Question about handi and rest placement.

[KIMBER45]

I have both read and experienced that placing the handi on a rest on the receiver is the best for acuracy. When shooting at something in the field, one seldom places their hand in that location. The question I have is -What happens to accuracy and point of impact when you place your support hand in a different location ?

[cwlongshot]

Point of impact change...

The difference is ''soffened'' because the shooters arms and hands do not allow for much bounce back as a hard bench does.

BUT I will offer that I do in fact hold my rifles as close to the hinge as possible while shooting off hand.

CW

[gcrank1]

I consider my H&Rs to be field guns, not bench rest guns. I tend to hold a field gun about midway from receiver to forestock screw, or a little back of that depending upon my field position. My backstop at home is 50yd. from my back deck rail and I will take a shot on occasion by just stepping out there, getting a reasonable comfortable position over the rail with the back of my hand at that forestock grip and touching it off at my steel. Most of the time. if I do my part, and with a cold barrel, they blow paint at the right spot, or appropriate POI for the elevation I have dialed in.
I suggest you shoot with the rest where you WILL hold the gun, because when in the field you will likely default to it, and see how well it does.

[KIMBER45]

I consider my H&Rs to be field guns, not bench rest guns. I tend to hold a field gun about midway from receiver to forestock screw, or a little back of that depending upon my field position. My backstop at home is 50yd. from my back deck rail and I will take a shot on occasion by just stepping out there, getting a reasonable comfortable position over the rail with the back of my hand at that forestock grip and touching it off at my steel. Most of the time. if I do my part, and with a cold barrel, they blow paint at the right spot, or appropriate POI for the elevation I have dialed in.
I suggest you shoot with the rest where you WILL hold the gun, because when in the field you will likely default to it, and see how well it does.

Good idea. In the heat of the moment, I'll put my hands where I put them on any long guns and not even think about the receiver.

[KIMBER45]

I just had another thought - does it matter when you place your hands if the barrel is free floated?

[gcrank1]

The 'free floated' on an H&R is different than on, say, a bolt action. On the bolt gun the action is well bedded or glass bedded into the stock with perhaps only the first couple inches of barrel forward of the action bedded, thereon it has no contact. In fact, for practical purposes you could cut the stock off right there but we must hang onto something out there. On this design where we hold it forward has some, but little effect for practical accuracy.
On the H&R you have that forestock mounting stud. Yes, from the spacer forward you can have no wood touching the barrel but you cant avoid that stud mount and whatever/however it affects things. The real pressure issue here might depend upon the pressure between the stud and the spacer face to the action more than the screw tension holding the forestock. I sure cant argue with the results some are getting by fine tuning that stud screw, but most are also using well fitting forestocks dedeicated to each barrel. They undoubtedly work in conjunction, but one should have more affect than the other, and Im curious which it is.
I believe this requires more well conducted trials, but if the action/locked up barrel has no pressure from the spacer then the stud thus has no forward pressure (as would be the case from a tight spacer to action) then the barrel harmonics should be better and as unaffected as possible on this design. I know I like how mine shoot when the forestock is not a tight fit. The recently posted spring loaded plunger from the spacer to action may be the next step from my basic approach.
But then we have to hang onto something out there and changes the above again. With no other tensions induced on the assembly than the hand support from straight beneath any affect may be minimized. I know for myself that since I shoot a lot offhand that I am a far greater cause for error than anything, so I can forgive a bit on the rifle. My forward handhold is not way forward like some, about my farthest is with the forestock screw just ahead of my index finger, and usually well back of that (comfortable and natural for me).
So, in terms of priortiy I think of it like this:
Snapping the action closed with the same amount of force each time
Have a clean and dry latch and shelf for lockup
A no tension forestock
Get comfortable and make a good shot each time

[KIMBER45]

The 'free floated' on an H&R is different than on, say, a bolt action. On the bolt gun the action is well bedded or glass bedded into the stock with perhaps only the first couple inches of barrel forward of the action bedded, thereon it has no contact. In fact, for practical purposes you could cut the stock off right there but we must hang onto something out there. On this design where we hold it forward has some, but little effect for practical accuracy.
On the H&R you have that forestock mounting stud. Yes, from the spacer forward you can have no wood touching the barrel but you cant avoid that stud mount and whatever/however it affects things. The real pressure issue here might depend upon the pressure between the stud and the spacer face to the action more than the screw tension holding the forestock. I sure cant argue with the results some are getting by fine tuning that stud screw, but most are also using well fitting forestocks dedeicated to each barrel. They undoubtedly work in conjunction, but one should have more affect than the other, and Im curious which it is.
I believe this requires more well conducted trials, but if the action/locked up barrel has no pressure from the spacer then the stud thus has no forward pressure (as would be the case from a tight spacer to action) then the barrel harmonics should be better and as unaffected as possible on this design. I know I like how mine shoot when the forestock is not a tight fit. The recently posted spring loaded plunger from the spacer to action may be the next step from my basic approach.
But then we have to hang onto something out there and changes the above again. With no other tensions induced on the assembly than the hand support from straight beneath any affect may be minimized. I know for myself that since I shoot a lot offhand that I am a far greater cause for error than anything, so I can forgive a bit on the rifle. My forward handhold is not way forward like some, about my farthest is with the forestock screw just ahead of my index finger, and usually well back of that (comfortable and natural for me).
So, in terms of priortiy I think of it like this:
Snapping the action closed with the same amount of force each time
Have a clean and dry latch and shelf for lockup
A no tension forestock
Get comfortable and make a good shot each time

So what your saying is- it's not enough difference to miss a deer at 150 yds. That's good enough for me.

[gcrank1]

  , thats probably a good way to put it....
FWIW, the old British Black Powder Express cartridges were intended to have practical hunting accuracy to 150yd. with no more than a 4.5" mid-range traj., which gives you a +/- 2" above/below the line of sight. This really gives you a point blank -0- to 150yd. without having to think hold over/under.For many of our popular traditional calibers this is still not a bad calc. With higher performing small caliber cartridges you could still use the criteria just extend the range, unless, of course, your game is smaller critters.
Ive used the +/- 1.5" (=3" mid-range traj.) happily for years but Ive had pretty close cover and a self imposed 100yd. limit. Now with some more open country around me Im going to go to the BPE criteria above and pretend Im on the Dark Continent.

[twoshooter]

The reason for the cautious bench shooting is simply for the purpose of determining the best accuracy load for the gun, and then for sighting in the gun itself. Once the load is standardized, and sighted in, you need to do some shooting at the expected distances and determine where that first shot out of a cold barrel is going, that is the one that matters. Despite what one may think, most people are lucky to hit a paper plate farther than 50 yards from an offhand stance, or a hundred yards with some support , like leaning against a tree. My handi's will all bench less than 2 " at 100 yards, which I cannot shoot offhand, so I dont worry about it much. My handis are for hunting, not competition , and I have faith that in any situation I could reasonably encounter, they do just fine.

[Sourdough]

Out to 100 yards I shoot off hand.  Beyond that I use shooting sticks, or a bi-pod.  I place the shooting sticks directly under the barrel lug.  The Bi-pod is mounted on a sling swivel that I mounted just behind the forearm screw.  Works for me from 100 out to 700 yards.

[nanuk-O-dah-Nort]

...FWIW, the old British Black Powder Express cartridges were intended to have practical hunting accuracy to 150yd. with no more than a 4.5" mid-range traj., which gives you a +/- 2" above/below the line of sight. This really gives you a point blank -0- to 150yd. without having to think hold over/under.

Ive used the +/- 1.5" (=3" mid-range traj.)

I think you may be confusing Mid Range Trajectory, with Poiint Blank Range Zone

the way I understand it, a 4.5" midrange means just that, at half way to zero, the bullet is 4.5" above the line drawn from bore to zero

this is also used to calculate the Point Blank Range, such that a 9 inch PBR zone is NEVER more than 4.5" high, and 4.5" below line of sight.  Probably a bit less due to sights being 0.700 above bore centerline.

so your 1.5" +/-  gives you a PBR based on a 3 inch zone, what ever that distance is.

When I studied up the info for my 500BPE Double, the Trajectory was ALWAYS based on line of bore to zero, which is actual bullet trajectory from barrel. 
My rifle was sighted in at 85yds.   It is my understanding that all doubles were regulated and sighted for 85yds.

[gcrank1]

Just so! (I should have caught that... ) The article I took it from referenced 'Stonehenge' (J.H. Walsh, editor of 'The Field', an influential British sporting magazine circa 1883) having queried notable British gunmakers at a BPE trials to establish the criteria to define 'an Express Cartridge'.
As quoted in 'The Black Powder Cartridge News, summer 2010, he reportedly had said:
"Finally therefore, I propose to define the Express as a rifle with a trajectory not exceeding 4 1/2" at 150yd., for which a MV of at least 1750fps is required"
Later in the article it is said that the guns and loads trialed for MV and traj. satisfied the above criteria and,"the velo was greater than 1750 and the 150yd. MRJ was under or about 4 1/2" for all except the .577BPE."
I should have noted the discrepancy. I believe that Walsh's quote of "a trajectory not exceeding 4 1/2" at 150yd." was correctly characterized to maintain that basically +/- 2" for PBR and the later statement by the author, or perhaps misinterpretation/misprint by the magazine editor may have inserted 'MRT' inappropriately? Then I erred by quoting that MRT designation.

[nanuk-O-dah-Nort]

I'd have to check my old tables, but I don't think my rifle could hold +/- 2 inches out to 150yds.

it was 500BPE double.

[gcrank1]

No worries!, it is a 500BPE Dbl. after all, and that IS enough 

[nanuk-O-dah-Nort]

No worries!, it is a 500BPE Dbl. after all, and that IS enough 

if the Muzzle Blast doesn't knock 'em over, the smoke chokes 'em enough for me to stick 'em with a knife!