Too much wood?

I love wood on a rifle or shotgun, especially wood that talks. But more often these days my tastes are swinging away from full, long stocks to the split butt and forend with an attractive piece of metal in between.
On double rifles and shotguns this is the norm of course, but what of on a bolt or other rifle? The Ruger No1 is the epitome of an elegant split form, but there are others whose looks are much enhanced by the metallic gap. The Blaser R8 is one for sure and the Marlin levers too.
Of course it is in the eye of the beholder, but I wondered how many are seeing the less wood is more thing?

Agreed, of the two rifles above, I greatly prefer #1.

I too find the break up of metal and wood aesthetically pleasing.

deewayne2003 said:

Agreed, of the two rifles above, I greatly prefer #1.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Bottom is overdone. German guns are kinda weird. They can look really great but they can also look ridiculous.

Wood bolt knob and side plates are just plain goofy

The #1 IMO is the most elegant and beautiful handling gun there is. Especially with the Alexander forend. Just love em. Have a Beautiful 7 mm mag that’s shoots excellent. Something about the action and cocking lever and those Ruger sights. But the can be a ligand a poke on accuracy from my experience.

Pig and a poke. God dam spell check!!!!!!!!!

Really can’t see the wood from the trees…. But still better than plastic

It's purely a personal preference thing, but I must admit that I'm not a fan of the split wood thing on bolt guns.

I like it on a double or a shotgun because it's an essential design element. It must be there, the stock must have a break, the gun must open. Function over form, the purest, cleanest design choice for what the piece must do. Done well, that's highly appealing.

On a bolt gun though it's just a fiddly stylistic element messing with the purity of what should be a clean, simple, elegant design. Not that way because it really needs to be for any functional reason... just stylistic elements for the sake of stylistic elements.

The split stock in the OP's examples are pointless. There is nothing 'functional' in the exposed block of metal in the first place. You could have just done a continuous stock and the gun would function identically, so you've just made a sweeping, uncluttered line noisy, complicated, and blocky for no reason. Not good. Quite Germanic in many ways. The Italians would never do that. Nor would the French. It's one of the reasons why I've never been of fan of Blasers aesthetically, although only one of many, to be perfectly honest.

Another controversial opinion; I don't think that the Ruger No. 1 is a particularly attractive gun either. I think the Marlin 1894 does a much better job of merging the interruption of the metal into the overall lines of the firearm than the random 'square block of metal' in the No. 1. Plus on the Marlin, you need a loading port. The interruption of the stock needs to be there, so it should be there.

The only thing worse is the #2 Blaser example in the OP. Design something needlessly fiddly, realize you screwed up, try and hide it with a stick on panel as an afterthought. Yuck.

I guess I'm just stubborn. I like what I like, and what I like are the cleanest, least cluttered lines possible. I'm sure others feel very differently, and that's fine.

At least we can all agree that the examples above are infinitely better than shitty plastic stocks at least!

I like the timber, not so much ch wooden bolt handles.

Not in the same league but Woox chassis’s are a modern chassis with a Timber buttsock and formed nicely integrated into the design.

I would be tempted to add one to a REM clone action custom build if I was to do one.

Doesn't do anything for me. At all.

I personally dislike blaser rifles all together. I’ve looked and them and handled them and just don’t have that feeling

The Sauer 200 is another split wood design and a turn bolt with a wonderfully slick action. Also a switch barrel design. I only bought it because I’d never tried one. This one is quite a shooter as is my R8, but I am still a fan of a full one piece stock on a rifle.

Nope...but then can't stand blasers anyway.... no1 are not bad same as most of that type single shot....love wood , but also like the synthetic stocked rifles I have as well...

Wood or synthetic….form or function

I agree with the op.

Much depends on the checkering pattern, and how much it covers. Like most good art, things look best when there is a balance.

I’ve read on several occasions that two piece stocks are not as accurate. No explanation was ever given so it could just be personal bias. Anyone here ever heard of this?

Ruger’s Woodside. Perhaps not “too much wood” but rather too much wood in the wrong place.

Lee Speed sporting rifles had the fore end separated from the stock 130 years ago . Bloody beautiful looking rifles .

My wife has the Intuition with a beautiful piece of timber and I like the breakup of the wood.


However, I’ve also seen the Blaser Sportster Classic. Like the one owned by @Red Leg and like that as well.


It just depends on the wood and particular rifle. At the end of the day, it’s hard to go wrong with a Blaser R8.