Why do stevens kick so hard?

[elkhunterCO]

So, I've had two stevens model 200's ( the savage 110 action but with stevens name) one in 25-06 and one in 30-06. The 30-06 kicked so hard that I traded it off. I mean it kicked way harder than my brother in laws 300 rum and my 25-06 kicks hard too. I always knew it kicked pretty good, but the other day I shot it alongside my new model 70 300 win mag and there was no comparison, that little stevens 25-06 was hammerin my shoulder compared to the 300. Just wondering if anybody else had a stevens that kicked like a slapped mule or what.

BTW- my 30-06 printed very small groups with factory ammo, and now that my 25-06 has a decent scope it is a very accurate gun

 

[viking499]

Light factory stock

 

[plmitch]

Can't say I've run into that. My granddaughter has one in 06 thats very smooth. She 14 and no problems.

 

[WestKentucky]

Yup. Light gun in general. Some of the savage built guns have smaller recoil pads condensing recoil to less surface area on the shoulder.

 

[rcmodel]

Weight.
Stock design / fit.
Size & quality of the recoil pad.

rc

 

[Geno]

My current M70s have Decelerator recoil pads...they are thick and absorb the perceived recoil very effectively. I am uncertain what recoil pad the Stevens' use. Too, the stock's design is critical. Weatherby stocks are among the best I ever have fired, due to the stock's cast-off.

Geno

 

[jmr40]

The lighter weight is part of it, but there isn't enough difference in weight to make a 25-06 kick harder than a 300 WM. A well designed stock and recoil pad can really tame some very light rifles recoil.

A typical 8.5 lb 300 wm shooting 180 gr bullets @ 3100 fps is still going to have almost double the recoil of a 7.25 lb. Stevens 200 in 25-05 shooting 120 gr bullets at 3100 fps. About 29 ft lbs recoil vs only about 15 ft lbs. Even if the 300 mag were in an extremely heavy 10 lb rifle it would still have 25 ft lbs of recoil, 10 ft lbs more than the 25-06.

Those weights would be pretty typical with scopes and mounts included.

The "ACTUAL" recoil of you 25-06 is considerably less. The "FELT" recoil feels worse than it really is because of a poor recoil pad and poor stock fit. Another factor is the speed of the recoil. The 25-06 is coming back into your shoulder faster. The greater recoil of the 300 mag is spread out over a fraction of a second longer.

I'm convinced the bigger part is between the ears. I've seen lots off folks convince themselves that a certain gun kicks harder than another. When in reality it does not.

 

[HexHead]

Too, the stock's design is critical. Weatherby stocks are among the best I ever have fired, due to the stock's cast-off.

Geno

This. People underestimate the importance of stockdesign when choosing a rifle. I'd say most give it little to no thought.

 

[taliv]

What specifically about the stock design makes a difference?

 

[Welding Rod]

Seems me stock material can play a part too.

I have shot lighter 375s with plastic stocks that were much tamer than a considerably heavier 375 w/ a wood stock (Ruger Magnum). Granted the Ruger's recoil pad was next to worthless as we'll.

I also noticed that my M1As are very tame (regardless of stock material) but my M1A Super Match in walnut that was very well bedded and considerably heavier had a noticeably sharper recoil impulse.... I assume due to the bedding. Although the thicker wood stock may play into it as well.

 

[Cee Zee]

What specifically about the stock design makes a difference?

Drop at the heel can make a difference in felt recoil. If a gun has a high axis it will have more barrel flip which in the case of a rifle means it will dig in at the top of the butt plate instead of spreading the recoil evenly over the entire butt plate. It doesn't actually kick harder but it seems like it does. This shows up in pistols a lot with the recoil in the grip of course. The Savage design comes from an era when iron sights were still often used. And it's hard to use iron sights on a rifle that's set up to use a scope. The drop has to be lower to allow the eye to see straight down the barrel instead of straight into a scope. That gives you a high axis essentially. And with that you get more barrel flip and more felt recoil. Most modern rifle designs use much less drop at the heel because they are set up to use a scope instead of irons. That gives you a recoil straight back into your shoulder which is more manageable than a stock with a lot of drop at the heel.

This type of thing is more commonly discussed regarding shotguns. Obviously most shotguns aren't designed to use a scope but they do compensate for the shooter's particular dimensions if you get a fitted stock. They want to control everything including the recoil with a well fitted stock. It's a different discipline and the rules are different but they are concerned with managing recoil with the dimensions of the stock.

 

[AABEN]

You can put some buckshot in the stock. That will take some of the kick out of it.

 

[HexHead]

What specifically about the stock design makes a difference?

On a Weatherby, the dropped heel places the stock in the meat of your shoulder and the Monte Carlo cheek piece pulls away from your cheek as the rifle recoils. Both of those, along with the excellent recoil pad they use, really control felt recoil.

 

[HexHead]

You can put some buckshot in the stock. That will take some of the kick out of it.

On a Blaser, you can get a tube with mercury in it fitted into the stock.

 

[dvdcrr]

On that Stevens you could put a 21 oz scope on it and shoot 85 gr. loads. That would take away some of the kick. And make it better balanced.