March
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Who's Online Now
4 members (Ian Forrester, SKB, Mills, 12boreman), 376 guests, and 4 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums10
Topics38,374
Posts544,009
Members14,391
Most Online1,131
Jan 21st, 2024
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 13 of 15 1 2 11 12 13 14 15
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,033
Likes: 45
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,033
Likes: 45
Our members seem to have access to vast libraries of literature concerning the shooting sports. Has anyone researched the origin of the term 'felt recoil'?

Do we know when this first appeared and whom to credit (blame)?

That person was the culprit.


"The price of good shotgunnery is constant practice" - Fred Kimble
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 869
Likes: 2
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 869
Likes: 2
This thread has reminded me of Abbott's 'Flatland'.

To be fair, most everyone here appears to have some math/physics coursework. Neurophysiology? Uh, no. So it's not surprising folks are apt to view shotgun recoil as though shotguns were rail-mounted artillery pieces - forgetting that people fire shotguns. What we really care about isn't a calculation of energy, force, moment, power, eieio. We care about what we feel. And every single recoil impulse we feel throughout our lives is conducted to, and processed by, our brains.

Nor am I surprised by some pretty silly ideas (preconceptions, really) about what humans can or cannot discriminate. If I can't consciously detect different rates of payload acceleration......in 5 shots or less......well, that proves that noone can. Not even over a lifetime, right?

But then......there's something called a flinch. A flinch is of interest because it is caused by the cumulative, non-conscious effects of recoil over time.

Gosh, it's as if the brain is able to perceive something that.......

Nah, can't be.

Sam

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,468
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,468
I didn't have the gumption to read 13 pages of opinion, but here is a bit of info from an aero engineer specializing in propulsion. Yes, burnt powder and gas IS an ejecta. You figure the powder weight and use 50% more velocity than the bullet/shot velocity up to a maximum of 4000 Ft/sec. Why? Because some fine soul measured it empirically and back calculated how to do it analytically. It was long before Sherman Bell, so it wasn't him. Lots of things enter into related calculations. For example, an increase in temperatures will increase pressure but decrease burn time so that the total impulse will remain the same.

Now felt recoil is a great opinion subject. There was the guy in Texas who fired his Weatherby rifle from a tree blind. The Italian maker of the stock forgot to put a pin through the wrist and the poorly grained wood in the wrist broke in two and the front part of the gun came back and cold cocked the shooter in the eye and nose. Hmmm, what was the FELT recoil? Next to nothing. There was less recoil on the rifle butt, and the rendering unconscious for 5 hours sort of dissipated the felt recoil, at least for 5 hours.

Now a great topic would be the design modifications to gunstocks to lessen felt recoil. Let's see, some variables would be area of butt, type of recoil pad, LOP, cast, drop, pitch, whatever you call the changing of the angle of butt relative to longitudinal axis, straightness of stock, weight, counter weights,.. who can add another dozen or so things?

Another interesting subject might be listing the things that effect felt recoil like...type and amount of adult beverage consumed the night before, amount of time spent teaching your son how to throw a fast ball and curve the day before, amount of aspirin consumed following the aforementioned sports, etc. How about a couple hundred suggestions on this topic?

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,372
Likes: 103
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,372
Likes: 103
Originally Posted By: Jim Legg
Watch their lips: if they move, they're lying. More powder-same payload and velocity = more recoil, both true and perceived.


Miller, apparently--in spite of going WAY over your bandwidth allotment in your last post--you neglected to read the nice, concise one just above it. Which I have included here. Jim's post seems to put him into agreement with Thomas as well, because there's always less of the faster powder . . . or rather, always less of Red Dot than either GD or AS. Which were the 3 powders we were discussing, until you decided to launch another diversionary smokescreen.

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Larry; I can't really answer for Jim, but I have been reading his posts here long enough I can "POSITIVELY" tell you HE Don't Agree with Thomas. You obviously haven't read his other posts. NoBody Larry Agrees with that Ludicrous statement "NOBODY" but You. Not Wonko, read his post, Not FNB25, red his, Definitely not Alliant, I quoted them. NoBody Larry, believes a gun can accelerate so fast you won't feel it as much; ""NOBODY"" But You.


Miller/TN
I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,812
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,812
No-o-o--body but no-o-o--body? You sound like the car dealer in Indianapolis who sponsored the late nite movie, Pipes. I'm not particularly "allergic" to Garwood's speculation of an insult to the shoulder that sneaks under the neural threshold. I don't know that it's more than speculation but I don't break out in hives when I read it.

jack

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,372
Likes: 103
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,372
Likes: 103
Miller, for everything you read, you certainly do a great job of misquoting me. Where did I say that I BELIEVE that? I posted a THOMAS quote as HIS theory, not mine. But Jim's quote above is crystal clear: faster burning powder is going to recoil less if there's less of it . . . and, in the case of RD vs GD or AS, there's always less RD. And I don't believe Alliant made any statement as to WHY one feels more or less recoil with this or that powder. All they said is that their slower-burning powders recoil less . . . which contradicts the formula, if you go strictly by how much RD you use, vs GD or AS. And which contradicts what Jim posted. So you can hang with Alliant if you want, but in doing so, you seem to be contradicting . . . yourself.

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,033
Likes: 45
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,033
Likes: 45
Alliant uses the term 'felt recoil'. They don't state their slower powders produce less recoil... less 'felt recoil'. It's advertising license, where lying is allowed. Like poker and politics.


"The price of good shotgunnery is constant practice" - Fred Kimble
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,983
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,983
That's why they use the term. There are lots of very real and logical reasons for "felt recoil" being less than true or free recoil. Recoil pads, built-in shock absorbers, the cycling of a gas auto vs. a fixed breech gun, etc. However, many times the term is wrongly used to justify the unjustifiable nonsense put out by the seller of the latest snake-oil idea.


> Jim Legg <

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,372
Likes: 103
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,372
Likes: 103
Yup. Felt recoil is indeed subjective . . . but at the same time, it means more to the guy on the receiving end than what the "book" tells him. In addition to the points Jim made, factors like hearing protection also play a role: it sounds louder, you think it kicks more.

Page 13 of 15 1 2 11 12 13 14 15

Link Copied to Clipboard

doublegunshop.com home | Welcome | Sponsors & Advertisers | DoubleGun Rack | Doublegun Book Rack

Order or request info | Other Useful Information

Updated every minute of everyday!


Copyright (c) 1993 - 2024 doublegunshop.com. All rights reserved. doublegunshop.com - Bloomfield, NY 14469. USA These materials are provided by doublegunshop.com as a service to its customers and may be used for informational purposes only. doublegunshop.com assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in these materials. THESE MATERIALS ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANT-ABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. doublegunshop.com further does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information, text, graphics, links or other items contained within these materials. doublegunshop.com shall not be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages, including without limitation, lost revenues or lost profits, which may result from the use of these materials. doublegunshop.com may make changes to these materials, or to the products described therein, at any time without notice. doublegunshop.com makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. This is a public un-moderated forum participate at your own risk.

Note: The posting of Copyrighted material on this forum is prohibited without prior written consent of the Copyright holder. For specifics on Copyright Law and restrictions refer to: http://www.copyright.gov/laws/ - doublegunshop.com will not monitor nor will they be held liable for copyright violations presented on the BBS which is an open and un-moderated public forum.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.0.33-0+deb9u11+hw1 Page Time: 0.061s Queries: 35 (0.039s) Memory: 0.8649 MB (Peak: 1.8988 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-03-28 19:38:42 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS