TargetTalk

It seems to me that the vertical distance from the sight aperture to the top for the cheek piece is a fixed constant relative to each shooter and position. Therefore if the sights are elevated with riser blocks, the cheek piece moves up the same distance (I could be wrong of course). For Offhand I would think that this change would require a change in the depth of the palm rest or a change in the supporting hand position. If this is the case, is the need for sight risers driven more by a need for better stability in the supporting hand provided by moving the rifle downwards with the improvement in head position a secondary benefit? Or in other words, is your head crammed down on the sights because the supporting hand can't lift the rifle high enough for the head to be in a relaxed position?

Primarily this:

your head crammed down on the sights because the supporting hand can't lift the rifle high enough for the head to be in a relaxed position?

Pat McCoy wrote:Primarily this:

your head crammed down on the sights because the supporting hand can't lift the rifle high enough for the head to be in a relaxed position?

But wasn't a higher rifle more popular in the past? Pullum & Hannekrat neither show nor describe risers, and rifles are higher. In 10m AR stock depth is limited, but not for 50m Smallbore, so there must be an element of choice.

But wasn't a higher rifle more popular in the past?

How far is the "past"? When I began shooting 3P, it was with a Winchester 52. No adjustable anything. You had to make your position conform to the rifle. By the time I was out of school (1968), we were seeing more Anschutz 1413s (with adjustable buttplates). Later the adjustable cheekpieces became available, and eventually someone (probably tall and/or with a long neck) realized they could make the rifle conform better to their preferred position by adding sight risers.

A repeatable position is much easier to attain when it is comfortable. Thus the equipment race (somewhat limited by rule for air rifles).

Pay,

Fair point, but why not raise the whole rifle? Unless cheekpiece are too high, then does it matter how the sightline reaches the right height? If it's equipment race, manufacturers could make taller palm rests, and possibly more profitably than sight raisers.

you dont want to raise the whole rifle because this is raising the centre of gravity, and will increase sway. The idea behind risers is to keep your head more upright, which lends better balance.