First of all, I would not take my opinion of a stock geometry from the website of a pedestrian mass produced rifle company that is perpetuating one American’s opinion of stock design. I’d Base my opinion on four centuries of stock design, or abridging that, you can pick up a copy of Michael Yardley’s book on gunfitting to understand the design characteristics for which the sporting rifle was designed.
The purpose of a game rifle stock is to have an increasing and elevated comb. It is designed with this purpose so that as inclination of a weapon occurs and the muscles of the shoulder and bicep contract, that the face is sliding forward on the stock while still providing proper stock alignment. That is the essence of gunfitting to provide that consistent sight picture, rapidly, at any angle. Numbers are custom, but classic standards such as 14-5/8” LOP with 1-1/2” DAC and 2-1/8” DAH have been determined by gunfitters as a baseline or starting point for more than a century but Roy Weatherby was either unaware of these principles or was ignoring them to overcomb comfort issues when applied to his design philosophy. (Speed kills, perhaps on both ends of the gun)
As alternative to that, Roy Weatherby‘s heirs needed to mass-produce rifles which precluded these considerations in the hopes of achieving three goals: 1.) Mass production where the sight alignment for long range shooting is generally usable for as many customers as possible, 2.) To deal with horrific recoil when shooting with the gun pointed at a 90 degree angle, thus the declining or “inverse drop” at comb versus heel. As the gun is fired, the face comes off the high-gloss polyurethane comb losing sight picture under recoil yet allowing the skin of the face to not friction burn as it inclines a normal comb. 3.) To design a system that might mitigate the chances of getting punched in the eye with a scope coming back at the face during muzzle rise from excessive recoil.
Or put simply: Roy’s goofy backwards comb was an essential design feature to deal with absurd recoil, thus undoing 150 years of design knowledge of stock geometry to whip up something that would deal with 378-460 weatherby recoil.
The hubris of an American wildcatter thinking he knew more than the combined knowledge of Joseph Lang, Boss, Woodward, Atkin, Grant, Lancaster, Churchill, Watson, Webley, Lee, Henry, Martin, Mortimer, Gibbs, Holland, and even their American Cousin’s such as Townsend Whelen, Seymour Griffin, Tom Shelhammer, Niedner, Sedgley, et. al.
Not a thing I can do about it. Though I don't think I'll take the .470 to Cordoba! 
