AR Sponsor
Posted: 8/17/2013 10:04:10 AM EDT
| I remember reading somewhere perhaps travis haley saying it was better to have the stock fully collapsed so you would have your body closer to the gun. Does this hold water? Anyway what are the benefits of either extending or collapsing your stock? And I know it helps when wearing plates but I'm talking about tactical situation. One better then another for accuracy? I know a lot of bench guys like it extended... I'm talking other then personal pref ..... Thanks |
| Two schools of thought that I know of: Some dudes swear they have more accuracy if they're touching their nose to the charging handle while looking down the sights or scope. Tactical teams also will practice entering a building with the fully retracted stock centered on their chest plate directly over their sternum. They feel the chest plate of their vest would absorb the recoil even at full-auto and maximize their peripheral vision by having the rifle centered and not having the rifle in their line of sight at all. Within ten feet in CQB you don't really need sights anyway. |
| It does help with maneuverability, and keeping yourself squared to the target to maximize your armor's effectiveness. I, though, physically can't shoot this way. I am just too tall, and require the stock a couple of positions out. For 3-gun / recreational shooting, I still prefer a fixed stock, and less of a squared stance. |
| Thank you for all the info... I wish I could find the Haley article I'm curious to why it was stated... On the complete other hand Sgm Lamb says fully extended helps for fast transitions... I'm not saying these men are gospel but I guess it's all personel pref.... I was just curious to see if there was any actual factual benefit |
AR Sponsor