I never even heard of negative comb height as a feature to look for until the Rokstok came around and it got an inordinate amount of hype on here. Now everyone is acting like it is a must have feature and that this stock is the future, but I don't buy it.
Whether or not you "buy it" doesn't change the fact that negative comb has been around for a long time in both rifle and shotguns. The reason that most stocks don't have it anymore is that the trend of huge objective scopes and high rings, coupled with a need for aesthetics over function drove things like Monte Carlo stocks and their like.
I usually shoot prone or sitting with a tripod while hunting, while occasionally using a tree or fence post for support. Depending on which position I am in, if I have a pack on etc, my face is either a little closer or a little farther from the ocular lens of my scope. I set up my eye relief on my optics to accommodate for that small variation. Now with an aggressive negative comb height, it looks to me that my eye would not be in the same position elevation wise to line up with my optic unless I am in the exact same spot every time. This also starts to be a problem with parallax on magnified optics with your head not being consistently in the same position.
That is the whole point. The ability to shoot with precision demands that you remove as much variability as you can. It always amazes me when I see people try to reload for single digit ES numbers but don't spend any time ensuring that their hand positions, cheek weld, trigger pull, etc., are not consistent.
Those claiming they can watch their hits through recoil, I am assuming because the stock is dropping away from your cheek during recoil to some degree? Does that not cause you to lose and have to re-establish your cheek weld for every follow up shot?
If you think that positive or neutral comb designs allow for you to maintain your cheek weld during the recoil, you are fooling yourself. The reason that you can manage your recoil better with this design is 1) the negative comb ensures you don't get whacked in the face by the stock and 2) this stock sits against your shoulder such that the recoil drives straight back, rather than down and back, thereby causing muzzle jump. Pair that with a lighter recoiling cartridge and a suppressor, and you have a great recipe for spotting your own shots.
I am also in the "its hideous" camp. Looks like someone picked up a normal stock and twisted the butt stock around 180 degrees and called it innovative. One benefit of a more traditional stock design in that you can move a rear bag forward and backwards for gross elevation adjustments. I understand if that was maintained in the Rokstok it would look like a fish tail, but any benefit of that feature seems to be eliminated here.
Again, having a "conventional" toe line means that the back of the stock will be driven downwards during recoil, causing muzzle jump and eliminating the ability to spot your shots. There is a reason why benchrest and other stocks designed to be shot off of rear bags all have a neutral (or flat) toe line. If you want to use a bag for gross elevation adjustments then you should get one that you can squeeze to increase or decrease its thickness.
The McMillan offerings look a little a lot more reasonable, but I can't help but notice they are copying Manner's homework on the LRH/Pro Hunter.
As I said before, looks have nothing to do with functionality. Just because the McMillans and Manners stocks cost more, doesn't mean they are functionally better.
