Boyd Allen
Active member
Although there have been many discussions about rifle balance, for a 10.5# PPC I think that it all comes down to getting enough weight on the rear sandbag.
I have a package scale that has a 70# capacity, that is low enough so that I can use it like a space under my rear bag, and my front rest has enough range of adjustment to level a rifle. I have done some testing by first zeroing (using the tare function) the scale with the bag in place, and then moving the rifle and front rest so that both front and rear centers of support are in different positions, and combinations of positions. Given that I weighed the rifle first, and that the weight on the front bag will be the scale reading subtracted from that weight, I made a table that shows the effects of different rifle support positions on front to rear weight distribution. What my testing verified is that the major determiner of weight on the rear bag is how far forward you place the front bag. This position will be determined by testing to see where the best accuracy is obtained, and the length of the forend.
The newest stock designs are able to take advantage of this because of the materials that they are made with. The carbon fiber gives the needed stiffness, and the wood the needed damping. You may have noticed that they have longer forends.
For those of us with older designs, of different materials, using a shorter barrel with a slimmer contour, to allow more weight to be added to the butt may be the only way to get enough weight in the back for reliable free recoil shooting.
What I think that this all comes down to is that if you are shooting free recoil, you need to have a minimum weight on the rear sandbag for the rifle to be stable as it recoils. On the other hand if you hold and shoulder the rifle, none of this matters very much. I suppose that I should also mention that there are shooters in the Hall of Fame that do it both ways.
I have a package scale that has a 70# capacity, that is low enough so that I can use it like a space under my rear bag, and my front rest has enough range of adjustment to level a rifle. I have done some testing by first zeroing (using the tare function) the scale with the bag in place, and then moving the rifle and front rest so that both front and rear centers of support are in different positions, and combinations of positions. Given that I weighed the rifle first, and that the weight on the front bag will be the scale reading subtracted from that weight, I made a table that shows the effects of different rifle support positions on front to rear weight distribution. What my testing verified is that the major determiner of weight on the rear bag is how far forward you place the front bag. This position will be determined by testing to see where the best accuracy is obtained, and the length of the forend.
The newest stock designs are able to take advantage of this because of the materials that they are made with. The carbon fiber gives the needed stiffness, and the wood the needed damping. You may have noticed that they have longer forends.
For those of us with older designs, of different materials, using a shorter barrel with a slimmer contour, to allow more weight to be added to the butt may be the only way to get enough weight in the back for reliable free recoil shooting.
What I think that this all comes down to is that if you are shooting free recoil, you need to have a minimum weight on the rear sandbag for the rifle to be stable as it recoils. On the other hand if you hold and shoulder the rifle, none of this matters very much. I suppose that I should also mention that there are shooters in the Hall of Fame that do it both ways.
