One thing I noticed the first and so far only time firing an AR was that I had to place the butt of the stock about half way off my shoulder in order to see the reticle in the optical sight(Eotech). I recently handled another AR with the old school carry handle setup, thinking iron sights might line up differently. Same thing; the stock was half way above the pocket where I normally shoulder my shotgun. Is this normal for ARs?
Stock placement on shoulder-noob question
-
Glocktalk is a forum community dedicated to Glock enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about Glock pistols and rifles, optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, and more!
Jamesey
1 - 2 of 19 Posts
Joined
·
16,794 Posts
The gun is the tool. You adapt it to you, not the other way around!
For many people, the stock in the pocket, cheekbone on the "comb" and eyeball on the same axis of the sights won't happen correctly with the typical configuration. That is why, at least in the last decade, there are so many new stocks with adjustment. If you look at all of the top competitors using the AR15, they have adjustable or custom made stocks so that the NPOA and fit are correct. Especially when shooting optics at ranges past 200 yards, parallax becomes an issue if the eyeball is not on the same axis as the centerline of the optic. There are a lot of good options, from $50 to $300 for adjustable AR stocks (not talking just about length). ALL of my ARs that are used to shoot past 200 yards have a stock that fits right, or is adjustable to ensure proper fit. Having the stock IN the pocket (yes even with the low recoil .223) allows you to shoot faster, transition faster and have more accuracy. The photo Lindenwood posted is terrible fit, but with a red dot and close targets, you can get away with it...a tad slower, but not a huge deal. If you are just plinking 200 yards and in, it does not matter as much.
For many people, the stock in the pocket, cheekbone on the "comb" and eyeball on the same axis of the sights won't happen correctly with the typical configuration. That is why, at least in the last decade, there are so many new stocks with adjustment. If you look at all of the top competitors using the AR15, they have adjustable or custom made stocks so that the NPOA and fit are correct. Especially when shooting optics at ranges past 200 yards, parallax becomes an issue if the eyeball is not on the same axis as the centerline of the optic. There are a lot of good options, from $50 to $300 for adjustable AR stocks (not talking just about length). ALL of my ARs that are used to shoot past 200 yards have a stock that fits right, or is adjustable to ensure proper fit. Having the stock IN the pocket (yes even with the low recoil .223) allows you to shoot faster, transition faster and have more accuracy. The photo Lindenwood posted is terrible fit, but with a red dot and close targets, you can get away with it...a tad slower, but not a huge deal. If you are just plinking 200 yards and in, it does not matter as much.
Joined
·
16,794 Posts
Luth-AR is one of the more budget friendly ones at $150. The MagPul PRS ($220) was one of the first, and still a very good choice, but heavy. The LMT DMR ($300) is my favorite, but it is expensive and I modify it. I run the LMT on my .308 pattern AR. Royal Arms ($150) is a pretty decent lightweight one and I use it on most of my.223 ARs. Tacmod ($250) is another very popular one. Then you have the Ruger stock that came on the RPR showing up as inexpensive take-offs...okay for precision, but I would not run it on a AR pattern...too easy to snag the adjustment levers.
I own at least one of each of the ones listed and they all have pros and cons.
I own at least one of each of the ones listed and they all have pros and cons.
1 - 2 of 19 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
