Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Rifle Balance ? for M.D.

After reading the thread about NULA in the other section of the forum and your Rifleshooter article mentioned in it, it got me to thinking. Have you, or anyone else for that matter, tried checking or comparing balance "FOC" style as an archer would with an arrow? That is, how far the balance point is in front of or behind the center point of the rifles OAL and how that affects how well you shoot the rifle?

I just checked two rifles. The Remington 223 ADL is just over 43" and the balance point is roughly 1 1/2" behind center (right at the recoil lug). The 1895GS is roughly 36" and the balance point is about 1/4'' in front of the center point (on the forearm almost to the receiver) the way it is set up. These balance points are with the rifles unloaded so of course it would move some with them loaded. I believe the 1895 is a little steadier for me off hand (especially when loaded) than the ADL but I'm not the best off-hand shot to judge by.

Using this calculator https://www.bowhunting.com/arrow-foc-calculator/ and figuring the recoil pad as the nock the foc for the 1895 would be .7% and for the ADL it would be -2.3%.

Food for thought, or am I just being loony?

Dave.

Dave,

You are being loony, but thinking a lot is one symptom of being a rifle loony! That sure might be another variable to consider.

Now I'll probably have to get some rifles and measure 'em....

John

Interesting discussion and article. To add to some of the measurements in the mentioned article, B.S.A. advertised the balance point of their smallbore rifles—No. 12 was 6.25" in front of the trigger (No. 8 was 5.5"), No. 13 was 4.75", and No. 15 was 7.25".

US military specifications for .22 LR match rifles (bolt action, heavy barrel) were 4 to 8" in front of the trigger for the balance point.

Sandlapper,

Interesting!

I had a BSA No. 15 for a while, that had been converted to centerfire and rechambered in .22 Hornet. It grouped well--but I didn't measure the balance point!

You wrote a great article on balance not long ago! Had me checking all my rifles.

Must be an individual preference thing maybe...the offhand target rifle that I shot my best scores with has the balance point 10 1/2 inches forward of the trigger? I had a Scheutzen that was even more muzzle heavy...the palm rest was about 3 inches behind the balance point...I suppose that was what the hooked butt and crescent buttplates were all about back when men stood on their hind legs to shoot.
The original records of Harry Pope and Dr Hudson took over a century to beat, IIRC. I think Pope shot 696 consecutive bulls (3.36") at 200 yards, I don't know if that was ever beaten.

Thanks!

Somebody else posted the link to the article on another thread--which is why dave284 brought the subject up again here:
https://www.rifleshootermag.com/editorial/tips-on-rifle-balance/372426

As important as rifle balance is weight distribution. Two rifles may balance at the same point and weigh exactly the same, but the distribution of the weight will significantly affect how the rifle feels. If the weight is primarily at the ends of the rifle (at the muzzle and butt) the rifle will feel slower than will a rifle where the weight is concentrated between the hands. A gunmaker may vary weight distribution depending on the intended use of the rifle. Lighter at the ends will make for a rifle which is quicker handling while concentrating weight at the ends will slow the feel and make the rifle steadier. Some people will prefer to have more weight at the ends to make the rifle swing more smoothly or to slow down the wobble. Others may prefer to have the weight more between the hands to speed up handling, or lessen fatigue from holding. My experience has been, while I might feel the difference, it won't actually make me shoot any better one way or the other. It does give me a possible excuse for those really bad days at the range! GD

The distance to the palm rest is best measured from the trigger, too—4 to 5" forward of the trigger for a smallbore target rifle.

Some balance point measurements and considerations for small-game rifles from an American Rifleman article:

Balance of a rifle means a good deal, if we learn to handle
it; it depends on weight distribution. For deliberate, super- .
accurate work no weight we can carry up and down the hills is
too much, though it can be in the wrong place. If the rifle
teeters at a balance point from 7 to 9 inches ahead of the
trigger and weighs from 9 to 12 pounds, it should hang well
for small-game sniping. For snapshooting we'd like to shift
the balance point to 7 1/2 or possibly 6 inches and get rid of
about three pounds, on the average. Amateur gunsmithing
can adjust the hang and fit of most rifles, hollowing or weight-
ing stock or forearm, slimming or building up, adding or
reducing stock length and the highly important pitch of the
buttplate—shortening the length to toe, for instance, if we
try for running game with reasonable calmness and still
overshoot.

Most of us find that a long, slim barrel balances better for
both quick and deliberate firing than a short, chunky one of
equal weight. And a breech-heavy rifle with massive action is
no precious boon to the snapshooter—unless he has one
and is determined to defend it! Try as I will, I can remem-
ber no occasion when a long barrel proved a handicap in
my brush shooting, though once I was nicely fouled up with a
20-inch tube.

https://archive.org/details/sim_american-rifleman_1951-07_99_7/page/26

Some people are sensitive to a long gun's balance and some aren't.

One of the best balanced rifle style that I've owned are the Husqvarnas with Mannlicher-style stocks.

One of the worst balanced rifle style that I've shot is the CZ 550 FS, since they have (IME) the balance and handling characteristics akin to a 6' cedar fence post.

If it's gonna be muzzle heavy, it's gotta have a butthook or similar. One of the best balanced rifles I've shot was a ML that was muzzle heavy. It didn't have a full hook, but it did have a little nub. It shot great offhand.

Every other rifle should balance between the hands. Total weight makes a lot of difference. I like very close, tight positions.

I have, on many occasions, been asked to change the handling of the rifle while retaining the same weight and balance point. Other times, I have been asked to shift the balance point forward or back; again, while keeping the weight the same. Silhouette shooters are often over sensitive to balance and too much weight can lead to fatigue. Sometimes, weight can be added to the stock, but often some recontouring of the barrel is required. In general, silhouette rifles are better with the weight toward the ends. I like hunting rifles better with the weight between the hands. A rifle use on running coyotes is better with some weight up front, to smooth out the swing. A rifle for quick shots at whitetails might be nicer if the weight is in the middle, so it points more quickly. As with so many other things, this reflects my opinion only and it may not be right. GD

I rebarreled a light sporter weight deer rifle years back. Factory barrel was 22", I stayed with factory contour but 23.25 ". Went with the odd length cause I couldn't decide on 23" or 24". The extra 1.25" hanging out there at the end improved the feel of that rifle considerably. It is easier to shoot offhand, and I really like it. Kind of wish I'd went 24", but it sure handles nicely as it is.

One of the best descriptions I've ever heard was from an elk guide who picked up my 338 and said, "I like this. The weight isn't all in one place."


Okie John

Okie john, I think that is why a Model 94 with a full magazine handles so well. The weight is well distributed.

Since everyone else is answering, why not? Rifle balance is just that. Now why do we always hear about all you guys that love that barrel heavy rifle??? That's not balance, that's off balance.

I may see things differently since I was a competitive trap shooter for years. I like a rifle to be lively in the hands and point like a shotgun and fit like a glove and to be an extension of my arm:


Here's one of my elk hunting rifles. Set up just like my pre 64 338wm. Balance is right at the front action screw and the rifle weighs 8 pounds all up. Most of my "hunting" rifles are like that. My precision rifles that wear bipods are not balanced like that. They serve a different purpose.

Balance can also mean, is it top heavy feeling? I've hunted with some rifles and knew on the first day that they were unbalanced because the scope was too damn big and heavy. Completely throwing off the "balance". Yet, some guys think they need a 30oz scope sitting on top of a 5 pound rifle. That just doesn't make any sense. That is an unbalance I just don't care for.

When hunting, the last thing you want to think about is your rifle. That should be natural feeling, not a hindrance and for damn sure not barrel heavy or top heavy. You guys have a right to like what you like, but I know what works for me. YMMV..

BSA,

Here's my reply to another experienced hunter on the same subject in another thread:

There's there's both "static" and "dynamic" balance, but the dynamic is discussed more among shotgunners and rifle people who shoot moving targets--whether animals or paper. There are professional running-boar target shooters in Europe--especially in Germany, of course--who have their own ideas about rifle balance. Have shot the running-boar targets over there and even in Texas, on a pig hunt hosted by Sauer, which set up a standard running-pig range for pre-hunt practice.

But the trigger is a far more meaningful point for static balance than any action-screw...

All of which means "what works for you, works for you." Which is exactly why I described Eileen's experience in the article....

Might also add that my experience in hunting rifles also involves observing a lot of other shooters in the field, both due to some guiding in my younger years, and going on a number of hunts with a lot of other people. This has been far more revealing than my personal preferences, and enhances my objective "balance."

What you've done is a lot like what I've done on several Remington 7s, replacing the 18.5" and 20" barrels with 22" and 24" 700 take-off barrels. The extra length improved how the rifles felt to me, even a small change, like swapping into a 22" 700 Mountain Rifle contour barrel, can make a noticeable difference in how the rifle feels if, BIG IF, the shooter is sensitive to such things.