The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Revolver Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old July 6, 2015, 01:29 PM   #26
wogpotter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2004
Posts: 4,811
Isn't the correct equation this from Newtons second law:
Second law:
The vector sum of the external forces F on an object is equal to the mass m of that object multiplied by the acceleration vector a of the object: F = ma.
which transposes to:
(Bullet mass X Bullet acceleration)+(propellant gas mass + propellant gas acceleration)= gun mass X gun acceleration.
__________________
Allan Quatermain: “Automatic rifles. Who in God's name has automatic rifles”?

Elderly Hunter: “That's dashed unsporting. Probably Belgium.”
wogpotter is offline  
Old July 6, 2015, 01:43 PM   #27
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 12,453
The felt recoil or kick isn't the same thing as actual recoil. The actual recoil has to do with that Newton guy. Felt recoil has to do with a bunch of factors that can be subjective. No arithmetic involved either.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old July 6, 2015, 03:48 PM   #28
JohnMoses
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 11, 2008
Posts: 197
There are 2 factors in firearm recoil equations - the first is primary recoil. Momentum will cover that (mass x velocity of bullet plus gun weight).
The second phase of recoil -secondary recoil- is related to the powder charge weight. The expansion ratio of smokeless powders is a constant -it doesn't matter what powder, only how much is in the cartridge. This is the 'rocket effect' ... it's like holding onto a bottle rocket. You only have to watch a slow-mo of a gun firing to see this effect. I use the link jmr posted to calculate recoil.
If I managed to upload my graph, these are the recoil and energy calculations for my standard handload of 3.6g reddot and a 160g bullet. I weighed the LCR with 4 loaded rounds, the 686 with 5, and the rossi was empty.

All that said, this is just a number. The ergomatics of the gun probably matter as much as the math.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf gun new.pdf (38.1 KB, 10 views)
JohnMoses is offline  
Old July 6, 2015, 04:34 PM   #29
wogpotter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2004
Posts: 4,811
Quote:
The felt recoil or kick isn't the same thing as actual recoil. The actual recoil has to do with that Newton guy. Felt recoil has to do with a bunch of factors that can be subjective. No arithmetic involved either.
True, but the OP was about different bullet weights/charge levels/velocity from the same gun so any effect caused by differing grips & so on would be negated as they'd always be the same within his framework for the question.
__________________
Allan Quatermain: “Automatic rifles. Who in God's name has automatic rifles”?

Elderly Hunter: “That's dashed unsporting. Probably Belgium.”
wogpotter is offline  
Old July 6, 2015, 07:03 PM   #30
FITASC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 6, 2014
Posts: 6,432
Quote:
The felt recoil or kick isn't the same thing as actual recoil. The actual recoil has to do with that Newton guy. Felt recoil has to do with a bunch of factors that can be subjective. No arithmetic involved either.
^^^^THIS

Felt, aka "kick" is a factor of gun fit - whether handgun or long gun. Big person vs small one; big meaty hands vs. small thin ones, the way of gripping the gun, etc.
__________________
"I believe that people have a right to decide their own destinies; people own themselves. I also believe that, in a democracy, government exists because (and only so long as) individual citizens give it a 'temporary license to exist'—in exchange for a promise that it will behave itself. In a democracy, you own the government—it doesn't own you."- Frank Zappa
FITASC is offline  
Old July 8, 2015, 02:20 PM   #31
Doc Holliday 1950
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2014
Location: Bout as south as it gets
Posts: 1,238
Okay everyone. I received the 2 boxes of 50 shells ammo by Magtech that I ordered
from Lucky Gunner. The one I was really interested in was the 38 CBC special short 125 grain LRN for my wife to use. Last time she shot was 6 or 7 years ago when she went for her permit to carry and qualified with a Taurus 38 spec Ultra lite Titanium 5 shot . Killed her hands and her interest in shooting and never . She was the only female in her class and she outshot everyone by a huge margin. The range Master was flabbergasted. But, because of the extreme recoil, she never
picked up a gun after that. I made her a deal she couldn't refuse and ordered the shorts for her lCR 357 with CT laser grips. It's the damn grips that's causing
all the problems because the grips do not have by any means the ability to mitigate the harsh recoil. Even I could not get passed this.
Well, SURPRISE SURPRISE SURPRISE. It worked. Happy wife ==== happy marriage.

Doc
Doc Holliday 1950 is offline  
Old July 8, 2015, 03:23 PM   #32
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holliday 1950
...Last time she shot was 6 or 7 years ago when she went for her permit to carry and qualified with a Taurus 38 spec Ultra lite Titanium 5 shot . Killed her hands and her interest in shooting and never ...
One more illustration that a very light gun isn't always the best idea. They are great to carry, but not so great to shoot.

On my trips to Las Vegas I'll usually carry my S&W 442 (snubie with an alloy frame). I shoot it regularly and qualified with it the last time I renewed my Nevada CHL, but it is just plain nasty to shoot.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old July 8, 2015, 10:17 PM   #33
Doc Holliday 1950
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2014
Location: Bout as south as it gets
Posts: 1,238
Well. I'm so used to carrying a 4" as my go to gun, that as long as I'm not swimming or on the beach, I'm ok. I toyed with the idea of getting the 3" 357
but I just really like how the 4.2" Ruger shoots. The weight doesn't bother me, It's just that I have to be very careful how i position it when I carry it inside the waist holster. I think my next purchase will be an all steel 2" and the heck with today's modern tech on steel/poly.
Doc Holliday 1950 is offline  
Old July 9, 2015, 08:39 AM   #34
Mike_Fontenot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 7, 2009
Posts: 568
The proportions of my 3" 60-15Pro .357 J-Frame and my 4-1/4" 69 .44mag L-Frame are very nearly the same ... if you see a picture of either one by itself, without anything to provide a scale, they are heard to tell apart. The 69 is much larger and heavier, of course, but the proportions are very similar.
Mike_Fontenot is offline  
Old July 9, 2015, 09:12 AM   #35
natman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 24, 2008
Posts: 2,604
Quote:
"Does muzzle Velocity and Muzzle Energy relate to felt recoil or kick?......

Also, does the weight of the bullet affect the two forces or is it strictly MV and ME"?
All else being equal the greater the velocity, the greater the recoil.

All else being equal the greater the bullet weight, the greater the recoil.

Recoil is a function of bullet weight (more = more recoil), bullet velocity (more = more recoil), the jet effect of the propellent gasses (more = more recoil) and finally rifle weight (more = less recoil).

Felt recoil is measure of how comfortable a rifle is to shoot and is a function of stock fit and padding. Take two rifles with the same weight and ammo. Recoil will be the same, but felt recoil on a rifle with a crooked stock and a thin steel buttplate will be much more than on a rifle with a straight stock and a nice thick pad.
natman is offline  
Old July 9, 2015, 09:52 AM   #36
stagpanther
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 11,654
I profess that I am not a physics guy--though I get the gist of what has been said so far. I think there might be something else going on with many handguns that hasn't been mentioned yet--and that is the "ergonomics" of how the recoil is "delivered" to the hand.

For example--I have a pet theory that depending on where you grip the gun and where the centerline of the bore is relative to where your hand is--the fulcrum point of the recoils' force may be magnified such that it is harder to keep the gun steady--thus leading to the impression of a heightened recoil force. I've also found that "reachy" triggers can aggravate this. I could be wrong too. ; )
__________________
"Everyone speaks gun."--Robert O'Neill
I am NOT an expert--I do not have any formal experience or certification in firearms use or testing; use any information I post at your own risk!
stagpanther is offline  
Old July 9, 2015, 10:59 AM   #37
Mike_Fontenot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 7, 2009
Posts: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by StagPanther
I have a pet theory that depending on where you grip the gun and where the centerline of the bore is relative to where your hand is--the fulcrum point of the recoils' force may be magnified such that it is harder to keep the gun steady--thus leading to the impression of a heightened recoil force.
A lower grip definitely affects the felt recoil, but I personally prefer the nature of the recoil with that low grip ... I don't aspire to fast follow-up shots, so a lot of muzzle-rise is a good thing for me, not a bad thing. When combined with my very relaxed hands, wrists, elbows, and shoulders, very little of the felt recoil makes it back to the rest of my body ... the felt recoil gets soaked up just by the mass (and hence inertia) of my arms, and doesn't jar my brain, eyes, teeth, neck, etc. But people who are trying to resist muzzle-rise, by using a very firm grip, so that they can get quick follow-up shots, probably dislike a high bore axis and a low grip.
Mike_Fontenot is offline  
Old July 9, 2015, 11:50 AM   #38
FITASC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 6, 2014
Posts: 6,432
The grips themselves also play a role, not just on how you grip them, but what they are made from. Pachmayr, Hogue and others have made fortunes from rubber grips as they give under recoil and do not transmit as much directly to the hand as solid wood or metal might.
__________________
"I believe that people have a right to decide their own destinies; people own themselves. I also believe that, in a democracy, government exists because (and only so long as) individual citizens give it a 'temporary license to exist'—in exchange for a promise that it will behave itself. In a democracy, you own the government—it doesn't own you."- Frank Zappa
FITASC is offline  
Old July 9, 2015, 02:34 PM   #39
Mike_Fontenot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 7, 2009
Posts: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by FITASC
[...] rubber grips as they give under recoil and do not transmit as much directly to the hand as solid wood or metal might.
It's not that they transmit less momentum to the hand ... it's that they spread that recoil over a larger surface area (less pressure), and also (probably more important) the recoil is spread over a longer time interval, so that the hand has more time to absorb it ... the recoil is less "sharp".
Mike_Fontenot is offline  
Old July 13, 2015, 09:17 PM   #40
Doc Holliday 1950
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2014
Location: Bout as south as it gets
Posts: 1,238
Just ordered the Hogue Tamer grips for her LCR. It will be here Friday. I expect that this will solve most of the issues that have come up with firing a snub. I'd like to thank everyone's input on this. You have all helped.
Doc
Doc Holliday 1950 is offline  
Old July 14, 2015, 12:50 AM   #41
Radny97
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 8, 2015
Posts: 1,021
I know this is very nonscientific and subjective but in my personal experience felt recoil has been affected by the following factors in descending order of importance:
1. Weight of the gun. A sub-factor of this is length of the barrel. The heavier the gun and the longer the barrel the less felt recoil for me. Of all the factors this has been the most noticeable factor. (And to the OP's question this seems to me to be the biggest reason why light weight snub nose revolvers like the LCR kick so hard; but I love them anyway ).
2. My grip of the gun. This includes both the way I hold the gun (i.e. The placement of my hands and fingers) the tightness with which I grip the gun, and the actual grips installed on the gun and the ergonomics of the gun. The higher to the bore axis I hold the gun, the harder I grip the gun, and the better the fit of the grips and ergonomics of the gun to my hand, the less felt recoil for me.
3. The pressure of the round. A sub-factor of this is muzzle velocity but as noted in the other posts above, a more slowly burning powder can achieve great velocity without a huge spike in pressure and the resulting snappiness. For example, a 38 special +p with a slow burning powder has less felt recoil for me than a 9mm at the same velocity (all other things being equal). I have noticed this pattern across several calibers and loadings.
4. The weight of the bullet. Compared to the other three above I have found this to be the least influential in felt recoil. However, that is not to say it is not a factor. I can definitely feel the difference between a 230 grain 45 acp bullet and a 125 grain 38 special out of a similarly weighted gun with similar pressure, etc.

I know there will be those who disagree with how I have grouped these factors and the order I have placed them in, but this is my subjective perception of how felt recoil works for me.

Last edited by Radny97; July 14, 2015 at 12:56 AM.
Radny97 is offline  
Old July 14, 2015, 01:03 AM   #42
highrolls
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 20, 2009
Location: already given
Posts: 115
tedbeau, your last question is the best thing in this thread. No the recoil would most likely not be the same but you could get them close. Here is the problem with that approach. Not only do different powders have different burn rates, thus different pressure-time curves, they also have different energy losses. For example, the heat energy transfer to the gun metal is just that, a "transfer" and does not contribute to the bullet/charge momentum, and thus, does not contribute to the recoil.

The other problem is "felt recoil" is quite subjective. Lets say you and I agree on a thermometer to use to measure the outside temperture and it is 68 deg f. You say it feels just right, and I say it feels cold and I need a jacket. In spite of that, we can sorta calibrate "felt temperature" and come to an agreement. We will start by jumping in some 33 deg f. water and we will both agree its cold but probably using colorfully different adjectives. We thus ballpark our way to agreement. That is what we have to do to get an idea of a common "felt recoil" measurement.

But where do we start? We cheat and simplify the problem. We really do not need to worry about pressure-time curves of different powders necessarily. When the charge in a cartridge goes off, any energy not used to generate a discharge from the barrel we ignore, well sorta. If we shoot cartridges fast enough, the heat of the gun may become hard to ignore but heat aint recoil. We focus on what we think can become a recoil measurement.

Newton's Third Law of motion. Everything that goes out the barrel has a momentum property that, when totaled, must equal the momentum imparted to the gun. If we keep it simple, no shotgun wads or wadding or cream of wheat in the cartridge, just charge and bullet, we can ballpark it probably as good as our chronometer can ballpark the bullet velocity.

The charge gas drives the bullet out the barrel, and also exits. We can assume all of it exits for calculation purposes even though a small amount of residue remains. The charge momentum is thus the charge weight (even though it becomes a gas) times the charge velocity. For the purpose of these calculations we shall use single base nitrocellulose at a powder charge velocity of 1585 meters per second (5200 feet per second). With the total momentum of all forward moving items calculated, we have the reward; momentum of the gun. If we know the mass of the gun, we can use the classical relationship between momentum and kinetic energy to compute the kinetic energy imparted to the gun.

And this Translational Kinetic Energy we compute is essentially the Free Recoil of the gun. Now the only problem is to determine how to relate this free recoil (remember the temperature measurement above) to "felt recoil". I actually posted some 3-D charts a couple years back somewhere on this forum for typical pistol calibers and pistol weights, but have not done that for rifles yet. I used metrics so the free recoil comes out in Joules.

All that aside, for Doc Holliday, My wife has the same problem. I solved it with 125 grain Penn LSWC bullets over 5.0 grains of Trail Boss in 357 Mag cases and the 357 LCR. I have taken this up safely to 5.3 grains and these approach 38 special + p velocities however the case starts getting filled to the base of the Penn's past that charge weight and do NOT compress this powder. Even when the powder just begins to touch the base of the bullets, very slight compression, I see case splits from the base of the bullet area going up to the top. She loves them and will shoot all I bring, which is a problem cause I like them too.
highrolls is offline  
Old July 15, 2015, 03:58 PM   #43
Frankly
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 6, 2015
Posts: 261
We tend to want everything to be cut and dry, but felt recoil is not that simple. In addition to factors most have readily acknowledged, the design of the gun can make a huge difference. Likewise with the body mass of the shooter, which is rarely taken into account at all.
Frankly is offline  
Old July 15, 2015, 04:11 PM   #44
wogpotter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2004
Posts: 4,811
Quote:
Likewise with the body mass of the shooter, which is rarely taken into account at all.
Very, very true. I was a slim 128~135 Lbs for most of my life, I could fire big boomers all day because they just "pushed me out of the way". My 240Lb friends got way more punishment than that because inertia kept them in one spot.
__________________
Allan Quatermain: “Automatic rifles. Who in God's name has automatic rifles”?

Elderly Hunter: “That's dashed unsporting. Probably Belgium.”
wogpotter is offline  
Old July 15, 2015, 10:01 PM   #45
James K
Member In Memoriam
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,383
When S&W came out with their Scandium .357, an FFL friend told me that the gun shops in his area were full of those guns, like new, each with a box of 47 rounds. The customer fired one shot, fired another to see if it was really that bad, fired a third to prove it, and traded the gun for something else.

Jim
James K is offline  
Old July 16, 2015, 09:41 AM   #46
Mike_Fontenot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 7, 2009
Posts: 568
The scandium/titanium ultralight S&W snubbies ARE very punishing when shooting even mid-level .357's (mid-500's of ft-lbs or so), but they are a DREAM to carry in a front pocket. And after shooting a couple of .357's in them, .38 non-plus-P's feel like .22's. How many bad guys are you going to need to shoot?
Mike_Fontenot is offline  
Old July 18, 2015, 10:29 PM   #47
Doc Holliday 1950
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2014
Location: Bout as south as it gets
Posts: 1,238
I've read everyone's posts to my question about recoil. The smaller the weapon the more difficult it is to shoot a full P+ or 357 mag load. This all is math and more math plus the type of grip's used. So, the problem as I understand it is to
be advised that if you use a full 38 or 357 load, you will have one or two shots
in a stress moment, you'd probably not feel it or whatever. I can live with this hopefully.
Doc
Doc Holliday 1950 is offline  
Old July 18, 2015, 11:51 PM   #48
KyJim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,137
Quote:
be advised that if you use a full 38 or 357 load, you will have one or two shots in a stress moment, you'd probably not feel it or whatever. I can live with this hopefully.
Doc
To further complicate things, though, is muzzle flip. The muzzle of a gun may rise or "flip" more in one type of gun than another even if the bullets are of the same weight, same muzzle velocity, etc. This can affect how fast you can get the barrel back on target.

A particular type of gun may have more muzzle flip than another because one barrel has a higher bore-axis than another and cause the barrel to torque upward in the hand more than in a gun with a lower bore-axis where the "recoil" is directed more in a straight line backward. A ported barrel (essentially holes at the top of the end of the barrel) forces some of the exiting gas upward which helps control muzzle flip. Obviously, a lighter barrel will increase muzzle flip even if the overall weight of two different guns is the same.

A .357 will definitely cause more muzzle flip than a normal .38 spl load from the same gun. Best advice is to start with mild or medium .38 loads and work up to .357 magnum. You may find the extra controlability in lighter loads to be more beneficial than the extra energy from a .357 load. Just something to think about.
KyJim is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.06250 seconds with 9 queries