Proper rifle fit VS recoil

I have read countless hours about proper rifle fit and the effect on felt recoil. I am an accomplished shotgun shooter; spent many years as a shotgun shooting sports instructor for a local 4-H team and still shoot about 5000 rounds of sporting clays per year. That said I completely understand and am pretty good at “shotgun fitting” and know what to look for. However, I do get lost on rifle fitting. So, my question is this, In terms of a rifle “fitting” what are the most important things to look for? What does “proper rifle fit” look like?



Thank you!!

Your experience aligns with fitting an open sight double rifle. Optics on a bolt gun optimize with comb height or adjustable cheek riser aligning eye with scope ocular height. Four contact keys are snug shoulder fit, cheek weld connected, strong hand staying connected to grip and weak hand staying connected to forend completely through recoil impulse.

Just one old man’s method. I hold the gun at low port arms, close my eyes, mount the rifle to my shoulder, open my eyes if the sights are aligned, trigger distance feels good, run the bolt from the shoulder. Bolt should not hit your nose. To me that’s good fit.I don’t care what Jack O’Conner said, European stocks fit me better and seem to spread the recoil on my shoulder. The unbent stick American standard stock directs all that recoil back and up right into your cheekbone. My body likes a 14 1/2” lop.

Schüler Jumbo said:

Your experience aligns with fitting an open sight double rifle. Optics on a bolt gun optimize with comb height or adjustable cheek riser aligning eye with scope ocular height. Four contact keys are snug shoulder fit, cheek weld connected, strong hand staying connected to grip and weak hand staying connected to forend completely through recoil impulse.

Click to expand...

Agreed!

All the principles you know Linkerman still apply. The only difference is cheek weld, because the line of sight is different when shooting with a scope. It is higher above the barrel(s).

Because of this -- the line of sight being substantially higher than the plane of the barrel(s) -- heavy-recoil rifle stocks benefit from having 1) as little drop at the wrist and at the comb as possible, in order to align as much as possible the axis of the recoil with the shoulder, and 2) as flat a comb as possible, in order for the comb upward slope to not slap the cheek under recoil.

This is pure geometry, and it is not intuitively realized until one actually fires such a stock.

This is where "proper fit" per se, differs somewhat from "perceived recoil".

For example, despite both rifles fitting me very well per MS 9x56's criteria, which I agree with, in the same caliber (either .300 Wby. or .375 H&H -- I happen to own R8 barrels and CZ 550 in both), the perceived recoil is lower on the R8 than on the CZ550 despite the R8 being 1 lb. lighter.

Also the R8 produces less muzzle jump/lift, because the bore/recoil axis is closer to the shoulder contact point, and therefore produces less upward rotation leverage.



Blaser R8 stock: 1/4" drop at the heel below bore axis + flat comb = lower perceived recoil despite almost 1 lbs. lighter rifle.



CZ 550 stock: 1" drop at the heel below bore axis + sloping comb = higher perceived recoil despite almost 1 lbs. heavier rifle.

This is of course not specific to R8 vs. CZ 550. The same applies to any two rifles featuring stocks with these contrasting characteristics.

@One Day... is spot on… a 1000% correct post…

MS 9x56 said:

Just one old man’s method. I hold the gun at low port arms, close my eyes, mount the rifle to my shoulder, open my eyes if the sights are aligned, trigger distance feels good, run the bolt from the shoulder. Bolt should not hit your nose. To me that’s good fit.I don’t care what Jack O’Conner said, European stocks fit me better and seem to spread the recoil on my shoulder. The unbent stick American standard stock directs all that recoil back and up right into your cheekbone. My body likes a 14 1/2” lop.

Click to expand...

Interesting… because from a physics perspective having less drop reduces vertical recoil. Just goes to show that fit is personal.

From pure physics, the higher the center of the recoil pad is relative to the centerline of the bore, the less the gun recoils in an upward direction (muzzle rise). And having a negative comb angle makes the recoil leave your cheek, whilst European style puts more of the recoil into your cheek as it recoils back into your face rather than away from your face.

Perceived recoil is very individual, even theory using well known things like where energy goes is varying in how people perceive them. It sounds to me like you don’t scrunch your shoulders up enough for American style when shooting or have weird shaped shoulders, so the butt pad rides up on your shoulder under fire rather than riding down or staying stationary. Changing butt pad angle/shape or changing shooting form for more shoulder scrunch could potentially help you shoot American style better, but if you shoot well and have guns that fit your style there’s no need to change whatsoever. It’s just interesting to discuss their effects.

One Day... said:

Agreed!

All the principles you know Linkerman still apply. The only difference is cheek weld, because the line of sight is different when shooting with a scope. It is higher above the barrel(s).

Because of this -- the line of sight being substantially higher than the plane of the barrel(s) -- heavy-recoil rifle stocks benefit from having 1) as little drop at the wrist and at the comb as possible, in order to align as much as possible the axis of the recoil with the shoulder, and 2) as flat a comb as possible, in order for the comb upward slope to not slap the cheek under recoil.

This is pure geometry, and it is not intuitively realized until one actually fires such a stock.

This is where "proper fit" per se, differs somewhat from "perceived recoil".

For example, despite both rifles fitting me very well per MS 9x56's criteria, which I agree with, in the same caliber (either .300 Wby. or .375 H&H -- I happen to own R8 barrels and CZ 550 in both), the perceived recoil is lower on the R8 than on the CZ550 despite the R8 being 1 lb. lighter.

Also the R8 produces less muzzle jump/lift, because the bore/recoil axis is closer to the shoulder contact point, and therefore produces less upward rotation leverage.

Blaser R8 stock: 1/4" drop at the heel below bore axis + flat comb = lower perceived recoil despite almost 1 lbs. lighter rifle.

CZ 550 stock: 1" drop at the heel below bore axis + sloping comb = higher perceived recoil despite almost 1 lbs. heavier rifle.

This is of course not specific to R8 vs. CZ 550. The same applies to any two rifles featuring stocks with these contrasting characteristics.

Click to expand...

I agree with your premise but the stock on that CZ550 is not of European geometry, it is an American configuration. My CZ 550 FS is of the humpback configuration. If you don’t mind me asking what is the length of pull on that 550? Just curious.

Everyone has covered much of the difference between rifles and shotguns.

I also find my double rifles are 1/8 to 1/4 in shorter than my shotgun LOP.
Boltgun and single shots are 3/8 shorter. For what feels best and I shots my best with.

Linkerman said:

I have read countless hours about proper rifle fit and the effect on felt recoil. I am an accomplished shotgun shooter; spent many years as a shotgun shooting sports instructor for a local 4-H team and still shoot about 5000 rounds of sporting clays per year. That said I completely understand and am pretty good at “shotgun fitting” and know what to look for. However, I do get lost on rifle fitting. So, my question is this, In terms of a rifle “fitting” what are the most important things to look for? What does “proper rifle fit” look like?

Click to expand...

With your experience, I think I am wasting time explaining anything. And even with 505 Gibbs you will be ok.
I shoot few thousand rounds per year, various calibers, but nothing extreme. Most shots in 308 win. Means zero recoil. I shoot clays as well, but not that much as you. Maybe 1k.

It is about the shooter, and about the rifle:

About the shooter:
So, one day I go to a range with a friend who bought 300 win mag. We had to zero the scope. All was installed and ready.
His gun, his shooting. I am spotter.
After few shots, he told me. I cannot shoot anymore, please you finish.
His shoulder was bruised, nice blue color.
So, I continued, zeroed a rifle, and continued plinking till we had ammo.
On my shoulder, no consequences. No problems.

1st lesson: properly holding a rifle is a must.
I place the stock, in a shoulder hole on softest place.
And I can compensate recoil. I regularly hunt with 9.3x62, Africa with 375 H&H, up to rental 416 Rigby. Never had a problem with felt recoil.

Thats about shooter.

About the rifle:
With length of pull, drop at comb, drop at heel: the rifle when brought up with closed eyes, must naturally align your eyes with the sights.
Bring it up and open the eyes, check if sight is aligned.
As simple as that. The stock must fit to your body dimensions.

But I must say, with all my factory stocks, I managed to compensate small imperfections, although I did meet with rifles not being perfect to my anatomy: for example cz 557.
With cz 557 I simply cannot align with iron sights

I think the biggest challenge is for rifle designer to find a design of stock where iron sights will align, and scope will align with the eye.
Most of them today give priority in design for scoped rifles. With modern stocks, must push the head low to get iron sights aligned, while aligning with scope is almost natural, in most cases.

Opposite problems come from older rifles designed for iron sights, when they fit a scope on them. Then there is a chance to loose cheek weld with stock. (of course there are solutions, but giving this as example)

Muzzle jump and recoil:
Perfectly explained by member @One Day...

One of the lightest recoil rifles I ever shot. 300 win mag.
Sauer 101.
See the unusual form of stock, in relation to barrel axis:
(photo from internet)

mark-hunter said:

One of the lightest recoil rifles I ever shot. 300 win mag.
Sauer 101.
See the unusual form of stock, in relation to barrel axis:
(photo from internet)

View attachment 740312

Click to expand...

Lightest recoiling I’ve ever shot (stolen pic from a different gun but same stock):




The one I shot was a roughly 9 pound scoped 300 norma mag improved 40° shooting 245gr bullets, and it felt incredibly mild to shoot, almost no muzzle rise whatsoever due to the butt pad going above the centerline of the bore. It takes a lot of shoulder “scrunch” to get good contact, but Once you have the form down it’s a dream to shoot.

I would say that alignment of your eyes with the sights is non negotiable.You cannot shoot if you cannot aim. Second is pain, if it hurts you will shoot badly. For me personally, drop at heel causes the muzzle to rise and that hurts your cheek. A comb that is higher at the front is the same. The butt angle also affects muzzle rise , the butt needs to angle forwards from top to bottom. Balance also affects muzzle rise with weight between the hands helping recoil. Muzzle heavy or butt heavy seem worse on recoil.

On technique, I think I would add to the thought above. I try to lean forward into the shot and get on top of the rifle. I am not fighting the recoil but I roll with it. Basically trying not to lean back. I feel the rifle recoils straight back before the muzzle rises and your cheek also moves back with your shoulder. Lean back and you have nowhere to go, the rifle comes back and up much quicker. I also think a shorter length of pull tightens your head shoulder connection and there is less cheek slap. I did my producer's shooting test and under pressure I was obviously less than perfect with my shoulder place,ment and had a lovely bruise on my arm, shoulder and chest.Also round the corners of your rubber recoil pad, that helps a lot. After that, I reduced my lop by 15 mm, rounded the pad and added a half pound of lead into the butt. Several of my friends have remarked that they would rather shoot my 458 lott than ANOTHER friends 375. Main difference is weight and drop at Heel and comb.

MS 9x56 said:

I agree with your premise but the stock on that CZ550 is not of European geometry, it is an American configuration. My CZ 550 FS is of the humpback configuration. If you don’t mind me asking what is the length of pull on that 550? Just curious.

Click to expand...

I fully understand that this stock is not representative of the "humpback" design of the CZ 550 European stock.

The criteria I was agreeing with were: "mount the rifle to my shoulder, open my eyes if the sights are aligned, trigger distance feels good, run the bolt from the shoulder. Bolt should not hit your nose. To me that’s good fit."

The stock I illustrated is a Bell & Carlson "American Safari" stock for the CZ550. The LOP is 14.125"



I agree with mark-hunter. The Sauer 101 illustrates perfectly the two principles I was discussing: "1) as little drop at the wrist and at the comb as possible, in order to align as much as possible the axis of the recoil with the shoulder, and 2) as flat a comb as possible, in order for the comb upward slope to not slap the cheek under recoil."

In this case, actually the comb slope has to be negative in order to clear the back of the bolt when fully retracted (another method is a channel cut in the stock, but I do not find it very aesthetic...)





Truth be told, mathematically the "humpback" stock amplifies muzzle jump because of the drop at the heel. Again, it is simple geometry. Its rationale is to put the shooter's eye naturally at iron sights levels.

But because it also requires a completely different cheek weld to be able to look through the scope -- which is much higher above the shoulder -- the perceived recoil is different: more muzzle rise and less bore axis push. Some like it, some do not. There is no right or wrong (but beware of the scope ocular coming much closer to your face).




This is where I agree again with mark-hunter "it is about the shooter".

As you can see from picture above the recoil back and up moves the stock away from the check weld, thus reducing the felt recoil. You are correct it is simple geometry.