Forestock proportions

[Larry Akers]

sorry for adding to the confusion. I didn't notice that until I couldn't edit it further.
I believe that anyone who makes a rifle that is a thing of beauty to behold and really looks nice is using Golden Mean proportions to accomplish that whether intentional or not because a rifle so designed "looks right". If you were to take one of Fred's (who says he doesn't use the GM) rifles and do some measuring, you would find GM proportions all over it--because it looks right. In you own case your eye picked up the slight disproportion of your forestock because it didn't look right. You may choose to go by eye when building a rifle but the GM is a good basic design reference.

 

[Onojutta]

Here's the example I was talking about. Note that if I were to apply this to my 44" barrel, this would actually put my entry thimble over 26" from the breech (3/5 of 44 = 26.4). That's more than twice ~12" shown in flehto's rifle, which we've established to be our example of properly proportioned. I can't tell if the sketch is measuring from the breech or the hammer, but not much difference either way.

Now, if I understand your application correctly, your 3:5 relationship would actually include the wrist, as shown in the sketch. How does the wrist factor in to the proportion of the forestock?

 

[Larry Akers]

I have screwed up some more. My expression of 3/5 is a fraction and I should have said 3:5 a ratio. If the ratio is applied to your barrel per your sketch, you get 16.5" from the breech to the rear pipe which is out of proportion to the rest of the rifle.
You need to get Bohnet's booklet! He has drawings, with proportinal lines, of guns from the 1600's thru the Golden Age of American rifles. It looks like as barrels got longer points of reference needed to change to keep the whole gun in balance and proportioned to "look right". You can't isolate one particular element (ie the barrel) because it's all a part of the whole and inter-related and must be looked at in that context. Bohnet explains it so much better than I.

 

[Onojutta]

And I just saw that I screwed up too and fat-fingered my calculator. The fraction is 3/8 not 3/5 which would give the 16.5" from breech to entry thimble- still way too long. I guess that part I'm still not getting is why use the nose of the comb as the reference point?
In any case, good discussion and I'll have to check out that booklet.

 

[Stophel]

why use the nose of the comb as the reference point?

Because that's the only place you can make it work...

 

[Capt. Jas.]

why use the nose of the comb as the reference point?

Because that's the only place you can make it work...

:rotf: