agdodge4x4
Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 31
Ha!!^^... good story!!! I would have bought it, joint and all.... and leave it in the butt. Perfect story pieces right there!^ That reminds me of the time i was at a gun show and was looking over an Enfield. The seller said he'd been all over the rifle. Good headspace. I flipped open the door in the butt to see if the cleaning kit was still there, and a very old, dry joint fell out with an old rusty lighter on the guy's table. I mean, it could have been a cigarette... we both stared at it for a long moment and he whisked it off the table and into the trash.
...not the head space i was in the market for!
/sorry for the digression.
^ That reminds me of the time i was at a gun show and was looking over an Enfield. The seller said he'd been all over the rifle. Good headspace. I flipped open the door in the butt to see if the cleaning kit was still there, and a very old, dry joint fell out with an old rusty lighter on the guy's table. I mean, it could have been a cigarette... we both stared at it for a long moment and he whisked it off the table and into the trash.
...not the head space i was in the market for!
The weight removed by those holes is pretty insignificant. I agree that a forward weight bias feels better, but the weight added to the butt has nothing to do with balance. It's simply making a rifle heavier to tame recoil. Thats is if it's just pure weight. In the case of a recoil reducer, not only do they add weight, but the inertia of the contents (e.g. mercury) work to counteract the rearward movement of the rifle.I cannot imgine wanting to add weight to the butt unless it had a very long heavy barrel and needed extra weight in the rear for balance. Most folks shoot better with weight slightly toward the front.
If you go to page 52 of Dean Whitaker's book.......