I don't completely understand the need for collapsible stocks

Agreed

To each his own, but that's one argument I can get behind. I'm only 5'8 and I'm also pretty big so short stocks work well for me. I find myself always putting them at their shortest setting. I personally love the LOP on a standard romanian style AK stock. Fits me perfect.

 

The adjustable stock also means more comfort in different shooting positions.

I personally like a very short LOP. I can do much more with a LOP that is too short than one that is too long.

I really like that the same rifle can fit my 10 year old, my 15 year old, my wife, and me. I even have an adjustable stock on my HD shotgun.

Assuming the original stock even fits you correctly.

As for need, I have never understood how people not in my situation will claim to know my needs. Funny how when people don't like something or don't have a need for it themselves, they relegate it to being not needed by anybody.

 

Usually, the argument against an adjustable stock is that it is difficult to get a good cheek weld. Having said that, I think it depends a lot on the shooter and the type of shooting.

 

And the nature of the stock -- some adjustables provide much better cheek weld than others.

 

Shorter LOP better for maneuvering indoors IMHO. I use a fixed stock on my target AR and a collapsable on my HD AR.

 

^This guy knows what's up!

I believe an adjustable stock is also known as "the shoulder thing that goes up". If that's not a good enough reason to own one, I don't know what is...

The fact that ninny politicians are filling their Depends and Tenas over folding and collapsible stocks makes owning them that much better.

 

This video really made the light bulb come on over my head regarding the usefulness of an adjustable stock. Right around the 8 minute mark:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlrGfhErqlg

 

Some adjustables provide better cheek weld than most fixed stocks. My VLTOR EMod stock has much better cheek weld than a standard AR fixed stock.

 

Thanks for posting that vid BLB68, I hadn't seen the "shoulder bump" before, I just do a full transition. Yeah, that method doesn't work too well w/o being able to fully collapse the stock. I'm going to train that some for sure.

 

Dr Rob nailed it in Post# 41. Originally a way to make ARs more compact for storage, it was found to be advantageous for various sizes of shooters. As body armor became more common, shooters discovered that the compact stock positions permitted accurate shooting with the torso directly toward the threat ('squared' rather than angled as with conventional shooting stances), maximizing the protection of the armor as well as allowing the greatest mobility.
Fad-dom followed...

 

This may apply to people with short necks, people who always shoot in plates, people who only ever shoot from CQB positions, or people who mount their optics too far to the rear and scrunch their heads back on the stock to get eye relief.

But I am on the small side of average (5'9", 180 lbs.), and if I am shooting a collapsible stocked AR, I generally have the stock adjusted all the way out and my cheek is resting on the bare buffer tube. I don't care what shape the stock is, because it is well behind where my cheek goes. The only exception is CQB shooting, in which case I'm not too worried about cheek weld anyway.

The only collapsible stocks I've ever seen that have cheek weld worth a damn are the UBR and F93. And it is at the cost of a lot of weight.

I always have to wonder what type of position folks are using when they talk about how great the cheek weld is on this or that collapsible carbine stock.

 

I shoot them all the way out also. My (non-tactical) beard ends up on the joint and gets pulled sometimes. The sliders also feel wobly to me when shouldered. Looking through the scope, put upward and downward pressure on the gun, and the stock moves/rattles. Not as bad as how underfolder AK's often feel, but the effect is similar to me. I wondered if it was part of the reason I cant spot hits shooting at the 300 and 600 yard plates with a carbine like I can with the rifle.

Perhaps they arent all that way, so far the ones I've looked at have the movement to some degree. Enough to bother me.

I think I may be lacking the tactical gene.

 

Very handy for hunting at my airport, from inside the ops trucks!

 

If collapsible was the end-all-be-all, why do shotgun shooters simply fit the stock to their preference (ensure the gun fits them) and then leave it alone?

 

Implying that shotgun shooters are the end-all-be-all?

 

Seems like they've been doing that whole tactical shooting kind of thing, you know, shooting at moving targets, going to different positions, etc, long before it was hip to do it with rifles. They've been around a while, and if it gave some of these high-end competitors an edge, they'd have done it by now. Having a stock that fits perfectly is the goal. Adjustability seems anathema to that.

 

Shotgunners adjust around the gun just like fixed rifle stock shooters instead of letting the gun be adjusted to them. I am reminded of a skeet shooter that came out with his custom measured skeet gun to shoot and his new thick coat. Darned if he didn't screw up and not take winter gear into consideration.

I can't think of many shotgun competitions that shoot shotguns prone. Which are those again?

So if adjustability is so bad, then why has it caught on so well?

 

There are collapsible stock options for shotguns. It's usually the combat shotgun crowd that uses them, for the same reasons as rifles, including the 'cool' factor.

 

Shotgunners most certainly do not adjust around the gun. The best ones fit a stock to themselves. You could call that adjusting. But once done, that is it.

Having a collapsible stock is all cool looking but there is no need to constantly adjust a stock while in use. The feature exists more for creating a single stock that more than one man can use.

I did not say being able to adjust a stock is bad. Don't put words in my mouth or onto my keyboard. But if micro selection is all that great, why don't AR's have adjustable gas systems for different loads?

Most guys go adjustable because it looks cool and is super tactical. Don't pretend otherwise. They want to have fun and play with your toys while you play solider or super SWAT man.

Or, instead of condescending, we could simply discuss the topic. Some guys like collapsible stocks. Some guys don't see a need in them. They aren't a critical need for a single shooter, often don't provide good cheek welds, and shot gunners don't use them in their sport.

If it were such an important feature, then it would use more universally (and all hunting rifles would have them, all hunting shotguns would have them, etc).

The need isn't so great. The want is so great. They are not needed if a stock is properly fit. Guys like collapsible stocks. That is central truth.

 

Then, there's:

 

Me too. My cheek was always on the buffer tube. That's one reason I removed the adjustable stock on my AR and installed a fixed stock.

I like the idea of an adjustable stock though, as has been mentioned in this thread.

Due to the ban of adjustable stocks in the '90s I will always keep (in a box) my now ubiquitous adjustable stock just because.

When I read that, I keep thinking of an operator named Gene.

 

Um, informal sporting clays "follow the leader".

We'd lay on our backs though. Regular stocks worked fine.