Weight & balance for Dr Tim

[JerrySharrett]

Not wanting to sidetrack Dr Tims thread anymore (Dr Tims threads are always submitted for the Wurlitzer (Pulletzer??) Prize at the end of each 10 posts you know). Anyhoo, that thread is evolving to weight AND balance. All of us old left seat air jockeys know that without proper weight AND balance the old ship just will not get off the ground!!

So, then, where is the proper balance point? What is the best weight distribution front/rear to handle best? What does best "tracking in the bags" really mean?? Anyone know??

 

[mwezell]

Jerry, IMO, any answer given can only be approximated. Too many variables are involved, like rest and bag setup, and stock design. Also, do you shoot uphill or downhill....or perfectly level?--Mike

 

[Nader]

Jerry,
It is nice to know you are there to throw me a life preserver when I occasionally "jump ship" .Thank you.
Like many, I have experimented( screwed around)with various LV rifles trying to figure things out. On the balance issue, very little improvement in accuracy can be directly related to balance.Stock design is more significant than anything. The old McMillan stocks were the worst, the new Leonards and Scovilles are the best.Stock design alone improves balance more than any weight distribution program one can apply.
As far as "tracking" is concerned, I have found that just about any good stock can be made to (or modified to) slide in the bags so that the crosshairs will track in the middle of the mothball throughout forward and rearward travel. How the stock reacts under the forces of recoil is another matter entirely. Upon firing,most molded fiberglass/foam filled stocks will "shuck and jive" themselves into a different aimpoint upon return to battery. The Leonard and Scoville will return very close to the same aimpoint. In both instances "really tuned" rifles will return to point of aim significantly better than out of tune rifles.
I have shot free recoil,bear hugging,bag squeezing,nob turning and Farley shifting and none of these techniques make any difference in rifle performance.A good barrel trumps everything and a mediocre barrel will not be competitive in any format.
So much for balance.
Joel

 

[mwezell]

A good barrel trumps everything.
Joel

Amen to that, Joel...except maybe, pulling the trigger at the wrong time.--Mike

 

[4Mesh]

Joel,

I would not have guessed us to be on the same page with this. I just looked up this thread after seeing your post in the other.

I agree pretty much 100%. As I said elsewhere, I think stock shape means a lot more to "Balance" than weight placement ever did. I also think that if you get a gun to track well while shooting free recoil, you've got one that will behave really well, regardless of how you handle it.

 

[alinwa]

Ok, on the subject of "stock shape" do we bed with the tip of the barrel ON or ABOVE or BELOW centerline? Which stocks? And how many build a left/right bias?

I've got 4 setting in the vises right now just deciding where I'm gonna' place the muzzles in relation to the centerline of the stock.......

al

 

[Boyd Allen]

Al,
For a short range Benchrest rifle, I thing that it is desirable that, when viewed from above that the CLs of the bag tracking surfaces of the stock be on the same line, the sides of the front surface be parallel, and that the CL of the barreled action be on the same line. I know that a distinguished gunsmith/shooter speaks of tilting the barreled action up in front to drive the butt stock into the rear bag, but IMO what is really happening is that the angle of the front bag surface is being made flatter, and that what happens at speed is different than what you see when sliding the stock by hand. If you use a offset stock, I think that the offset should be parallel.

As far as stock design goes, those that shoot well with the front bag nearer the muzzle do more to bias the weight distribution toward the rear than can be achieved, within weight limits, by adding weight to the butt, with the front bag farther back. The only problem with this approach is that one has to be careful to design enough damping into the stock to offset the vibration characteristics of higher modulus materials that generally accompany these designs. This is where wood, and its proper selection generally comes into the materials mix.
Boyd

 

[4Mesh]

Wow Grouper, that was a mouthful!

Ok, on the subject of "stock shape" do we bed with the tip of the barrel ON or ABOVE or BELOW centerline?

Im not sure what you mean here Al. Centerline? CL of what? For what you are saying here, you're looking at a profile of the stock. Is your "centerline" some reference to the forearm? I'm lost...

Which stocks?

I begin wtih a blank, so, mine are mine. Can't help there. I have purchased lamiinated blanks, but, also make my own laminates too. I prefer less laminations fwiw. Which ain't much. 1/16" laminate stocks are pretty dense.

And how many build a left/right bias?

I can't get on board with this. Everything I've gone through in my mind says this isn't helpful. I'd prefer a centered, but wider stock. I think if you actually use legal bags with real sand in em, it tends to upset when weight is greater on one side. I've never seen one of these show me anything at the wailing wall, so I'd reserve my opinions till I saw one that really worked.

I've got 4 setting in the vises right now just deciding where I'm gonna' place the muzzles in relation to the centerline of the stock.......

hmmm. You mean in relation to the plane of the forearm bearing surface?

 

[alinwa]

Yes Phil, I strike a line parallel to the plane surfaces of the forearm. Of course we can all whine about how these are crooked but this to me is minor. I don't expect stocks to be straight anymore than I expect new cases to be straight.......it's a small matter to pick a "boreline" and work from it.

One of the best shooting setups I ever had was set up with the muzzle almost 3/16" left of this line, the gun tracked like a rail. I just couldn't live with it because I felt like it pointed forever left. My Heavy 300WSM is adjustable in deference to this 20yr-old memory/belief. I've yet to find time to adjust it.

Up and down is referenced from the bearing lower surface of the forearm. Question is do we prefer simple parallel to the riding/sliding surface or some sort of up/down pitch bias?

Buttstock is a separate entity IMO and a large subject of its own.

al