Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Rifle balance?

Guys-

This forum is a bit different (in a good way) from the forums I usually frequent in that a lot of guns here are lightweights vs heavy rifles on the other sites. Don't get me wrong, both guns have their place as I have a 14 to 35# heavys and 6-8# lightweights.
I recently had my tikka t3 lite cut to 20" and barrel/bolt spiral fluted. I plan to do a little stock trimming when i get home in a couple months... I put a bushnell 2.5-16x42 in DNZ lows. It's a bit heavy to keep with a lightweight theme but I wanted a little more robust scope for this mountain rig.
I also have a custom SA 700 with a 20" barrel and Alaskan stock with a vortex 4-16x50 (had a weaver 4-20x50).

Now- I've seen several post on here stating their gun is "perfectly balanced"? Based on what? Where is the optimum balance point? Do you want 60% of the weight in front on the trigger....?

Excluding varmint rifles- I only find balance an issue on short barreled rifles. They feel butt heavy and scopes accentuate that. Scopes on rifles with more standard barrels are better centered over the trigger and have less affect- at any weight. Least in the stuff I have used.

If I read you correctly I agree with you on the other posts where rifle balance is mention as if it were critical.

Now to "Each his own." on this. If it matters to someone else then it matters.

It does not matter to me on hunting rifles unless they are way too heavy and then its just the carry weight and not the aiming.

I have lightweight rifles and heavier hunting rifles up to heavy varmint rifles. So called "balance" does not matter to me unless of course it's shooting offhand.

I have target rifles also and am familiar with the 'balance' required.

I think most guys like for their rifles to have a neutral balance, so that the rifle would balance between the actioin screws. This makes it handy to carry one handed.

However, I like a slightly muzzle heavy rifle, one that balances forward of the front action screw somewhere. I find this makes quick shots and moving shots a little easier and no detriment in a shot where I can take my time.

+1. The OA weight factor aside, even a very light rifle can have a good balance with a slight muzle bias which will make it track a little better.

The Nula is a case in point where a light rifle can have (is reputed to have) all the right handling characteristics, I like mine to balance on the front action screw and for me this makes a good pointing rifle that is easy to carry.

Von Gruff.

Rifle balance is very important to me as a lot of my hunting involves moving through dense timber, and some shots have to be taken quite quickly. I think rifle balance is very overlooked, and many of the "fast handling" rifles out there on the market actually do a very poor job of it. Often these are short barreled rifles that swing quickly, but don't track true - they are too muzzle-light. At the same time, many of the uber-light-stocked mountain rifles i have held also feel completely wrong. Around the front action screw is right for me, too.

I think the balance point is just in from of the trigger but depends on how well the stock fits you. Good balance can counteract the perception of weight to a cerain extent.

When I first got my Merkel double it felt light but it weighs 11lbs. It is easier to shoot offhand (as far as strain holding it up is concerned and holding on target) than my 10lb 26" barrel CZs which have a balance point much further forward and feel much heavier.

I'll check out where the balance points are when I get home tonight (another good excuse to pull the rifles out of the safe).

I think what guys are thinking when they say "perfectly balanced" is their rifle comes up to their shoulder naturally and points and feels like a fine shotgun. Comes up and finds the target, swings and feels like an extension of ones own body part....

The first time I picked up a custom stocked rifle,I experienced what "balance" was....everything lined up and despite more weight than is popular today, the rifle had a neutral weight which made it fell....well....weightless. Yet it hung on target and stayed cemented there with little effort.

It can be deceptive and only in the shooting does it really become apparent. The pre 64 M70 in 375H&H seems clunky,but when shouldered,it takes some conscious effort to get it off target...it is easy to hit with from unsteady positions.The sights seem to not want to move off target.

To paraphrase someone famous...balance is like pornography...you can't describe it very well, but you know it when you see(feel) it...

Many of todays factory rifles don't have it....one exception seems to be the wood stocked Kimber 84L,which to me seems better once it gets a scope mounted on it..

Well said!! And if you have ever picked up a rifle that isn't well balanced you will know the difference. I once had a 7mm08 that when I carried it, it felt like packing around an anchor and never felt "right".

My bud is model 70 feather weight all the way. He loves the balance in them. I have a kimber montana. The difference in balance and feel to me is unquestionable. Montana has it beat by 100 miles. But to my bud, who shoots moving deer, he loves his model 70's.

Depends what you're "balancing" them on.

I did some measurements on Sunday (after the range). I'll need to do more (length of pull etc). There are formulas/rules for fitting (eg shotguns) and there's probably some for balance too - well, I mean balance is part of fitting.

CZ550:
The balance point is 6 inches in front of the trigger.
My left hand sits 2 inches in front of the balance point.

Merkel double:
The balance points is 3 inches in front of the front trigger and 4 inches in front of the rear trigger.
My left hand sits 4 inches in front of the balance point,

The CZ is overall 6 inches longer than Merkel. The CZ feels very muzzle heavy. The Merkel is 1 lb heavier than the CZ but is easier to hold on target.