How long is "too long"

[Ontario Hunter]

I must respectfully disagree with your assessment of limb save recoil pads. I use them on my harsher recoil guns and they tame recoil admirably. I have not had one either jam my finger with trigger guard or set triggers. Have not had any movement side to side on any of my guns since mounted. To each his own but for me I will continue buying and using limb saver pads both slip on and mounted.

If you read through the thread you'll see I'm not the only complainant. I even tried putting a way too small size small Limbsaver on my A5 shotgun thinking it would have to stay in place (no Pachmayer were available when Decelerator slipped off in the field). Nope! I couldn't finish one station at trap range without restraightening that damn slip-on. It shifts sideways and then the gun mounts improperly. Eventually I had to use Gorilla duct tape to hold it in place. The cut to fit Limbsaver seems to be slightly stiffer than slip-on. Shooters need to understand there is a point of diminishing returns re recoil pad softness. Too soft and one just as well have a balloon full of air between the shoulder and butt of stock. You're gonna get smacked harder than if the gun was wearing no recoil pad.

 

[MS 9x56]

If you read through the thread you'll see I'm not the only complainant. I even tried putting a way too small size small Limbsaver on my A5 shotgun thinking it would have to stay in place (no Pachmayer were available when Decelerator slipped off in the field). Nope! I couldn't finish one station at trap range without restraightening that damn slip-on. It shifts sideways and then the gun mounts improperly. Eventually I had to use Gorilla duct tape to hold it in place. The cut to fit Limbsaver seems to be slightly stiffer than slip-on. Shooters need to understand there is a point of diminishing returns re recoil pad softness. Too soft and one just as well have a balloon full of air between the shoulder and butt of stock. You're gonna get smacked harder than if the gun was wearing no recoil pad.

That Just has not been my experience. I even have one on my 12 gauge slug gun. For me they work.

 

[CoElkHunter]

I must respectfully disagree with your assessment of limb save recoil pads. I use them on my harsher recoil guns and they tame recoil admirably. I have not had one either jam my finger with trigger guard or set triggers. Have not had any movement side to side on any of my guns since mounted. To each his own but for me I will continue buying and using limb saver pads both slip on and mounted.

Yeah, I'm keeping my Limbsavers. I'm going to try the double sided tape trick though. They REALLY tame the recoil well!

 

[CoElkHunter]

If you read through the thread you'll see I'm not the only complainant. I even tried putting a way too small size small Limbsaver on my A5 shotgun thinking it would have to stay in place (no Pachmayer were available when Decelerator slipped off in the field). Nope! I couldn't finish one station at trap range without restraightening that damn slip-on. It shifts sideways and then the gun mounts improperly. Eventually I had to use Gorilla duct tape to hold it in place. The cut to fit Limbsaver seems to be slightly stiffer than slip-on. Shooters need to understand there is a point of diminishing returns re recoil pad softness. Too soft and one just as well have a balloon full of air between the shoulder and butt of stock. You're gonna get smacked harder than if the gun was wearing no recoil pad.

I actually have a beige slip on Pachmayr on my Browning A Bolt .338. I thought it was a Limbsaver, but it's not. The beige is more "appealing" with the walnut stock than a black Limbsaver. Funny thing is, that for years I only used the factory pad. But the extra padding is welcome at least on the range. Kind of like shoeing a mule. They don't need to be shod like a horse does, but once they have those shoes, they don't want to go back to bare hooves. LOL

 

[sgt_zim]

1" slip on gets me to 14.5" LOP and the Bradley is great. recoil is now acceptable

3 in orange are after i zeroed, 50 yards

2000MR, 74 gr, dgx bonded 400 gr, 2240 fps.

gonna take it out to the deer woods in an hour or 2

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Get your minds out of the gutter.

My current project is to get all my rifles to the correct LOP. Right now, they're all OEM, so 13.5 or 13.75". I need to lengthen them all to 14.75 or 15".

Standard screw length to attach recoil pad to butt stock is roughly 2", and it looks as though I'll need to go to 3.5" or even 4" screws to get my rifles to an appropriate length. Screws are terrific at holding a static vertical load, but are brittle and don't do sheer well at all, if at all.

At nearly double the length, I'm a little concerned over the extra torque that can be imparted via every day use (not the actual shooting part, just all the other stuff that goes along with transporting them and hunting with them). Am I being overly paranoid? Or is this potentially a thing? Is my only real option to spend a fortune on bespoke stocks? Add to THAT complication is that I am a lefty.

@sgt_zim
Just get shorter arms problem solved. Ha ha ha ha ha.
Seriously tho you could just go to a heavier gauge screw. Most stock screws are 8 to 10 gauge, if you went to a 12 to 14 gauge that would solve the sheer problems. Them you may have to alter the head diameter to the proper size so you don't damage the pad.
You could also just use longer screws and epoxy the pad to the stock as well.
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

No offense to all the midgets here (which is almost all of you), but trying to describe the issues associated with being really tall seems to be about the same as trying to describe color to a person who's been blind since birth.

@sgt_zim
We can't help it if we are normal height mate.
A lot of people I know have ducks disease.
There arse is to close to the ground.

It ain't PC to call some one a midget now. Thank God I'm not into politics.
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

For my light-recoiling rifles like my 6.5x55 and my 280AI, not a big deal. But my 45-70, 9.3x62, and 404J are a little stiff in the recoil department, especially when firing from a bench. I'm told that a proper LOP will take a bit of starch out of the recoil.

The real issue with the larger bores is load development. It's a challenge to shoot any of them more than about 10 or 12 times during a range session. I've got a PAST pad on order, that should help some.

@sgt_zim
If all else fails just do what I do when shooting off the bench.
I put on 2 pairs of big boy pants and tell myself to suck it up princess it's only a few rounds to sight in and shoot the bloody thing.
We must be a bit tougher in Australia.
Ha ha ha ha ha
Bob

 

[Ontario Hunter]

@sgt_zim
If all else fails just do what I do when shooting off the bench.
I put on 2 pairs of big boy pants and tell myself to suck it up princess it's only a few rounds to sight in and shoot the bloody thing.
We must be a bit tougher in Australia.
Ha ha ha ha ha
Bob

Big boy pants? Must have extra room in the crotch?

 

[PCC600]

Other factors besides height come into play when selecting proper LOP: long neck, thin (or thick) shoulders, stooped stature, long arms.

I got fitted up by Rigby for a new 500NE . To my surprise their main focus was on cast off not LOP . Rationale being they want a tight consistent fit of my cheek on the stock .

 

[AZDAVE]

@rookhawk I agree on the fitting book by "Michael Yardley's Gunfitting" I have read it several times. and was fitted by several companies that have a clue. (Verney Carron, Rigby and a late old friend that first showed me that my rifle and shotguns were to short) I learned to shoot shotguns by jump shooting duck and doves and am a decent game shot. so will pickup the Churchill book.

 

[sgt_zim]

I got fitted up by Rigby for a new 500NE . To my surprise their main focus was on cast off not LOP . Rationale being they want a tight consistent fit of my cheek on the stock .

the bradley cheek rest goes a long way towards that. worst part of the recoil before was that the comb slapped the snot out of my face.

 

[rookhawk]

the bradley cheek rest goes a long way towards that. worst part of the recoil before was that the comb slapped the snot out of my face.

@sgt_zim I have a few questions for you. A.) Do you have a picattinney rail on your rifles? B.) Are you using medium or high rings? C.) Do you have optics with greater than 40mm exit objectives?

When someone complains of getting kicked in the face by their stocks, 90% of the time or more, its because of ABC above, 10% of the time the gun is just poorly stocked or the person's face isn't stereotypically the size of the average Western European.

You have to remember that tactical pretend sniper guns and stocks are what sells. They make up at least 80% of all new gun sales. Those stocks were designed as part of a battle and engagement system for military applications: 1.) That the shooter is prone, 2.) That the stock is way too high because there are no iron sights considered, only high magnification optics. 3.) That adjustability and fit for the operator is all conducted using pic rails to move optics back and forth, or quickly replace them for other types of optics depending on the tactics applied in warfare.

When you take 1-2-3 above and look at how people hunt, they are going to get kicked like donkeys. I bet less than 1% of all hunting shots are taken prone.


Just because it sells and is popular, doesn't mean its correct or good. In the case of gun fit, almost everything being sold is to mimic special forces equipment but it is not correct for most hunting applications. Hence, most people are miserable with what they bought but they cannot figure out why because that's virtually all that is sold.

 

[bowjijohn]

@sgt_zim
It ain't PC to call some one a midget now. Thank God I'm not into politics.
Bob

I resemble that description

Less wind down here

 

[sgt_zim]

@sgt_zim I have a few questions for you. A.) Do you have a picattinney rail on your rifles? B.) Are you using medium or high rings? C.) Do you have optics with greater than 40mm exit objectives?

When someone complains of getting kicked in the face by their stocks, 90% of the time or more, its because of ABC above, 10% of the time the gun is just poorly stocked or the person's face isn't stereotypically the size of the average Western European.

You have to remember that tactical pretend sniper guns and stocks are what sells. They make up at least 80% of all new gun sales. Those stocks were designed as part of a battle and engagement system for military applications: 1.) That the shooter is prone, 2.) That the stock is way too high because there are no iron sights considered, only high magnification optics. 3.) That adjustability and fit for the operator is all conducted using pic rails to move optics back and forth, or quickly replace them for other types of optics depending on the tactics applied in warfare.

When you take 1-2-3 above and look at how people hunt, they are going to get kicked like donkeys. I bet less than 1% of all hunting shots are taken prone.


Just because it sells and is popular, doesn't mean its correct or good. In the case of gun fit, almost everything being sold is to mimic special forces equipment but it is not correct for most hunting applications. Hence, most people are miserable with what they bought but they cannot figure out why because that's virtually all that is sold.

weaver bases and low rings to go with vx5 1-5x24

even looking down the OEM iron sites pulls my face off the comb, cant get any closer to the bore than that

 

[rookhawk]

weaver bases and low rings to go with vx5 1-5x24

even looking down the OEM iron sites pulls my face off the comb, cant get any closer to the bore than that

Yup. You’ve done everything right, you just have a stock that is way too low for the gun. A shame, but a common one where companies mix-and-match stocks and actions that will bolt up, all without considering that comb height matters for shooter experience.

In your situation with the cost of the gun and the materials its made from, I think you’ve already done the very best you can by using that kydex padded comb my friend.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I resemble that description

Less wind down here

@bowjijohn
Less oxygen up here and when it rains us tall people get wet first.
Ha ha ha ha ha
Bob

 

[sgt_zim]

Yup. You’ve done everything right, you just have a stock that is way too low for the gun. A shame, but a common one where companies mix-and-match stocks and actions that will bolt up, all without considering that comb height matters for shooter experience.

In your situation with the cost of the gun and the materials its made from, I think you’ve already done the very best you can by using that kydex padded comb my friend.

i had considered Warne bases, but they werent THAT much lower than the weavers

 

[rookhawk]

Talley mounts and their low rings are as low as you can go. Not sure it’s worth it, but at least 1/4” lower than weaver.