I've been bouncing around some ideas and thought I'd ask you guys about them. I've been thinking about making a weight to attach to the buttstock of my rifle. The original conception was to reduce recoil for long days at the range with 400+ projectiles. Later I began considering the benefits moving the center of gravity (COG) from the fore stock closer to the Butt. So here goes the theory.

All my ML's have a COG in the forestock, where I would grip the rifle in my left hand. I can balance them right at that point. It seems to be a natural place to put the balance of a rifle. What got me to thinking of moving the COG back, to say the pistol grip, is how that COG makes it difficult to sight while standing.

Here is the physics. Holding the rifle at the COG makes the rifle a teeter-totter with the fulcrum being located at the COG. ALL, that is ALL, of the weight of the gun is supported at the COG. Now it is possible to support some weight on either side of the COG, which can be done by gripping the rifle beyond the forestock. Of course, this just extends that weak arm that much further and little is gained.

So with conventional balance, we have the entire weight of the gun being supported by an extended weak arm. It isno wonder it is difficult to steady a rifle while standing. On the other hand, if the COG were at the pistol grip, then the strong arm, not fully extended, could support the weight. Furthermore, the shoulder and extended arm could share the load of the weight of the rifle. For example, 25% left arm, 25% shoulder, 50% right arm at the pistol grip. It may be possible for a rifle, twice the weight, to "feel" half as heavywhile sighting in the standing position.

I am curious as to what you guys think or if you know of anyone doing something like this. And if so, how well it worked.

Happy Hunting, Phil

sounds like your either an engineer or SHOULD be an engineer! lol...i do like a heavy gun for shooting...but not carrying hunting...not sure how heavy you want to go...or what it would take to balance a rifle out...guess it would all depend on each individual rifle...i think there are target shooters that add a weight right infront of the trigger area...maybe im wrong...free hand shooting a good balanced rifle makes all the diffrence...good idea...rigging up something to play with that would require potentially ruining a good rifle would be the hard part....need a way to attach a weight where you think it should go...and play around with where the weight goes and how much it wieghs...im thinking somewhere inbetween your 2 hands...but if a rifle is BADLY weighted forward then it may need to be back further or vice versa...i can see that having a nice balanced feel to it....then when you figure it all out you can rig up a weight to make the wieght practical so its not in the way and still be functionable....either in the stock somehow..or maybe something like a bow stabalizer that screws into the stock at the right point...and has the right weight to it....idea makes sense to me.....just takes some tinkering and thinking....i used to love physics class in highschool....some of that stuff was pretty neat...i wonder if theres a way to figure out EXACTLY where and how much wieght should go where.....im betting theres a way to figure it out to equalize the center of gravity throught the legnth of the rifle.....hmmmm

My guess is you might move it back a little - but moving it way back is going to be self-defeating. Too butt-heavy and the rifle will really be whippy (and HEAVY). It will also not carry near as well. I believe a slightly front-heavy rifle is much easier to steady for off-hand shooting.

But whatever cocks yer pistol!

I'm not sureeither. I hunt with a backpack. I need water, food,and other materials in the mountains where I hunt and have to pack out a kill. If I carried a weighted gun to the field, I would devise a yoke of some sort to support the weight of it so that my hands merely balance it in the yoke. I've been meaning to do this anyway as _ANY_ weight rifle gets heavy out west, unless you are taking a stand close to camp or car.

Maybe. Itwon't hurt to tinker with it. As far as ruining a rifle, I would devise a system that attached outside the stock, wrapping around it, so that it could be held in place with tape or an elastic knee brace kind of thing. That way, if I don't like it, I can discard the whole idea as an adventure in LA LA land,and discard the device, with my rifle none the worse for wear.

If i pursue it, I'll let you know how it works.

Happy Hunting, Phil

Maybe so. But then maybe not.There will be every bit as much weight carriedin the barrel and forestock as there ever was. I'm sureyour thoughts on this matter are correct forguns of identical weight, only having different centers of gravity, though Ido doubt itwould be significant where the center of gravity is moved by adding additional weight.

This may be correct, though of course, I disagree at the moment. I am interested in why you believe so.

Happy Hunting, Phil

I was taught when I was learning to build rifles that for a rifle thats to be shot off hand you should balance at the front edge of the trigger guard.
Recoil - one of the mercury loaded recoil compensators will normally be the best. If you wish to build your own I have seen the weight on a shaft with a spring in front of it work well. Lee

Phil, mainly I base the "front-heavy" comment on my own experience and reading any number of similar comments over the years. Look at most any target rifle made to be fired off-hand.

http://mlhunter.com/prod01_rifleguide1.htm paragraph on overall length.

http://www.muzzleblasts.com/vol4no1/articles/mbo41-1.html

Just a couple of quick references google turned up.

My neighbor bought a cheap little CVA sidelock (Bobcat I think) .50 caliber. The rifle was incredibly light but the balance point was too far forward. Isuspected it was going to kick like a mule with any serious load and his first shooting session confirmed that suspiscion. So I took his buttpad off and filled the hollow stock with gray packing foam and 2 lbs of sinker lead, using strategic SWAG positioning. The rifle then balanced more like a modern piece and hehas told me thefelt recoil was greatly reduced.

U.C.

It occurred to me that I may have confused what you meant by whippy. I took this to mean that the muzzle would raise more sharply when fired. Is this the meaning you were trying to convey?

I have been testing the feelof my muzzleloaders and my centerfires aiming to an object 50 yards out in my back yard. I have to confess, for me, the balance point closer to the trigger is far easier to steady. I am leaning towards what lemoyne said as it makes perfect sense to me from the physical point of view. Also, Lee was in the trade of building rifles. I did not get that impression that the authors of the web articles.


I want to reduce recoil at the range anyway, I don't see what harm it would do to try it. Though after Lee's comments, I would opt to balance in front of pistol grip in the trigger guard area. All I have to do shoot some groups with the weight on and removed to see if i get any benefit out it.

Happy Hunting, Phil

This makes sense to me. Have you shot a rifle constructed on that design?

Happy Hunting, Phil

Yes thats where I balance mine, I have found it much better for competition,I also have always balanced the varmit rifles I builtthat way also.
With the balance between the hands I do much better on a running shot. Lee