As a rule of thumb, how long should the forearm be on a custom rifle, half the barrel length or slightly shorter?
Thanks

Do a search on "the golden mean ratio".

On American style stocks here is my rule of thumb for standard weight barrel in a hunting rifle. 26"-=12", 24"-=10 1/2" , 22"-10" , 20"-=9". Remember that there is not a correct answer for this question. Everyone has his own idea of a nice looking rifle stock. Look at the overall length of butt stock to the forend and try to have a balance of portions.

Les is spot on. I always stay an inch or so short of half the barrel length.

Well, tried the golden mean and that looked a bit short for a 24" barrel and half minus an inch looked a bit long, so I actually ended up about where Les is and I think that looked pretty good. Shouldn't be this hard should it?

I like the fore-end of a bolt action rifle to be the length of the action and shroud measured from the start of the barrel.

If you're building a rifle for show and tell, do whatever looks good.

But if you intend on hunting- what type of game?

If you plan on shooting off sticks, a tad longer is better for steadying than shorter. If you plan on off handing it, you don't need that extra inch or so.

Classic American built rifles have forearms that are too blocky and long, IMHO.

Take a look at some classic English rifles, which generally have shorter forearms than our homegrown varieties. IMHO, the classic English rifles have far more graceful lines and the shorter forearms are a big factor in that.

Plus, the classic English forearm is gradually and very nicely tapered upward from the front of the magazine box to the tip. Some American rifles have very little or no taper at all - hence the blockiness.

One can go too short and too tapered, however, and that's as bad, or worse, than too long.

Just to play devil's advocate here is a

TRICK QUESTION

Which is more "classic" - a slim full length mannlicher style ? Or the short, slim style of an original Rigby?





Or somewhat in between like the longer and fuller American style ?




I hold that they can all be done to look nice. It is just a matter of taste.

Phil, I think either of the two rifles in your first picture are "classic".

IMHO the "American" stock style has about twice as much wood as a rifle needs... Especially in the fore end.

My favorite bolt rifle stocks, are like the old British rifles.

In todays world, rifles made by Ralf Martini, and the new Heym Express bolt rifle [stock design by Ralf Martini], handle and feel the best, by a wide margin, again IMHO.

The "American" stock design feels like a boat oar to me...

IMO it depends upon the shooter's shooting style and the arrangement of the front sling swivel.

If the shooter wants to use a shooting sling for increased accuracy then the front swivel needs to be mounted on the forearm wood, period, end of discussion. This obviously requires a longer and fuller forearm than the early UK and Euro styles.

OTOH if the shooter doesn't use a shooting sling and the rifle will be used primarily for closer shots, then the front swivel can be mounted out on the barrel and the forearm can be made shorter and slimmer.

I own and build rifles with both styles of forearm/swivel mounting, with the shorter ones hovering around the 8.5"-10" mark and the longer ones never exceeding 11" even when used with 26"-28" bbls.
Regards, Joe

Barrel dia can have a visual consequence as well.
My 7x57 has a 25in bbl and a 7 3/4 forarm yet my 404 has the same bbl length and an 8 1/2 forarm. )n the other hand I built a 20 VarTarg with a 25 1/4 in bbl and it has a 10 in forarm and they all look right to my eye for the style of shooting they were designed for.

Von Gruff.

quote:

Originally posted by ozhunter:
I like the fore-end of a bolt action rifle to be the length of the action and shroud measured from the start of the barrel.

This is what I usually go with, sometimes plus or minus a bit. But, as others have said, it's really a matter of what a guy likes.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
J

Hey Phil,
Do those sling hooks scratch the metal at all?

They haven't scratched mine at all. Most of the time I don't like carrying a rifle with a sling but the hook type are great and reliable for quickly adding or removing the sling

When I said forearm length is a matter of taste I received an e-mail from gunbuilder D'Arcy Echols who reminded me that it is also a matter of function. Here is what he said

This Gibbs has a 24" Barrel and the forend is made to hold onto and control the rifle in recoil which there is plenty of. The checkering is 20 LPI instead of my usual 26 LPI. The owner would not have been able to handle this rifle as well with a typical English or German type forend. He shot one Ele with it already and has booked another hunt to Bots for the second. He shoots the rifle often


The 264 is a scaled down rifle for a shorter client with a no neck, short arms but big hands. It has a 12 1/2" Lop and 9 " forend despite the barrel being 26" . Both fit the clients needs and desires



I certainly have to agree as on really heavy kicking large bore rifles like the 505 one is better served with a forend with enough meat to hand onto. Although I also prefer the aesthetics of the slim, minimal English style, I tried on on my 505 and found it much more difficult to control than the older stock with a beefier forend.

With all do respect to Darcy, I have shot double rifles in 500, 577, and 600 with splinter fore ends, and 505 Gibbs and 500 Jefferie bolt Rifles with English stocks ie. minimal wood.
Your fingers "grab" the barrel, not just the 'wood".. With minimal wood the rifle lays a lot lower in the hand...

I much prefer "minimal wood".
It is simply a matter of taste.

I thought we were talking about forearm length on bolt rifles. Double rifles are completely different as their barrels are already wide.
try controlling your 577 by only holding onto the wood !

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Your fingers "grab" the barrel, not just the 'wood".. With minimal wood the rifle lays a lot lower in the hand...

I much prefer "minimal wood".
It is simply a matter of taste.

Exactly!