BCM 7.5 oz
http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/BCM-GUNFIGHTER-s-Stock-Mod-0-Black-p/bcm-gfs-mod-0-black.htm
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/05/04/bravo-companys-bcm-gunfighter-stock/
Magpul SL 9.6 oz
http://store.magpul.com/product/MAG347/MOE-SL
http://www.tactical-life.com/gear/magpul-moe-sl/
Until I can look at them side by side Id appreciate any info from those that have.
I have both. There’s scant difference between the two, except that the Bravo seems to fit my Colt buffer tubes tighter. Weight isn’t a big deal for me.
I’ve bought and sold different stocks and would go with
-B5 (And I prefer the Bravo to both the BCM and SL, and prefer the SOPMOD to the Bravo because I have a huge head and it has a huge cheek weld).
-BCM
-Magpul
In that order.
The BCM has an interesting cheek weld that I personally appreciate more. Preference is all that will make you feel otherwise. The BCM is clearly more thought out and a better deal.
Note: The BCM stock is a modular stock that will be adaptable with future products BCM plans to offer.
thanks for the input, I currently use an str but was thinking of trying the LWRC compact on my SBR until these came along
I have neither yet but from what I’ve gathered, BCM for carbine buffer, Magpul SL for VLTOR A5 tube…
I have the Magpul SL and I really like it but the B5 is still my favorite, I don’t have much time with the BCM but all of them have their good points. I’d probably go with the B5 everytime. Depends on your taste and needs I guess
I have the BCM and am running it on an A5 tube. It fits like it’s made for it. It allows almost an inch less LOP over the B5 when collapsed all the way.
It has been tough to get answers about the bcm with a5…
Now about the lwrc, isn’t it just like a mini B5? How does it fit on an A5?
I really want to get one of the BCM stocks to try. Been using STRs but I think the BCM stock might fit what I need a little better…
I left an STR for the BCM. I’m very happy so far.
How does the cheekweld compare? I originally went with the STR because it was comfortable and easily consistent in that regard. If I can get close to it with the BCM without the added complexity of the STR storage I’m all in. I like to KISS with my rifles…
First, I was honest with myself about how much cheekweld I wanted versus how much was needed to enable me to cheek the gun consistently. The BCM is still a good piece better than a stock with no cheekweld, it is lighter, and it locks up much tighter in the first two positions than the STR. The STR had just as much wobble on the RE as a std mil spec stock when fully collapsed. The BCM feels solid in every position. It’s very LMT like with regard to RE fit (a good thing IMHO) without being so tight it can’t be adjusted.
I will always prefer a larger cheekweld like the STR or SOPMOD, but the BCM is substantially lighter, has a better lock up in all positions, and its cheekweld is good enough. It’s about on par with my wife’s B5 bravo for cheekweld, which is also good enough.
I gain nothing in the cheekweld dept from any AR stocks. My head is too short… so I get a jaw weld… and am not picky on stock shapes for that.
A stock should cost $50 and be strong. That’s it. 
That’s its job. Be strong and affordable.
That all depends on what is important to you. The MOE SL and BCM stock are built with different design priorities and the SL design is clearly thought out to meet the requirements we set out for it. In this post I will highlight the some of the SL differences and why we designed it as we did. I will also answer any questions on the SL design the best I can.
Length- The MOE SL is longer than both the B5 and BCM stocks. This is to allow it to fully collapse and lock on the longer A5 and AR10 receiver extensions.
Regular carbine stocks hit the rear of the longer tubes usually resulting in the stock being unable to lock in the last position. This position compresses the pin and floats the stock between positions in an unlocked state.
Release Lever- The MOE SL features a recessed release leaver that is shielded from the stock body from accidental release from a underside impact.
The B5 and BCM both release with conventional underside pressure.
Friction Lock- The MOE SL has two specially coated leaf springs that constantly take up any play between the receiver extension and the stock body.
Neither the B5 or BCM has a friction lock and both rely on conventional spring pressure to push the pin up and engage the buffer tube. In the case of the BCM stock the pin unit has stabilizing wings that will work better in this regards than the B5’s conventional pin. For those who state that their conventional stock is nice a tight on their tube, remember The ALU of the tube and the polymer of the stock will expand and contract differently in various temperatures and humidity. The end result is a tube that fits right in wet and hot Louisiana will fit very differently in cold and dry Montana. The MOE SL Friction locks give consistent resistance in all climates.
Buttpads- The MOE SL and BCM stocks feature slanted rubber coated butt pads with an angled toe kick. The B5 is just angled and rubber coated.
Cheek Weld- The MOE SL has a cheek weld based upon the original Colt ACR prototype stock (the father of the SOMPOD). It is wider than a CTR but not as wide as the B5. The BCM is similar to the SL in width but the shape is different. This is the most subjective part of the stock so I will not attempt to claim one is better than another.
QD Sling Options- The MOE SL and B5 stocks have a machined QD sockets that are injection molded into the stock body and allow for all common QD sling set ups like offside vertical orientation. The B5 is rotation limited via the QD cup and the SL is rotation limited by the stock body.
The BCM stock uses two plates that are slid in to the rear of the stock body post injection molding to provide the QD hole and the body design will not allow for offside vertical orientation of the sling in the QD.
Material- The MOE SL uses our propriety resin used in the STR stock and other products. This material has a proven track record of consistent performance in wide range of temperatures and over time. The B5 stock appears to use conventional material similar (but not the same) as the proven SOPMOD stock. The BCM stock body uses a couple of different polymers that have been used in this application before but have less of a track record than the polymer used in the SOPMOD. (It could be better or worse, field testing in multiple environments will shake that out)
Weight- Material is the biggest effect on the weights of each of the stocks but they are within 2 oz of each other. MOE SL 9.6 oz, B5 8.25oz, BCM 7.5 oz
Price- The MOE SL and BCM stocks have an MSRP of $60 and the B5 is $62
Impact Strength- In our drop testing the MOE SL outperformed the STR which out preformed all others in the 2012 Military Times break test http://gearscout.militarytimes.com/2012/02/01/buttstock-bashfest-gearscout-finds-out-just-how-far-tough-talk-goes/.
Now this test was unscientific and the biggest thing left out was drops in extreme environmental conditions such as sub zero and super hot temperatures. The MOE SL has been tested in these environments also. It should be noted that one of the stocks that tested well in the Military Times test literally exploded when we dropped at sub zero temps. In testing the MOE SL with it’s geometry and hardened pin started to deform the buffer tube detents so the buffer tube is becoming the limiting factor of stock strength.
With the B5 being built around the SOPMOD geometry it should fair similar to the SOPMOD although the quality of the metal used in the pin quickly becomes a factor if the body material holds up.
From the video released by BCM, the stock appears to “self collapse” under extreme loading. While this is documented as a feature to protect the integrity of the stock it is a design philosophy we to not agree with. We might be wrong on this but it is not something we will be designing into our stocks.
Modularity- While this is a feature of BCM stock it comes at a price. I patented the one of the first modular AR15 Carbine stocks back in 1999 and what we came to discover is that the price of modularity will require a compromise of one or more of the following -Increase in Price, Reduction in Strength, and or Increase in Weight. At the $60 price range a user would be likely better buying a another single purpose stock with no compromises over a modular one. Again we have a different design philosophy but ours is based on our experience in designing both modular and non modular products.
Install and Removal- The MOE SL and the B5 both can be installed and removed without tools (I will say the B5 is a tad easier but not by much). The BCM stock requires a tool (firing pin, bullet tip, allen key) to be inserted to over drive the pin to allow the stock to be installed or removed from the buffer tube.
Just as a data point on weight. I have 3 samples of B5 Bravo stocks here and all of them weight north of 9oz and none of them weigh the same.
Rich, thanks for opining. Did you find that temperature or humidity played a bigger role in stock strength when temperatures were extreme?
YMMV, but I prefer a bit of extra weight on my stock to help balance out all the crap I add to front and the SL is perfect in this regard. I dont own a BCM stock to compare but the magpul SL locks up rock solid on an A5 tube and collapses down to almost the threads on a 7 pos. A5 buffer tube. Tried it on another A5 and regular carbine tube with the same result. However it does leave 2 streaks(shinier compared to matte finish) on the underside of the tube. I was told in another thread this was tested thoroughly and should not wear on the anodizing.
Just got the SL for my SBR, ill post pix and first impressions when I get a chance but it fits the pws tube well, no play and its finish is really good.
I swapped out an STR for the BCM, and went back to the STR. Just wasn’t for me. Was worth a try though. Sold it and got most of my $ back.
The BCM was tight with no wobble at first but after using it a couple of times it started to loosen up. I took it appart to try and see if anything loosened up inside, but everything was fine. Went back to the STR. Always liked the cheek weld better anyways.
YMMV
If you have not seen the video I did with the BCM crew on the new Gunfighter stock you should definitely check it out;
In the strength department it is strong as hell and when combined with its lightweight it puts it in a class by itself