Thread: My 9.3x62...

Originally Posted by Tentman

I had Stug's Mauser 9.3x62 before him and it is a very light rifle with open sights, I found it very mild to shoot with factory loads but I don't recall shooting it prone. I think it still had the factory horn buttplate in those days.

Were I too shoot it again I'd get someone to check my posture on the gun, I'd want my head up, cheekweld is a benchrest invention that yank gunwriters have witters endlessly about until it has become gospel, but if you watch how the Euro hunters - yes hunters, they shoot "heads up". No3 is wrong about the hogsback stocks, yes they may offend the eye, but for offhand shooting at moving targets they are very effective, and suit powerful rifles just fine.

Ya gotta be careful what you read or are influenced by in most things, shooting as well!

Actually no I'm not wrong - but equally you are correct as well the hogsback stocks are designed for offhand shooting. I probably should have been clearer that everything I was saying about stock design is in comparison to the modern type sporting rifle which could be shot from prone, kneeling, the bench or offhand. The hogsback are not intended for anything other than offhand, and that suits the purpose of the rifle ("dangerous game" standing hunting from a shorter range where you need to let a LOT of light into something).

Hogsback or dropped comb stocks from the bench or prone are just nasty, the rotation up when you are at a bench or prone means you can't move with the recoil and it just hurts. The straight stocks pushing straight back are more comfortable from these positions as you are able to absorb the recoil with more muscle groups - biology. Less of a smack to your AC and rotator cuff...

If you have to shoot one from the bench, the better options I've found are a "lead sled" followed by a shooting stick that allows you to rest the rifle in the standing position and assist you to steady the rifle to shoot accurately. The last one of these I had anything to do with was a Sako dangerous game rifle in .375 H&H (bloody beautiful rifle too with an absolutely stunning chunk of tree on it). Same issue with the stock though with quite a good drop on it. It had been set up with a set of scope mounts that were not doing the business so the scope was shifting. Ended up by the time it was sorted having to do a box and a half of ammo through it, three of us. I got the last 5 or so rounds all to myself as the booby prize, the other guys had given up (smaller framed blokes). I felt pretty bloody smashed after that, did the last three off the bench to get a good representative group target (roughly 3/4" at 50m) but to be truthful I really do not want to do that to myself again.

Originally Posted by No.3

Hogsback or dropped comb stocks from the bench or prone are just nasty, the rotation up when you are at a bench or prone means you can't move with the recoil and it just hurts. The straight stocks pushing straight back are more comfortable from these positions as you are able to absorb the recoil with more muscle groups - biology. Less of a smack to your AC and rotator cuff...

This is not really true. Modern straight stocks are straight only for scope alignment. A straight stock does not mitigate recoil in any way...if it did they would have been making them that way from the start on safari rifles and putting the open sights on islands.

I am not shooting this rifle with a straight (or straighter) stock and expecting the recoil to be lessoned. A rifle that recoils straight back hits you harder that one that rises. (I am not sure what muscle groups are meant if the rifle is held in the same place.) I have shot a lot of rifles of all kinds, and have done a lot with old and vintage rifles with stocks designed for open sights. (with scopes and without) and I can tell the difference.