The Russian Mosin Nagant Forum

Hello friends,
All things being equal, (condition, matching-non-matching numbers, armory, price),
what would be a better choice, laminate or solid stock? I have always liked solid wood stocks and don't
care much for plywood or synthetic stocks. Accuracy is important and looks.
I will be buying a SKS in a few days and have this choice. Thanks for any and all opinions.
Roman

I have always loved lam. stocks, but new to SKS's myself, i didn, know they were lamy,s out there ????

Thanks for your reply. I'm in Canada and have an opportunity to choose from a few 1950"s Tula laminated stocks.
They are in very good condition, re-furnished. The birch carbines are also 1950's re-furnished. I doubt they are collectibles.
I want a good shooter. There must be a reason for the lams to be more expensive??

I'm much more familiar with Mosin's . lamys are always more expensive. The SKS is new to me, i just purchased a Chinese SKS, which with help from the forum, turns out to be, most likely Russian. I haveno way to date it .

Your SKS has a lovely patina. Sure looks like it has seen some action. The "KL" prefix before
your serial number is Cyrillic indicating some Russian origins. The "V" shape mark on your stock
may be a partial stamp very similar to a stamp on my 1928 Mosin Tula stock.

With a regular hardwood stock, the odds can be a little better getting an original numbered stock, typically only refurbs were done in laminate. There really is not much difference other than appearance, and a laminate typically means refurb. The price difference I think comes from demand.

Either will do the job, it just boils down to personal preference.

Thanks Greasemonkey,
That answers my question rather well. I surely think that matching numbers are important. Subliminally, I was thinking
that someone might have a concern with changes in humidity affecting the guns accuracy. Laminates are more stable than
solid woods, although I haven't seen any twisting or misfitting furniture on the Mosins I've seen.

romantic1 wrote:Thanks Greasemonkey,
That answers my question rather well. I surely think that matching numbers are important. Subliminally, I was thinking
that someone might have a concern with changes in humidity affecting the guns accuracy. Laminates are more stable than
solid woods, although I haven't seen any twisting or misfitting furniture on the Mosins I've seen.

I'm in Louisiana which has anywhere from 50% to 90%+ humidity. I have a 1952 Tula refurbed SKS in a laminate stock and it hangs on the wall with only a coating of CLP on it. That rifle is a tack driver. It had an aftermarket bolt cover with a scope on it when my uncle gave me the rifle. I hated that junk cover for many reasons, it was not accurate because it never maintained POA, but mainly was it wasn't the original and it took my uncle 2 years to find the original but he finally did. Before I got that cover I used to shoot the rifle with irons sights since it was a see through setup and it never surprised me. That rifle was in a safe in his basement with no real temperature control for a least a decade. I cleaned it up, oiled it and shot it with no adjustments and it hit the bullseye with irons at 75yds.

Good to know. Thanks.
I guess it's not quite right to confuse a laminated stock with what is normally thought of as plywood.
To answer my own question, laminated hardwood is in a class all its own, stronger and more stable
than slab cut birch. I like what you said about accuracy with iron sights.

romantic1 wrote:Good to know. Thanks.
I guess it's not quite right to confuse a laminated stock with what is normally thought of as plywood.
To answer my own question, laminated hardwood is in a class all its own, stronger and more stable
than slab cut birch. I like what you said about accuracy with iron sights.

That rifle was in Maryland before it came to me. Pretty much the same humidity range and lower winter temps. My uncle takes very good care of his firearms but they are in a safe with no other protections. He's not a preservationist so adding the scope cover was done on a whim but not something I would have ever done. Plus they simply don't seem to work. They have set screws that you're supposed to screw into the receiver to lock it in place (ouch!, I just cringed posting that). Problem is it marrs the receiver. Oh and it doesn't hold POA so it's a waste of time, is ugly and damages the rifle. Did I mention I hated that thing?

Bottom line is this rifle and the Yugo M59/66A1 I have that's in a solid wood (Elm, Thanks Carl) are both better shooters than me with my old eyes. I did the same thing with the Yugo when I first shot it. Bullseye at about the same distance. Not a lot of them but it's capable and will do it. The SKS is a great platform and capable of great accuracy.

As far a the reference to laminates being plywood, well they are, lol. Just not the same plywood you'd be refinishing the basement with.

I've never seen much difference in accuracy between my '50 hardwood Tula refurb or my '52 Tula laminate.

WeldonHunter wrote: Bottom line is this rifle and the Yugo M59/66A1 I have that's in a solid wood (beech I believe) are both better shooters than me with my old eyes. I did the same thing with the Yugo when I first shot it. Bullseye at about the same distance. Not a lot of them but it's capable and will do it. The SKS is a great platform and capable of great accuracy.

Yugoslavians use elm stocks.

Greasemonkey wrote:I've never seen much difference in accuracy between my '50 hardwood Tula refurb or my '52 Tula laminate.

WeldonHunter wrote: Bottom line is this rifle and the Yugo M59/66A1 I have that's in a solid wood (beech I believe) are both better shooters than me with my old eyes. I did the same thing with the Yugo when I first shot it. Bullseye at about the same distance. Not a lot of them but it's capable and will do it. The SKS is a great platform and capable of great accuracy.

Yugoslavians use elm stocks.

I meant to put it's a refurb too Carl. Don't know if that makes a difference. Elm huh? Never heard that. Well don't remember if I didn't anyway, lol. You would know better than me.

Both of mine are stock force matched refurbs. Heck they both shoot better than I do anyway

My non refurb. 1956 Tula is in its original lam. stock.

Yesterday I bought a lam. Tula 1955-56. Thanks for helping me with my decision. All numbers match except for the mag.
The stock is original and the gun has been refurbished. Someone at the arsenal took a grinder or coarse sander to the stock
and left unsightly cross grain marks. The year is gone from the stock but the original serial number was left. Actually I am
quite pleased with the gun. It was the last lam. they had, which made my selection easy. Cheers, Roman

the idea of the laminated versus the hardwood of course comes down to what you prefer . the laminated stocks are better overall with climate .they are less likely to crack at the wrist .Just think about almost every k98 k98k etc ,all laminated from 1938 about mid year change over from walnut ,they never looked back ,white glue version then the most common red glue ,never much hear about a broken stock with a K98K . Oh and most certainly put the whole plywood thing in the garbage ,laminated stocks are NO plywood made crap ,actually again very strong .


SAPISHKA