How Much Does Your Rifle Weigh?

The old master gunsmith, barrel maker, and Schuetzen shooter, H.M. Pope, wrote an essential article on offhand shooting over 100 years ago. Upon re-reading the article, I came upon an item of interest, so I decided to investigate further and see if I could better define some comments made by Pope for my enlightenment. Pope dealt predominately with Schuetzen rifles, where the palm rests were commonly used. Our Black Powder Cartridge (BPC) rifles are not so different in offhand shooting; rather than using a palm rest, we place our hands and fingers directly under the rifle for support in essentially the same place on the rifle. Typical hand placement is near where the forearm meets the receiver.

It seems that some rifles are easier to hold in the offhand position than others, and part of the ease might be related to the amount of weight carried by the left hand or right hand if you happen to be left-handed. Holding can be considered a subconscious activity when the rifle weight and balance are correct.

I downloaded a copy of the article by H.M. Pope from the International Single Shot Rifle Association website. The article was originally from the July 1, 1922 Issue of Arms and The Man and titled Off Hand Rifle Shooting by H.M. Pope. The following select quotes are directly from the article.

“It must not be forgotten that the weight that the left hand is holding is considerably in excess of the rifle itself, due to the center of gravity of the rifle being outside of the support”

“Weight of Rifle. For the finest offhand shooting, the rifle must be muzzle-heavy. This is not as most shooters suppose, wholly in the weight of the rifle, but in the disposition of the weight; as much weight as possible should be in the barrel. Weight in the stock and butt plate is useless except in absorbing the recoil. The use of a heavy butt plate is to be condemned. While it tends to balance the rifle when the same is carried free, its weight is entirely on the right shoulder in shooting and does not in any way change the weight supported on the left hand, in fact the rifle at the shoulder is a second-class lever in which the power is the weight of the rifle concentrated at the center of gravity, which should be well beyond the left hand. The fulcrum is the shoulder, and the work is the weight held by the left hand. If the center of gravity is in front of the left hand, then the weight held in the left hand is greater than the weight of the rifle [emphasis added]. If the center of gravity is behind the left hand, the weight will be less than the weight of the rifle [emphasis added]. It is necessary to hold a reasonable amount of weight on the left hand in order that the swing of the rifle may be slow [emphasis added] and give one time to pull. It is possible to build a rifle to weigh 12 or 20 pounds and have it hold exactly the same. In other words, except to absorb recoil, the shooting weight of a rifle is not what the rifle actually is, but how the weight is distributed. Anyone can prove these facts for themselves, as I have done for many years for my customers, by simply holding the rifle by the butt plate so that it will not overturn on a small platform scale, first weighing the rifle itself, than by supporting it at various places to see what the left hand actually holds, and not forgetting before you finish to tie a couple of [pounds] or so onto the butt plate in order to convince yourself that it has absolutely no effect on the weight held by the left hand, and there has no effect on the shooting balance of the rifle and no influence in slowing the movement of the muzzle in aiming.”

A second-class lever describes a system where the load is between the fulcrum (shoulder) and the effort (supporting the rifle’s weight with the left hand); see diagram. The load is what Pope describes as “the work” held by the left hand. If this load is too great, keeping the rifle reasonably steady in the offhand position becomes challenging. Conversely, if there is not enough load on the left hand, the rifle bobs and weaves across the target since there is no weight to dampen the movement.

I weighed eight typical Black Powder Cartridge and Schuetzen rifles and determined the weight the left hand would support and the total rifle weight. I used a scale that read down to tenths of an ounce. To simulate the weight the left hand would support, the rifle was balanced on the edge of a deck of cards (still in the box) where the receiver meets the forend. The Schuetzen rifles were weighed by placing the palm rest upon the scale. I zeroed the scale to compensate for the weight of the cards, although this step was probably superfluous since the weight of the cards was minimal compared to the weight of the rifle. It took a bit of developed skill to keep the scale reading from changing while balancing the rifle on the cards while simultaneously holding the buttplate. The results are listed in Table 1. Within the table are rifle descriptions, barrel dimensions, using Winchester barrel contour nomenclature, rifle weight, and supported rifle load by the left hand.

In looking at the table and knowing which rifles I found the most comfortable from offhand, I did come to some conclusions. A rifle weighing 12 to 13 pounds with a supported weight ranging from 15.3 to 16.1 pounds works well for me. The Miller Schuetzen rifle, No. 8 in Table 1 with attached muzzle weight, is also comfortable to shoot offhand, although it weighs 15.6 pounds with a supported weight of 18.7 pounds. This rifle has a hooked butt plate and a palm rest, which helps to tame the weight. It also has a reduced length of pull and sits closer to the shooter, resulting in a more vertical left arm under the palm rest.

Pope’s Schuetzen rifle (No.150) weighed a reported 13.75 pounds. Remember that people were smaller during that era, so this was not a light rifle. During the summer shooting season, Pope would ride his high-wheel bike to the shooting range before work to partake in some offhand practice. This exercise and regular practice no doubt improved his offhand holding ability.

RIFLE FIT

The rifle and supporting weight are essential pieces of an offhand rifle. The rifle must also fit the shooter reasonably well with a rifle butt stock that allows for good cheek pressure, especially with a scope. Most BPC rifles are designed for iron sights, and many shooters “turkey neck” to line the eye with the scope. A strap-on cheekpiece can help with this and is within the rules for BPC rifle scope and target rifles.

Rifle fit is essential, but difficult to achieve. My personal preference is a CPA Stevens 44½. Indeed, everyone is built differently and has different tastes, but I find a Stevens the easiest for me to hold without undue strain. This does not imply I do not have movement when holding; I have less wobble with a rifle that fits well and is within my weight capability.

If shooting in scope class, it is possible to adjust the holding weight using a different type of scope. A more extended scope will shift some of the weight forward, resulting in a more muzzle-heavy rifle while increasing the holding weight. Many shooters like muzzle-heavy rifles. Conversely, a shorter scope can reduce the required holding weight.

I have modified a few of my rifles by cutting off some portion of the barrel. I think long and hard before I do this, since the process cannot be reversed. As built by CPA, rifle No. 6 in Table 1 had a 30-inch, No. 5, octagon-to-round barrel. Another gentleman specified the rifle, but lost interest in the purchase. I wanted the rifle for offhand practice. I was made aware of the size of the barrel when I made the purchase, but I was confident I could work through the issue. After a few range sessions, I quickly determined that it was too much for me and that the long barrel added nothing to the 22 Long Rifle ballistics. I took two steps to shorten the barrel, first to 28 inches, but still a bit heavy. I then went to 26 inches, and it is wonderful to shoot offhand. This rifle is a Model 52 or “Schuetzen Junior.”

ONE INCH OF BARREL

If we were to remove an inch of the barrel or perhaps replace a barrel with one that is an inch longer, what would be the impact on the required holding weight?

To answer this question, I ran a little experiment to determine the impact of one inch of the barrel using a No. 3½ contour barrel. Rather than cutting off an inch of the barrel, I calculated its weight. Knowing this weight, I taped a paper tube to the end of the barrel and inserted 2.95 ounces of cast bullets. I then weighed the rifle and the supporting weight, as was previously completed. This gave me the weight for a 31-inch barrel; the existing rifle has a 30-inch barrel, and I calculated the impact of removing an inch, creating a 29-inch barrel.

The table shows that removing only one inch from a No. 3½, a mere three ounces, reduces the holding weight by a half pound, a ratio of 2.7 to 1. For this particular rifle, every ounce removed from the end of a 30-inch barrel has a disproportional impact on the amount held by the supporting hand.

SIGHT RADIUS

Walter Roper was a handgun shooter of note. He was a tireless experimenter on all shooting-related things, particularly handguns. He completed some tests on the X and Y Errors, (with X being the bullet unbalanced, and the Y error being the bullet tipping upon exiting the barrel) with the famous Dr. Mann. This indicates how well he was known in the shooting world.

The sight radius is the distance between the front and rear sight. This is typically a function of the barrel length. If you are concerned that removing an inch or two from your barrel might impact your iron sight radius and reduce the potential accuracy, Roper completed a series of fascinating experiments. These tests were referenced as the “Sighting-Triangle Method.” Among other things, these tests were used to determine the impact of sight radius on the ability to center the target consistently.

A revolver was securely held in a fixture so it did not move during the test. The shooter looked through the sights at a standard target while an assistant moved the target until the shooter felt the sights were precisely centered. A pin poked a hole through the center of the target into a backer behind it. Three tests gave the corners of a triangle. While testing pistols with a sight radius of 143⁄8 inches and 7 inches, the aiming accuracy was not proportional to the sight radius.¹ Although one sight radius was half the other, the results were identical. The human eye and motor skills are so adept at centering the sights and the target that plus or minus a couple of inches of barrel length will not affect aiming ability. Of course, with a scope, the length of the barrel has no impact on aiming.

I CAN MAKE IT UP ON MY CHICKEN SCORE

After shooting a poor prone relay in silhouette, it is common to exclaim that the poor score can be “made up on chickens.” Although comical, there is more truth to this statement than not. I have always felt that hitting a chicken had a more significant impact on placement within a match than hitting a prone target. It does not seem possible. I came across the three-day Texas 2024 BPCRA Fall Classic Match scores. It was a great find since the sample size was considered significant from a statistical standpoint, greater than 30, and there was a total of 180 record shots fired over the three days for the 31 shooters.

In a silhouette match, 25 percent of the course of fire is offhand on the chicken targets. However, regarding placement within the Texas Fall Classic Match, a regression line was fitted using chicken and prone scores as the independent variable and placement 1st to 31st as the dependent variable. The resulting equation explained 97 percent of the variability in the data. This is almost a perfect fit. More importantly, the results can be stated with 99 percent confidence based on an ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) table. Based on the Texas Fall Classic Match data, a shooter’s chicken score had a 42 percent greater impact on placement within the match than the prone score. There was only a seven-point spread among the top 10 shooters in the prone scores for the three days of shooting, a total of 135 record shots, only a 5 percent difference. However, there was a 12-point spread in the chicken scores of the top 10 shooters for three days of shooting, a total of 45 record shots. A difference of 27 percent, a much wider spread. So, yes you can make it up on your chicken score.

HOLDING ABILITY AND RESOURCES    

In addition to the overall weight and the load for the supporting hand, your holding ability impacts your offhand shooting. As David Tubb states, “Shooting prone is like walking on your feet; shooting standing is like walking on your hands. You don’t have to pay attention when you’re walking on your feet, but you do when you’re walking on your hands.” ² Improving holding ability with a well fit, balanced rifle can and will increase your offhand scores.

Holding the rifle without firing can build muscle control and reduce the wobble, training the required muscle groups. Dry-firing or indoor gallery range practice can help when the outside weather does not cooperate.

In Ways of the Rifle, co-author Gaby Buhlmann describes all shooting positions extensively and provides comprehensive information about offhand rifle shooting.³ It is an invaluable resource for the expert or aspiring offhand shooter. The book is expensive and difficult to find. When searching, obtain a copy in English rather than the original German.

CONCLUSION

When discussing the secret of steady holding as it relates to the offhand position in the Handbook on Small Bore Rifle Shooting, Colonel Townsend Whelen states, “Relax all the other muscles also that are not needed to hold the bones in position. Try to make the bones hold the rifle. Relax, be lazy, be quiet, be slow, be uniform, and thus you will gradually learn to hold steady. He who fusses, frets, screws himself into an uncomfortable position, changes his position, tries to hold by brute strength, never learns to hold steady.” ⁴

References:

¹ Roper, Walter F. Experiments of a Handgunner. Palladium Press. Birmingham, Alabama 2005.

² Tubb, G. David. High Power Rifle. Zediker Publishing, Clifton, Colorado May 1993.

³ Buhlmann, Gaby, et al. Ways of the Rifle. MEC, Dortmund, Germany May 2002.

⁴ Whelen, Colonel Townsend. Handbook on Small Bore Rifle Shooting. Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute. New York May 1941.