recoil v accuracy

[westcliffe01]

If you have already concluded that the rest of us are wrong, then its time to end this conversation. Sorry about being so slow on the uptake...

 

[WildRose]

If you have already concluded that the rest of us are wrong, then its time to end this conversation. Sorry about being so slow on the uptake...

Your choice Cliffe. LW and I will continue having a good conversation. Bob will continue bragging about his credentials and insulting me, and we'll all just move right along.

No one has disputed the results of the math, nor the recoil sled test both of which support my point.

No one has been able to show how a muzzle break can reduce felt recoil by 2/3 if the majority of the forces that cause recoil are not related to what happens at the open end of the barrel. Even the best MB will not approach 100% efficiency so it's reasonable to conclude that even a greater than 2/3 of the forces causing felt recoil happen as a result of the expulsion of the expanding gasses and bullet, not what happened prior.

I'm fine with respectful disagreements, it's the pomposity, arrogance and bullying that won't work, and I cannot be bullied. Not on line, and most certainly not in person.

 

[westcliffe01]

Just consider that many people thought that the earth was flat, since that was how they perceived it. Similar to how others thought the planets revolved around the earth since thats the way it appeared when you looked at the night sky. And many brilliant people who figured out the truth were burnt at the stake by the ignorant or those threatened by the new information.

The phenomena we are talking about happens too fast for a person to accurately evaluate without some special means. Analytical tools have progressed far enough to cover the subject matter in this thread with a great degree of reliability.

It doesn't sound like you have spent time developing a consumer product. Where one starts with an idea, makes a solid model, meshes it in CFD and FEA and runs analysis to see if it behaves the way you expect. Then builds prototypes and tests them in bend tests for fatigue, on shaker stands to check if they can handle vibration etc etc. It doesn't sound like you are in touch with what it takes to develop a product in 18 months which has to meet federally legislated 10 year durability.

You have spent 11 pages in this thread repeating your statements and ignoring contributions by others. When asked what it would take to make you agree with someone else's viewpoint (since everyone, including YOU could be wrong), there is apparently no experiment, dataset or fact that will make you change your mind.

Given that mindset (nothing left to learn from any of us), you have made my ignore list.

Happy trolling...

 

[WildRose]

Just consider that many people thought that the earth was flat, since that was how they perceived it. Similar to how others thought the planets revolved around the earth since thats the way it appeared when you looked at the night sky. And many brilliant people who figured out the truth were burnt at the stake by the ignorant or those threatened by the new information.

The phenomena we are talking about happens too fast for a person to accurately evaluate without some special means. Analytical tools have progressed far enough to cover the subject matter in this thread with a great degree of reliability.

It doesn't sound like you have spent time developing a consumer product. Where one starts with an idea, makes a solid model, meshes it in CFD and FEA and runs analysis to see if it behaves the way you expect. Then builds prototypes and tests them in bend tests for fatigue, on shaker stands to check if they can handle vibration etc etc. It doesn't sound like you are in touch with what it takes to develop a product in 18 months which has to meet federally legislated 10 year durability.

You have spent 11 pages in this thread repeating your statements and ignoring contributions by others. When asked what it would take to make you agree with someone else's viewpoint (since everyone, including YOU could be wrong), there is apparently no experiment, dataset or fact that will make you change your mind.

Given that mindset (nothing left to learn from any of us), you have made my ignore list.

Happy trolling...

Since you cannot refute the math or the test results feel free.

I do produce a product for consumers and the science behind it is at least as complex as what we are discussing here. It's genetics, and I have been enormously successful with it.

 

[bman73]

.

I accept that it begins with ignition. I dont' accept that it is significant to accuracy.

I have proven beyond a shadow that the bulk of measurable and felt recoil is due to muzzle blast, which of course occurs as the round exits along with the burning propellant.

If these arethe points that you are trying to make then I do agree with you on that clarification. There are two phases of recoil, the first being when the round goes off which is not able to be reduced, and the second phase happening when the bullet leaves the muzzle. It is the second phase of recoil that a muzzle brake acts on and definately does reduce the amount of felt recoil. But the laws of physics do state that recoil begins with the round leaving the case neck, it probably does not affect accuracy because there is virtually no way to influence it as it is all contained by solid structure so it as repeatable as anything ever will be. Once you get it dialed in it reacts exactly the same everytime.

 

[WildRose]

.

I accept that it begins with ignition. I dont' accept that it is significant to accuracy.

I have proven beyond a shadow that the bulk of measurable and felt recoil is due to muzzle blast, which of course occurs as the round exits along with the burning propellant.

If these arethe points that you are trying to make then I do agree with you on that clarification. There are two phases of recoil, the first being when the round goes off which is not able to be reduced, and the second phase happening when the bullet leaves the muzzle. It is the second phase of recoil that a muzzle brake acts on and definately does reduce the amount of felt recoil. But the laws of physics do state that recoil begins with the round leaving the case neck, it probably does not affect accuracy because there is virtually no way to influence it as it is all contained by solid structure so it as repeatable as anything ever will be. Once you get it dialed in it reacts exactly the same everytime.

Actually you can dampen the first phase as well with hydraulics like we do on big guns.

Way back before we went all high tech one of the things we used to dampen recoil were mercury filled recoil pads that upon compression shot a stream from the pad into an expansion chamber in the butt. It had a dual dampening effect by shifing mass, as well as just acting as a nice recoil pad.

I think it was referred to as a "mercury buffer."

Some of the big LR tacticals from 408 Cheytac on up also employ hudraulic recoil buffers built into the stock and stocks specifically designed to flex in such a manner as to absorb some of the shock. Some of the Manners and other tacticals for even our LR rifles have that feature built in.

You can't eliminate it but you can manage it to tolerable levels through such means. None of those means however will do as much for reducing overall felt recoil and rearward motion as a good muzzle brake.

 

[bman73]

I had actually just remembered those and was coming to edit my post but you beat me to it. I was actually considering putting one in my 358 Norma many years ago but figured after spending all the money I did to make it lighter to carry why would I spend more to make it heavier again? Went the muzzle brake route instead

 

[lightwind]

bman73: I am almost with you on most of what you had to say with a couple of exceptions.

You stated:

"But the laws of physics do state that recoil begins with the round leaving the case neck, it probably does not affect accuracy because there is virtually no way to influence it as it is all contained by solid structure so it as repeatable as anything ever will be. Once you get it dialed in it reacts exactly the same everytime."

The key is that it is only this internal recoil that can affect the trajectory. If you think about it, once the projectile has left the barrel, it is over. So, what happens is that you have to worry about minimizing the effects of the internal ballistics. The external ballistics (after the projectile has left the barrel) are about minimizing the punishment you take. Why do you think that precision shooters go to all of the trouble they do to make sure that they have minimized the effects of this recoil. If it is something that they have: "no way to influence" then what makes a good shooter?

The initial recoil is not all contained in a solid structure. The recoil can be seen to bend, twist, and yaw the rifle BEFORE the projectile leaves the muzzle. So, you work to modify the movement of the POI with each shot. That is done by controlling the internal ballistic recoil. Not the external ballistic recoil (that is done with a muzzle brake).

The effectiveness of a muzzle brake is dependent on how hot a load is. The ratio of the mass of the propellent to the mass of the projectile as well as how much pressure is left in the barrel when the projectile leaves is what determines how effective the muzzle brake is. The great sled tests that shown by WR show that brakes are effective. Suppressors are even more effective because they reduce the felt recoil as well as the muzzle blast. That reduces flinch. Put a hot round in a light rifle and we all flinch. Mitigate that with a suppressor or a brake and we flinch less. The bottom line is that the reason the muzzle brake can help accuracy is that it gives us the chance to flinch less (which is part of the time before the projectile leaves the barrel). However, the brake does nothing for the trajectory of the bullet because it has already left the barrel when the hot gasses are redirected.

As you pointed out. There are two phases. Please point out how the second phase of recoil can affect the trajectory if the bullet is gone?

Also, please point out how the first phase (which I see WR now says does exist but is not important) is not controllable. WR: can you please explain how the only part of the recoil that can affect the bullet is not important?

WR - I agree that a muzzle brake (as well as a suppressor) can mitigate recoil -but only after the projectile is gone. Can you please explain how that helps accuracy?

Again, I go back to the good shooters who work tirelessly to control the motion of the rifle before the bullet leaves the barrel (which I am sure includes WR). Why would they do that if it were not important?

 

[WildRose]

I had actually just remembered those and was coming to edit my post but you beat me to it. I was actually considering putting one in my 358 Norma many years ago but figured after spending all the money I did to make it lighter to carry why would I spend more to make it heavier again? Went the muzzle brake route instead

Sorry for breaking the post up like that. Had to fix my lovely wife some dinner right fast.

If that monster is still beating on you and you have the budget for it, look at some of those tactical stocks.

Bell and Carlson makes a great one.

2098-___ Remington 700 BDL -- LONG ACTION

That is specifically designed to flex to take some of the sting out.

I had some concerns about the design maybe tending to increase muzzle flip through it's flex, but with a good MB that doesn't seem to be a problem at all.

 

[WildRose]

bman73: I am almost with you on most of what you had to say with a couple of exceptions.

You stated:

"But the laws of physics do state that recoil begins with the round leaving the case neck, it probably does not affect accuracy because there is virtually no way to influence it as it is all contained by solid structure so it as repeatable as anything ever will be. Once you get it dialed in it reacts exactly the same everytime."

The key is that it is only this internal recoil that can affect the trajectory. If you think about it, once the projectile has left the barrel, it is over. So, what happens is that you have to worry about minimizing the effects of the internal ballistics. The external ballistics (after the projectile has left the barrel) are about minimizing the punishment you take. Why do you think that precision shooters go to all of the trouble they do to make sure that they have minimized the effects of this recoil. If it is something that they have: "no way to influence" then what makes a good shooter?

The initial recoil is not all contained in a solid structure. The recoil can be seen to bend, twist, and yaw the rifle BEFORE the projectile leaves the muzzle. So, you work to modify the movement of the POI with each shot. That is done by controlling the internal ballistic recoil. Not the external ballistic recoil (that is done with a muzzle brake).

The effectiveness of a muzzle brake is dependent on how hot a load is. The ratio of the mass of the propellent to the mass of the projectile as well as how much pressure is left in the barrel when the projectile leaves is what determines how effective the muzzle brake is. The great sled tests that shown by WR show that brakes are effective. Suppressors are even more effective because they reduce the felt recoil as well as the muzzle blast. That reduces flinch. Put a hot round in a light rifle and we all flinch. Mitigate that with a suppressor or a brake and we flinch less. The bottom line is that the reason the muzzle brake can help accuracy is that it gives us the chance to flinch less (which is part of the time before the projectile leaves the barrel). However, the brake does nothing for the trajectory of the bullet because it has already left the barrel when the hot gasses are redirected.

As you pointed out. There are two phases. Please point out how the second phase of recoil can affect the trajectory if the bullet is gone?

Also, please point out how the first phase (which I see WR now says does exist but is not important) is not controllable. WR: can you please explain how the only part of the recoil that can affect the bullet is not important?

Not unumportant, but mathematically negligible in the calibers we are working with for the most part. Now when you are talking about the big 300 plus grain bulletts exceeding 3000fps where your recoil force exceeds 80lbs it's goign to be more noticible, but again, for the length of time between ignition, and exit of the barrel the majority of that force is going to in a straight rearward direction, moving you directly away from the target, but not creating a problem with pitch or yaw.

You engineers are thinking in microns, we're thinking in mils, MOA, and inches. What is negligible in this context would destroy for example a jet at mach three or rocket at mach 5 or cause catastrophic failure of a nuclear weapon.

WR - I agree that a muzzle brake (as well as a suppressor) can mitigate recoil -but only after the projectile is gone. Can you please explain how that helps accuracy?

The sound suppressors act by reducing total air/blast pressure at the downrange end similar to the muffler on your car. It's a large volume of air space (compared to the barrel) with buffers to deflect the sound, break it up, and absorb it, and lots of CC's for the gasses to expand. It took decades to develop good sound suppressors that didn't have a serious impact on velocity and acuracy because of vortex forces within.

Again, I go back to the good shooters who work tirelessly to control the motion of the rifle before the bullet leaves the barrel (which I am sure includes WR). Why would they do that if it were not important?

Think in terms of an accumulation of tolerances and my car wreck example.

If you are creating pitch or yaw with your movements just at the time of ignition your errors are going to be magnified exponentially as the force of the shot begins shoving the rifle back.

Think of being hit from the rear as you begin to make a right hand turn while going over a speed bump with your front wheels. Both the Yaw and pitch will be greatly magnified vs not being hit. In this case your car is the rifle and your hood ornament is the end of the barrel.

Am I making better sense yet?

 

[bman73]

bman73: I am almost with you on most of what you had to say with a couple of exceptions.

You stated:

"But the laws of physics do state that recoil begins with the round leaving the case neck, it probably does not affect accuracy because there is virtually no way to influence it as it is all contained by solid structure so it as repeatable as anything ever will be. Once you get it dialed in it reacts exactly the same everytime."

The key is that it is only this internal recoil that can affect the trajectory. If you think about it, once the projectile has left the barrel, it is over. So, what happens is that you have to worry about minimizing the effects of the internal ballistics. The external ballistics (after the projectile has left the barrel) are about minimizing the punishment you take. Why do you think that precision shooters go to all of the trouble they do to make sure that they have minimized the effects of this recoil. If it is something that they have: "no way to influence" then what makes a good shooter?

The initial recoil is not all contained in a solid structure. The recoil can be seen to bend, twist, and yaw the rifle BEFORE the projectile leaves the muzzle. So, you work to modify the movement of the POI with each shot. That is done by controlling the internal ballistic recoil. Not the external ballistic recoil (that is done with a muzzle brake).

The effectiveness of a muzzle brake is dependent on how hot a load is. The ratio of the mass of the propellent to the mass of the projectile as well as how much pressure is left in the barrel when the projectile leaves is what determines how effective the muzzle brake is. The great sled tests that shown by WR show that brakes are effective. Suppressors are even more effective because they reduce the felt recoil as well as the muzzle blast. That reduces flinch. Put a hot round in a light rifle and we all flinch. Mitigate that with a suppressor or a brake and we flinch less. The bottom line is that the reason the muzzle brake can help accuracy is that it gives us the chance to flinch less (which is part of the time before the projectile leaves the barrel). However, the brake does nothing for the trajectory of the bullet because it has already left the barrel when the hot gasses are redirected.

As you pointed out. There are two phases. Please point out how the second phase of recoil can affect the trajectory if the bullet is gone?

Also, please point out how the first phase (which I see WR now says does exist but is not important) is not controllable. WR: can you please explain how the only part of the recoil that can affect the bullet is not important?

WR - I agree that a muzzle brake (as well as a suppressor) can mitigate recoil -but only after the projectile is gone. Can you please explain how that helps accuracy?

Again, I go back to the good shooters who work tirelessly to control the motion of the rifle before the bullet leaves the barrel (which I am sure includes WR). Why would they do that if it were not important?

I apolgize if I wasn't too clear in my points, I kind of jumped in on the convesation a little late and only commented on parts of the conversation and no the whole subject. I just got hung up on the whole recoil starting part and totally left out the main question of the OP regarding accuracy issues. I don't think that the muzzle brake has an actual physical affect on the bullet trajectory besides what it makes the shooter do. I am only speaking from my personel experinces here now with no actual scientific data, but I believe that I shoot better with a brake because of what I do prior to pulling the trigger. No flinching, not tensing up in anticipation of the thumping I know will come etc. Without a brake on my bigger guns I am not looking forwards to what I know is coming, with the brake I am able to relax and focus on what I need to do to put the round where I want it. As far as the not being able to reduce the primary recoil phase I had forgotten about mercury dampers and other hydralic dampers that can be put in the recoil pads and stocks. It has been a more than a few years since I have seen one of those and I was actually coming back to edit my post to reflect that but I was beaten to it by both you and WR.

 

[bman73]

Sorry for breaking the post up like that. Had to fix my lovely wife some dinner right fast.

If that monster is still beating on you and you have the budget for it, look at some of those tactical stocks.

Bell and Carlson makes a great one.

2098-___ Remington 700 BDL -- LONG ACTION

That is specifically designed to flex to take some of the sting out.

I had some concerns about the design maybe tending to increase muzzle flip through it's flex, but with a good MB that doesn't seem to be a problem at all.

Thanks for the tip on the stock and I will keep it in mind but I have actually just received one of Kirby's Painkillers and am sending the gun out to get rethreaded to fit it. The threads I have left from the useless hunk of garbage that I took off, because of poor design and manufacturing, didn't match up. From what I saw on youtube of his brake being tested I think it'll be okay now. Been shooting it for 3 years without a brake so if that painkiller does even half of what it's supposed to It'll be fun to shoot regularly again.

 

[WildRose]

Thanks for the tip on the stock and I will keep it in mind but I have actually just received on of Kirby's Painkillers and am sending the gun out to get rethreaded to fit it on there. The threads I have left from the useless hunk of garbage that I took off because of poor design and manufacturing didn't match up. From what I saw on youtube of his brake being tested I think it'll be okay now. Been shooting it for 3 years without a brake so if that painkiller does even half of what it's supposed to It'll be fun to shoot lots again.

Make sure you send it to the right place. Just like a bad crown an improperly mounted brake can have devastating effect on accuracy due to buffeting.

 

[bman73]

Make sure you send it to the right place. Just like a bad crown an improperly mounted brake can have devastating effect on accuracy due to buffeting.

It definately ain't going to where it had the other one put on thats for sure Unfortunatly because of my location I am kind of limited as to where I can take it. I am going to ask the gun dealer that I have ordered my 110ba from as to who he would send it to if it were his. Got a feeling I'm going to be shipping it out. Any suggestions for the central interior of B.C. welcome. (sorry to the OP about the hijacking)