Here's a basic question. What is the advantage supposed to be of a barrel band sling swivel on a rifle vs one on the stock forend? They look cool, but it would seem that if you use the sling for shooting, you are putting downward pressure on the barrel. Any explanation appreciated. Thanks, MMM.

On rifles with lots of recoil it prevents the front swivel from striking your hand.

When the rifle is slung, the barrel doesn't stick up as far and is therefore less likely to catch on brush, etc.

And, most importantly, it looks cool.

carries better too

Just don't use a tight sling when you shoot!

This is from an article I wrote a while back where I was refering to short forearms of 7-9 inches of early English styled rifles compared to the modern 10+ inch norm.

It is interesting to note how many supossedly knowledgable writers continue to perpetuate the fallacy that this stud is barrel mounted because if it was mounted on the fore arm it might dig into the leading hand during recoil.They have not recognised that the design of these rifles negated the ability to mount the stud on the fore arm as this was usually very short in front of the receiver ring and left insufficient room for this purpose. Besides which the recoil of most of the rifles they were used on was, and is really quite easily handled. When it first came into practice it hadn't been too many years since military rifles from which all sporting rifles were developed, had extremely long barrels and the rear sling stud was mounted in the front of the trigger guard. It was to have the slung rifle sit lower on the shoulder and bring the weight down making it more portable, controllable, and practical to carry. When rifle developement mooved toward the sporting requirements these lessons were kept in mind. The fore arm was shortened to be just enough to hold onto as the weight of the former military arms was such thar no-one wanted to carry that much when it was not necessary, besides the rifle was not likely to be needed as a club that the military action sometimes necessitated. However the barrels were still longer than is now the norm and up to thirty inches was not uncommon so that keeping the weight lower when the rifle was slung was still desirable. It was when factory hunting rifles which usually had fuller and longer fore arms became cost efective for the average man with their forearm mounted sling stud,(because this is a cheaper option) that the confusion started. While most who aspire to :safari" will be unable to afford the cost they still want their rifles to look as if they were about to go and the barrel mounted sling stud is a factory offering to pander to this desire, even when a ten inch or longer for end negates the need. As many of the factory stocks were improperly shaped to help with recoil the transition to recoil being the reason for barrel mounting the sling stud began. This is a manufactured reason as any rifleman who has used the heavier calibers will tell you it takes very few shots from a propperly shaped stock to accustom yourself to this factor. If it can not be handled then the rifleman ( or woman) needs to reconsider whether he really needs this level of power.

Von Gruff.

I partially disagree with the above.

Early muskets had their slings mounted close to the muzzle and at the front of the trigger guard in order that the rifle might be slung muzzle down for carrying.

The sling swivels were moved to the rear as barrels got shorter at the beginning of the smokeless powder era.

The common carrying mode in Europe is still muzzle-down, so the rear swivel is mounted about halfway between the PG and the stock's toe to position the rifle's butt at the proper height. This places the front swivel further forward than is usual on US rifles, which are usually slung muzzle-up.

The use of the shooting sling came along well after the repositioning of the swivels and is almost exclusively an American development, initiated and popularized by Townsend Whelen in the early 20th century long after the shorter forearms were commonly used in Europe.

The shorter forearms with barrel-mounted swivel were and are a result of the muzzle-down carry mode; originally the short-forearm style had nothing to do with recoil at all.

Muzzle-down carry is about 5 times faster than muzzle-up carry so I position all my rear swivels at least 3-4 inches forward of the stock's toe, for faster gun handling.
Regards, Joe

Von Gruff has the waterfront just about covered. As I (slowly) progress along this steep learning curve, I am starting to think in terms of thinner and longer barrels in order to give certain cartridges a few extra inches to develop some more velocity. Often I am deluding myself, but not always.

With lenses newly developed at INEEL (Idaho National Laboratory), we will be able to focus on the front sight as well as the target simultaneously. Us middle aged duffers will still need a mild lens for our new found farsightedness (presbyopia). Still, the prospect of a tiny lens in a striker mounted sight plus a twenty six inch barrel gives me new hope for a return to shooting with iron sights some day.

For the sake of balance I will be back where this all started. A short forearm, a long barrel and a barrel mounted swivel base.

Imagine, seeing both the front sight and the target with perfect clarity.

For the majority of us, it will continue to be primarily an ornamentation, and a low cost one at that. Do not forget to lop off a lot of the for arm.

FWIW, My 416 Rigby has always worked fine with a stock mounted stud.

So, do what you want.

lawndart, even with prescription glasses the bolt mounted aperture sight and even the bridge mounted model is still a workable sight for me. Even though these have been posted before this is what I built for pair of a light and a heavy. The light rifle is the 7x57 with bolt mounted aperture,and has a 7 1/2 in forearm while the heavier 404 with bridge miounted aperture has a 9 inch length. Both have 25 in barrels and the sighting plane is extended from 29in to 32in by going from the bridge mounted to the bolt mount. A large part of the aperture's effectiveness is dictated by playing with not only the size of the aperture but the rim thickness as well and of course the thickness of the front sight blade. I have taken goat at 185yds on the move with the 7x57 and the aperture sight without difficulties although I carry a scope in qd rings if things stretch out much past this distance. Have seen a piece about the lenses you talk about but not sure they are necessarily an necessity for hunting situations, although I can see they may benefit some on paper.




Von Gruff.

Von Gruff,

I just typed a nice reply, but hit the wrong button. I must be time for bed. I will try tomorrow.

Von Gruff,

Beautiful (read functional) rifles.

May I bug you for details?

PS I will likely install those lenses on the rear back up sight for use on an AR-10 and some local National Match competition folks, then give them a look see out in animal/convention natue.

J.D., I'm curious how the muzzle down ends up being faster? I'm not sure how others do it, but when I have my rifle slung (I almost always carry my rifle in my arms/grip) and need to bring it up for a shot I bring it under my arm by the butt, grabbing the forend and bringing it to my shoulder, has seemed fast to me and doesn't involve removing from my shoulder.

that said, I'm always up for better methods and could switch to a muzzle down carry if there were an advantage.

Thanks.

Red

The old Williams Gunsight Co put out a booklet about customizing military rifles, and a section of that booklet (IIRC) showed the senior Williams demonstrating the muzzle-down carry. I was in my VERY early teens when I saw this, and it stuck.

For right-handers, sling on the left shoulder with butt behind the shoulder and muzzle down. The left hand holds the forearm behind the front sling swivel and controls the rifle, leaving the right hand free for other tasks like drawing & shooting a handgun or swinging a blade.

When sudden need arises the shooter raises the rifle slightly, allowing the sling to fall off the shoulder, and at the same time rotates the rifle and swings it around to sock the butt into the shoulder as the right hand grasps the wrist.

I've never been to Africa but have been told that this carry method or some variation is quite common over there. If you'll give it a fair trial I think you'll like it but it works best with swivels mounted further forward than the US norm.
Regards, Joe

I know that this is a common carry method of some military troops. It is also taught at some of the domestic combat schools, including Thunder Ranch. Having your support hand on the forearm of the gun does make it quick to bring it into action.