Wesquire

Also, a 16" barrel has 4 times the volume of a 4" barrel. This means the gas will already be dispersed over 4 times the area, meaning 4 times less pressure before even factoring in mechanical differences.

The difference in the effect on the comp is almost completely negligible. It is a completely different beast than open guns (like 3-4 times less pressure at the muzzle than in a pistol). I'm pretty sure Max even suggests to tune your load without the comp on the gun. The comp just lets you relax a tad more.

The lighter bullet, the better. 124gr was a significant improvement over 147ge. 105gr was a significant improvement over 124gr. It isn't about gas working the comp, it is about a quicker impulse.

Get the Mcarbo metal trigger, polish everything really well, and get the wolff reduced power sear spring and return spring. This gets it as nice as it will probably get until/if volq improves their trigger

Yes, obviously it would be muzzle velocity divided by the time. Nobody has denied that peak force happens then. The point is that the total force is not limited to just the peak force.

No. That is what you are doing. I'm saying that it should just be f=ma and you use the muzzle velocity, not an arbitrary point inside the barrel where acceleration peaks.

And I segmented it in response to previous posts segmenting it. Yes, the force will be different between short and long barrels. That's been my point. Seems like we are in agreement.

If you are wanting to segment into the first half and second half like some posters are doing, then the force in the second half is lower because you start from the velocity at the end of the first half, not from zero. However, I don't see any reason to segment it like this. I have said momentum is the relevant metric from the beginning. I'm not who brought force up. I've only been discussing force because someone made the claim that the force is equal between long and short barrels because peak acceleration happens early.

My bad, I was trying to notate acceleration as fps per second. Not to square the velocity. I'm not saying that the force in the second half of the barrel is higher than the first half. I'm saying that only looking at the first half because it is highest in that interval is wrong. The bullet still accelerates (albeit at a slower rate) in the second half, ergo additional force to what happened previously. Furthermore, my point is that force is not the relevant measurement here. I think you'd agree with that. Momentum is what dictates recoil.

Bottom line, F = m*a. The bullet still has mass and is still accelerating for the entire length of the barrel. Ergo, the total force increases for the full duration the bullet is in the barrel. This should not be controversial.

This is the point I've been making. Other people are trying to break it down further from just the muzzle velocity and look at just the segment within the barrel in which the bullet accelerates fastest.

Force is not instantaneous. Say the 100gr bullet gets to 1000 fps in the first half of the barrel and it takes 1 second. The F would be equal to 100gr x 1000fps^2. However, in the second half of the barrel it accelerates further to 1200 fps and it takes .5 seconds (simplifying). That's an additional F equal to 100gr x 400fps^2. You don't just look at what the maximum interval of force was. The powder is still burning for the full duration the bullet is in the barrel. IDK why you would think the force would be instantaneous.

No. I'm just not ignoring the additional force that happens after the first half of the barrel. The rate of acceleration slows, but the total force still goes up.

We are talking about if everything else was kept equal. You will get more recoil out of the same ammo in a longer barrel than a short one.

I'm curious what effect I should expect when experimenting with different recoil spring lengths/weights in my Ruger PCC. Also, how analogous would this be to AR buffer springs?