Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Extreme Long Range Hunting & Shooting (ELR)
375 Cheytac Brake?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="J E Custom" data-source="post: 1066300" data-attributes="member: 2736"><p>You make some good points Roy, and hear is my take on different types of test to measure recoil.</p><p></p><p>While trying to duplicate real world test and recoil numbers this is what we found. </p><p></p><p>First was to rule out perception. (If you ask 10 people to guess how much recoil a rifle produced there were 10 different numbers).</p><p></p><p>We also looked at strain gauges and found that they did not respond fast enough to get reliable results and we did not like to restrain the rifles in fear of damaging them to get good results. </p><p></p><p>Next was the free floating type of test. It would not repeat because of many different elements and also could not be measured. It did however have one good attribute, the rifle was free to move instantly, but with no damping inertia rendered it useless and inconsistent.</p><p></p><p>We also looked at a weight system but it was not real world because the rifle had to overcome the weight of the rifle and the weights that it had to lift before it could move at all skewing the recoil values. </p><p></p><p>When a rifle is fired buy a person, it will move instantly and as the rifle recoils more, more body weight is added as compression of the shooters body is increased. So we decided to try and duplicate these parameters and start with as little preload as possible (Just enough to move the rifle back in battery and stay at or below 1 pound at rest) and increase the load on the rifle as it moved further back.</p><p></p><p>With these things in mind, we looked at real world movement of different shooters and found that measurements were very consistent with the same shooter. But When we changed shooters, this distance (Measured by computer) changed, but was very consistent.</p><p></p><p>We realize that the design we came up with is not perfect, but it did duplicate conditions and is very repeatable And without exception less that 1 ft/lb off from computer models/calculations no mater what the rifle weight and cartridge power is.</p><p></p><p>It is however something mechanical and things can go wrong so each time we start testing we use the same rifle and load every time as a bench mark to assure everything is in proper working order.</p><p></p><p>The machine we test on has no agenda or knowledge of the brand of brake we are testing so the results are real and not perceived. And as a results of impartial testing, many of MY perceptions and</p><p>beliefs were drastically changed.</p><p></p><p>I don't consider my self an expert, But do consider myself qualified to talk Intelligently about muzzle brakes due to the amount of impartial testing we have performed.</p><p></p><p>J E CUSTOM</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="J E Custom, post: 1066300, member: 2736"] You make some good points Roy, and hear is my take on different types of test to measure recoil. While trying to duplicate real world test and recoil numbers this is what we found. First was to rule out perception. (If you ask 10 people to guess how much recoil a rifle produced there were 10 different numbers). We also looked at strain gauges and found that they did not respond fast enough to get reliable results and we did not like to restrain the rifles in fear of damaging them to get good results. Next was the free floating type of test. It would not repeat because of many different elements and also could not be measured. It did however have one good attribute, the rifle was free to move instantly, but with no damping inertia rendered it useless and inconsistent. We also looked at a weight system but it was not real world because the rifle had to overcome the weight of the rifle and the weights that it had to lift before it could move at all skewing the recoil values. When a rifle is fired buy a person, it will move instantly and as the rifle recoils more, more body weight is added as compression of the shooters body is increased. So we decided to try and duplicate these parameters and start with as little preload as possible (Just enough to move the rifle back in battery and stay at or below 1 pound at rest) and increase the load on the rifle as it moved further back. With these things in mind, we looked at real world movement of different shooters and found that measurements were very consistent with the same shooter. But When we changed shooters, this distance (Measured by computer) changed, but was very consistent. We realize that the design we came up with is not perfect, but it did duplicate conditions and is very repeatable And without exception less that 1 ft/lb off from computer models/calculations no mater what the rifle weight and cartridge power is. It is however something mechanical and things can go wrong so each time we start testing we use the same rifle and load every time as a bench mark to assure everything is in proper working order. The machine we test on has no agenda or knowledge of the brand of brake we are testing so the results are real and not perceived. And as a results of impartial testing, many of MY perceptions and beliefs were drastically changed. I don't consider my self an expert, But do consider myself qualified to talk Intelligently about muzzle brakes due to the amount of impartial testing we have performed. J E CUSTOM [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Extreme Long Range Hunting & Shooting (ELR)
375 Cheytac Brake?
Top