RokStok

[Reburn]

This is what I picture every time he says it..

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

This really needs to go in the shoot2hunt thread.
But it is very funny

 

[Billy Goat]

I figured you already knew that UM has a Tea Bag and that you were looking for something more creative. I failed to come up with one. Well, I did come up with some options, but while they didn't violate any RS explicit standards, they would have failed the "IYKYK" test.

Negative

However great minds think alike, I just always come up with things a little late.

 

[tpicou]

Anyone know if this works with trigger hangers or would it need to be opened up a bit?

 

[Grumman]

It was said early on that a CTR bottom metal inlet may be available based on demand. Any chances of that happening now?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wapitibob]

@SDHNTR be aware of this detail.

So if any of you haven’t figured this out (stock above boreline) or forgot about it, you’re not cleaning your rifle (barrel bore) while it’s in the stock unless you do it from the muzzle or pull it from the stock. Your other option is to follow the no clean routine

Edit: or use a pull through cleaning system.

I pull my cleaning rod way above my stock when I clean, simply because I don't want it touching the stock. If I tried, I could clean the gun with it 2"+ above the stock when using a bore guide. Cleaning a rifle with this stock and my current bore guide and rod will be a non issue.

 

[Overwire]

Post 2013 is talking about toe angle. I understand that completely. I’m talking about the extreme comb angle and I’ve yet to see a logical explanation.

This is turning into too much back-and-forth and only adding to the chaos of a 2000+ post thread. Everyone can disregard, and I will ask Form directly via PM. It seems I am the only one who really cares about this particular matter anyways.

I am also interested in the reasoning behind the comb angle being what it is. It is possible to design the buttstock with the height of the pad above bore line, the height of the comb in the area the face rides and the comb angle all as independent variables, though it would need to look a little different. I haven't shot a negative comb stock but intuitively it would seem that a 6 deg negative comb, for example, would be less sensitive to face position than a 12 degree. So why is 12 deg best?

I am also curious around the design intent for the small scallop at the bottom of the buttstock near the pad. I understand that it was necessary to have a discontinuity in the toe line in order to accommodate an existing butt pad but why is the discontinuity at the pad/toe rather than near the grip? It would seem that you would want to avoid having the discontinuity where you are most likely to be using a rear support and it would seem that people use a rear bag near the pad/toe more often than near the grip.

 

[PantherCity]

I am also curious around the design intent for the small scallop at the bottom of the buttstock near the pad. I understand that it was necessary to have a discontinuity in the toe line in order to accommodate an existing butt pad but why is the discontinuity at the pad/toe rather than near the grip? It would seem that you would want to avoid having the discontinuity where you are most likely to be using a rear support and it would seem that people use a rear bag near the pad/toe more often than near the grip.

This. It’s better in the newer iterations but on the first one it looks like they just inverted an old weatherby buttstock.

Reverse Monte Carlo

I have one on order, but this is the one nit I could pick without touching one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SDHNTR]

I am also interested in the reasoning behind the comb angle being what it is. It is possible to design the buttstock with the height of the pad above bore line, the height of the comb in the area the face rides and the comb angle all as independent variables, though it would need to look a little different. I haven't shot a negative comb stock but intuitively it would seem that a 6 deg negative comb, for example, would be less sensitive to face position than a 12 degree. So why is 12 deg best?

Exactly! Glad to know there are other thinkers here.

 

[SDHNTR]

I also want to know if there will be inletting for any sort of flush mount bottom metal?

 

[TheCougar]

View attachment 646596View attachment 646597

I’m still not 100% sold on the tripod shooting in general but this is definitely working well as an attachment point.

I am. We did a lot of tripod shooting this summer and working on field rear supports. I use a backpack and trekking poles, mainly. I can get the wobble down to .1 mil when I’m solid on the rear support. The real challenge is getting set up quickly. A lot of the drills I do with my son are 2 shots on target within 2 minutes from a standard carry position. It’s not easy, but gives great functionality in the field where prone isn’t an option.

 

[Formidilosus]

There is nothing specific about a comb angle.

- Recoil pad above bore (red)
- Negative comb
- Able to remove bolt (yellow)

Make a straight line between the top of the pad, and the nose of the comb and you get what it is (green).






As for the back of the toe. Red must be maintained. Make it thinner and risk of breakage occurs. Bottom of red back, parallel to bore (green). The notch is what it is. There is a bit more to it, but this is the base. Understand this is a print where the recoil pad is attached already.







There is zero issue getting a sight picture with the comb angle. None. I’m sure there is a freaky shaped face somewhere that will have issues, or believe they do. But if normal stocks work for you, this will too. Like anything new, there may be some adjusting to do.

Additionally, and this is a big one- due to grip size, shape, and angle; as well as the comb height and angle, length of pull is very forgiving. Multiple women that need a 12.5” or so LOP with factory T3 stocks, have had no issue at all with this one at 13.5”.
Just as I have stated about the Tikka Master Sporter setup I have with a 14.7” (IIRC) LOP, from small people that struggle with a factory T3 stock, to 6’5” dudes- they all are able to shoot it without much issue.

 

[Formidilosus]

The goal was to get above bore line and remain functional for cheek weld, etc. The angle is what it is based on function. Those are my summarizing thoughts after keeping up with this thread since inception.

This is correct. There’s a bit more to it, but that is the gist.

 

[BjornF16]

Post 2013 is talking about toe angle. I understand that completely. I’m talking about the extreme comb angle and I’ve yet to see a logical explanation.

This is turning into too much back-and-forth and only adding to the chaos of a 2000+ post thread. Everyone can disregard, and I will ask Form directly via PM. It seems I am the only one who really cares about this particular matter anyways.

I linked to post # 2014…that is what I meant to reference. It is definitely talking about comb angle

 

[TX_Diver]

Who makes that front bag… sounds heavy but seems to work well

Snap On... If you thought existing shooting bags were expensive wait til you see that one lol

 

[TheCougar]

Exactly! Glad to know there are other thinkers here.

I think these are all fair questions. There really haven’t been any testing videos or discussion. I thought there would be a lot more information behind the iterative improvements and design of the stock. A lot of it was implied and left to us to notice small differences in the pictures. At the risk of presumption, it seems that the idea was ”more negative comb is better”, therefore we go to the extreme and back it off until it meets acceptable criteria for the majority of shooters. The problem with this is that may miss the ideal comb angle by only approaching from one direction, rather than starting with a very negative comb and a flat comb and working them both towards the optimal angle. The same could be said for the heel.

A drastic comb angle like the Rokstok will, I’m assuming, force your cheek weld into the exact same position every single time, because to be forward or aft of the sweet spot will give you vertical scope shadow instantaneously. This has ramifications for multiple shooting positions, as tripod, prone, and offhand all have different ergonomics based on the position of your shoulder, neck, and head.

I don’t disagree with the premise of the stock: proper grip ergonomics, and above bore line pad, negative comb, and a parallel or near parallel heel. Nor with the experience and skill of those involved in the design. The issue is more the methodology, experimentation testing, and validation that went into the development. Asking questions of exactly why a 12 degree comb, for instance, are valid. Why not a 10 or 8 degree comb? Was an 8 degree comb tested to see if it was inferior or superior? I think these are fair questions.

 

[TheCougar]

There is nothing specific about a comb angle.

- Recoil pad above bore (red)
- Negative comb
- Able to remove bolt (yellow)

Make a straight line between the top of the pad, and the nose of the comb and you get what it is (green).

View attachment 646632




As for the back of the toe. Red must be maintained. Make it thinner and risk of breakage occurs. Bottom of red back, parallel to bore (green). The notch is what it is. There is a bit more to it, but this is the base. Understand this is a print where the recoil pad is attached already.
View attachment 646633






There is zero issue getting a sight picture with the comb angle. None. I’m sure there is a freaky shaped face somewhere that will have issues, or believe they do. But if normal stocks work for you, this will too. Like anything new, there may be some adjusting to do.

Additionally, and this is a big one- due to grip size, shape, and angle; as well as the comb height and angle, length of pull is very forgiving. Multiple women that need a 12.5” or so LOP with factory T3 stocks, have had no issue at all with this one at 13.5”.
Just as I have stated about the Tikka Master Sporter setup I have with a 14.7” (IIRC) LOP, from small people that struggle with a factory T3 stock, to 6’5” dudes- they all are able to shoot it without much issue.

Did you look at other angles with a bolt cut out? Crappy iPad photoshop:

 

[Formidilosus]

I think these are all fair questions. There really haven’t been any testing videos or discussion. I thought there would be a lot more information behind the iterative improvements and design of the stock. A lot of it was implied and left to us to notice small differences in the pictures.

Why would there be information about changes made and why until the stock was finalized? Everyone was too busy worrying about how it looked and what paint color to get.

If it were up to me, no one would have known about this until it was ready.

At the risk of presumption, it seems that the idea was ”more negative comb is better”, therefore we go to the extreme and back it off until it meets acceptable criteria for the majority of shooters. The problem with this is that may miss the ideal comb angle by only approaching from one direction, rather than starting with a very negative comb and a flat comb and working them both towards the optimal angle. The same could be said for the heel.

Why are you focusing on the comb angle? At no point have I ever wrote that a certain comb angle mattered. See post #2,271.

A drastic comb angle like the Rokstok will, I’m assuming, force your cheek weld into the exact same position every single time, because to be forward or aft of the sweet spot will give you vertical scope shadow instantaneously. This has ramifications for multiple shooting positions, as tripod, prone, and offhand all have different ergonomics based on the position of your shoulder, neck, and head.

Nope. In more than a dozen people that have had hands on, no one has had an issue from prone all the way to standing. From little girls, to well over 6 foot.

I don’t disagree with the premise of the stock: proper grip ergonomics, and above bore line pad, negative comb, and a parallel or near parallel heel. Nor with the experience and skill of those involved in the design. The issue is more the methodology, experimentation testing, and validation that went into the development. Asking questions of exactly why a 12 degree comb, for instance, are valid. Why not a 10 or 8 degree comb? Was an 8 degree comb tested to see if it was inferior or superior? I think these are fair questions.

I answered it in post #2,271.

 

[Formidilosus]

Did you look at other angles with a bolt cut out? Crappy iPad photoshop:

View attachment 646650

The comb would be too high to see through low rings.

 

[fwafwow]

I think these are all fair questions. There really haven’t been any testing videos or discussion. I thought there would be a lot more information behind the iterative improvements and design of the stock. A lot of it was implied and left to us to notice small differences in the pictures. At the risk of presumption, it seems that the idea was ”more negative comb is better”, therefore we go to the extreme and back it off until it meets acceptable criteria for the majority of shooters. The problem with this is that may miss the ideal comb angle by only approaching from one direction, rather than starting with a very negative comb and a flat comb and working them both towards the optimal angle. The same could be said for the heel.

A drastic comb angle like the Rokstok will, I’m assuming, force your cheek weld into the exact same position every single time, because to be forward or aft of the sweet spot will give you vertical scope shadow instantaneously. This has ramifications for multiple shooting positions, as tripod, prone, and offhand all have different ergonomics based on the position of your shoulder, neck, and head.

I don’t disagree with the premise of the stock: proper grip ergonomics, and above bore line pad, negative comb, and a parallel or near parallel heel. Nor with the experience and skill of those involved in the design. The issue is more the methodology, experimentation testing, and validation that went into the development. Asking questions of exactly why a 12 degree comb, for instance, are valid. Why not a 10 or 8 degree comb? Was an 8 degree comb tested to see if it was inferior or superior? I think these are fair questions.

All fair questions, and I’m sure there are others that could be asked, and explained. (Materials, sources thereof, whatever.) But we (or at least some) were constantly peppering them with other questions, and pressing for a quick delivery. So they could have decided to focus first on getting one out and then can later provide more information for those who are interested.

 

[Brontosaurus]

Everyone was too busy worrying about how it looked and what paint color to get.

I resemble that remark.

But also I'm not concerned about the shape of the stock itself as I'm putting my trust into people who know more about proper design than I do.