• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Adding weight to a rifle

I actually cut some grooves in a piece of aluminum round stock to try that. Every time I pulled the weight out, the 'o' rings wanted to stay in the tube. -Al
Yes, I've done o-rings and found them to be more trouble than they are worth. Dang thing can be hard to get in and out if the seal is tight enough. Might be that is what was rolling the o-ring off of the rod. The tubing I use is usually just a few thou or so over the od of the copper tungsten rod. So, a piece of electrical tape only wrapped about 3/4 of a full turn around the rod leaves a little space for air to escape and keeps it snug in the tube at the same time. Like I said previously, this can be easy or hard...your choice. But yes, o-rings can work too.
 
I actually cut some grooves in a piece of aluminum round stock to try that. Every time I pulled the weight out, the 'o' rings wanted to stay in the tube. -Al
Might need a little oil and a closer fit between weight and tube. A nominal 1/8 o-ring needs a groove .120-.125 deep from the ID of the tube. So, with .010 clearance all around, the groove would be .110 to .115. deep and .125 wide. I guess electrical tape is easier! WH
 
Might need a little oil and a closer fit between weight and tube. A nominal 1/8 o-ring needs a groove .120-.125 deep from the ID of the tube. So, with .010 clearance all around, the groove would be .110 to .115. deep and .125 wide. I guess electrical tape is easier! WH
It's adjustable if ya stretch it tighter, it gets thinner. Lol! It does make things easy is all.
 
I like a tube for several reasons. But this one was done w/o a tube. A piece of 1.00" round mild steel is drilled and tapped 1/4-20. It's then bedded solidly to the area behind the pistol grip. A weight with a 1/4-20 stud can be screwed into it and some compressive material added to the back to contact the butt plate to keep everything under a bit of tension.
ncUxYhhl.jpg


It's like a carnival...ya' pays 'yer money and ya' gets 'yer choice.
:cool:
 
I added weight to the back of my laminate br stock by installing a mercury recoil reducer that I had laying around. It was a 3.5” Benelli recoil reducer. I just wrapped a couple of pieces of blue painters tape to a tight fit and it’s worked perfectly fine for years now. The stock just needed a 1” or 3/4” I forget hole on the stock. I believe I used a hole saw for the hole. This might not be good idea with a synthetic stock I couldn’t tell what type of material your stock is.
Good luck with your project.
Jason
 

From what I've read, where ratio of copper to tungsten favors copper it is easier to machine, but generally it machines like gray cast iron.
 
Last edited:
70/30 machines very well with standard tooling. 80/20 isn’t horrible but I wouldn't go any less.
I’ve used 93/7 and it wears out a few bits before you’re done. I tried drilling and tapping a nice piece of pure tungsten I got once and gave up on that quickly! I ended up putting it in a copper tube and pouring lead in around it with a S/S plug for the screw. Worked great but more effort then is required.:rolleyes:
I agree with Al, 80/20 is a good compromise if you can find it.
YMMV,
G
 
Adding a weight into the butt of the rifle stock, as many indicated works and just the other day on the Daily Bulletin section, one shooter showed how he uses the ankle weights to balance and add weight to his bench rifle. Check it out.
 
I added weight to the butt end of my Bravo stock. I used a 5 oz. fishing weight that I heated up until I could hammer it to shape. Finally got it and it was a tight fit. I also used silicone to hold everything together. A couple of days ago I thought I heard a slight rattle after I fired a round. When I got home I took off the butt plate and sure enough, the weight was loose. Rifle is a .243. I plan on using some epoxy today on it. We'll see how that goes.
 

From what I've read, where ratio of copper to tungsten favors copper it is easier to machine, but generally it machines like gray cast iron.
The copper alloy helps a lot. I found and bought a piece of tungsten and used it ONCE. Not tungsten carbide, but tungsten rod. It was tough as hell but I did manage to get a hole in t and tapped. It cut in a bandsaw, actually pretty well but other machining ops were tough and yes, it was a lot like cast iron, as it appeared a sintered material, fwiw. But as Al said, the 70/30 machines pretty good and is actually easier to find anyway than that tungsten rod was. I prefer the 70/30 over the 80/20/ The 80/20 gets pretty hard to work with. I think technically, it's Tungsten copper, where the big number is the tungsten..fwiw. And even the alloy cuts a bit like a really tough brass, somewhat like cast too, just no nearly as difficult to work with, ime.

There may be some tricks to working with it that will help. My experience machining it is limited to these weight systems, so certainly not extensive at all.
 
Working in the Radiology field, I had access to used tungsten copper material that older XRay tubes used as anodes. As newer tubes were developed that used rotating tungsten copper discs as the anode, the older tubes were phased out and often either tossed out or sold for scrap. -Al
 
The copper alloy helps a lot. I found and bought a piece of tungsten and used it ONCE. Not tungsten carbide, but tungsten rod. It was tough as hell but I did manage to get a hole in t and tapped. It cut in a bandsaw, actually pretty well but other machining ops were tough and yes, it was a lot like cast iron, as it appeared a sintered material, fwiw. But as Al said, the 70/30 machines pretty good and is actually easier to find anyway than that tungsten rod was. I prefer the 70/30 over the 80/20/ The 80/20 gets pretty hard to work with. I think technically, it's Tungsten copper, where the big number is the tungsten..fwiw. And even the alloy cuts a bit like a really tough brass, somewhat like cast too, just no nearly as difficult to work with, ime.

There may be some tricks to working with it that will help. My experience machining it is limited to these weight systems, so certainly not extensive at all.
You only have to play with the 100% stuff once, and that's enough for most of us.
Yes it is a sintered material, I am not quite sure how they introduce the copper into the alloy.
The .825 round bars of W93/CU7 (claimed) I got a few years back was purchased from a
scrap metal dealer in Tel Aviv.
The amusing thing was he landed it in to me for about about 1/3 the cost I could get it here in the states.
Go figure.
G
 
Last edited:
You only have to play with the 100% stuff once, and that's enough for most of us.
Yes it is a sintered material, I am not quite sure how they introduce the copper into the alloy.
The .825 round bars of W93/CU7 (claimed) I got a few years back was purchased from a
scrap metal dealer in Tel Aviv.
The amusing thing was he landed it in to me for about about 1/3 the cost I could get it here in the states.
Go figure.
G
It is on the expensive side but it just works se well as a weight in a small space. Sounds like you know it better than me but being roughly 1.5 times as heavy as lead, it's about as dense as there is without raising flags from the feds. Imagine explaining you're just using this piece of uranium rod for a weight in a gun stock to homeland security. Lol!
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
165,855
Messages
2,204,356
Members
79,157
Latest member
Bud1029
Back
Top