I have never owned one of these units and was wondering how this unit works for you? I bought one to save my shoulder from bag shooting when working up new loads.

Just curious if the rubber forearm rest does as well as the older soft rest. Never really shot off this one before but always shot off leather bags.

Just looking for something quick and simple to have to work loads up on. By the time I shoot a lot of 7mag loads I tend to get that jerk knowing how the kick will be on my bad shoulder.

Opinions appreciated.

I do have an opinion; they are vexatious contraptions designed by satan and serve no useful purpose at all. They are crutches that bear no resemblance to shooting a rifle in the field. Better to let a friend test your rifles for you. They will also break stocks if you use them wrongly.
Can you tell I hate them? A friend has one; he does not like to shoot rifles so it works for him, as there is no sensation of actually shooting except for the noise. Like playing a video game; sort of like shooting a rifle but not really.
Now, for the shoulder injured, then they will serve those guys well.

It tried one for a while. I was working up loads in a big bore and using 25 pounds of weight on the sled. It ended up shearing the scope off the bases and ruining the scope. A range acquaintance had his rifle stock break at the wrist while using his.

I have one of these slip on pads. They are super soft and spongy and really do a good job of mitigating recoil.

recoil pad

good for load development on big bores - and i mean BIG bores .. other than that, nuttin -- but if you rifle kicks the ever lovin snot out of you, and you have to work up loads, they aren't bad

We have one, and have used it as is, without additional weights.

Works as advertised.

When developing loads for the larger calibers, like the 460 Weatherby for instance, I used a PAST shoulder pad, and a bag of lead shot between my shoulder and stock.

You still need to hold the rifle down, but at least the shoulder does not suffer.

The guys I see using them here are afraid of their rifles and aren't able to actually shoot them accurately if not using the sled, as in a real hunting situation. I use a PAST sissy pad and quit after 20 rounds.

I have that old pad. I am looking for a quick fix for my kids to sight in.
I do not mind 5-10 shots and I can usually hold all 5 in a 1" or less but getting old I get the jerks with the 7 mag and heavier loads when working up powder increments.

Shooting a bag where you do not touch anything is how I have always shot.

What do you do with the lead Sled three with the hard rubber fore end grip and the hard rubber butt plate. Would it be better to have a softer fore end holder and butt plate rest?

Do you really have to just hold the gun down on the fore end to get the best results off the sled?

the problem with the lead sled is that the rifle is allowed to accelerate before the recoil is absorbed and the rifle stopped. Comparison: a rifle with a custom barrel/action weighs 40 pounds. When fired the bullet/gases generate rearward movement in the rifle and it moves as a function of the force moving the weight, then exhausting the force and the rifle slowing to a stop. Even with large cartridges such as "African Rifles" the forces moving a 40 pound rifle will result in minimal movement.
Method two: a 10 pound rifle is placed in a cradle that weighs 30 pounds. the same African cartridge is fired. But now instead of the force pushing against a fixed mass of 40 pounds, its initial pulse involves only the 10 pound rifle, so it gets up a pretty good head of steam- even if it is only for a very short distance. Then it meets the restraints of the 30 pound cradle and the recoil is absorbed to the level of the 40 pound rifle.

the difference is that the second situation involved the rifle having a high rate of acceleration due to the powerful cartridge in a light rifle, then equally quick deceleration as it was stopped by the cradle. the process would have only involved a half inch or less of actual space so may not have been noticed by the shooter. But the rifle and particularly the scope would have noticed. Scopes are built to absorb acceleration recoil. scopes will withstand severe shock when they absorb recoil that accelerates them to the rear. However they are not designed to absorb deceleration or it's equivalent, reverse acceleration. And that is what's happening when the fired rifle is slowed by the lead sled.

To prevent damage, the deceleration of the rifle needs to be slowed, which means less lead on the sled. If the rifle is allowed sufficient "follow through" from the shot there will be no damage to the rifle or scope. As has been noted above, using the lead sled without additional weight or with just a few pounds will allow sufficient follow through. Stack two 25 pound back of lead shot on the lead sled and shoot a high powered rifle on it is a recipe for a broken scope and the weakest link in the rifle.

I have heard about the stocks breaking/cracking with them. I think at least it would pound the hell out of the recoil lug.

Two or three layers of 3x6, very dense foam works wonders.
On a big bore where the practical range is under 100 yds. the sticks work fine for me for load development. 2 moa group is ok for me. ( MOBH. Minute of buffalo heart.)

Rifles were designed to be fired by Humans. If you want a mechanical device to fire your rifles, then put the barreled action in a mechanical gun mount and don't pretend it is still a "rifle"..
This opinion is not directed at anyone.

So what you are saying is no or little weight is best?
Are you better off using a soft forearm support vs being locked in the hard rubber holder.
How about the back holder it is hard rubber too and flat so the pad does not fit flush.

Do you have to hold the fore arm down to get the sled to work?

quote:

Originally posted by JimTx:
So what you are saying is no or little weight is best?

From the comments on various sites and also my contacts with the customer service rep at Leupold, the main problems come in when more than 25 pounds of lead is used on the sled. If 25 or less is used the rifle is allowed to dissipate its recoil over sufficient space-time that the deceleration is not an issue.

this has been my experience- if I put one bag of shot on it, things go okay. If I put two, that's tempting fate.

I have found that they tend to be more trouble than they're worth for other than load development. They just get in the way of being able to hold the rifle to your shoulder and grip in in a normal fashion.

quote:

Originally posted by Ray B:
...To prevent damage, the deceleration of the rifle needs to be slowed, which means less lead on the sled. If the rifle is allowed sufficient "follow through" from the shot there will be no damage to the rifle or scope. As has been noted above, using the lead sled without additional weight or with just a few pounds will allow sufficient follow through. Stack two 25 pound back of lead shot on the lead sled and shoot a high powered rifle on it is a recipe for a broken scope and the weakest link in the rifle.

Yep, that'll do it. Maybe those are some of the recoil problems Swarovski had in mind when they put the coil springs behind their erector tubes.

Someone I know made an ersatz recoil reducer that looked like a steel skate board with a bracket at the back. Even without the bag of shot on board it managed to crack the stock of a .300 magnum within 10 minutes.

The fault with the Caldwell design is that it has RUBBER feet, which grip the bench top. This creates an additional and difficult to calculate resistance to initial movement. This additional resistance (coupled with excessive weight on the "sled") can easily put too much strain on the stock/bedding and lead to damage with hard-recoiling rifles.

I have designed and built my own recoil-absorbing rest which has a smooth steel base that slides easily on the swath of carpet that I place under it on the bench top. This rest is heavy enough by itself (about 15-20 pounds) to add sufficient mass to that of the rifle to sufficiently dampen the recoil of the largest rifles.

Each shot moves the rest a quarter-inch (.222 Rem) to an inch (.375 H&H) rearward, depending on the level of recoil of the gun. IF THE REST DOES NOT MOVE TO THE REAR UPON THE RIFLE'S DISCHARGE, THEN IT IS PLACING A HUGE INERTIAL LOAD ON THE RIFLE'S STOCK! (I think you'll find that those rubber-footed Caldwell stock-breakers stay pretty much in place upon firing.) Like the venerable Ransom pistol rest, my rest must be re-positioned after several shots from a light-recoiling rifle, or after each shot from a very heavy-recoiling rifle.

My shooting friends have found my rest(s) so enhancing to accuracy that they want to use them even in the prairie dog fields to shoot their .204's off of.

Whoever dreamt of this contraption is an idiot!

The way it is designed is just plain useless.

True.
If you mount a rifle on a tank, which we did (M16 mounted on the search light mounts for close range gunnery training), then you can get the most accuracy out of the rifle, because you aren't shooting it any more; it becomes a mechanical contraption; what is the point of that? Part of the art and skill of rifle shooting is that a HUMAN must do it. Not a machine. That becomes another activity but it ain't rifle shooting by any stretch.

With my thumpers at the range, I rotate between sticks, the sitting position, and off hand. It gets better when you have learned to roll with the incoming tide. Like Tom, I use the thickest PAST pad available. Since there is not pachyderm hunting in my future, I don't shoot anything heavier than a 416 Rigby. To practice gun handling skills, I use 350-grain hard cast, and gas checked bullets over trail boss, then XMR 5744, and a gradually escalating dose of H 4895.

Have usedMagna-Porting at times to keep muzzle flip to an acceptable level. That was a problem with a lightweight Sako Hunter in a standard weight fill McMillan stock. The Magna-Porting tamed the flip right away.

For working up loads, I added a bag of lead shot between the butt pad, and my shoulder pocket. No matter what, I always have two hands on the rifle. It is not meant to be a coaxial gun mount. Tried a lightweight 416 Rigby at the bench one day. Five rounds later, and I was crying for my mommy (even though I never did get along with her).

There was once a recoil taming device that was bolted to a bench. It had two large springs, so it didn't crack stocks, or shear off scopes. I wish someone would start making those again.
Good luck.

I use one these for load development in my rifles. The plastic has a lot of give to it.