different impact when using a lead sled
11-17-2007, 05:02 PM
#2
Typical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 986
RE: different impact when using a lead sled
No experience yet but I would expect that if the gun is not allowed to let the barrel rise normally as it would when held there could be a difference. I would make sure that the barrel was not held down and the recoil portion of the sled does not control how the gun rises in recoil. I have a similar rest that uses weight in the base but the recoil restriction is a strap that allows the rifle to move in recoil. I think the Lead Sled has a solid plate that the butt rests against which might be different.
11-17-2007, 07:13 PM
#3
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Saskatchewan Canada
Posts: 6,921
RE: different impact when using a lead sled
Partner has a lead sled and I have seen no shift in POI over the past 2 years in numerous rifles it has seen. It still recoils but the prinicple behind is to add weight to the rifle to reduce the felt portion. I have shot it with sand bags and without, a noticable difference in the felt department.
11-17-2007, 08:31 PM
#4
Typical Buck
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Jackson, TN
Posts: 836
RE: different impact when using a lead sled
Yes Sir, absolutely. I was coming to the forum today to post my experience when I saw your question.
I have an Ruger M77 in .270 made in 1984. I am setting it up this year as a longer range gun because I am hunting a corn field which presents longer shots. I never had a problem with this gun until I starting working with it this fall shooting it out of a lead sled at a buddy's range (I've never used a lead sled in the past with this gun, just sandbags.
The .270 was printing bullets all over the paper with no pattern or consistancy. Other guns I have shot well enough out of the lead sled (Rem 700 in 30.06, Browning A-bolt in .243, Omega .50 cal muzzleloader) that I never considered it asthe source of the problem. I replaced the scope on the gun (an older but excellent Redfield) with a Burris Fullfield II with no improvement. I floated the barrel myself, no improvement. I took the gun to a smith who adjusted the trigger to 3 pounds, no improvement. Shot 4 or 5 different kinds and weights of factory130, 140, and 150 gr ammo with no improvement. I'm pulling my hair out now.
I take the gun to another gunsmith who shoots it himself on sandbags and shoots a 1.25 inch group. Now I put two and two together - it is the damn lead sled.
I shot the gun this past Thursday on a front rest and rear bag and it shot less than an inch with Winchester 140 gr. Accubonds.
Talking to the gunsmith (a very experienced shooter, former military sniper) he said that some guns just shoot horribly when placed in a leadsled where the gun's movement is restricted. He advised me to place the front rest as far back as I can toward the receiver so as not to put any pressure on the tip of the forearm.
So let's review: I spent $200.00 on a new scope, 4 or 5 boxes of ammo (about $100.00), and $50.00on a trigger job to learn finally that there was absolutely nothing wrong with the gun in the first place.
Big dummy.
Thank you lead sled.
I have an Ruger M77 in .270 made in 1984. I am setting it up this year as a longer range gun because I am hunting a corn field which presents longer shots. I never had a problem with this gun until I starting working with it this fall shooting it out of a lead sled at a buddy's range (I've never used a lead sled in the past with this gun, just sandbags.
The .270 was printing bullets all over the paper with no pattern or consistancy. Other guns I have shot well enough out of the lead sled (Rem 700 in 30.06, Browning A-bolt in .243, Omega .50 cal muzzleloader) that I never considered it asthe source of the problem. I replaced the scope on the gun (an older but excellent Redfield) with a Burris Fullfield II with no improvement. I floated the barrel myself, no improvement. I took the gun to a smith who adjusted the trigger to 3 pounds, no improvement. Shot 4 or 5 different kinds and weights of factory130, 140, and 150 gr ammo with no improvement. I'm pulling my hair out now.
I take the gun to another gunsmith who shoots it himself on sandbags and shoots a 1.25 inch group. Now I put two and two together - it is the damn lead sled.
I shot the gun this past Thursday on a front rest and rear bag and it shot less than an inch with Winchester 140 gr. Accubonds.
Talking to the gunsmith (a very experienced shooter, former military sniper) he said that some guns just shoot horribly when placed in a leadsled where the gun's movement is restricted. He advised me to place the front rest as far back as I can toward the receiver so as not to put any pressure on the tip of the forearm.
So let's review: I spent $200.00 on a new scope, 4 or 5 boxes of ammo (about $100.00), and $50.00on a trigger job to learn finally that there was absolutely nothing wrong with the gun in the first place.
Big dummy.
Thank you lead sled.
11-17-2007, 10:38 PM
#5
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Coralville, IA. USA
Posts: 3,802
RE: different impact when using a lead sled
So let's review: I spent $200.00 on a new scope, 4 or 5 boxes of ammo (about $100.00), and $50.00 on a trigger job to learn finally that there was absolutely nothing wrong with the gun in the first place.
Big dummy.
Big dummy.
Mike
11-17-2007, 10:48 PM
#6
Fork Horn
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 233
RE: different impact when using a lead sled
I have been doing a lot of shooting lately and with out a sled I doubt I would be able to brush my teeth. Once I found a round that I like I was going to compare to what groups I shot in the sled by shooting out of it. I hope there is not to much of difference since I don’t have a limb saver yet (still in the mail) .50 omega
