Trainer rifles and the importance of bolt throw?

[Redshako]

How important is bolt throw? I have been shooting a T1x quite a bit this summer and I am considering upgrading it to match the chassis, reticle and balance point of the new center fire rifle I have been planning to replace the R700 I have been using for precision shooting to date.

Obviously, the goal of a trainer is to match ergonomics and manual of arms as much as possible. But, what is the thinking about moving between actions with longer and shorter bolt throws?

 

[Dthomas3523]

How important is bolt throw? I have been shooting a T1x quite a bit this summer and I am considering upgrading it to match the chassis, reticle and balance point of the new center fire rifle I have been planning to replace the R700 I have been using for precision shooting to date.

Obviously, the goal of a trainer is to match ergonomics and manual of arms as much as possible. But, what is the thinking about moving between actions with longer and shorter bolt throws?

I’d put it at the bottom of the list. Balance and maybe triggers would be the most important.

I shoot a vudoo (very short throw), AI, Impact, and Curtis.

Can’t remember the last time I short stroked or had any bolt manipulation issues moving between the rifles.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

I don't think matching ergonomics and manual of arms is obvious at all.

IMHO, the key goal of training is to improve marksmanship basics. As far as similarity goes, capabilities should be common; but as long as the firearm/system functions reliably and is capable of accurately reflecting performance improvements or degradation, it's doing its job.

IMHO, demanding that the rifle be identical with the competition rifle, down to all but those things which are essential to a trainer (chambering, and some few other things) simply, in turn, demands that the shooter become slaved to be proficient on, and only on, a very limited set of ergos and configurations.

That, IMHO, is counter to the definition I employ describing a true marksman. Such a marksman's skills should be sufficiently flexible to derive the full accuracy potential for nearly any rifle. That, or be able to localize any equipment flaw preventing it.

I have tried and maintain rifles which meet each extreme of the rifle v trainer spectrum. In practice, it makes no appreciable difference.

Greg

 

[Redshako]

Greg,

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I have been considering this for the last week.

I completely agree that marksmanship is THE critical skill. However, for some of the games/competitions we use to exercise that skill, there are other considerations. Whether it is fieldcraft for hunting, timing for trap/skeet or in this case, the separate skills of a) building a good firing position in unusual positions or b) moving safely and smoothly between firing positions under time pressure.

I think these skills are different and distinct from marksmanship and will not spring naturally into ones head without careful considered practice.

Pete

 

[Dthomas3523]

I don't think matching ergonomics and manual of arms is obvious at all.

IMHO, the key goal of training is to improve marksmanship basics. As far as similarity goes, capabilities should be common; but as long as the firearm/system functions reliably and is capable of accurately reflecting performance improvements or degradation, it's doing its job.

IMHO, demanding that the rifle be identical with the competition rifle, down to all but those things which are essential to a trainer (chambering, and some few other things) simply, in turn, demands that the shooter become slaved to be proficient on, and only on, a very limited set of ergos and configurations.

That, IMHO, is counter to the definition I employ describing a true marksman. Such a marksman's skills should be sufficiently flexible to derive the full accuracy potential for nearly any rifle. That, or be able to localize any equipment flaw preventing it.

I have tried and maintain rifles which meet each extreme of the rifle v trainer spectrum. In practice, it makes no appreciable difference.

Greg

Pretty much the same I have experienced.

The only thing I have seen that makes a difference if it’s not close to the same is the balance point of the rifle. For positional shooting that is. If the balance point is completely different, then I may have to build positions a bit differently.

Not that it’s a deal breaker. Just the only noticeable difference.

I notice zero difference is bolt throw/lift, stock, or triggers (the slight note on trigger is I might need a few dry fires to tune my finger).

I use a 90 degree trigger pull, so I use whatever grip I need to accomplish that. Cheek weld is whatever the rifle needs to get a good sight picture.

Learn good fundamentals and you’ll find out a trainer rifle being exactly the same isn’t that big a deal. Generally speaking.