doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Why do most prefer a straight stock?

I love the leather covered pad on the bottom gun. Now, that's a gorgeous gun! Thanks for sharing, Lloyd.

I have, but they didn't get started until I had quit looking.

I am actually pretty content with my Beretta 626 onyx. I just wish it had longer barrels and a stock long enough that I didn't need a spacer.

I have built two Upland Gun Company SxS's and I am very pleased with both, although the price has gone up around $2k since I had mine built.

Jimmy: A bit of a confession here...that's not a leather pad exactly, it's elephant.

Hard to tell just what Dr. Wanker is suggesting here...

We do know that matchlocks weren't really suitable for shooting at flying or running targets, but it would be ridiculous to think that straight grip firearms are an obsolete relic. In fact, the straight grip was undoubtedly more popular than pistol grip guns throughout the flintlock and percussion era with both rifles, and shotguns, and it carried on in huge numbers well into the 20th century. I'd guess better than half of lever action rifles have a straight grip. And don't forget the tens or hundreds of millions of bolt action military rifles that had straight grips, including Krags, Enfields, Springfields, Carcanos, and a good many Mausers. It seems that somewhat exaggerated pistol grips became popular with the advent of full-auto rifles. I suppose it would be harder to control a straight grip full-auto firearm, but a few were made.

One advantage of the straight grip design that hasn't been mentioned is that a lot of walnut gun stock blanks tend to fall a bit short when it comes to incorporating a full pistol grip, either due to grain flow, or running into sapwood. I myself like a nicely done Prince of Wales grip best on a shotgun, but would never reject a nice straight grip gun.

I'm late to the conversation, but here goes; I used to wonder why the English settled on a straight grip splinter forend configuration before 1825, but as in most of the other seeming quirks they have adopted in the construction of double guns, most all of them are tried and true and have proven the test of time. Not only is the straight grip splinter configuration the lightest most handsome configuration for a double gun, but it allows you to shoulder it a split second faster than any other combination, and in some types of shooting, such as bobwhites, grouse, woodcock, or Huns, that split second can make the difference between a hit or a miss. I've tried them all, mostly in best grade guns, and this was my takeaway, for what it's worth.

Thanks. I did notice the rougher texture, but I never thought to ask. That makes it even more exquisite!!

if American shooters preferred straight grips, then straight grips would be our factory standard...which instead, are pistol grips.

The fastest mount/shoot people in the world are international skeet shooters. Hasn't been a straight grip in that crowd for many decades. They use what works and glove grip stocks are more common every year..

They seem focused on consistency of gun mount and control for some reason.

Having been both a serious competitive shotgunner and a serious bird hunter/wayterfowler I can ditto what WTS just posted. I do not agree that a straight grip is faster, or more consistent.

Control of the shotgun is of the utmost importance for both. Having fairly tried both, in both disciplines, I'm pistol grip for anything with any hint of recoil.

And, anyone who has ever hunted wild quail and woodcock knows the importance of a quick mount.

Edited to add: Perfecting the move/mount on a flushing bird is the key to quickness. Too many people are wound up like a spring when expecting a flush, and they try to shoot too quickly. That often makes for bad form and results in a miss. There's an old adage I remind myself of constantly when hunting behind pointing dogs . . . . "Slow is smooth, smooth is fast".