Cone height

Help Support :

You do need to get someone to look at the fit whilst mounted. EJC is a very nice ground and I would make the journey to see Will.

There are so many things that might be wrong (or right). The 694 has a wide stock, which reduces cast, and if you head is too upright etc. etc. Will has correctly pointed out that new shooters tend stand too upright - I liken it to skiing in that more control comes from the stance being more aggressive - very roughly with conventional/sunglasses glasses on, a good mount means you would be looking out of the top third.

It's not just the mount that's an issue but that the mount is a personal thing and the gun's standard dimensions are a manufacturers compromise. If your 694 has the standard stock (35/55) it is extremely unlikely to be too low.

Its also that changing one thing affects another - pitch is often overlooked and can easily explain mussel flip/kick. Even a small change with even out the contact area.

I'm afraid (and have seen) shops say a gun fits when its well off the mark - they bend the person around the gun - and that's what you must now avoid.

In short - decent coach before you touch the gun.
Thank you for the points and I don’t disagree with Will for one second. I’m up in Belper which makes Will’s very kind offer difficult to take up sadly.
 
As you’re in Belper , perhaps a call to
Neville Guns in Alfreton ? splendid place , nice people , like a gun filled version of the Tardis . They could probably help via the Joe Neville shooting school up the road from the shop ,
Yes - I know the place and did email them re a fitting but never had a reply…..maybe I should have called in as it’s only 20 mins away. I‘ve just emailed this fella - fingers crossed

 
Hello

i read the first link some time ago and the latter link doesn’t work. I am in no way wanting to reopen a previous argument between yourself and another, more importantly deviate this thread, but surely your suggestion of another product is as arguably misplaced as myself buying the 694 without a prior fitting?

✌️
 
You do need to get someone to look at the fit whilst mounted. EJC is a very nice ground and I would make the journey to see Will.

There are so many things that might be wrong (or right). The 694 has a wide stock, which reduces cast, and if you head is too upright etc. etc. Will has correctly pointed out that new shooters tend stand too upright - I liken it to skiing in that more control comes from the stance being more aggressive - very roughly with conventional/sunglasses glasses on, a good mount means you would be looking out of the top third.

It's not just the mount that's an issue but that the mount is a personal thing and the gun's standard dimensions are a manufacturers compromise. If your 694 has the standard stock (35/55) it is extremely unlikely to be too low.

Its also that changing one thing affects another - pitch is often overlooked and can easily explain mussel flip/kick. Even a small change with even out the contact area.

I'm afraid (and have seen) shops say a gun fits when its well off the mark - they bend the person around the gun - and that's what you must now avoid.

In short - decent coach before you touch the gun.
I would try to find somewhere with a "try gun" that can be adjusted to find a comfortable comb and heel angle, to give you some idea of the correct gun fit. A simple way of getting the correct body position is to point your belt buckle to where you intent to kill the bird, then you won't over stretch!
 
I’ve been clay shooting for about 6 months and go every week. I’ve got a beretta 694 and I love it - silly point but i seem to shooting where I’m aiming if that makes sense, even if I’m not always aiming in the right place, practise and some lessons will sort this I’m sure.

Hoping to avoid the fair but not needed comments of ‘should have tried one first’, so here goes. When I mount the gun and get a full view of the rib, I’ve begun to notice that the but of the cone is sitting about an inch above my shoulder. What modifications would be available from the gunsmith the bring the cone lower.

Thank you in anticipation of some insight
I’ve been clay shooting for about 6 months and go every week. I’ve got a beretta 694 and I love it - silly point but i seem to shooting where I’m aiming if that makes sense, even if I’m not always aiming in the right place, practise and some lessons will sort this I’m sure.

Hoping to avoid the fair but not needed comments of ‘should have tried one first’, so here goes. When I mount the gun and get a full view of the rib, I’ve begun to notice that the but of the cone is sitting about an inch above my shoulder. What modifications would be available from the gunsmith the bring the cone lower.

Thank you in anticipation of some insight
Its also that changing one thing affects another - pitch is often overlooked and can easily explain mussel flip/kick. Even a small change with even out the contact area.

I'm afraid (and have seen) shops say a gun fits when its well off the mark - they bend the person around the gun - and that's what you must now avoid.

In short - decent coach before you touch the gun.
I would try to find somewhere with a "try gun" that can be adjusted to find a comfortable comb and heel angle, to give you some idea of the correct gun fit. A simple way of getting the correct body position is to point your belt buckle to where you intent to kill the bird, then you won't over stretch!
 
Until someone helps OP sort proper stance, hold, mount and cheekweld, a try-gun is only making the hole deeper. You can adjust such a stock to any weird way a shooter may want to hold his gun, but that doesn't mean that way of holding and mounting the gun is correct. I'd consider it more likely that OP isn't mounting correctly, given the "molar" issue. Unless OP is outside of the size-ranges the large manufacturers account for, adjusting a gun to facilitate improper habits isn't going to help in the long run.

@Stiggers - book lessons from someone who knows what they do. Don't mess with your stock until you know it's the stock and not your ability. As per above, if you feel your jaw, you are giving the gun room to move under recoil. For lack of firm cheekweld, the gun will find a way to touch your cheek. If that is due to the stock, your comb would rather be too low than to high. By my guess it's neither, but only a good shooter standing next to you can tell you for sure.
 
The 694 has a wide stock, which reduces cast, and if you head is too upright etc. etc.
I'm a little confused reading this, I would have thought a wider stock increases the gun's cast (or reduces the need for cast to be added, whichever way you want to look at it)? Noob here , so just trying to understand better!

@Stiggers I'd love to hear how this ends for you with the 694, of the guns I tried recently that seemed the closest fit for me so it's at the top of my list for a 'keeper' gun. Ironically an ATA seemed like a very similar fit so I decided to go with that as my 'starter' gun, it can serve as a backup/guest gun in the future.
 
As cast is measured from the center line of the stock, a wide comb has the effect of reducing cast as your cheek sits slightly to the side of the comb and not actually on it. If you have a thin face the effect is less - more if you have a fat face.

If its confusing think of the extremes - a 4cm wide comb which is very flat at the top will push your head away from the center line by up to 2cm. A 5mm wide (pointy) comb by hardly anything.

Its not just that the 694 stock is wide but that its wide at the comb. I had cast added to mine to match the 682 stock (and thus cast at face) I was using previously. The fact that Beretta did not add cast to compensate for the width of the stock was a mistake in my view - and - I know better than a company that has been making millions of guns a year, for 500 years.

The other point to make and again confirms that you need someone who knows to fit you stock is that cast at the heel & toe maybe different to cast at the face. This is often where some guns (which have less cast to keep the comb in the right pace) don't fit female shooters around their chest and into their narrow shoulder pocket.
 
DaveJH I'm not surprised you are confused. Most who ask for "expert advice" on these forums don't actually mean that. They want opinions and everyone who has been shooting a shotgun for a year or so will offer one. As you can see from the replies, they are often conflicting.
 
I don't think DaveJH was confused by the type of help/advice being offered here but why a thick comb might reduce the effective cast on a gun.

Happy to hear your opinion (and those of others) on that point if you think I have got it wrong or described it badly or there is a good source of reference to explain the point better.

What we don't need to do is go back to the 'I've been doing this a long time therefore . . " debate. The (majority) of advice to the OP was to meet with someone well qualified to check the OP's stance and mount before making any changes to the gun - particularly I would add irreversible ones. I think that shows the contributors are aware of the theirs & the forums limitations . . .
 
Freddy. My reply certainly wasn't intended as a pop at you. But we both know that on here, common sense isn't exactly common any more and for some, experience doesn't count for much these days.
 
I disagree - Most, if not all, of contributors here - both on this thread and the forum generally - have both common sense and experience.

Different opinions - Yes - and that allows for constructive discussions and a reputation built and not relied on.
 
Freddy. I too welcome "constructive discussions" but most of the time that doesn't happen on this or many of the other forums. The "I have never tried this but I know it doesn't work" mentality always exists for some. That's why, (as others have already stated), true professionals are reluctant to participate.

So, why do I? I like to think it is because I have a genuine interest in giving advice to help shooters, not increasing the size of my wallet. And a lot of the time the advice is free. But of course, that will also be frowned on by some I would think? The World is a troubled place. Full of liars, cheats, skam artists and the like. What happened to the old values that we all once knew?

And Freddy, if you like to read, I have a suggestion for you. Forget about "Internet hostilities" for a minute. I also wrote a book called "A Pheasant for the Dinner, Two Pigeons for a Pie" and you can buy the Kindle version from Amazon UK for 2.87 GBP. It is an interesting read, so they tell me. Buy the book, it will give you a better insight into why I genuinely like to help shooters if I can. If you don't enjoy the book, I will be more than happy to mail you a cheque for DOUBLE what you paid for it. Good luck with your future endevours.
 
Last edited:
I also wrote a book called "A Pheasant for the Dinner, Two Pigeons for a Pie" and you can buy the Kindle version from Amazon UK for 2.87 GBP.

Really? I think others may have pointed this out already, but given the above and many other posts, we could be mistaking your genuine interest as wanting to sell books. If so, try the For Sale / Wanted section, as your comments here don't strike me as serving the interests of the OP. I know I am doing the same thing by reacting to you, but it is getting bothersome.
 
No Luke, I don't just come on here to sell books, I also come on here to offer advice. My suggestion to the OP was a Graco 575S which I think would have worked for him? And I give others advice via e mail, exactly as I did with you, remember?

I think you will find that if you take the time to look at a plan of a skeet field, #3 and #4 are parallel to the flight line of the low house target, #4 and #5 are parallel to the flight line of the high house target. If the angle relative to your shooting position is the same and the distance to the target is the same, I would suggest the lead will be the same? You don't agree and that's why you are missing. My advice was correct. Thank you.
 
IMHO , Stiggers has done the right thing , he’s contacted an established shooting coach , who has been a champion in his own right . That was the consensus of the posters on this thread . He’ll get more from a couple of hours face to face than a year’s advice on the internet from people who’ve never seen him , his build , his stance and who don’t know his current style or ability and are unable to look at the gun he’s using .
 
MartynB I agree 100%. There is a limit to what Internet experts can achieve. But from the description of the problem, (in my professional opinion), the Graco is a good option and that's why I suggested it.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top