How are these guys getting any accuracy shooting like this?

[Trey Veston]

On a couple of my YouTube videos, due to the bag rest and angle of the camera, it looks like I am resting the barrel of my rifles on the sandbag, which viewers are quick to point out will ruin accuracy and cause stringing. I'm actually not, since I have been told since I was a kid not to do that.

But then I was looking at pics of my dad at one of his BPCR matches, and realized that EVERYONE was resting the barrels of their Sharps and Highwalls on shooting sticks, and seem to be doing just fine shooting at up to 1000yds.
It seems like the physical properties of the rifles means that there is not enough fore end to rest on a bag, but some do, and shooters choose to use traditional sticks with felt or carpet on them.

I don't know enough about the physics of rifle accuracy to understand why it's OK for these rifles and not others. Can someone explain?

 

[LocoGringo]

Ok, I'm guessing here, but the nature of the barrels is very different in these black powder barrels versus the barrel of an AR-15 for example. The black powder rifle barrels are very rigid and thick, "heavy duty" steel whereas the barrel of an AR-15 is much more lightweight and "delicate". The AR-15 is much more susceptible to flexing with weight on the barrel which is why they hit higher on the target when resting the barrel on something rather than the handguard. The black powder barrels are much thicker and heavier and are less susceptible to flexing by resting on sticks. Again, that's my guess...

 

[rhino465]

Ok, I'm guessing here, but the nature of the barrels is very different in these black powder barrels versus the barrel of an AR-15 for example. The black powder rifle barrels are very rigid and thick, "heavy duty" steel whereas the barrel of an AR-15 is much more lightweight and "delicate". The AR-15 is much more susceptible to flexing with weight on the barrel which is why they hit higher on the target when resting the barrel on something rather than the handguard. The black powder barrels are much thicker and heavier and are less susceptible to flexing by resting on sticks. Again, that's my guess...

I concur. Deviations in point of impact arising from stress on barrels due to them bending slightly is less of an issue with a very stiff barrel/receiver combination as seen in the photo. It will simply bend less from the same amount of stress. The thicker, stiffer barrels will also show less deviation due to the position of the support affecting the vibrations induced in the barrel when fired.

 

[Mk-211]

Beginner's Guide To Long Range Muzzeloading | Black Powder Cartridge

Black Powder Cartridge News - Published quarterly - Spring, Summer, Fall and Winter Issues.

www.blackpowdercartridge.com

A whole lot of reading material.

 

[5whiskey]

To only add a bit to LocoGringo and Rhino, in addition to the barrels being much stiffer there is much less velocity and pressure generates by black powder. This also reduces stressor forces, those forces already being applied to a significantly thicker hunk of steel

 

[Varminterror]

I don't know enough about the physics of rifle accuracy to understand why it's OK for these rifles and not others. Can someone explain?

Because these guys are not demonstrating the bleeding edge of 1,000 yard performance, while other rifles are…

 

[Jim Watson]

They are at the bleeding edge of black powder 1000 yard performance.
Don't you think they would use the rest placement that gave best accuracy?

 

[Varminterror]

Ok, I'm guessing here, but the nature of the barrels is very different in these black powder barrels versus the barrel of an AR-15 for example. The black powder rifle barrels are very rigid and thick, "heavy duty" steel whereas the barrel of an AR-15 is much more lightweight and "delicate".

Barrel steels used in both can be and most often are the same. Rigid and thick are a design parameter, and in most cases, the BPCR rifles aren’t actually thicker than match AR barrels - and certainly not thicker than the straight 1.25” barrels which can be used in bolt guns…

But I’ll gladly see the rigidity and thickness of a BPCR rifle and raise them this… the barrel on the left is a common 1.20” at the breech, straight for 5”, tapering to .93” at a 27” muzzle… the barrel at the right is… more rigid and thicker…

 

[Varminterror]

They are at the bleeding edge of black powder 1000 yard performance.
Don't you think they would use the rest placement that gave best accuracy?

The point is that all of them are hindered by the same poor performance handicap. So the “bleeding edge of BPCR” really isn’t impressive by contemporary standards. So the universal handicap for them is accepted for what it is - a fair game.

Being the fastest minivan on the road doesn’t mean a minivan is the best example of race car design. Being the highest scoring single shot black powder rifle with splinter forend and being fired from a pair of sticks isn’t analogous to a favorable practice for long range precision. Not so different than when HP matches didn’t allow optics or didn’t allow even free float handguards - everyone had the same handicap, so the game was fair, even though it’s well demonstrated that performance would improve by floating the handguards and by using optics. And of course, using 223, 308, or 30-06, or other surplus military cartridges is another performance handicap in and of itself…

So it’s fair to acknowledge that BPCR is a handicap class, the entire sport as a whole - it’s not demonstration of best practices for precision. THAT is the singular reason those rifles are fired from barrel supports rather than free floating, and all other precision shooting sports are fired with free floating barrels with no contact with their support. So THAT is the answer to the OP’s question - why is it ok for these rifles to be fired with barrel contact, but not others… the true answer is that it’s not actually ok, and the rifles ARE influenced by the contact - but everyone is handicapped in the same way…

 

[Jim Watson]

True, you would not be allowed to free float a Sharps barrel, but don't you think somebody would have tried resting on the splinter foreend?

Why don't all the smokeless shooters hump 40 lb rail guns? Because that isn't their match.

 

[Varminterror]

True, you would not be allowed to free float a Sharps barrel, but don't you think somebody would have tried resting on the splinter foreend?

That answer is pretty well described by physics - putting the point of support so close to the buttstock allows way too much muzzle hop, and way too much input for small movement in the tail. It’s Archimedes’ principle at work.

Why don't all the smokeless shooters hump 40 lb rail guns? Because that isn't their match.

Yup. Every game has its handicaps required by their rule set - but some matches have far less demonstrated consequence for their rule choices than others. The gap between Heavy rifle and Open rifle is much, much smaller than that between Open Rifle and BCPR, because the rule limitations are far, far less influential.

The guy asked for contrast between BPCR and other disciplines - the acceptance of lower performance standard to conform to the chosen rule set is the answer.

 

[LocoGringo]

Barrel steels used in both can be and most often are the same. Rigid and thick are a design parameter, and in most cases, the BPCR rifles aren’t actually thicker than match AR barrels - and certainly not thicker than the straight 1.25” barrels which can be used in bolt guns…

But I’ll gladly see the rigidity and thickness of a BPCR rifle and raise them this… the barrel on the left is a common 1.20” at the breech, straight for 5”, tapering to .93” at a 27” muzzle… the barrel at the right is… more rigid and thicker…

View attachment 1199636

Ok, all of that is true, but you missed the point of my illustration and reason for using an AR-15 as an example. Thinking of the standard profile AR-15 barrel, there are lots of videos showing that if you rest the barrel, rather than the handguard, on something, the round will strike higher than the "zero". This is proven over and over. The OP is asking why these black powder guys rest the rifle on the barrel rather than the forearm for that reason. You have chosen the extreme example of match barrels trying to, what, disprove what I am saying? I chose the extreme example of an AR-15 barrel (standard profile, not a 1.20" match profile) to illustrate why I thought these guys were resting the rifles on the barrels and not the forearms. I admit, it's just me thinking and I don't KNOW why they don't rest their rifles on the forearms rather than the barrel, but the reasoning I gave makes sense to me. I could be completely wrong, and I fully admit it.

Not everyone wants to be on the "bleeding edge of extreme accuracy" like you. They're just having fun with their primitive rifles and wringing out every bit of distance and accuracy they can while HAVING FUN. Lighten up a bit man.

 

[Chuck R.]

I competed in BPCS and BPCR mid and long range, as well as buff matches.

My rifles and loads were j sub MOA using cast bullets, iron sights and with the barrels resting on sticks. It's important to note, that the stick placement wasn't hap hazard, I did my load development off of sticks, and I had tape on my barrels to ensure that my placement was consistent.

My BPCRs (1874 and 1885s) have forearms that're fixed to the barrels. I preferred my sticks as far out as possible to minimize the fulcrum effect. The further out on the barrel, the less movement for the muzzle. We weren't allowed rear support.

 

[Litetrigger]

Don't you think they would use the rest placement that gave best accuracy?

Check with the BP competiton rule book and you'll understand why they use that type rest.

 

[Walkalong]

Besides, it's consistency that's important, and it's not like they are putting enough pressure on the barrel/support spot to flex it.

 

[jmr40]

It's about doing everything exactly the same way every time. If you zero the rifle with the front sandbag under the stock then start shooting with the barrel resting on a hard surface you're going to get a different POI. If you were to zero the rifle with the barrel on a hard surface, and do it exactly the same every time you shoot it's going to consistently hit in the same spot.

 

[Robert]

Shooting rifles off a bench is boring, at least BPCR is interesting. Their barrels weigh more than most AR-15s and some long range rigs. To each their own.

 

[shoobe01]

It's about doing everything exactly the same way every time. If you zero the rifle with the front sandbag under the stock then start shooting with the barrel resting on a hard surface you're going to get a different POI. If you were to zero the rifle with the barrel on a hard surface, and do it exactly the same every time you shoot it's going to consistently hit in the same spot.

This, but also this.

Does everyone forget that almost nothing was free floated just 50 years ago, and among the things that ruled were slings? Not just resting on the barrel or a handguard that's touching the barrel, but actively pulling on the side of the gun.

How'd that work? Consistently. All the shooting methods provide a way to be stable then have to be absolutely consistent. Sling shooters knew back then that POI was off by a lot vs offhand and... that's it. They knew and accounted for it.

I started in this sort of sling tension oriented stuff and was terribad at it, no matter how much I was taught.

 

[doubleh]

I'll echo jmr40 on this subject. These guys experiment until they determine where they get their best groups and use that exact position from match to match. Same thing as benchrest shooters, long range shooters, and even offhand shooters do. Find what works best and do that with every shot as close as possible. The farther the rest is from an unsupported rear the less the shooter's movement affects the shot. I believe it is called moment of arm, something I picked up when I was a kid building and flying model airplanes. The shorter the moment the more affect it has on movement and the quicker it does it.

Something I have always wondered about in the back of my mind but never explored is what affect free floated barrels on BP guns would have. Improvement in accuracy or a waste of time and material? I have never seen any research but I have paid little attention to BP shooting in general for several years.

 

[PapaG]

The muzzle rest was standard in the days of black powder chunk gun, slug gun and round ball bench rest shooting. Also for the early days of Scheutzen uing black powder cartridges, either fixed or "muzzle-breech loading. I did it with my rolling block with 1 1/8" a cross the flats octagonal barrel also. Most if not all that you see are large diameter barrels in slow moving (relatively) black powder calibers. Stiff barrels.
I tried it with my Numrch barrel musket but it didn't work because, I think the barrel was of too thin a profile.
My flintlock rifle had to be rested on the area bout halfway down the forend shooting cross sticks for the same reason. 36" long, 15/16" barrel.

 

[Varminterror]

Something I have always wondered about in the back of my mind but never explored is what affect free floated barrels on BP guns would have. Improvement in accuracy or a waste of time and material?

The only way to accomplish it in these rifles is with a float tube which mounts like the Bayside FrankenRuger shroud, or some other long, stiff protrusion from the receiver forward to the support point - not so dissimilar to a Bipodext now being see in ELR competition, but taken to the extreme. At that point, they’re certainly no longer the same design as the spirit of the sport would dictate, so there’s no market to do it. By the time you’ve added some kind of fore-stock or float tube which offers continuous rigidity from the receiver forward, you’ve simply (re)created what the world as a whole created to replace these rifles, and the game is no longer the game. So Archimedes’ Principle rules and harmonic dampening is recognized as relatively less critical than support radius. And the game is still the game.