Help LS Wild design the new stock!

[Schmo]

Yeah, I guess that makes sense.
I would note, however, that most (all?) factory rifles with wood stocks come with at least 1 nice straight hole for a sling swivel. Perhaps y'all could set up a drill press and pre-drill a couple of nicely centered and straight holes for us?
The reason I suggested inserts, like the factory plastic Tikka stock has, was for a clean interface with standard bolt threads. I would argue that those press fit inserts cost pennies, and drilling and pressing them in takes seconds each. It would make for a much cleaner, more finished looking product. Again, premium product for a premium price.

Two thoughts:
First, maybe the manufacturer could do the typical two front stud spacing like for the old Harris bipods, and that would give guys two holes for a short Arca/pic section?

Second, on the premium product, premium price. We have to figure out what price point is going to sell best. Would that be a basic model that has the lines/contours that are wanted, and nothing else, at a really affordable price point? Or would it be the lines/contours wanted, plus QD cups, holes/threaded inserts, etc at a decently higher price?

 

[OneGunTex]

Second, on the premium product, premium price. We have to figure out what price point is going to sell best. Would that be a basic model that has the lines/contours that are wanted, and nothing else, at a really affordable price point? Or would it be the lines/contours wanted, plus QD cups, holes/threaded inserts, etc at a decently higher price?

A Boyds "precision" laminate stock will run you $249. For another $80ish, you can get adjustable LOP, adjustable comb, and pillar bedding. That's your competition, like it or not. The price that was suggested at the beginning of this thread was $500. Charging double the competition sounds premium to me, so I'm expecting a premium finished product.

(FWIW, you're also competing with the RS Lite, but their competition is $599 Stocky's carbon stocks - they can clearly differentiate from Boyds in material alone)

 

[Schmo]

A Boyds "precision" laminate stock will run you $249. For another $80ish, you can get adjustable LOP, adjustable comb, and pillar bedding. That's your competition, like it or not. The price that was suggested at the beginning of this thread was $500. Charging double the competition sounds premium to me, so I'm expecting a premium finished product.

Boyd’s does not have a single properly designed stock in regards to modern field shooting. Everything is either bad comb design or weird lines/aesthetics.

We will be cheaper than a CF stock, but we’re also not really trying to compete with a CF stock. This is for those of us who like the look and feel of shooting a wood stock without a custom wood stock price tag of nearly $2,000 these days.

 

[Schmo]

For another $80ish, you can get adjustable LOP, adjustable comb, and pillar bedding.

I was just looking on their site. Adjustable comb adds $71. Pillar bedding adds $68. The particular stock I was looking at didn’t have adjustable LOP available, but ordering different length than standard was $31 more. So, that pushes it up to almost $400. And then it has to be made. Ours will be properly designed, in stock, and ready to ship.

I don’t want to come across as upset or defensive. I’m enjoying our discussions.

 

[BLJ]

Would that be a basic model that has the lines/contours that are wanted, and nothing else, at a really affordable price point? Or would it be the lines/contours wanted, plus QD cups, holes/threaded inserts, etc at a decently higher price?

We have to figure out what price point is going to sell best.

I think it’s admirable to try and take suggestions on this to try and find something that will appeal to everyone.

But, I think your going to have to choose to abide by one of the quotes above and not both.

 

[hibernation]

Second, on the premium product, premium price. We have to figure out what price point is going to sell best. Would that be a basic model that has the lines/contours that are wanted, and nothing else, at a really affordable price point?

I sure hope so.

 

[BLJ]

Are you planning to offer adjustable LOP and adjustable comb height?

Neither models have showed that.

 

[OneGunTex]

Boyd’s does not have a single properly designed stock in regards to modern field shooting. Everything is either bad comb design or weird lines/aesthetics.

Correct. Which is why at $300, the consumer buys yours and not theirs. But at twice the price, you have to question whether good ergos/design itself is worth it.

The other features were a bit of a red herring, since they're not things we've talked about for your stock. Sorry about that. Just an example of other "premium" features and the prices they bear.

 

[Schmo]

Are you planning to offer adjustable LOP and adjustable comb height?

Neither models have showed that.

No sir. The comb is high enough that adjustable comb will not be needed. On the LOP, I think we’re planning on the standard being 14” or 14.5”, with the ability for them to be trimmed down as short as 12.5”

 

[Schmo]

But at twice the price, you have to question whether good ergos/design itself is worth it.

I personally do not buy stocks that aren’t well designed, no matter if they’re $50, unless I were doing mods to make them properly designed. Are you meaning you’ll buy an improperly designed stock because it’s cheap?

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Boyd’s does not have a single properly designed stock in regards to modern field shooting. Everything is either bad comb design or weird lines/aesthetics.

On that, I agree completely.

There’s definitely a niche to be filled between a $2200 wooden Rokstok, an $800 Woox that is what it is, and a Boyd’s stock that isn’t well-designed. I would be shocked if you could not make a decent profit selling the “nice-to-haves” version of this stock for $600-800 and the bare essentials version for $400-500.

Remember that when you talk about increasing cost and lead time, that the customer who wants what he wants is still going to have to pay more and have it take longer to get what he wants. I factor that extra time and money into my decision to purchase something in the first place.

 

[bwood1]

Boyd’s does not have a single properly designed stock in regards to modern field shooting. Everything is either bad comb design or weird lines/aesthetics.

We will be cheaper than a CF stock, but we’re also not really trying to compete with a CF stock. This is for those of us who like the look and feel of shooting a wood stock without a custom wood stock price tag of nearly $2,000 these days.

Never shot a Boyds. So I don't know anything about lines etc., but the one thing that keeps intriguing me about them is that I can get a classic looking wooden stock from them with checkering detail, high-end walnut, gloss finish, pillars, the works and still be under $800. I've priced "doing it right" on custom wood stocks, and they're more than I'd be willing to spend for an entire custom rifle setup. I wasn't originally buying Q's points, but the more I think about it, he may be right. Once I spend over about $200 I'm going to be averse to drilling and augmenting a stock on my own.

While it should satisfy the feel of shooting a wood stock, I don't think this is going to satisfy the look of a wood stock issue you're looking to solve. Pretty futuristic looking. Not a bad thing. It just seems like the "void" being filled is an affordable substitute to the Wood RokStok. Awesome product, but I don't know that it's really appealing to my wooden stock wants as much as creating a classy twist to an already cool product which.

Getting 19 pages of consumer research from a forum like this can be as paralyzing as it is helpful. I would focus hard on what y'all originally set out to do with this stock, and what market need you're trying to fill to guide your decision making on this. I assume the impetus for this project must have come out of you guys saying something like "you know it would be really cool if ______ were available on the market". Keep working towards that. I would also look at how you're differentiating yourself from Boyd's, MDT Timber Core, and Woox. You can get a new Timber Core for with bottom and LOP spacers for $800 on Midway, a Boyd's decked out laminate Boyd's Pro Varmint in your choice of color for $400, Woox Wildman for $630, and Exactus for $800. What are you solving that these are missing, or are you solving the same things at a better price? Also, a big portion of the market is buying what looks cool. They don't have any clue about who's designs are actually good in practice. It's too expensive to try more than a couple of things out. Ultimately looks, marketing, price and utility are going to be your biggest sales drivers when someone chooses your stock over another.

Today, if I had to make the decision on a wooden stock and yours was also available on the market. I think , unless your marketing does a good job of explaining why I should believe otherwise, I'm just going to choose the most affordable option available of all of those mentioned, because none of them seem all that different.

 

[Schmo]

While it should satisfy the feel of shooting a wood stock, I don't think this is going to satisfy the look of a wood stock issue you're looking to solve. Pretty futuristic looking. Not a bad thing. It just seems like the "void" being filled is an affordable substitute to the Wood RokStok. Awesome product, but I don't know that it's really appealing to my wooden stock wants as much as creating a classy twist to an already cool product which.

The short of it is that “classic” stocks are not well designed for realistic field shooting. They don’t handle recoil well, and they sometimes make it worse. They make it more difficult to spot shots.

 

[hibernation]

Never shot a Boyds. So I don't know anything about lines etc., but the one thing that keeps intriguing me about them is that I can get a classic looking wooden stock

That's the crux of it right there. It's not that a Boyd's (or whoever's) is poorly constructed, it's the physical geometry and design of the stock for shooting. Form dictates function. If Boyd's made something with higher recoil pad, shorter trigger reach, yada yada, I don't think this project would exist.

Also, a big portion of the market is buying what looks cool. They don't have any clue about who's designs are actually good in practice.

This is unfortunately very accurate. I'm hoping this project doesn't worry about that part of the market.

 

[Schmo]

Also, a big portion of the market is buying what looks cool. They don't have any clue about who's designs are actually good in practice. It's too expensive to try more than a couple of things out. Ultimately looks, marketing, price and utility are going to be your biggest sales drivers when someone chooses your stock over another.

Today, if I had to make the decision on a wooden stock and yours was also available on the market. I think , unless your marketing does a good job of explaining why I should believe otherwise, I'm just going to choose the most affordable option available of all of those mentioned, because none of them seem all that different.

To be completely honest, we’re not targeting the big portion of the market. We’re targeting hunters and shooters who care about proper design. Besides going custom, there isn’t much that directly competes with what we’re trying to accomplish. We are targeting those who do know what separates a good stock from a “meh” stock. We can try to educate those who don’t know, and I would say that has at least already partially been done in this thread. However, the largest part of our target base already realizes what we’re trying to do.

 

[NSI]

This is wood, so just tool paths not molds.

Do the inexpensive DIY-friendly market-hole-filling version first (but stop short of insulting customers with a 2x4 foreend). Then do a best-guess moderately finished SKU as a second act.

It's just software.

-J

 

[bwood1]

To be completely honest, we’re not targeting the big portion of the market. We’re targeting hunters and shooters who care about proper design. Besides going custom, there isn’t much that directly competes with what we’re trying to accomplish. We are targeting those who do know what separates a good stock from a “meh” stock. We can try to educate those who don’t know, and I would say that has at least already partially been done in this thread. However, the largest part of our target base already realizes what we’re trying to do.

If that's your target market that's great, but it also means you're going to need to be open to a lot more SKUs to satisfy that group.

Although I think your assumption that everyone you're targeting already knows is short sighted. I follow the hell out of this stuff. Stock info is tough to come by other than what websites say or personal reviews which you have to take with a grain of salt if you don't know the person reviewing.

 

[OneGunTex]

I personally do not buy stocks that aren’t well designed, no matter if they’re $50, unless I were doing mods to make them properly designed. Are you meaning you’ll buy an improperly designed stock because it’s cheap?

To be completely honest, I have *never* restocked a rifle. I have always shot with the "classic" ergos, and the once or twice I've considered getting a new stock, I was looking at one of the Boyds "precision" stocks or a chassis because I thought that would be better, but i never actually spent the money. I was considering an RS Lite, after reading everything on here about "proper" ergos, and then this project started. Judging by all the stocks on the market (many), and the number that look like yours (few), I don't think I'm that out of the ordinary. If y'all can successfully run a business by selling only to the people who will pay $1000 for a rough 2x4 with "proper" design, more power to ya. (I exaggerate for effect, but you get where I'm going?)

 

[Billy Goat]

Instead of an actual skeleton stock, I wonder what the old boat paddle ruger composite type would look like?

Might be more work than just knocking it all out.

Personally, I wouldn't have much issue with modifying the stock however I wanted, but I'm likely not your average customer.

 

[OneGunTex]

To be completely honest, we’re not targeting the big portion of the market. We’re targeting hunters and shooters who care about proper design. Besides going custom, there isn’t much that directly competes with what we’re trying to accomplish. We are targeting those who do know what separates a good stock from a “meh” stock. We can try to educate those who don’t know, and I would say that has at least already partially been done in this thread. However, the largest part of our target base already realizes what we’re trying to do.

One more thing, as someone relatively uneducated, I'm somewhat suspect of the phrase "proper" design. 150 years of rifles and for some reason 90% of them look the same and voila in your Edison-like genius you (and UM) found the One True Stock! Which is why I keep saying, convince me that this design is so good that the shape itself is worth more than any other laminate stock on the market.
I mock, don't take it the wrong way, but again I don't think I'm that unusual even for your average RS reader.