Length of pull question
- Thread starter Runs With Fire
- Start date
FWIW...
I'm a fairly gangly 6'8" so I'm always struggling with an internal LOP debate. Is it worth ordering aftermarket stocks? So far I haven't sprung for one, but that might change after this deer season.
I have learned that I can make 13 3/4" work. But I'd love to get my hands on 14 1/8" or 14 1/4". On occasion I've used a pair of gloves between shoulder and butt, or a wadded up pair of hiking socks. But that's generally just for prone or sitting.
So... so much of it is situational. If I am going to have a rifle that I will shoot the same way every time I shoot it, I may want to really fine tune the LOP. But my "target" shooting consists of practicing for hunting situations. And the shooting positions that present themselves when hunting could fill their own book. So if it's reasonably comfortable and accommodates appropriate eye relief, it's good enough for me.
But being the size and build that I am have conditioned me to make such compromises. So maybe that's just my $.02 and worth no more than that.
I'm a fairly gangly 6'8" so I'm always struggling with an internal LOP debate. Is it worth ordering aftermarket stocks? So far I haven't sprung for one, but that might change after this deer season.
I have learned that I can make 13 3/4" work. But I'd love to get my hands on 14 1/8" or 14 1/4". On occasion I've used a pair of gloves between shoulder and butt, or a wadded up pair of hiking socks. But that's generally just for prone or sitting.
So... so much of it is situational. If I am going to have a rifle that I will shoot the same way every time I shoot it, I may want to really fine tune the LOP. But my "target" shooting consists of practicing for hunting situations. And the shooting positions that present themselves when hunting could fill their own book. So if it's reasonably comfortable and accommodates appropriate eye relief, it's good enough for me.
But being the size and build that I am have conditioned me to make such compromises. So maybe that's just my $.02 and worth no more than that.
I've found that there is another element of the question not yet discussed. Specifically, it applies if one is talking about stock length on a rifle with a peep sight mounted on the rear of the receiver such as an M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, M1A, AR-15, AR-10, Mini-14, etc. With those rifles and using the iron sights rather than a scope, it is important to get one's eye close up to the rear peep sight so the LOP isn't as important as the Heel to Aperture (HtA) distance (the distance from the top of the buttplate to the rear peep sight aperture).
I've found that my M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, and M1A, all came stock with a HtA distance of 14" while their LOP was 13". They were easy and natural to get one's eye up close to the rear aperture. My 583 Series wood stocked, Mini-14 Ranch Rifle came with an LOP of 13.5" but a HtA distance of 15.5" which required that I stretch my neck uncomfortably to get my eye in the same position as with the GI rifles it was supposedly patterned after. The solution was to add an aftermarket rear sight which moved the aperture back 1/2" and then cut the stock down 1" to gain the 14" HtA. This resulted in an LOP of 12.5" but the same sighting position as the Mil rifles.
I've found that my M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, and M1A, all came stock with a HtA distance of 14" while their LOP was 13". They were easy and natural to get one's eye up close to the rear aperture. My 583 Series wood stocked, Mini-14 Ranch Rifle came with an LOP of 13.5" but a HtA distance of 15.5" which required that I stretch my neck uncomfortably to get my eye in the same position as with the GI rifles it was supposedly patterned after. The solution was to add an aftermarket rear sight which moved the aperture back 1/2" and then cut the stock down 1" to gain the 14" HtA. This resulted in an LOP of 12.5" but the same sighting position as the Mil rifles.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Tallest, why not add spacers and a thicker butt pad?
Hey Art,
The main rifle in question still has a hollow plastic stock. I would like to swap it out for wood before I go to the expense or effort of spacers. If I'm going to order a wood stock, probably a Boyd's, I can order it longer with a minimal increase in expense.
I would love to put a spacer on the M77 .280 I use, but it's technically a long term loan from someone significantly shorter than I am.
Look at Kick-Eze spacers. They are not a permanent attachment. All you have to do is unscrew the recoil pad, insert the spacers (trimmed to stock dimensions before inserting) and rescrew in the recoil pad. If the spacers are thick enough, you might have to use longer recoil pad screws. Returning the rifle to its original configuration would take less than 5 minutes.
gun fitting?
I think there are some distinctions to be made between stocking a rifle that is meant to be shot statically (i.e. immobile) and a shotgun that is meant to be shot dynamically, with the gun mounted and fired as soon as it meets shoulder and cheek. For a shotgun for wingshooting or clay target shooting the stock dimensions are typically set to allow the shooter to shoot where he's looking, since the eye is essentially the rear sight on a shotgun. This assumes the shooter has a solid, repeatable, consistent mount - and that typically takes a few thousand rounds and maybe some instruction to achieve.
I would think that stock dimensions that brought the eye into the proper relationship with front and rear sights on a rifle would be the right dimensions to have. But you can also do a great many things on a rifle (i.e. crawling the stock, canting the head, bending neck and head to align the eye with the sights) that don't work with a shotgun.
But I'm a retired FITASC/English Sporting shooter, not a rifleman. What do you rifle guys say? Is a gun fitting for a rifle worthwhile? For a shotgun it certainly is, if the fitter knows his business.
I think there are some distinctions to be made between stocking a rifle that is meant to be shot statically (i.e. immobile) and a shotgun that is meant to be shot dynamically, with the gun mounted and fired as soon as it meets shoulder and cheek. For a shotgun for wingshooting or clay target shooting the stock dimensions are typically set to allow the shooter to shoot where he's looking, since the eye is essentially the rear sight on a shotgun. This assumes the shooter has a solid, repeatable, consistent mount - and that typically takes a few thousand rounds and maybe some instruction to achieve.
I would think that stock dimensions that brought the eye into the proper relationship with front and rear sights on a rifle would be the right dimensions to have. But you can also do a great many things on a rifle (i.e. crawling the stock, canting the head, bending neck and head to align the eye with the sights) that don't work with a shotgun.
But I'm a retired FITASC/English Sporting shooter, not a rifleman. What do you rifle guys say? Is a gun fitting for a rifle worthwhile? For a shotgun it certainly is, if the fitter knows his business.
I believe that's what I said. However, that's if you want a HtA distance of 14" like the M1 Garand, Carbine, and M16A1 have. If you're really big and find that you're all up in the sights of them, you may want it a longer length. Remember, some shooters are 6'8" while others are 4'10" and one size definitely does not fit all.
LineStretcher
New member
I recently replaced my Weatherby Mark V stock with a Boyd's Platinum. I had several LOP options so I measured and got 14". I have a 36" reach. I decided to pull out several rifles and check for cheek weld and eye relief. I came up with with 13 1/2. But then I realized that maybe I had mounted my scopes to compensate for the shorter stock and it turned out that I had. I went back to the Wby and set the scope up for best bolt handle clearance and ease of adjustment. When I shouldered the rifle I found well under optimal eye relief. I put a piece of tape on the stock where my cheek was landing then moved my head back, found the proper location and put a piece of tape there. I measured that distance and it was 3/4 of an inch. The Wby stock had a 13" LOP so I ordered my Boyd's stock with 13-3/4" LOP.
The stock arrived the other day and I installed it and shouldered it. With the rifle snugly into my shoulder at a comfortable position, my cheek landed exactly at the right location for proper eye relief. Looking through the scope and then moving my eye left to right did not cause the cross hairs to move on the target.
So, in my opinion, proper LOP is dependent on
much more than body size and arm length. Its correct when you shoulder the rifle and everything falls into place in a natural way. Whether you do that with scope positioning, butt spacers, recoil pads or stock replacement is entirely up to you.
The point is that the initial measurement is important but it's not the final determining factor.
The stock arrived the other day and I installed it and shouldered it. With the rifle snugly into my shoulder at a comfortable position, my cheek landed exactly at the right location for proper eye relief. Looking through the scope and then moving my eye left to right did not cause the cross hairs to move on the target.
So, in my opinion, proper LOP is dependent on
much more than body size and arm length. Its correct when you shoulder the rifle and everything falls into place in a natural way. Whether you do that with scope positioning, butt spacers, recoil pads or stock replacement is entirely up to you.
The point is that the initial measurement is important but it's not the final determining factor.