if you just want to have a cheap hunting rifle and you're not looking for absolute precision, you could probably get by with just the pillar bedded stock and call it a day.

Don't know your barrel contour, but this is a deal on a Hogue pretty similar to what I ended up with for my Weatherby. In fact, it's essentially the same stock, color and all, just for a 700 SA.

https://www.amazon.com/Hogue-70312-...591077124&sprefix=hogue+remington+700&sr=8-11

I'm attracted to a synthentic because they are lighter than a wood stock

Click to expand...

You need to do some research. Most cheap synthetics are no lighter than wood, and many are heavier. Hogue is one of those that is a LOT heavier than wood.

Weighing stocks on postal scales can be quite informative. It does vary by individual stock and manufacturer, but MOST walnut bolt action rifle stocks are pretty close to 32 oz. Winchester Featherweight and Remington Mountain rifle stocks are in the 28-30 oz range. Most laminated wood stocks are going to be about 36-40 oz.

Most factory synthetics are in the same 28-32 oz range. When you get to inexpensive aftermarket synthetics stocks most are about 32-36 oz range. Some, like Hogue are 40 oz with pillars, closer to 48 oz with full bedding block.

When you move up to mid priced stocks like B&C they do offer a lightweight version for some rifles, butthey are still about 28-30 oz. but most are 32-36 oz. Same with HS-Precision.

Even high end synthetics from McMillan, Brown Precision, etc.which start at about $500 will be 32+ oz for their standard fiberglass stocks. To get a true lightweight synthetic prices start at around $600 for a Kevlar stock. McMillans version will weigh 22-23 oz. Brown Precision makes one as light as 16 oz.

I wouldn't waste my time or money on most aftermarket stocks unless you're going to spend the money to do it right. The factory synthetics at 28-32 oz are as light as you're going to get for under $600 and shoot just fine.

I've tried just about all of them. Either stay with factory, or save your pennies and go with a McMillan Edge. My Edge stocks aren't any more accurate, but are about 1/2 lb lighter, and look a lot nicer. They were expensive, but I gained something for my money. I can't see spending $200-$300 for a downgrade compared to what came on the rifle.

The point @jmr40 makes above is well advised, but I would add the following caveat:

Many, many of these aftermarket options, although the same weight or even slightly heavier than a factory synthetic, are FAR stiffer.

So a shooter/owner can consider:

1) Carrying the same weight for a stiffer stock, less influenced by positional pressures is often worth the expense.

2) When the factory synthetic stock is enhanced through bedding and stiffening to free float and stiffen the stock from the action, to become equivalent to the aftermarket option, the factory synthetic becomes heavier than the aftermarket option.

The second is the only reason I spend more time, money, and energy to use stiffening rods in any factory synthetic I choose to keep, rather than simply pouring them full of epoxy. Adding ~2oz of epoxy to support a 1.5-2oz piece of steel rod or aluminum angle is a less weight than pouring 3/4-1lb of epoxy into the forend to stiffen the stock, and changes the balance of the rifle considerably less.

bummer7 said:

JMR40 and Varmiterror,
You have some very good points on the benefits gained from using quality parts. I appreciate your thoughts and information. This is a lot of information to consider about the type of stock i should take into consideration for a rifle.
Great idea about using a postal scale to weigh the stocks. I wiill give this a try.
-s
PS. You have me curious as to what or using 2 oz piece of steel rod or aluminum angle epoxied into place helps. Can you please clarify your kdea on this?

Click to expand...

I'm not one of those two, but I'll just add that I've seen/heard of people using carbon fiber arrow shafts for the same purpose, would save on weight over steel or aluminum.

BigBL87 said:

I'm not one of those two, but I'll just add that I've seen/heard of people using carbon fiber arrow shafts for the same purpose, would save on weight over steel or aluminum.

Click to expand...

Ive used aluminum square tube, carbon arrow shafts, filled epoxy, straight epoxy....heck i tried the stiff loctite gap filler (that was a stupid idea.....tho maybe as the "glue" for aluminum or carbon square tube.)
Ill echo VTs comment on the weight, I use straight epoxy pretty often when TRYING to ad forward weight, but other options are lighter and in some.ways easier to work with.

oh reason behind the whole deal is stiffening the stock so it dosent flex as much.

bummer7 said:

Thank you. that helps me understand a bit more. I take it the idea is to epoxy a strong lightweight piece of metal or rigid rod to the front end of a stock? and under the barrel? With the intent of the metal or rod to stop the front end of the stock from flexing? Am I describing this correctly?

Click to expand...

Yeah thats the basic idea. We all seeme to go about it a little differently, and may chose different material for different projects/preferences/availability (pile of busted arrow shafts), but thats what were trying to accomplish.

I don't care about looks, so Hogue is where I live. It's all about the practical, without the craptical. But I'm looking for rifles that are shooters.
I sold my best looking gun, beautiful Black Walnut Stock JM Marlin, it had me a nervous wreck, that I would dent or scratch the stock.
I bought the same type rifle with a crappy, dinged up stock, never been happier. Don't have to worry about ruining the furniture.

bummer7 said:

Sorry if this is a dumb question but i have to ask. Why reinforce the fore-end of the stock? Shouldn't i be more concerned with the stock area supporting the action, recoil lug, and maybe a partial area under the chamber. What am i missing or not seeing here?
Thanks guys.

Click to expand...

It's to try and prevent the forend from moving and contacting the barrel. Or used to fix a forend that may have twist in it.