Trapshooters Forum banner

21 - 40 of 79 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,213 Posts
Except that ONE GUY.

Of course, Neil Winston DID. He did it with a Remington 870 barrel that he had. The result? Not a damn bit of difference. But, but, but, that's only one gun! True. But it provides ACTUAL EVIDENCE. Which nobody else provides
What did Neil test for on his 870 barrel? Did he send the barrel to a testing lab to find exact recoil before and after the test? Did Neil have the equipment to do this testing himself?

I ask because while I doubt that anyone can feel the difference in shooting 25 shots with a overbored barrels. I have to wonder if a shooter can feel the difference at the end of the day? or the next morning after a long shooting day. The reason I ask, is that there have been a small number of shooters who swear that they can shoot more and feel less at the end of the day. Of course like you said. After spending all that cash to have the work done. It would be easy to mentally talk yourself into believing the work helped! Even if there were no difference. So i"m curious in Neils complete testing of the 870 barrel, if the actual recoil was tested by a machine that breaks the recoil down to a measurable number??? Thanks break em all jeff
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,066 Posts
If you're really interested in less recoil spend the money from the barrel work and put it towards a prosoft or stock lock. I guarantee you'll get your moneys worth with one of them instead of barrel work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,790 Posts
A thread with almost 500 posts, discussing cones, bores, fast vs. slower powder, and felt recoil. Neil briefly discusses his short and long cone studies with a Perazzi and a 870 here

It might be wise to scroll on past the posts by the no-longer-on-the-forum mxsst/Phil
 
  • Like
Reactions: hbar314

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,427 Posts
That's what I guessed. To bad he did not find a way to measure the recoil, before and after? If any? sigh. break em all Jeff
He told me that he tried and tried to directly measure recoil and it was much harder than he ever thought.

He did create a test with a bunch of subjects to try to test the "fast powder versus slow powder" recoil claim.

Nobody did better than guessing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jk80 and Kazer

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,213 Posts
Tim, does your testing machine from Neil have a way to test recoil? If so I have a 28 inch mod. choked 870 barrel, and a 30 inch full choke 870 barrel, if you know where that old over-bored 870 barrel is that Neil used is today? We could test the recoil of the two barrels, on the same receiver and stock!!! My barrels are the older light contour barrels everyone liked. If that's a test you may like to do? I'm game, if you are!!! The results could be interesting to say the least? Mmm break em all Jeff
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,213 Posts
Oh Well!!! So much for that idea. I posted my thread before your last reply came up on the screen. Thanks for the info. break em all jeff
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,427 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: Kazer and JPM

·
Registered
Joined
·
363 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,522 Posts
I have spent all the money and have had all the magic barrel voodoo done to my gun. None of it did anything perceivable to me. Maybe someone out there can tell a difference, but I am not one of them.
EDIT: Scores did not go up with barrel voodoo, they went up when I spent time practicing, had a stock made so the gun fits me better, when I went to Pilla glasses and could see targets better and when I used Phil Kiner's clinic and eye videos to help me out with my cross firing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
If you back bore, over bore, have your barrel ported and screw in one of those slotted chokes when you pull the trigger the gun will pull forward.
I developed reverse thrusters like jet engines have for the end of the barrel. This project is in the final testing phase. They should be available after the election unless the left stops the testing.Think and vote wisely!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
92 Posts
"Another technique for reducing recoil is the lengthening of the forcing cones in the barrels of your gun. Much of the felt recoil from a shotgun is due to friction and pressure created in the five inches forward of the chambers. It is in this area of each barrel, called the forcing cone, where the wad and shot are forced to transition from the wider diameter of the chamber to the narrower diameter of the barrel. Forcing cones that have a steeper transition will produce greater recoil. Barrels with a more gradual transition will produce less felt recoil."
Don Currie is NSCA’s Chief Instructor, an Orvis Wingshooting School instructor, and Master Class competitor.

Does this sound right?
The entire forcing cone recoil debate can very easily and forever be put to rest with simple testing and elementary low-tech equipment. But, of course, if someone requires sophisticated high-tech equipment it also exists.
It perplexes me why this decades old debate continues unanswered, unless manufactures and gunsmiths want to continually amass the monies of gullible gun owners. EXAMPLE of testing; look at a YouTube video demonstrating recoil measurements: www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bbIxLhALws
There are several similar YouTube videos posted addressing recoil. It’s time to put hearsay to bed once and for all with a bit of simple testing.
If someone would ask nicely, I’m suspecting that perhaps timb99 might donate his time to preform the tests. Any one up to contributing a few $$$ to purchase the simple equipment for him?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,404 Posts
If recoil is recoil, why does a muzzle brake work on a pistol or rifle?

And not that many people would know it (probably the "shotguns have lower pressure so porting doesn't work" crowd), but a muzzle brake on a shotgun would also be quite effective as well. At one time I had a "Super Comp", which was a compensator that replaced a Cutts which was made by Mike Greenblatt (PerazziBigBore on here). It had ports all the way around, angled backward at 45 degrees. I screwed my Cutts off, screwed his Super Comp on, and ran 100 straight at skeet with it the first (and only) time I shot it. It was likely the strangest sensation I've ever felt, the gun quite literally had no recoil, but you would get a huge blast of air in your face every time you pulled the trigger. Effective though a bit distracting. Similar concept to the original Rhino chokes.

There is more to FELT recoil than meets the eye.

Why is the felt recoil of a semi-auto shotgun very nearly universally lower than a fixed breech gun of the same weight? Newtons laws say that the recoil HAS to be identical, yet I defy anyone to tell me that the recoil on a semi doesn't FEEL like it's significantly less. Same with a PFS, Soft Touch, Gracoil, ect.

The name of the game in "recoil reduction" is to try and spread the recoil out over the longest possible amount of time. I believe lengthened forcing cones contribute to that. In fact the Baker Big Bore barrels that were .780-.800 ID (.800 bore having ZERO forcing cone) basically proved that with plastic wads you don't even really need a forcing cone at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
978 Posts
If a long forcing cone or an overbored barrel affects recoil wouldn’t the same principle apply with a full choke verses a cylinder choke
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,404 Posts
If a long forcing cone or an overbored barrel affects recoil wouldn’t the same principle apply with a full choke verses a cylinder choke
Theoretically, yes. In at least as much as choke constriction has an effect on velocity, and by extension recoil.

That brings up an interesting tangential thought, to what affect, if any, does the forcing cone length/angle affect the velocity, and if there is a resultant change in velocity, that could be the explanation of reduced ACTUAL recoil.
 
21 - 40 of 79 Posts
Top