Folks,
Looking for some info from users of either of theses butt stocks ? The Luth is a little lighter and less $$$$ , but the Magpul has a great reputation.I only know what I have read on the web . I want an adjustable stock but without a ton of weight . Sometimes you can't get what you want so please tell me the pros and cons of which ever stock you are familiar with so I can make a good choice.

Thank youall in advance for your time and help .

Good Shooting,

Soup

TTT

I have both.

The Luth is a nice unit for the cost and weight but not nearly as quick to adjust as the Magpul. Adjustment is via set screws so not field expedient per say. It currently resides on a SPR'ish 18" that is my wife's "do-all AR.

The PRS resides on my 20" bench build. It is bulky, heavy and expensive but is adjusts quicker then the LUTH, feels better on my cheek, and feels more stable to me.

For a bench rig I prefer the PRS or UBR. For a calling rifle that sees occasional bench work I would go Luth.

T T T

I really like the PRS stock on a couple of different rifles. I like most things magpul so I might be biased.

I have both,

I will resonate the words of MALLARD, I like the luth because of the weight, but the PRS is a better stock if you are not weight conscious.

I have never tried the Luth but the PRS I had was just too darn big and bulky. I guess if I wanted a bench gun it would be ok but it was just too much to walk and hunt with.

TTT