View Single Post
Old January 8, 2013, 07:03 AM   #22
Doc Hoy
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Posts: 5,105

My thesis omits moments of torque because of two things:

1. They would be difficult to quantify accept to say that their total wants to send the recoil upward as well as backward. I say that because when I fire a pistol the barrel wants to rise a bit.

In the way of amplification, the barrel does not rise appreciably until the ball has left the barrel. The means that the force imparting acceleration to the muzzle of the barrel in the upward direction has not developed the moments of torgue until after essentially all of the acceleration has been imparted to the ball.

2. In the end moments matter little more than the acceleration of recoil because my point is not which direction the forces are directed but the members upon which they act. In a Remington there are two members and in the Colt there is one.

Further, Even if we consider only the moments, the stress imparted to the frame of the Remington would act mostly as a pulling force on the upper member of the frame. And depending upon the pivot point of the revolver when it is held in the shooter's hand and fired, the force on the lower part of the frame could be either push or more likely a bending force. Because of the shape of the grip in a revolver and the fact that our holding the revolver imparts a force which wants to hold it in a constant orientation, I think the pivot point would be below the center of the cylinder but I am not certain of that. I am relatively certain though, that the pivot point of a revolver fired in free space is different from the pivot point of a revolver that is fired while somoeone is holding onto it and trying to point a target.

In a Colt, all of the force is felt as either a pulling force on the arbor or a bending force on the arbor.

As was said, this force is evident on the recoil shield of the Remington or the recoil ring of the Colt. Absent the effect of the bullet in the barrel this force tries to accelerate the revolver rearward and upward at the muzzle. The explosion in the cylinder drives it back against the recoil shield and this act pulls on every part of the revolver which is connected to the recoil shield. So in a Remington that is two frame members, plus the barrel, plus the loading lever. In a Colt it is the arbor, plus the barrel, plus the loading lever.

What is the weight of a Colt barrel and loading lever in comparison with the weight of the Remington barrel and loading lever? (That is a rhetorical question.)

My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government. Thomas Jefferson

Last edited by Doc Hoy; January 8, 2013 at 09:36 AM.
Doc Hoy is offline  
Page generated in 0.03476 seconds with 7 queries