<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sunday GunDay: The Modern F-Open Rifle</title>
	<atom:link href="https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/12/the-modern-f-open-rifle-action-stock-optics-and-cartridge/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/12/the-modern-f-open-rifle-action-stock-optics-and-cartridge/</link>
	<description>from AccurateShooter.com</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2026 16:26:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.26</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Joe</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/12/the-modern-f-open-rifle-action-stock-optics-and-cartridge/comment-page-1/#comment-56349</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Joe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2019 16:42:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=62044#comment-56349</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As far as reducing torque that compresses one side of a sand bag and tilts the rifle is concerned, I would suggest that we have it backwards in conventional thinking.  

Envision two guys holding opposite ends of a spark plug socket.   One twists and the other opposes the twist.  Now envision that guy opposing the twist has the benefit of using an 18 inch long socket wrench, and instead of holding one end of the socket, he holds the wrench handle.  The guy twisting the socket will now hove one heck of a hard time working against the guy holding the handle.  

In this analogy, the man resisting the twist is the rifle rest and the guy twisting the socket is the rifle action torquing under fire.  

Just like making the forend wider reduces sand bag deformation, so would moving the action up in a stock, away from the bag, instead of being on level with it.  Such a design increases bulk and weight, but to my thinking necessarily reduces, not increases, torque, and therefore deformation of the sand bag resulting in annoying tilt.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As far as reducing torque that compresses one side of a sand bag and tilts the rifle is concerned, I would suggest that we have it backwards in conventional thinking.  </p>
<p>Envision two guys holding opposite ends of a spark plug socket.   One twists and the other opposes the twist.  Now envision that guy opposing the twist has the benefit of using an 18 inch long socket wrench, and instead of holding one end of the socket, he holds the wrench handle.  The guy twisting the socket will now hove one heck of a hard time working against the guy holding the handle.  </p>
<p>In this analogy, the man resisting the twist is the rifle rest and the guy twisting the socket is the rifle action torquing under fire.  </p>
<p>Just like making the forend wider reduces sand bag deformation, so would moving the action up in a stock, away from the bag, instead of being on level with it.  Such a design increases bulk and weight, but to my thinking necessarily reduces, not increases, torque, and therefore deformation of the sand bag resulting in annoying tilt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: christian bouguereau</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2019/12/the-modern-f-open-rifle-action-stock-optics-and-cartridge/comment-page-1/#comment-56341</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[christian bouguereau]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2019 11:49:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=62044#comment-56341</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I would have kept the 35° angle but increased the body length and reduced the neck length to almost half and used the 7mm WSM die to size the neck. A .350 Rem Mag sizer would have sized the body.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would have kept the 35° angle but increased the body length and reduced the neck length to almost half and used the 7mm WSM die to size the neck. A .350 Rem Mag sizer would have sized the body.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
