Synthetic vs. Laminate

[Correia]

Just curious, what are the pros & cons of synthetic vs. laminate rifle stocks?

I would think that synthetics would be tougher and more weather resistant, but laminates seem very popular as well. Please educate me oh wise Riflemen!

I'm thinking about restocking my Mauser, and originally I was thinking about synthetics, but those Richard's microfit stocks are looking mighty nice.

 

[CWL]

Laminates can get dinged-up or be improperly finished so that they absorb moisture or solvents which may cause them to "de-laminate". Synthetics, while not as "purdy" shouldn't have this problem.

 

[Quartus]

I expect that laminates will fade away, replaced by synthetics. Real wood will last, because of its beauty.

Laminates don't have the same history or beauty as real wood, and synthetics outperform them.

 

[Art Eatman]

With proper glue, a laminated wood stock is the strongest one could have. (They don't even use the word "glue" anymore; "adhesive", nowadays. Chemical magic.) Apparently, the fibers of wood are stronger in resisting bending (not in tension, and maybe not in compression) than the fibers used in synthetic stocks. But gunstocks aren't subject to much tension or compression along their lengths.

With proper surface finish, weather is no particular problem, this side of a month-long hunt in a rain forest. This doesn't mean that a synthietic is less than the absolute best from a weather-resistance standpoint. For all practical purposes, for the average user, it's a wash.

FWIW,

Art