The Shotgun Stock Fit Thread

The shooter ID error has already been corrected. But for interests sake, this is Anthony Matarese...



Seems like a lot of the top sporting clays shooters are very forward on the gun, with their noses just about at their knuckles. A stark contrast from Kim Rhode being well beyond the old "2-3 finger spacing" guideline. I don't know if Kim is just the oddball, or if that has something to do with the different games dictating a different style.

Shotgun "fit" is as much an art as a science, I think. Matching shooting style to individual anatomy and all the available stock dimensions (cast, drop, pitch, grip, etc.) introduces an endless combination of variables. I would agree that different gun fitters might come up with different dimensions for the same shooter, although the differences should be minimal unless the shooter changed their style or gained/lost a lot of weight between fittings. And as falconflyer pointed out, unless your mount is 100% consistent then a professional gun fitting is a waste of time.

I would disagree with Don Currie's opinion that LOP is the most important dimension. It is by far the easiest to adjust, but my own experience and certainly the photos of top shooters we've seen here would indicate LOP is not so critical. I would quickly qualify that by saying you can get used to a particular LOP and shoot it well, but find a change difficult. That was eluded to by another comment here and my own experience support this. I'm 6'4" and grew up shooting a Win Model 12 that was about 13.5" LOP, then eventually an 870 at 13.75". I shot the 870 for a very long time and because I didn't know any different I just made my body/shooting style fit it and I shot it very well. I shot other guns of "average" LOP fine as well. Only about 5 years ago (after 30+ years of shooting) I started getting quite interested in sporting clays and have since been exposed to some "good" shooters and a few guys who knew a little about stock fit. I was told my 870 stock was far too short and as I started shooting better and moving to different guns I've now come to realize my most comfortable LOP is really about 15.25-15.5" depending on the gun and time of year (i.e. thickness of clothing). I hope to get a gun fitting someday, just to see how it might feel to have all the other minutiae tweaked.

Stock fit is definitely a complicated topic, although "close enough" works "OK" for all but the highest performing shooters.
 
ninepointer said:
LOP is important to me insofar as it affects my sight plane. At 6'2" with long arms and neck, I crawl the stock and see far too much barrel on must guns. Longer LOP puts my cheek farther back on the stock and gives me the flat sight plane I prefer. Berettas are particularly challenging for me; I have yet to handle one that provided me with enough drop in the stock.

I recently had a SxS stock bent cast-on (I'm a lefty) and I'm eager to give it a try.
Click to expand...


We're seeing a trend with sporting clays shooters moving to longer stocks than what is or was considered normal but people are bigger and taller these days. A lot of old guns have LOP's of 14 inches or so and more modern guns seem often to be around 14.5 to 14.75 but these taller shooters are getting stocks made that are over 15 inches. I also think that high rib guns often fit taller shooters too because they don't scrunch their heads down as much. At 6 feet I've never felt the need to use a high rib gun in fact I've tried them and find them a bit awkward but I can see where there is a place for them.

A lot of shooters don't under stand why shotgun stocks have the rear of the comb lower than the front. The principal/theory is that your gun is fit so that the sight picture is correct for a target that is slightly higher than the shooter but your head doesn't stay perfectly aligned vertically with the barrels when you shoot a really high or really low bird. Your head tilts with the gun up and down but not as much as the gun does, so when you shoot a high bird your eye gets lower on the comb so you see more rib however, it also moves ahead and the ramped comb lifts your face to keep your eye aligned where it should be. Conversely, when you shoot a target that is lower than you are, your eye automatically goes a bit higher than the barrels and at the same time it moves rearward on the comb so the drop at the back lowers your eye to keep it aligned properly with the barrels again. The concept is easy to see if you take a gun (with an empty chamber of course) and see the way your head moves as you point it up and down at extreme angles. This is why trap guns can have parallel stocks, because the target is more or less the same height most of the time but they don't work so well on skeet, sporting or field guns. A common problem is that sloped combs can transmit recoil to the shooters face, especially with heavy loads. The adjustable comb allows you to tailor the slope of the comb so it mitigates recoil to the face but still allow some drop to compensate high and low targets.
 
I find drop at comb to be more of a factor for me than LOP, and I actually prefer a parallel comb for all clays. When I went to my F-3 Vantage with Supersport stock, I did have to remove considerable material from the comb, but I left the comb parallel, and my shooting definitely improved with the F-3.
 
stubblejumper said:
I find drop at comb to be more of a factor for me than LOP, and I actually prefer a parallel comb for all clays. When I went to my F-3 Vantage with Supersport stock, I did have to remove considerable material from the comb, but I left the comb parallel, and my shooting definitely improved with the F-3.
Click to expand...

I'll second you on the parallel comb. I much prefer it to a tapered drop at heel. Here is the adjustable comb and butt on the Citori XS Vic Tomlinson recently completed. The rear post spacer is 1/16" thicker than the spacer on the front post which allowed me to get the comb sitting parallel.
 
Last edited:
Falconflyer said:
MK2750. Nice job on the wooden recoil pad. When I looked at the first picture I thought it might have been a leather recoil pad initially. I've built a few of those out of pig skin over the years and they really ad to the ascetics of a gun also.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I just watched a video on making the pig skin covers and will certainly give it a try. I already have the Pachmayr Old English pads ground perfectly for several shotguns like the guy from Midway uses on the video. It should be a fun project especially if we end up in some kind of quarantine lock down.
 
So how about a discussion of cast.

cripple.jpg

So, that's eye catching but a horrible example - I think intended for a left eye dominant right hand shooter (with a foot long neck). How about cast though. Can be changed by shims, bent wood, adjustable comb or even adjustable butt pad. Compare and contrast?
 

Attachments

  • cripple.jpg
    cripple.jpg
    20.6 KB · Views: 108
Rob! said:
So how about a discussion of cast.

View attachment 361281

So, that's eye catching but a horrible example - I think intended for a left eye dominant right hand shooter (with a foot long neck). How about cast though. Can be changed by shims, bent wood, adjustable comb or even adjustable butt pad. Compare and contrast?
Click to expand...

And in a pinch, a decelerator pad will work by adjusting to your mounted cast. Not recommended as a permanent fixture.;)
 
The Baron said:
Shotgun "fit" is as much an art as a science, I think. Matching shooting style to individual anatomy and all the available stock dimensions (cast, drop, pitch, grip, etc.) introduces an endless combination of variables. I would agree that different gun fitters might come up with different dimensions for the same shooter, although the differences should be minimal unless the shooter changed their style or gained/lost a lot of weight between fittings. And as falconflyer pointed out, unless your mount is 100% consistent then a professional gun fitting is a waste of time.

I would disagree with Don Currie's opinion that LOP is the most important dimension. It is by far the easiest to adjust, but my own experience and certainly the photos of top shooters we've seen here would indicate LOP is not so critical. I would quickly qualify that by saying you can get used to a particular LOP and shoot it well, but find a change difficult. That was eluded to by another comment here and my own experience support this. I'm 6'4" and grew up shooting a Win Model 12 that was about 13.5" LOP, then eventually an 870 at 13.75". I shot the 870 for a very long time and because I didn't know any different I just made my body/shooting style fit it and I shot it very well. I shot other guns of "average" LOP fine as well. Only about 5 years ago (after 30+ years of shooting) I started getting quite interested in sporting clays and have since been exposed to some "good" shooters and a few guys who knew a little about stock fit. I was told my 870 stock was far too short and as I started shooting better and moving to different guns I've now come to realize my most comfortable LOP is really about 15.25-15.5" depending on the gun and time of year (i.e. thickness of clothing). I hope to get a gun fitting someday, just to see how it might feel to have all the other minutiae tweaked.

Stock fit is definitely a complicated topic, although "close enough" works "OK" for all but the highest performing shooters.
Click to expand...

I agree if one shotgun is your goal. I have several that I like to hunt with under different conditions and it was the lack of consistency that was screwing with me, especially LOP. If I am shooting a gun shorter than I am use to I see nothing but the back of the receiver when I shoulder it. A gun just 1/4 inch too long shows me a bunch of barrel if I can even get it past my jacket. But you are right, I could get use to any gun as long as it was reasonably close.

My story is much like yours except add in an XL900 SKB that I have been lugging around since the 1970s. I was very excited when I picked up the SKB 100 that I purchased from you (Thanks again) as I figured I would shoot it instinctively like the 900. Although the drop and cast was nearly identical, the 100 was almost 1/4" shorter. My 900 is just slightly under 14" and the 100 very close to 13 3/4 as you probably noticed. I could shoot the 100 okay but it always gave me pause when I shouldered it, which of course meant Ruffed Grouse gone and dirty looks from the flushers.

After measuring upteen times and cutting once to square here it is today. The LOP is identical to my 900 and I love shooting it. As I mentioned earlier, I sometimes don't swing it as smoothly as longer and heavier guns but in the early season it whacks Ruffies like I was shooting heat seeking missiles. I am often surprised when the dog brings a bird back after a snap shot that happened so quickly it is hard to visualize.

kLAa0Oz.jpg
[/url][/IMG]

5z35Vfc.jpg
[/url][/IMG]

I think it looks pretty good too. I was climbing the shotgun ladder and planned to part with this one when I picked up my Iside but there is still room in the safe and the 25 inch Mod/Imp are rarely offered up for sale any more. I only shoot it hunting so it is very important that it comes up like the guns I shoot clays with.
 
Falconflyer said:
That's opening up another can of worms altogether! Bulky jackets, sticky recoil pads, fabric that doesn't allow the recoil pad to slide easily, bad technique, all of these things play a part in guns hanging up on clothing and many of them have little to do with gun fit.
Click to expand...

True enough ... but you still have to get the gun to your face without being belted in the shnoze !
 
And then there is that bit of "hibernation fat" that sticks on to the face come winter.

Oh Dear: All these problems are worse than that flippin friggin virus.;)
 
Was out molesting skeet today and thought of a couple more issues. One, wearing six layers of clothes in this weather including a down vest (but not a real down vest that's cruel) mounting the butt to my shoulder was sloppy and all over the place; what do regular shooters wear in winter to get solid and consistent mounting? And two, all of that (okay, almost all) comes off in the summer and it's going to make some difference to LOP and such; does anyone adjust or add a shim in summer to balance out?
 
old303 said:
Was out molesting skeet today and thought of a couple more issues. One, wearing six layers of clothes in this weather including a down vest (but not a real down vest that's cruel) mounting the butt to my shoulder was sloppy and all over the place; what do regular shooters wear in winter to get solid and consistent mounting? And two, all of that (okay, almost all) comes off in the summer and it's going to make some difference to LOP and such; does anyone adjust or add a shim in summer to balance out?
Click to expand...


Lol.... some one should write a song about that! :)
 
Very nice job, MK2750! I love the SKB 100's (I've had two in 20ga over the years, but never a 12ga) but they always felt too petite for me. I've started shooting 12ga Browning BSS's for my SxS fun and they fit me much better - large frame and solid, like me. lol I shoot my BSS almost as well as my 725, setup with a LOP of 15.25"
 
Rob! said:
So how about a discussion of cast.

View attachment 361281

So, that's eye catching but a horrible example - I think intended for a left eye dominant right hand shooter (with a foot long neck). How about cast though. Can be changed by shims, bent wood, adjustable comb or even adjustable butt pad. Compare and contrast?
Click to expand...

They were popular after the Great War because a lot of shooter had lost the use of their right eye. There were also guns designed to be shot with one arm.

You just need enough cast to get your eye behind the rib without canting your head. The sequence of a gun mount should be; move your front hand first, your trigger hand second, and your head not at all.
 
9.3mauser said:
.....You just need enough cast to get your eye behind the rib without canting your head....
Click to expand...

So, some methods of cast are adjustable. Is there a difference in what is achieved? Is an adjustable comb better than an adjustable butt pad? I get that vertically, one adjusts the position of the comb as compared to the rib - and the other compared to the shoulder pocket - but with respect to cast, is one superior (or shims or bending wood?)

nahhh.... that's wrong. I'm twisting my head and arms around trying to feel it and it's wrong. :confused:
 
Last edited:
I think it's more impressive that there was 1/2" difference in LOP, that's a big difference. Could be affected by the type of gun (over/under vs side by side), type and height of the rib, intended type of shooting, amount and type of clothing. This suggests that there is no 'ideal' length of pull for any individual. Something to also remember, a longer stock with the same drop at comb and heel as a shorter one will have a more parallel stock line relative to sighting plane, therefore to get the same eye placement relative to the sighting plane will require a drop adjustment in conjunction with a change in length of pull unless one moves the head backwards or forwards. Complicated? Yup. Exact? Nope. Repeatable? Maybe. This is why truly talented gun fitters are scarce.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom