I am having a .50-caliber lever action rifle made. Rifle will have 22-inch barrel, use a Brockman or Grizzly Custom Guns adjustable aperture rear sight, and [an appropriately heighted] Lyman target front sight with blade seated upside down.

I've shot Marlin M1895s and Browning M71s. I found the Browning to have much less apparent recoil. But I'm uncertain how much of that difference can be attributed to difference in rifle weight, or lighter bullet, or stock dimensional differences. From memory I believe M71's stock is straighter than the Marlin, but that doesn't tell me much. Does this accrue from less drop at comb, at heel, difference in down pitch, thicker comb, thicker butt, or what? Doug Turnbull claims the M71's stock promotes apparent recoil rather than diminishes it. Our different perception is the reason for my query. I'm having a stock made for me, and I want to arrange it to have the most control of recoil I can.

I find a Belgian Browning Superposed Grade I with slightly shortened length of pull and an off-the-shelf Brno ZH 200 to fit me well. I cannot identify any particular problems or benefits with any rifle I've fired.

I am 69 inches, weighing 145 pounds, 41 regular sport coat. My mother says I resemble a short Tom Selleck, but you know how mothers are.