Question about "LOP" for military rifles
- Thread starter BCRider
- Start date
Paladin308
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- The Man Cave
Not sure about the LE, but for the Mosin, the Russians have pretty much always used shorter stocks than American rifles. There's a lot of theories as to why, perhaps it was to accommodate bulky uniforms. Personally, I just think it's just sort of something you get used to. Someone who started out shooting shorter LOP rifles would likely find American rifles to have a very long LOP.
Do remember that there were 4 different lengths of Butt for the SMLE, 6 for the Number 4.
The SMLE came out with 3 butt lengths (Short, Normal and Long) but added an extra one (the Bantam) in WW1 when they were recruiting so many short Welshmen.
In War Two this continued on the Number 4, plus 2 extra lengths for men who were taller than normal. These were the Extra-Long and the Extra-Extra-Long butts.
They are well marked, B for Bantam, S for Short, N or no marking at all for Normal, L for Long, XL for Extra-Long and XXL for Extra-Extra-Long.
The Commonwealth was the only military Power to understand that NOT all men are created equal.
Everyone else used the "one-size-fits-all-and-you-WILL-like-it" theory.
Didn't work.
The Commonwealth could train men to be better shots, and do it faster, than the other Armies.
This was continued with the FAL rifle.
The SMLE came out with 3 butt lengths (Short, Normal and Long) but added an extra one (the Bantam) in WW1 when they were recruiting so many short Welshmen.
In War Two this continued on the Number 4, plus 2 extra lengths for men who were taller than normal. These were the Extra-Long and the Extra-Extra-Long butts.
They are well marked, B for Bantam, S for Short, N or no marking at all for Normal, L for Long, XL for Extra-Long and XXL for Extra-Extra-Long.
The Commonwealth was the only military Power to understand that NOT all men are created equal.
Everyone else used the "one-size-fits-all-and-you-WILL-like-it" theory.
Didn't work.
The Commonwealth could train men to be better shots, and do it faster, than the other Armies.
This was continued with the FAL rifle.
In the past, when a country issued a service rifle where the design used a one piece wood stock, it was easier to manufacture the stock with a LOP to accomodate the "average" soidier. Problem with that is there are soldiers on the bottom and top sides of the average, and the rifles won't fit them particularly well.
Smellie already covered the Enfields in his post, but I wondered... How do the rifles from some other countries compare.
So... I went and measured the LOP on a few rifles. The test subjects and measurements were; M1 Garand 13", M1917 13.375", Swede M94/14 Carbine 13", Swede M94 13.75", Ross Mk2** Target 13.25", Ross Mk2 5* 13.75"
None of these stocks appear to have been shortened, and all have a LOP between 13-14"
I'm Not sure how that compares to Commercial Sporting Rifles.
Smellie already covered the Enfields in his post, but I wondered... How do the rifles from some other countries compare.
So... I went and measured the LOP on a few rifles. The test subjects and measurements were; M1 Garand 13", M1917 13.375", Swede M94/14 Carbine 13", Swede M94 13.75", Ross Mk2** Target 13.25", Ross Mk2 5* 13.75"
None of these stocks appear to have been shortened, and all have a LOP between 13-14"
I'm Not sure how that compares to Commercial Sporting Rifles.
.
During the Vietnam War, the Advisors in the field recommended that the stocks on the M1 Garand rifles issued to the South Vietnamese Army be shortened ONE INCH. Someone in the rear changed that, and the stocks were shortened ONE AND ONE HALF INCHES.
.
During the Vietnam War, the Advisors in the field recommended that the stocks on the M1 Garand rifles issued to the South Vietnamese Army be shortened ONE INCH. Someone in the rear changed that, and the stocks were shortened ONE AND ONE HALF INCHES.
.
1) People were a lot smaller a century ago, especially the malnourished peasants that tended to get pushed into fighting the wars.
2) Shorter LOP is useful for dealing with bulky winter gear as needed in Russia and other cold climates.
3) It is easier to learn to shoot a rifle that is too short than too long, so I think most armies erred on the short side.
I have long arms and have yet to find a milsurp rifle that isn't way too short for my tastes, it is just part of the deal. I often use a slip on recoil pad to add LOP and soften the edges of those steel butt plates.
Mark
2) Shorter LOP is useful for dealing with bulky winter gear as needed in Russia and other cold climates.
3) It is easier to learn to shoot a rifle that is too short than too long, so I think most armies erred on the short side.
I have long arms and have yet to find a milsurp rifle that isn't way too short for my tastes, it is just part of the deal. I often use a slip on recoil pad to add LOP and soften the edges of those steel butt plates.
Mark
Cottage Hill Bill
CGN Regular
- Location
- Pensacola, FL USA
Jakester,
The Savage model 99 which was in production for the first 3/4 of the 20th century came with a 13"LOP. I would guess that most sporting rifles are in the 13-14 inch range since manufacturers aim for the middle of the bell curve. If you're one of the folks in one of the tails of the curve you either get out the saw or glue on the butt pad.
The Savage model 99 which was in production for the first 3/4 of the 20th century came with a 13"LOP. I would guess that most sporting rifles are in the 13-14 inch range since manufacturers aim for the middle of the bell curve. If you're one of the folks in one of the tails of the curve you either get out the saw or glue on the butt pad.
Better too short than too long. Plus has the average height of a person increased since those rifles were designed? Also, are people still wearing the same thickness of clothing, especially in a field situation?
Good point, STEVEBOT-7: In the past 130 years, average height of males has increased close to 2 inches.
There is also personal preference. I am normal size (based on 1944 averages), rate a Normal butt...... but I FEEL better and SHOOT better with a Short on my FAL and my SMLE I*** both.
There is also personal preference. I am normal size (based on 1944 averages), rate a Normal butt...... but I FEEL better and SHOOT better with a Short on my FAL and my SMLE I*** both.
Don't feel bad guys, my brother is smellie plus a foot or so. He's like 6'6" and like me has extra long long arms. He really struggles to get a good position with any milsurp rifle and pretty much uses a recoil pad on everything!
I find my mosin m91 to be strange in the fact that it's such a long gun but the butt stock is so short.
I find my mosin m91 to be strange in the fact that it's such a long gun but the butt stock is so short.
The straight grip M1903 stock was made for a race of dwarves. LOP is only 12.75 inches. If you shoot from the prone position and put your thumb across the small of the stock chances are you will get bopped in the snout by your thumb knuckle. Most folks learn to rest their thumb alongside the small of the stock, rather than on top of it which is the habitual hold. Shooting from other positions, incl the bench, is OK.
I think Purple has sort of nailed it.
The military practice is shooting prone, why? Cause that's the best way of killing sh1t without getting killed. The military measurement is from the inside of the bent elbow, along the forearm and onto/into the small of the butt. Straight wrist with the trigger finger...yea, wait for it!?! ON THE CENTER OF THE FINGER, not the tip (like pistol).
You'll find that unless you happen to be 7 feet tall, your LOP will fit lying properly prone with the proper grip. The problem most of us have, myself included is the typical "shotgun stance" (even at the bench) this is wrong, wrong, wrong...did I mention its wrong?
The military practice is shooting prone, why? Cause that's the best way of killing sh1t without getting killed. The military measurement is from the inside of the bent elbow, along the forearm and onto/into the small of the butt. Straight wrist with the trigger finger...yea, wait for it!?! ON THE CENTER OF THE FINGER, not the tip (like pistol).
You'll find that unless you happen to be 7 feet tall, your LOP will fit lying properly prone with the proper grip. The problem most of us have, myself included is the typical "shotgun stance" (even at the bench) this is wrong, wrong, wrong...did I mention its wrong?
It is interesting how quickly better nutrition can change the body size of a population in a comparatively short time. The Korean population is a good example. While North and South Korean people are genetically identical, poorer nutrition in the North has resulted in the population being 2 inches shorter, on average, than people in the South in the space of only 50 yrs.
Getting back to the M1903 Springfield stock design/LOP, it may well have suited the majority of the troops when introduced in 1903, but when it went out of production in 1944 it was waaay too short.
Getting back to the M1903 Springfield stock design/LOP, it may well have suited the majority of the troops when introduced in 1903, but when it went out of production in 1944 it was waaay too short.
...Hmmm, nutrition has more effect in the realization of "rickets", "hip dysplasia", "scurvy" than height. How tall you are going to be is in your DNA. How healthy you're going to be is another entirely different question.
People back in the day weren't any shorter than we are today. General Issac Brock war of 1812 was something like 6'4" {"yea but he was a General, he was eating properly" right!?, Wrong. Strong Wine and Salt Pork is no diet} William Wallace {Mel Gibson's movie Brave Heart} stood well over 6'2" in the 14th century {ever taste Scottish "cuisine"?}, and if we go waaaay back in history there was this Philistine called Goliath...{you hopefully know the rest of that story}
Most folks have seen the short a$$ed beds {rope strung} and figure the bed is no more than 4' long, therefore...
Fact of the matter is back then everyone slept kind of sitting up, like fetal but sitting and leaning back on a pillow against the head board {or wall if there wasn't one}.
I'll hazard that if (and I don't know this to be true) older guns had shorter LOP it was due to the way in which they were operated rather than the population was generally "smaller".
People back in the day weren't any shorter than we are today. General Issac Brock war of 1812 was something like 6'4" {"yea but he was a General, he was eating properly" right!?, Wrong. Strong Wine and Salt Pork is no diet} William Wallace {Mel Gibson's movie Brave Heart} stood well over 6'2" in the 14th century {ever taste Scottish "cuisine"?}, and if we go waaaay back in history there was this Philistine called Goliath...{you hopefully know the rest of that story}
Most folks have seen the short a$$ed beds {rope strung} and figure the bed is no more than 4' long, therefore...
Fact of the matter is back then everyone slept kind of sitting up, like fetal but sitting and leaning back on a pillow against the head board {or wall if there wasn't one}.
I'll hazard that if (and I don't know this to be true) older guns had shorter LOP it was due to the way in which they were operated rather than the population was generally "smaller".
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_height#History_of_human_height
According to study by Economist John Komlos and Francesco Cinnirella, in the first half of 18th century, the average height of English male was 165 cm, the average height of Irish male was 168 cm. The estimated mean height of English, German, and Scottish soldiers are 163.6 cm - 165.9 cm for the period as a whole, while that of Irish was 167.9 cm. The average height of male slaves and convicts in North America was 171 cm.
England is now 1.776 m
We used to say the SLR came in "long", "very long", "way too long", and "Infantry".
According to study by Economist John Komlos and Francesco Cinnirella, in the first half of 18th century, the average height of English male was 165 cm, the average height of Irish male was 168 cm. The estimated mean height of English, German, and Scottish soldiers are 163.6 cm - 165.9 cm for the period as a whole, while that of Irish was 167.9 cm. The average height of male slaves and convicts in North America was 171 cm.
England is now 1.776 m
We used to say the SLR came in "long", "very long", "way too long", and "Infantry".
I would tend to agree here.
When using my SMLE No5 I find the short LOP to be fine: it allows for smooth use of the bolt and sets my eyes well on the sight (Battle sight while standing, flip-up adjustable while prone) in heavy brush. The modern stocks I think are more set to use with optics that tend to need more space to prevent scope kiss, need more space to clear the bolt by the optics and need more length to operate the bolt with modern rounds. Modern scopes tend to sit with the eye piece behind the rear sight, where pictures of WWII scoped rifles I have seen had the eye piece in front of the rear sight since scoping it was not designed into it.
Size of shooter and gear, in my opinion, were not as important as getting an "average" sized LOP for the application.
Think people were more "stock crawlers" as well in those days.
Get the eye as close to the rear sight as possible. Grizz
The WW2 musketry manual, "Shoot to Live", describes how buttstocks were to be correctly fitted to the recruit's No4 rifle. The butt was to be placed in the crook of the right elbow, the wrist kept straight, the rifle cocked and a measurement taken with the trigger mid-way between the first and second joints of the index finger.
