I have a collection of mainly 20th century battle rifles.  All presumably milspec’d to withstand the rigors of combat/abuse.  Virtually nothing I own, aside from a few in polymer, wears a new commercial wood stock and nothing so seemingly fragile as a Boyds laminate that I feel failed on me recently.  It was an At-One-Thumbhole stock on a Ruger American Ranch (7.62x39) that was leaning against a wall.  It was lightly bumped causing it to fall over, 90 degrees, under its own weight, down onto a not-so-hard vinyl floor.   As you can see it sustained severe cracks across it’s body.

In milsurp circles I’ve always believed laminate stocks to be considered tougher and stronger than standard wood stocks (i.e. 91/30’s and AKMs in laminates).  I would think any stock should be able to take mild to moderate abuse whether in combat, on a ranch, in the bush or forest hunting.  I’m mainly a medium skill plinker, so, yea and occasional mild drop or tip-over may happen at the range or at the house.  I absolutely love the appearance and form factor of this stock but should it be so apparently brittle?

Without much apology Boyds has thankfully taken it back for a full refund but are not directly fessing up to any kind of warranty/material failure, rather, doing me a “favor”.  I have been offered a replacement at a modest discount (mainly due to a bunch of other hassles I won’t go into) but, in short, should get another laminate version or go with a solid walnut variant instead.  Boyds won’t answer which would be stronger either way.

Laminate will always be tougher than a single piece of wood(assuming laminate is not pine).  Having said that, there isn't much wood left in that inlet that that barreled action requires.  You can see where crack started at along the bottom of the trigger inlet going fwd.  The sides, where crack is, appears to be very thin, probably what enabled the crack to form from its fall.

I'd be more leary of the bridge around thumbhole.  Those look really skimpy, good luck.