For a standard rest which is best, the 2 inch or 3 inch Stabilfeet?Back when dohrman first came up with the superfeet concept he told me that he went thru a bunch of different rubber. Not just any rubber will work. Too hard and it slides, too soft and it causes vertical. Too thick is bad too. The only one out there that works right is the dohrman design sold by steve at benchrite. If the bench is polished smooth a drop of water under each foot will make them feel permanent.
My club does not allow hammers. The benchresters are using pointed feet with no permanent damage. If anything I see cosmetic scratch marks from moving around a rest, but they go away over time.This thread has been up here for a while and I wonder why it is and who here cares. I know many clubs have past rules that mandate the use of feet to protect their concrete bench tops from who? Do the steel peg, properly used, destroy the tops? I have seen pock marked concrete tops but then I have seen guys hammer their pegs into the concrete. Why not just ban the use of hammers?
Years back, with the help of many volunteers, I ran the building of forms that were used to build a total of seventy monolithic reinforced concrete benches on two ranges, and was personally involved in organizing and doing much of the work involved in pouring 42 of those benches at what was then my home club. Over the years too have read several threads on this subject. Invariably there is some fellow that thinks that resurfacing benches is no big deal, and my response has always been, how many benches have you built for public use, with your own hands? To this I will add, how many have you resurfaced? I have months of my life in the construction of a world class firing line and benches and do not apologize to anyone for speaking out against all who take a casual view of damaging them. To end on a positive note, with sharp points, even my old Hart rest will stay in place on concrete, but that is on a bench that has not been steel troweled to a polished finish or had hardener applied as part of its construction. The problem is that people plop their rests down with the points extended and then drag it into alignment, dulling the points. Most do not have hardened points, and they rapidly become dull. The discs solve the problem of bench damage. I also agree that the only people that I have seen using a hammer have been benchrest shooters. Build a range and set of benches with your own hands and then come back and tell me how you feel about people who intentionally damage it.This thread has been up here for a while and I wonder why it is and who here cares. I know many clubs have past rules that mandate the use of feet to protect their concrete bench tops from who? Do the steel peg, properly used, destroy the tops? I have seen pock marked concrete tops but then I have seen guys hammer their pegs into the concrete. Why not just ban the use of hammers? These pock marks are generally at clubs that host many bench rest matches. I’ll single out the Kelbly range, who had acne of the bench until they hosted the World Championships there. For that they mixed a concrete slurry and floated it on the benches. Presto-change-o. I don’t know if that was any different than cutting the grass, grooming the berms, or grading the road. It’s just another task associated with range management.
I use an Hayes Front Rest that weighs 38 pounds. I stripped the jackets off three 30 caliber armor piercing rounds and after drilling the pegs of the rest, I heated and press fit the armor piercing cores for points for my pegs. I use this rest on my concrete top at home and I don’t have to pound or tap the pegs to set them and I haven’t damaged the bench top one bit. So why the interest in super feet if you don’t need them? I will say that improper technique will move your rest around and if you use the super feet you may need the rubber bottoms. I don’t know, is this really an issue or am I being trivial?