Synthetic stock vs. Non-synthetic/aftermarket stock.

[Reno1]

I have a 93FV. Does an aftermarket stock make a difference in accuracy/performance? I will be using this mainly for hunting, but I still want a very accurate rifle. Would I be better off with a Savage thumbhole stock, or some other Savage or non-Savage stock? The 93FV is relatively light, at 6 lbs. I prefer something slightly heavier as it is easier to steady while aiming from a standing position while hunting. So I'll either add weight to the stock or get another. What are your experiences? Thanks.

[264fan]

I have both laminate and plastic, I don't think you will see a great improvement by going laminate unless you glass bed as well as pillar bed or use the thick bottom iron. Have 2 FV's with scopes they are about 7-71/2 lbs are well balanced and are more accurate than I can hold in any field position. If you just have to get the last little bit of accuracy out of your rifle then laminate plus bedding will help you get there. This is a personal thing but I detest a thumbhole for hunting, too slow to get off the next shot.

[TOP PREDATOR]

just like with centerfires, wood expands and contracts and will change the POI at times, where the synthetic doesn't. i admit the savage plastic stock sucks, but at least stays stable.

most of the replacement stocks you see for these things are for looks and comfort with no "tangible" accuracy improvements in them other than a freefloating channel.

BUT comfort and a good feel in a stock may actually improve the shooter's performance (cheeck weld, eye alignment, grip, etc.) rather than the rifle's as generally a comfortable rifle is handled better than an uncomfortable one.