I’ve recently purchased a set of stand-alone rifle plates (BAE Eclipse) and a basic plate carrier (TYR Tactical). This is my first go at running plates and I immediately noticed the difficulty in shouldering the weapon and getting my normal cheek weld. I have been training for so long without using plates that this seems somewhat unmanageable. Are there any tips on how to make the transition to running plates and not feel like you’re starting over? I have adjusted the stock position (obviously) but that alone is not making a huge difference. Just curious how you guys approach this.
When you say you adjusted the stock position, does this mean that you’re placing the buttstock on the Plate Carrier and not in the pocket of your shoulder? A correctly sized and designed PC should allow you to get the buttstock into the pocket of your shoulder with your normal length of pull. For people stuck with larger, more cumbersome options like the IBA, there may be no choice but to collapse the buttstock a bit. But since you can do what you want, get something that allows proper placement of the stock.
In the attached picture, the rectangle is empty. It illustrates how a properly fitting carrier should not interfere with shouldering the rifle.
If you have something that fits properly, all I can say is keep at it. For me, shooting without plates feels odd, and I actually shoot better with them. In time, you will get very used to running plates. And in that time, you’ll figure out what works for you as far as adjustment of the PC, loadout on the PC itself, vertical positioning of the plates, etc.
I agree with what a0 is saying to 95% - don’t compromise the utility of the plates by moving them out of the way. If you’re carrying that extra 12lb on you, make sure the plates are in the correct position (see Terminal Ballistics forum thread on plate placement - basically line up the top of the plate just under the notch between your clavicles).
From there, work out how to get the rifle shouldered consistently. The newer Tyr carriers look like they should be fine with the SAPI cut BAE plates - it might just be that you’re used to shouldering the rifle a touch low and that’s causing you to get caught on the second corner of the plate.
For sure man. When I said “adjust vertical positioning of the plates” I didn’t mean to take them off of the vital zones. I’m talking about working inside of that zone to facilitate maximum comfort / ergonomics…assuming there is some buffer room. If the OP’s plates are large enough relative to his body size to be causing a problem, I’d wager that he does have a little bit of wiggle room to move them around. But great point, coverage should not be sacrificed for the sake of comfort when it comes to plate positioning.
Appreciate the responses and I’m tracking; makes sense. I had previously read the thread on proper plate placement and I may have been running mine slightly high (trying to ensure I had good coverage). I made a few adjustments and it helped. Failure2stop’s post sums it up great and I’ll try that.
I added the plates as part of my active shooter kit for LE. I just want to be sure when the need arises, I can shoot as proficiently with them on as I can without.
There is definitely a learning curve. However, the plates will force you to be consistent with how you mount the rifle. Consistancy breeds efficacy and once you make the adjustment I think you will see some improvement in your overall shooting.
I would say you should never feel like you’re starting over. If you’ve got good fundamentals built in it should overcome your uncertanty with the PC. My advice is trigger time. I had to go from the OTV to the larger bulkier MTV down to the SPC and it was very frustrating at times. I have a thick chest and T-Rex arms and adding anything to the area makes it more difficult to get a truly confident position. However, working through things like stance and angle I was able to get pretty comfortable. Take your time don’t get frustrated and keep improving until you find youself improving the finer details instead of overall position.
Another thing you can try is canting your rifle slightly along the shooters cut of your plate. I estimate that its only about a 10-15 degree cant so it won’t disturb your sight picture, yet it will fit in your shoulder pocket much easier. It’s how I have been shooting mine with plates and I like it…YMMV
While I often preach consistency or commonality amongst things, I often do quite the opposite myself. This can be seen in how I manipulate different handguns or pistols as an example. So for this topic, yep once again I do things a bit different that what I may suggest.
When running no armor, or soft armor only, I prefer more of a pec placement of the stock. When running hard armor I am definitely more out on the outer side of the shoulder pocket. I also like to have stocks that have larger padding as in I add the larger stock pad on my CTR type stocks. This is not for any protection from recoil but rather the traction that the padded surface provides when in contact with cordura or similar type fabrics that can be a bit slick, especially if wet…
I chose to go with the narrower swimmer/shooter/operator/whatever cut plates to minimize the change I use - it is pronounced between no-armor and with SAPI plates in, even using an SPC, which drove me nuts. Still a slight shift running operator cut units in the issue cut SPC, but the toe of the stock keeps hitting the exact corner of the soft armor for me, and sliding off, which has actually introduced a consistency problem I never had.
While I often preach consistency or commonality amongst things, I often do quite the opposite myself. This can be seen in how I manipulate different handguns or pistols as an example. So for this topic, yep once again I do things a bit different that what I may suggest.
I am very similar, and in the past felt a bit weird about the differences between some of my instruction and my actual use.
But then again, I place a flash-bang differently than I introduce a frag, I use a different trigger press on precision rifles than I do on stock G19 at 3 yards while wearing gloves, I use the reticle of my optic at 5 meters differently than I do at 500 meters, etcetera and ad nauseum.
I think the consistancy thing can be taken too far.
I use whatever method gets me the best hits the fastest, and I am unabashed about it. Then again, I have a different skill-set than the guy that picked up his first AR 4 days ago, where consistency is a different type of focus.
+1 on FTS. I also dryfire it with the focus: not moving my head, eyes on target, in a good fighting stance to find a consistent (as can be) spot and maybe one click in the stock.
Works great on my Velocity/Mayflower low pro rig.
I agree completely and funny we are talking about this as I get a lot of questions in regards to this consistency and commonality topic especially in regards to what I teach and what I actually do.
I created a separate post to explain my thoughts, but this is still along the lines of what F2S mentions above. While we may agree on points here, I don’t want to put any words into what he may be saying above. Since I get asked quite a bit about this topic in regards to commonality and / or consistency and that I may perform certain skills differently from what I may teach, I thought I would expand on how I feel about it. Now when I am teaching certain things I perform them in the manner that I am teaching, but I am often viewed doing things perhaps a bit differently outside of teaching. Of course I always clarify this with all my students from the onset and explain the reasoning. However much is left unsaid on forums so these are only my own thoughts on the topic.
I believe that consistency or commonality is often over emphasized, there I said it. However I will readily admit that when teaching newer or even intermediate shooters commonality or consistency plays a larger role in how I teach, or in other words the skill levels of the target audience plays a huge determining factor. I do find that in basic or intermediate level courses, consistency and commonality helps the overall progression of the class as a whole and we may provide individual instruction for those who exhibit high skill sets given the material trained and who may be experimenting or looking to come up with variations to increase their own individual performance. So as a shooters skill level increases and as they start to “find themselves” and develop their own “unique style”, commonality and consistency can play a lesser role. I will go as far as saying that commonality and / or consistency may even be holding a shooter back from being good to being great. I will also note that a shooter should be able to perform skills at a high level before they may start to experiment. I also find that as skill levels increase, shooters naturally start to plateau or start to get diminishing returns on their training investment. This is when you start seeing shooters experimenting with various methods or techniques in a search for those incremental improvements that may jump start them. It is at those times that I will encourage or foster this progression and start suggesting “non-standard” ways of looking at things to find solutions. This often upsets traditionalists who remain rigid on what may be considered standard TTP’s, but then again I am often viewed as being a bit “outside of the box” anyway.
Also as F2S mentions skill set plays a huge role. There are those who may want to mimic what I do, or what another shooter may be doing, when in reality they may be skipping steps in the valuable learning progression that I may have followed to arrive at where I or where they are at right now. Mimicking is good when done correctly, however there needs to be a method for the madness so to speak. As an example look at the tons of shooters who mimic a certain shooting style commonly viewed on training videos, but can’t hit what they are shooting at. They look fast and slick on the movements but they have no clue about making lead hit what they are shooting at. Is that “value added” training? Well that depends I guess. Also what works for me, may not work for the guy next to me. If skill levels, time and resources for training permit I very much feel a shooter can benefit greatly from having a varied “game” or a mixed “bag of tricks” so to speak. However a new shooter or even an intermediate shooter, or those who don’t have the time and / or resources on the range, commonality and consistency in base fundamentals is definitely a good thing.
I think my comment about consistancy was misunderstood. I was not be talking about how things are done with and without gear. What I was reffering to placing the stock of the rifle in a repeatable place when you mount it. Consistancy in stock placement make your first shot quicker as your sights will more repeatably find the same point of aim. With plates you have a pretty small margin of error for where the stock goes and does not allow the sloppyness that you can get away with when running slick.
f2s - I agree wholeheartedly that some folks seem to take the consistency thing too far.
OP - Everyone’s body type is different and I haven’t ever had any issues with stock placement and plates. But I do generally place the stock higher on my shoulder. I should clarify that I do lean my shoulders forward to create a solid contact with the stock, otherwise the toe of the stock will be on the shoulder and the top will be in air (not the end of the world but I prefer solid contact). I find mounting my carbine this way comfortable with and without armor. Give it a shot, see if you like it. Otherwise you may need a different PC or smaller plates.
Ptrlcop - People take the consistency thing too seriously regarding stock placement. Remember that you’ll have a different stock placement not only depending on kit, to include gas masks, but also body position. And unless you are surprised, your weapon should be mounted in my opinion at the low ready or sul. This means that at least the toe of the stock is right where it should be so consistency shouldn’t be a big issue.
Bit of a side note: We train for consistency because, on the day, it allows us to be closer to the ideal, closer to perfect. That is all. I see people developing range scars all the time when things don’t go perfect. For example, draw from holster drills where the individual fumbles breaking retention and resets the drill rather than fighting through it. You see the same things with malfunctions, reloads, etc… So if you’re training your 1 hit rifle drill at the range from say the high ready and your stock placement isn’t perfect, fight through it, don’t reset the drill. The POS isn’t gonna give you time to reset.
Edit to add: Ptrlcop, I apologize that for a part of my response directed to you, I had confused you with the OP. I think I have made it right in my edit.
I’ve been following these plate system threads closely because I’m researching for a purchase. While I have no information relative to choosing plates on their attributes, I think that based on the current controversy, I’ve crossed BAE Systems equipment off my list.
