Rifle Building

[hawkeye]

I'm a novice in building a rifle, In the past I assembled a couple kit gun's, that's it!
My question is does the drop of heel depends on shooters posture for best sight picture in a build

[sz]

Yes drop at heel and drop at comb are best determined by measurements of your body.  Cast off too.   Not that you need it to be perfect, (look at military issue rifles. Many men can fire rifles with a set or measurements made in mass produced rifles and do fine)   BUT if you build from a blank it takes no more time or effort to get it perfect than it does to get it "pretty close".

[hawkeye]

Are there any sources (books of Else) to determine of as guide to figure out?

[rich pierce]

For most folks, handling a modern shotgun designed to fit 75% of shooters will tell you what you need to know. Close your eyes, pick it up and point it, and open your eyes. Are you looking right down the sight rib or top of the barrel? Then that length of pull, drop at heel, and drop at comb will work for you.

Are you staring at the breech hump and can’t see the bead? You need less drop.

Are you looking down on the barrel? You need more drop.

[hawkeye]

Okay Rich,
Thank you for explicating a bit. Keep that in mind

[rich pierce]

Okay Rich,
Thank you for explicating a bit. Keep that in mind

I get a gun that fits then use those measurements. It can be challenging trying to make different styles of rifles using this technique but it can be done. With a rifle I calculate drop from the sights, not the barrel. I don’t want to have to pick my head up to align the sights.

[RMann]

Thanks Rich, as a new builder that is the clearest and simplest advice I've read and a practical starting point for any of us rookies that have a shotgun around. 

[Daryl]

Much also depends on the style of rifle. Some styles have more drop at the heel and comb, while others have straighter stocks.
Jaeger rifles and English rifles usually have straighter stocks and point much better than many of the later American made guns.
The Earlier American guns like the Edward Marshal are very close to the Jaegers as the German & perhaps English influence came
from Europe with the settlers.
Google, along with the search engine here, should help.

[WadePatton]

Are there any sources (books of Else) to determine of as guide to figure out?

Because I didn't have any sort of muzzle-loading gun under my roof, or any close-by builders at the time, I laminated a pair of 2x4's and roughed out my design for drop, pull, and cast-off.  I used a nail for trigger position, and added a bit of iron out front for weight and balance.  I very roughly shaped the thing (wrist, cheek, butt) and used the seam between the 2x4's as my sighting reference.  I'm pleased with what it showed me as I built those numbers into my first build.

Coming from the bicycle arena, I knew that "what fits most" didn't fit me.  I built my bikes (could have hired it done) to get something that actually fit me properly. There is no factory bicycle frame with the geometry I need, only custom. Fitment in cycling is critical for best muscle recruitment/efficiency and handling. 

Guns I don't find quite so critical, but that I was keenly aware of how much fantastic my fitted bikes rode compared to anything I'd ever had before (in standard frame geometries). So I wasn't about to miss an opportunity to be sure I had good fitment with my longrifle.  Also it's much different when not using a rear sight and I'll be doubly careful laying out any smoothies I build.  Measurements and formulas can give us jumping off points, but I'm still going to use a try-stock to double check it all.

Daryl is right, Drop is a styling component.  You can't monkey with the drop a lot without seriously compromising the school/style of gun.  There's one small company that makes BP guns that look "flat" to me because they use more modern geometries on their stocks--universally I suppose. Those guns don't interest me at all, they just don't look right to my eye and I'd rather deal with compromised fit than to carry a ML with modern stock shapes. 

[rich pierce]

To illustrate I traced a off the shelf, mass-produced modern gun then traced 5 of my guns on top in different colors. About all of them have the same drop at the nose of the comb. Most of the muzzleloaders have more drop at the heel than the modern gun. But despite the similarities in drop they do not look cookie cutter.

[rich pierce]

As Daryl mentioned, 18th century Germanic and English guns are very comfortable to shoot and in some cases have almost identical architecture to modern wing guns.


This one lies right over the tracing of the modern gun.

[Eric Krewson]

Make a simple adjustable try stock. when you adjust it to the point you can close your eyes, shoulder your try stock, open your eyes and have the sights be in perfect alignment you will know your exact measurements.

I determined my measurements from my try stock, transferred them to each of my builds and have rifles and fowlers that fit me perfectly.

[Daniel Coats]

Hey Eric, I"m curious what the pull length and drop worked out to be on your try stock? I'm thinking of making a try stock for my next build.

Just now noticed the butt portion is on the left side. Would moving it to the right side simulate cast off?

[smylee grouch]

I can see your try stock's adjustment for drop, etc. but does it also have an adjustment for cast and pitch?

[Dphariss]

People also need to remember that into the 19th c rifle matches were shot from a rest.
Like the modern "chunk" matches which carried over in parts of the US to present day. But in the mid-late 19th c Schuetzen shooting caught on. And there was BIG money in it. Enough that really good shooters would travel long distances by train to attend big matches and could make over a years wages in a big match. But WW-I killed Schuetzen here.
If shooting offhand you need a rifle that is stable in the offhand position.
And the result of this can be seen in some stock designs. I have a friend who owns a rifle stocked by our long time friend and mentor Dong King in the late 1950s copied from an original rifle he had access to. The rifle is not a good offhand gun. But when shot from a chunk or plank rest its function becomes apparent. For this it works.
Shotguns are made for an entirely different shooting posture since the target is invariably flying. Thus the shotgun shooter must use a stance that allows free movement. The rifle shooter tries to dampen all movement and places his feet and body in relation to the target to achieve this. While as Daryl pointed out the English and continental rifles have very comfortable stocks they are not the best offhand guns and many were in bore sizes that require good recoil characteristics as does the shotgun. I have over the years done some pretty good shooting with "American" rifles that are ill fitting, too short or too long, bad comb angles.  When offhand rifle shooters start talking about "balance" I just roll my eyes..
Unless the shooter is out of shape the "ill balanced", muzzle heavy, rifle with a crescent buttplate is a better choice for offhand and I think this is one reason why the crescent but came into favor. Its easier to index the same way every time when shot off the arm.
AND I stock a heavy recoiling rifle a lot different than I would a longrifle.
This likely needs editing but I need to get to the shop. 2 hours late now.

[hawkeye]

This seems a good topic to read and hear different solutions. Like I said before I made only to kit guns from pecatonica, one was a Armstrong with 42 inch straight barrel and the other was a Jaeger with 31'' swamped barrel.
Still I liked the Armstrong better to shoot off hand

[Waksupi]

When building a personal long gun, I will shoulder it repeatedly with my eyes closed. Open my eyes, I want to be looking at sights lined up. I adjust to make it so. I also liked to be able to have customers come to the shop to get a custom fit in the same way.