Rokstok review thread

[plebe]

Got out and shot it today, it certainly feels better. Without a suppressor I can easily keep the target in the FOV of a fixed 6x scope at 100 yards using a bare muzzle 308 loaded with 178 gr bullets. I had intended to get more video (I shot fifty 308 rounds), but I though I would be cool and use the video with my shooters global shot timer, somehow I did not capture any video and only realized it when I had 5 rounds left.

Seated unsupported with the 308 I scoped myself with the factory stock, not horrible, but enough to draw a very slight amount of blood from my glasses hitting my face.

Switching back to back, the first shot with the Rokstok after using the factory stock feels significantly better.

No pictures of the targets because the scopes were sighted for the suppressor and the POI shift was enough that some shots completely missed the target.

308

223

Thanks for taking the time to film yourself.

Any measured difference in standing shot accuracy between the two? Your form is significantly different from one stock to the other when shooting offhand.

 

[Marbles]

Thanks for taking the time to film yourself.

Any measured difference in standing shot accuracy between the two? Your form is significantly different from one stock to the other when shooting offhand.

Not that I noticed, my off hand needs practice and is pretty inconsistent day to day.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Not that I noticed, my off hand needs practice and is pretty inconsistent day to day.

That stance and grip can work for most folks, but nearly every single shooter who switches to an elbow in belly and practices is far more accurate.

 

[Marbles]

That stance and grip can work for most folks, but nearly every single shooter who switches to an elbow in belly and practices is far more accurate.

There is no argument on the accuracy aspect, there is a reason the elbow in belly is used by a lot of competition target shooters.

I have decided to train the less stable stance as it is more dynamic and will allow faster position changes (such as on a moving target). It is also the stance I would want on a close in and aggressive animal.

 

[NSI]

There is no argument on the accuracy aspect, there is a reason the elbow in belly is used by a lot of competition target shooters.

I have decided to train the less stable stance as it is more dynamic and will allow faster position changes (such as on a moving target). It is also the stance I would want on a close in and aggressive animal.

This is where it’s at. In a world where I can get to Olympic stance, I can probably get more stable than off-hand. In a world where off-hand is necessary, speed and dynamic movement are probably more important. It’s perfectly achievable to keep rounds in 8” at 100yds with the AR style grip.

-J

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

There is no argument on the accuracy aspect, there is a reason the elbow in belly is used by a lot of competition target shooters.

I have decided to train the less stable stance as it is more dynamic and will allow faster position changes (such as on a moving target). It is also the stance I would want on a close in and aggressive animal.

I think you are slow to build Olympic stance because of lack of practice is all. I've killed thousands of rabbit and squirrels with this stance (moving targets as the group scatters and then you kill the next one). It's just as fast as the "trap shooter" stance for target re-acquisition. Proper mechanics are never removing the elbow from hip/stomach and cycling bolt while maintain down range sight picture. You never re-build the position between shots.

 

[Formidilosus]

I think you are slow to build Olympic stance because of lack of practice is all. I've killed thousands of rabbit and squirrels with this stance (moving targets as the group scatters and then you kill the next one). It's just as fast as the "trap shooter" stance for target re-acquisition. Proper mechanics are never removing the elbow from hip/stomach and cycling bolt while maintain down range sight picture. You never re-build the position between shots.

It may be “fast enough” for you, but it is not “as fast” or as controllable.


Classical stance and grip as you use:

Advantages

1). A bit smaller wobble zone.



Cons:

1). Loss of positive control of the rifle (think of a lever)
2). Significantly less recoil control
3). Significantly less ability to spot impacts through the scope.
4). Significantly less control in “driving the gun onto target, from target to target, or with a moving target.



3-gun or “aggressive” stance and grip:


Advantages:

1). Positive control of the rifle (think of a lever)
2). Significantly better recoil control
3). Significantly higher ability to spot impacts through the scope.
4). Significantly more control in “driving the gun onto target, from target to target, or with a moving target.


Cons:

1). A bit larger wobble zone.




There is nothing “wrong” with a classical offhand stance and position, but it is designed around flat range, sling use and single shots with ample time. In every sport/competition where speed, movement and control matter, they have all demonstrably arrived at similar stance and grips as the 3-gun/more aggressive version.

 

[Marbles]

I think you are slow to build Olympic stance because of lack of practice is all. I've killed thousands of rabbit and squirrels with this stance (moving targets as the group scatters and then you kill the next one). It's just as fast as the "trap shooter" stance for target re-acquisition. Proper mechanics are never removing the elbow from hip/stomach and cycling bolt while maintain down range sight picture. You never re-build the position between shots.

Could be, would you use that stance on a charging animal? Practice and familiarity certainly makes many things easier. This is another thing were I'm copying Form, because so far everything he has said shooting related holds up, and after arguing against some things (Wizer QuickStix, bipod) I have found he was correct all along.

Edit: I see Form posted while I was writing.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Could be, would you use that stance on a charging animal? Practice and familiarity certainly makes many things easier. This is another thing were I'm copying Form, because so far everything he has said shooting related holds up, and after arguing against some things (Wizer QuickStix, bipod) I have found he was correct all along.

Edit: I see Form posted while I was writing.

This would 100 percent be the stance I would use to shoot a charging animal, and have used to kill a charging black bear (likely was a bluff charge but he's dead now and can't ask him haha).

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

It may be “fast enough” for you, but it is not “as fast” or as controllable.


Classical stance and grip as you use:

Advantages

1). A bit smaller wobble zone.



Cons:

1). Loss of positive control of the rifle (think of a lever)
2). Significantly less recoil control
3). Significantly less ability to spot impacts through the scope.
4). Significantly less control in “driving the gun onto target, from target to target, or with a moving target.



3-gun or “aggressive” stance and grip:


Advantages:

1). Positive control of the rifle (think of a lever)
2). Significantly better recoil control
3). Significantly higher ability to spot impacts through the scope.
4). Significantly more control in “driving the gun onto target, from target to target, or with a moving target.


Cons:

1). A bit larger wobble zone.




There is nothing “wrong” with a classical offhand stance and position, but it is designed around flat range, sling use and single shots with ample time. In every sport/competition where speed, movement and control matter, they have all demonstrably arrived at similar stance and grips as the 3-gun/more aggressive version.

I've worked on this quite a bit for the last decade plus. In field practice on targets while moving back and forth and side to side. There is zero time discrepancy between building either position and getting the gun on target with proper practice.

Follow up shots are just as quick as well depending on chambering of the rifle (6mm and below generally speaking), even with several side steps/forward and back steps, staying in position and target in the scope. We practice this with targets placed 25-150 yards and spread apart roughly 270 degrees (like a Pac-Man shape shooting away from designated setup area) for dynamic movement. It's much different than going from "station to station" like a 3 gun comp and simulates a charging or close moving animal who's been wounded. The trap shooter stance works great for that even though the vast majority of folks cannot hit 12" targets past 80ish yards on average using that stance. They switch to traditional and the hits start coming. A first shot hit on a charging animal is way better than a miss with maybe a faster follow up shot and potentially better control. By then you're normally tossing the rifle and pulling sidearm if practiced.

Recoil control can be much better with the trap shooter grip and stance with practice. Most will find that with practice the traditional grip and stance can have recoil controlled very well also. Maintaining that body/shooting position while moving is very easy and stable with practice. Can be awkward for some at first, but once they switch they rarely go back. My thought process is always, best chance at a first round hit on a close animal, traditional is very successful compared to trap shooter in live drills. I don't "love" the popular 3 gun stuff because it doesn't accurately simulate a charging animal/danger close shot. At least in general in our niche hunting application.

Hit rates on moving targets like coyotes, hogs, rabbits, and squirrels all show much higher hit rates with traditional stance over trap shooter stance. This has been field proven over the last 10-12 years with over 300 shooters of all skill levels.

I was planning to get some video showing this position with realistic dynamic movement (not moving from "station to station") but simply shooting at simulated moving targets, good footwork and maintaining targets in the scope. Folks are usually quite surprised and giddy going from military training grips to a position they can actually hit shit with.

There are always 17 ways to skin a cat, and if somebody is proficient and practiced that is the main key here. Based on what I've seen and read @Marbles and @NSI do a great job of practicing these skills, they will be 1,000,000 times better off in a danger situation than 99% of hunters, no matter what stance they use.

 

[mlevimadden]

Could be, would you use that stance on a charging animal? Practice and familiarity certainly makes many things easier. This is another thing were I'm copying Form, because so far everything he has said shooting related holds up, and after arguing against some things (Wizer QuickStix, bipod) I have found he was correct all along.

Edit: I see Form posted while I was writing.

I heard Form talk about the cons of using a bipod on the S2H podcast but didn't realize he argued against using quickstix. Can you point me to the post or recall what the argument against them was?

 

[JollyRoger]

Not sure how I missed this thread for so long. I’ve posted my thoughts elsewhere but overall this stock is fantastic to shoot and carry. A few things that stood out to me:
- I realized with other stocks (factory Tikka and KRG Bravo) I was doing some muscling to reliably spot my impacts. This was apparent when shooting the RokStok and has since been fixed.
- I almost always need to build up a cheek rest. To the point others can hardly use my rifles without taking it off or dropping it all the way. Maybe it’s the thought that I should be able to rest my dead head on the stock and see through the scope? I don’t know, but the RokStok with UM low rings I feel neutral and confident behind the rifle. Some of that is changing the way I approach things, but I am happy with the height and angle of the cheek rest.

Spotting shots is a breeze.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

This is another thing were I'm copying Form, because so far everything he has said shooting related holds up, and after arguing against some things (Wizer QuickStix, bipod) I have found he was correct all along.

I have found this to be the case as well in what I've tried... However, I will race you with building a position and getting a shot off with a hit on target, me with a Spartan long leg bipod and you with quick sticks, any day of the week! haha.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Not sure how I missed this thread for so long. I’ve posted my thoughts elsewhere but overall this stock is fantastic to shoot and carry. A few things that stood out to me:
- I realized with other stocks (factory Tikka and KRG Bravo) I was doing some muscling to reliably spot my impacts. This was apparent when shooting the RokStok and has since been fixed.
- I almost always need to build up a cheek rest. To the point others can hardly use my rifles without taking it off or dropping it all the way. Maybe it’s the thought that I should be able to rest my dead head on the stock and see through the scope? I don’t know, but the RokStok with UM low rings I feel neutral and confident behind the rifle. Some of that is changing the way I approach things, but I am happy with the height and angle of the cheek rest.

Spotting shots is a breeze.

That thing is sweet! What's the chambering?

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

It’s perfectly achievable to keep rounds in 8” at 100yds with the AR style grip.

-J

I have seen the opposite to be true. At 100 yards with AR grip most shooters are missing a 12" plate more than they hit it. Generally speaking.

 

[Marbles]

I heard Form talk about the cons of using a bipod on the S2H podcast but didn't realize he argued against using quickstix. Can you point me to the post or recall what the argument against them was?

He talks obout it on the S2H FF following the one on bipods (I think), he has also done so on various threads, though I would have to use the search function to find them.

 

[JollyRoger]

That thing is sweet! What's the chambering?

6mm Creedmoor!

Started life as a 6.5CM CTR. Today it wears 20” Bartlein 3B, RokStok, KRG Midas trigger, High Desert Rifleworks KRG compatible bottom metal, UM short bolt, UM low rings, and the Maven RS1.2 mil scope (in manly black ), and a Liberty Precision Mach S suppressor.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

6mm Creedmoor!

Started life as a 6.5CM CTR. Today it wears 20” Bartlein 3B, RokStok, KRG Midas trigger, High Desert Rifleworks KRG compatible bottom metal, UM short bolt, UM low rings, and the Maven RS1.2 mil scope (in manly black ), and a Liberty Precision Mach S suppressor.

I want it!

 

[Marbles]

I have found this to be the case as well in what I've tried... However, I will race you with building a position and getting a shot off with a hit on target, me with a Spartan long leg bipod and you with quick sticks, any day of the week! haha.

I pulled the quickstix off my poles and am just looping the straps now. Speed wise you might win if you have the long Spartan legs. Though, if we are going from walking in the mountains to shooting, it would depend. In county were I'm using a pole and an axe, I would not have one pole in hand. In county were I have both poles in hand, I would be curious as to how you pack the Spartan.

 

[kswaterfowl]

6mm Creedmoor!

Started life as a 6.5CM CTR. Today it wears 20” Bartlein 3B, RokStok, KRG Midas trigger, High Desert Rifleworks KRG compatible bottom metal, UM short bolt, UM low rings, and the Maven RS1.2 mil scope (in manly black ), and a Liberty Precision Mach S suppressor.

How do you like that mach s?