# Which type of rifle do you prefer and why?



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

About a month ago I made a post asking which gun should be next on the list; viewtopic.php?f=15&t=15196. I am now leaning towards the 243 by Savage, possibly narrowed down to these two:
Thumbhole laminate








Stainless synthetic








I am certainly still open to other reccomendations, but I am just bored out of my mind this time of year, not quite able to get out and do much. Anyways, which do you guys like and why? I am leaning towards the thumbhole laminate, price difference is negligible. In general, any pros/cons on the stainless? I just wanted to make a post to keep my drive alive on saving for this and get some insight from everybody, so let me hear your thoughts.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

The laminate has the looks, but the stainless synthetic wins the practicality contest. It is really tough to make those awkward left handed shots with the thumbhole stock.


----------



## Al Hansen (Sep 7, 2007)

Loke said:


> The laminate has the looks, but the stainless synthetic wins the practicality contest. It is really tough to make those awkward left handed shots with the thumbhole stock.


+1, being a lefty with the long guns, those thumbholles don't work. (unless you special order one).


----------



## Lycan (Sep 22, 2008)

I'm not a big fan of the thumb hole, although I am a fan of laminate stocks. The thumb hole is a bit awkward for certain shots. It also tends to pinch, especially with larger calibers. They're alright for a rimfire or varmint caliber bench gun, but for general hunting purposes I prefer other styles.


----------



## Frisco Pete (Sep 22, 2007)

I would agree that the thumbhole style is best for bench use. They are more awkward to carry than standard sporter stocks and are slower to bring to bear from the carry position for a quick standing shot. The total rifle weight is heavier as well with the laminated/thumbhole style stock. The real appeal of the thumbhole Savage shown is for varmint hunters who shoot prairie dogs from the bench, or Eastern Whitetail deer hunters who use a stand for hunting.

I am another one who likes laminated stocks because they are stable and look good, but only in a conventional sporter configuration. Of course there is absolutely nothing wrong with the synthetic conventional stock shown and in real hunting use out here in the West where we hike around and occasionally have been known to bang the stock against a rock or scratch one going thru the oakbrush, except for looks, perhaps. Laminates tend to be a slight bit heavier than traditional walnut or many synthetics.

Stainless rifles coupled with synthetic stocks make a tough and weather-resistant combination.


----------



## sawsman (Sep 13, 2007)

Of the two pictured, I would take the Savage stainless over the thumbhole version. The SS/composite rifle would hold up better in rough field conditions. I've heard good things about the triggers on them Savages'.

If I had to choose another it would be a wood stock and stainless barrel just because I'm partial to them.


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

I think each type of rifle is chosen for it's given application. I wouldnt want to take a heavy barrel rifle with a thumbhole stock out for bunny busting, and I wouldnt want to take out a light rifle for target shooting at a distance.

I own a Marlin 917 VSFT stainless thumbhole .17HMR that is great fun to shoot, but not a practical carry rifle for pushing through sage brush. But it is great for longer shots on squirrels and rabbits.

I have also owned some stainless synthetic stock rifles in the past. And kind of regret getting rid of them. They are light weight, and you dont worry about scratching up the stock like you would with a Grade III-VII stock on a nice Blaser. I think they make great hunting rifles for rough terrain. 

But again, I think it all depends on what you intend on doing with the rifle...


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

Thanks guys, I had not even thought about the weight issue. The Davidson's website shows that the laminate only weighs 1/4 lb more than the synthetic. Additionally, what is the problem with the thumbhole other than the left handed issue? I don't in any way question your guy's opinion, I just don't quite understand the issue. I have a thumbhole 22 and really like it. Otherwise, I was thinking that the laminate would be more durable than a synthetic as you could sand out a scratch...? As far as the use intended; it would be kind of a pronghorn or deer rifle and maybe something to hand down to my son in a few years.


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

I dont think that there is a real problem with the thumbhole stock. It is very comfortable to use, but it is a bit bulky as far as putting it on a sling. Mine kinda jabs me in the side of the ribs if I put a sling on it. But that is my only real gripe. But my friend has the same model rifle I do, minus the thumbhole stock, and mine weighs about 1 lb more. So if it is only 1/4 lb more, go for it.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

I've shot a couple of rifles with a thumbhole stock, I just didn't care for them. It all boils down to personal preference. If you like the thumbhole stock by all means buy it and enjoy it. But they are just not for me.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

I just got a $100 off of a $500 purchase coupon from Cabela's today, so the purchase could possibly be sped up to this month maybe.


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

Can't go wrong with laminated stocks. I have a few from Boyd's and they're great.


----------

