Stock Rigidity

Get or give advice on equipment, reloading and other technical issues.

Moderator: Mod

Message
Author
Gyro
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:44 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Stock Rigidity

#16 Postby Gyro » Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:19 pm

DaveMc wrote:My thoughts are - there is no right and wrong here and it really depends on how the whole package acts together with the shooter.
Light stiff stocks can work very well if they are on the right platform and allowed to move backward/track correctly and consistently without imparting a significant recoil "reaction" on the action and barrel (like a rail gun). The downside is more felt recoil if you aren't free recoiling. Of course your shoulder force can then impart a recoil impulse back through the stock and action. Whether or not this impulse affects the muzzle before the bullet leaves is very much dependent on the whole interaction, barrel time and recoil speed etc. Bench rest rifles (esp 6ppc) with short barrels and higher speed, lighter projectiles are a different kettle of fish to a larger, heavier calibre, slower, longer barrel etc.

The long and short of it is we see many very accurate, heavy wooden stocks but you can also build very accurate rifles with light stocks and more weight in barrel and action. All of the above are interesting to experiment with.

What is hard to control and will definitely throw in a lot of vertical barrel whip is a heavy stiff stock and no room to move in rest.


Thanks DaveMc !!!

My stock is bloody low at both ends and when I added the extra weight I could to the package I first put it right on the guns centre of mass, which was close to the bore centre line. It shot VERY well like that but of course that's no good to an innovator to have it going so well so I became unhappy with it mostly as it was disconcerting to see it torquing so much in the bags !

So I moved that weight/s to positions further away from the bore axis to lessen the torque reaction, which it did. And it still shot well and by this time I'd changed the media/hardness of the bags so by now I'd moved a ways from where I'd started.

BUT I still often think I should have left it how I first had it and just not gotten worried about seeing it torque so much ? In fact I've now pretty much convinced myself it did shoot better then. I can easily return it to that place though.

As you say it's how the whole package works together and ya just gotta do the hard yards to work all that stuff out. I've been doing this only 9 years.

Albow
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:59 pm

Re: Stock Rigidity

#17 Postby Albow » Thu Mar 15, 2018 10:23 pm

Hey Rebel I have made a few composite stocks and some had too much flex and wouldn’t group especially with the heavy recoil I was shooting. They were the ones that were using foam filling materials to keep weight down. I ended up going to a solid type of fill like Macmillan’s use on my current stock and it is very good, just very heavy. When I have filmed my current stocks and watched them in slow motion and it is amazing how much they ‘flex’ or move under recoil. I think what is important is there is not too much flex and it is consistent.

Dave your reference to rail guns and rigidity has been raised by Tony Z on this matter too. Seems as long as what ever is made is consistent shot to shot along with the other aspects that you mentioned it may not be possible to be too rigid.

Gyro would be interested to see a picture of your stock. Sounds interesting. Any chance of showing me a photo. I too have also read that thread (is a sticky in this forum) on stock design and recoil. :D
Thanks Al

Gyro
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:44 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Stock Rigidity

#18 Postby Gyro » Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:32 am

Al. I'm shy of putting up a pic just yet as the way I've made this stock, around a Barnard SC receiver, and using the receiver as a "stressed member " is as far I know new. It's NOT a design that lends itself to a production run scenario though as it's way too time consuming and technical to make, except for somebody like me with lots of free time and the know how. At the end of the day it's pretty much as DaveMc puts it .... " it's how everything works together ".

I reckon the load gets tuned to the gun and when you change one thing your actually changing other things too. All kinds of setups can probably work but I still reckon an overly flexible stock is one to avoid ! Fine in the perfect world when the conditions are easy and you've lots of time to focus on the gun handling but when the conditions get hard then ya need a gun that essentially drives itself, so you totally focus on trying to make sense of the conditions. The only big shoot that I go near is our Nationals at Trentham and it's normally a place with hard conditions, hence my thinking.

The last " flexible " stock I made was about 4 years ago. One day it would shoot lights out then the next day it was SHITE. Once I saw that pattern clearly it went to the dump with some household rubbish, despite the fact I'd put a lot of time into making it. God I waffle on ..... cheers Rob Kerridge

Brad Y
Posts: 2022
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:21 pm

Re: Stock Rigidity

#19 Postby Brad Y » Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:56 pm

I’m following this one with interest.

My situation is that I’ve recently sold my f class gear to finish building my house while I’m on apprentice wages. It won’t be A fair while before I’m able to participate in any form of shooting again, but I’m slowly making inroads into that.

My aim is to build a multi purpose ftr, 1kbr and 500 fly stock. I’m going for something similar to that of what Bryan litz uses in shape. I understand it’s not designed for f class, but I feel it could be quite suitable for all 3 disciplines with some tweaks and obviously some work on technique while using it off a bipod.

Chopper
Posts: 947
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:04 pm
Location: Albury

Re: Stock Rigidity

#20 Postby Chopper » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:05 am

Try some Benchrest or Fly shooting and back your rifle up to the firing point with your rifle on a block of steel or concrete
I have not seen too many win over a nice lump of wood with a driver shooting it the way it needs to be driven
Shooters Do Not spend more time in shooting the equipment and finding out what the rifle needs to do to shoot, soft hold ,hard hold ,or in the middle.
You will be SUPRISED in trying this method ,
Go to the range and hug it hard for five shots , Then free recoil for five shots
And see the diff,
you may be chasing a load you already had, or might think twice about bagging a scope, or wind,
Chop

Gyro
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:44 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Stock Rigidity

#21 Postby Gyro » Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:04 am

True Chop. You could actually write a book on this subject though. The way a rifle is 'driven ' of course has huge implications for where the shots go. The time the bullet is in the barrel is said to be 2 milliseconds and it seems obvious to me a lot can happen in that time re where the barrel ends up pointing as the bullet exits. Shooters spend HUGE money on say the scope so they can see flies on the 1000 yard target but that absolutely doesn't mean the bullet will go to the right place !!

'Tis complicated to be sure to be sure ...

Wal86
Posts: 174
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 5:10 pm
Location: Kilmore, VIC

Re: Stock Rigidity

#22 Postby Wal86 » Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:55 am

It's funny how this topic has come up, im in the process of changing my stock on my fstd rifle.. Reason being is im not completely comfortable shooting my current stock on the mound..
This stock however is extremely comfortable from a bench...
I wouldn't use something with a thumbhole for BR, but I think it might suit me more for fclass shooting..
Im looking at the Fopen stock built by Joe West, has anyone had anything to do with his stocks?
Any feed back would be greatly appreciated..
Cheers
Alan
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Gyro
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:44 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Stock Rigidity

#23 Postby Gyro » Sat Mar 17, 2018 7:08 am

NO. Isn't there a good plain Jane laminated stock made in Oz that's left beefed up through the mid-section ?

I see online the Spear of Destiny stock from Shurley Brothers made I believe with collaboration from Mr Gonzales . I think. Just buy that Wal they're only $2250 US.

Wal86
Posts: 174
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 5:10 pm
Location: Kilmore, VIC

Re: Stock Rigidity

#24 Postby Wal86 » Sat Mar 17, 2018 7:52 am

Gyro,
Not familiar with stock but $2250 US, :shock: ouch...

Brad Y
Posts: 2022
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:21 pm

Re: Stock Rigidity

#25 Postby Brad Y » Sat Mar 17, 2018 11:14 am

A lot needs to be said for what is winning. Bob eagers stocks work. Ken noye stocks work. Most will work fine. Have seen a few joe west laminates here in WA and they are comfy if you grip your rifle, I never did shooting more free recoil with thumb on top and the saum I would lean into a little more than the shehane. Agree with what chop says, need to experiment.

Gyro
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:44 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Stock Rigidity

#26 Postby Gyro » Sun Mar 18, 2018 3:10 am


Albow
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:59 pm

Re: Stock Rigidity

#27 Postby Albow » Sun Mar 18, 2018 7:19 am

Thanks for the link to that article Gyro. Interesting to see what they are doing with their stock designs.

Looking at the pictures it is interesting to see where and how they put in the carbon stringers as they call them.
Thanks Al

Gyro
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:44 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Stock Rigidity

#28 Postby Gyro » Sun Mar 18, 2018 8:00 am

Very interesting yes. I'm not saying you HAVE TO spend that much on a stock but maybe there's something in what these guys are doing ? Maybe a shooter who wants to be on the podium should consider that perhaps they do need to spend more for the stock ? Look how much we spend on the other bits.

Gyro
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:44 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Stock Rigidity

#29 Postby Gyro » Sun Mar 18, 2018 8:38 am

Or just make your own ..... laminate up to size with carbon fiber panel ( with a zero-degree layup ) and wood, all in the vertical plane. Glue together with epoxy in a press. Ya may need to pin the laminations together before glueing under a press as otherwise they all just squeeze everywhere ! If ya know someone with a copy-router setup they can rough it out for you ?

Going off topic but some ideas there.

Albow
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:59 pm

Re: Stock Rigidity

#30 Postby Albow » Sun Mar 18, 2018 8:43 am

Gyro agree that you need to pay for somethings however the gear that we buy and pay a lot for is relative to the item by my way of looking at it in regards to machine & tooling required to make it along with the complexity and skills necessary.

US$2250 as the starting price for these stocks according to the manufacturers web site is well and truely out there considering the cost of materials they are using and the actual hours it would take them to build a stock.

Compare that to a custom action and what they cost. A BAT custom is US$1300 give or take according to their website so something seems a little skewed though people must be paying it.

I have made quite a few timber laminates and plugs for my composite molds though not looking to go that way this time.
Thanks Al


Return to “Equipment & Technical”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests