Page 1 of 1
Rule Interpretation
Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:06 pm
by remmy511
From the rule book on Standard silho "The comb shall not extend above the centerline of the bore, but Monte Carlo roll may rise 1/2 inch on the off side."
...so does that mean the Monte Carlo comb can rise 1/2" above the bore centerline...or it can stick out from the side 1/2" but not extend above the centerline of the bore?
B.
Re: Rule Interpretation
Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:58 pm
by 1armoured
Yes,
the Monte-Carlo roll over can rise 1/2" above the bore, on the 'offside',
i.e not on the near side to your cheek,
nor in the centre in line with the bore.
Simple test is a rigid cleaning rod in the bore.
From memory, none of the de luxe 54 sporters are anywhere close to being above the bore.
I think the MS54 is a bit closer.
cheers,
Re: Rule Interpretation
Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:32 pm
by Jason
Yep.. 1armoured is right. It can extend up to 1/2" above the centerline of the bore on the offside. If you pull the bolt out and look down the bore from the muzzle, if the comb is visibly rising up past the center of the boreline it's not legal. A cleaning rod doesn't have to clear. Many rifles that are perfectly legal have the comb visible looking down the bore but it doesn't rise above the midpoint.
Re: Rule Interpretation
Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2011 12:08 am
by remmy511
...okay so this sounds like on the back-side of the comb, it could rise 1/2" above center bore, but as it slants down it must at best cross the centerline of the bore. This doesn't sound like it answers my problem, that being having a long neck I have high mounts that put only my chin on top of the cheek well, so I was hoping this 1/2" might give me more contact, but I don't think it will. The rise would need to be on the inside to do me any good. I think tall people shouldn't shoot rifles...only handguns.
B.
Re: Rule Interpretation
Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2011 12:58 am
by Jason
Nope, it doesn't help you at all. Doesn't help me with the same problem either. It's not that big of a deal. I just don't have my rings at max height.
Re: Rule Interpretation
Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2011 8:56 am
by Jerry G
Ring height should be determined by your body shape. You need to have a good cheek/stock contact. But............ The more erect you can hold your head, the less strain on your neck and the less tired you will get.
Re: Rule Interpretation
Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2011 9:48 am
by remmy511
Jerry G wrote:Ring height should be determined by your body shape. You need to have a good cheek/stock contact. But............ The more erect you can hold your head, the less strain on your neck and the less tired you will get.
Yeah, it really does sound like a trade-off, I 'm going with erect head first and forget any contact with the stock other than just the side of my chin, it feels alright and I can hold pretty good.
B.
Re: Rule Interpretation
Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2011 4:23 pm
by AZRifle
A little late but....
I can attest to the cheek on the stock importance. I used to have tall mounts to be more comfortable overall and keep my arms lower against my body. After gaining a lot of experience, I tried it again with shorter mounts and realized what I was missing. The contact of your cheek against the rifle is another point of stabilization. It is like changing from a bi-pod to a tri-pod. You do not want it to be a forceful pressure but just positive contact.
Jerry