Bear1142 Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Anybody use a Harrts Mercury guide rod in their P226 (9mm)? I'm interested in your impressions. I'm considering trying one in my 226 Production gun. Erik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranger Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 I have one in my 226 and my P16-40. I like them. I am not sure if the mercury really helps or if it is just the additional weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcoliver Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Not a sig but on a glock. Didn't seem to have any enhancing effect aside from that secure feeling of a metal guide rod head not chipping anytime soon. YMMV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spd522 Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 I have 2 of them. One I have in my P226 9mm and have also used it in my P220 45. I notice a slightly softened recoil snap. It is a bit more noticable in the 45 than the 9mm. I also use one in my P18-9mm Para Ordnance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Gimmick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Years ago I got sent two of these things, one for a SIG P220/P226, the other for a 1911. I was kind of turned off on the concept, as soon as I opened the shipping box and noted the droplets of silver mercury inside the plastic sleeve where the 1911 rod had sprung a leak before it was ever even put into a gun. Tried the other one in a P226. Honestly the only effect I noticed was not reduced recoil but a really strange, I'd almost call it a secondary recoil impulse through the gun when firing. I didn't like it, and greatly prefer my guide rods be simply steel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 The Harrts recoil rods were all the rage 10 years ago. Then they disappeared from the face of the earth only to reappear again recently to drain a new generation of hapless shooters of their hard-earned dollars. The theory is that you're reducing recoil by dragging mercury across ball bearings that remain stationary in space while the gun recoils around them - thus dissipating some of the energy in viscous friction. The only way in hell it could work is if the ball bearings were made of material 5 times denser than uranium. The steel ball bearings accelerate right back with the gun, thank you very much. In the end, the Harrts is an overpriced, underperforming frame weight. And yes, I have used on in a Glock (hell no I didn't buy one) with absolutely no difference in muzzle flip. Theory and reality remain miles apart on this one. They didn't work then and they won't work any better now. Save your money for a Ron Popeil Pocket Fisherman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimel Posted October 29, 2004 Share Posted October 29, 2004 Tried one several years ago. Took a perfectly functioning pistol and turned it into a jam-a-matic unless I held it muzzle high for a minute before firing. Screw that. I had a pocket fisherman I used to carry in my service van when I was working in the McCall/Cascade area in central Idaho. I would spend my lunch hours (and more) fishing with it. Worked better than the mecury guide rod ever did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
et45 Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 I had a friend who had a Pocket Fisherman,would not sell it to me because his mother bought it for him.He left it in the trunk of a car that he sold.I ragged on him for months afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackdragon Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Ditto, Had one about 10 yrs ago in a sig 220. Nothing, Nada I thought it was a waste of my $, Yep EricW I fell for that crap! Ivan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul B Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 I use a Mercury guide rod in my P16-40 and it does help dampen muzzle flip. It's not because of any pseudoscience like the claims for the Harts, it's because it is much heavier than steel. My rod is made of steel and is hollow and filled with Mercury - no ball bearings etc. Because Mercury is much heavier than steel or even tungsten it is a good way to give a little more muzzle weight in the muzzle light Para. If you can find a hollow rod and get your gunsmith to fill it with Mercury it will be at least a half ounce heavier than the same steel rod. It works for me but your results may vary because it's a balance between barrel weight and rod weight. I don't think there is any real advantage to having the Mercury sluice around inside the rod. Mine is just filled up and capped with a set screw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bear1142 Posted November 5, 2004 Author Share Posted November 5, 2004 I use one in my limited gun (I'm one of the few) and it works for me, but I'm not so sure about the Sig. The diameter of the guide rod is much smaller and shorter. I have some doubts about its ability, but I guess I'll have to spring for it and give it a try. Anybody know where you can get solid guide rods for a Sig 226? Either steel or Tungstun? Erik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detlef Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 rubbish: Mercury is liquid, and although it has a higher atomic number than Tungsten is 25% less dense ("lighter"). You want weight? Dispose of your Mercury guide rod and get a Tungsten! --Detlef Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Erik, Give Dave O. a shout. I'd imagine he tried virtually everything during the years he was shooting Sigs.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 In my G35, for me, the "difference" was more of a function of spring weight than of any differences between the stock rod and the Hartt's (hey, it came with the gun). I've come full circle on the weight thing with Glocks: stock rod if you're cheap, steel if you want the security of a rod that won't bend, snap, chip, whatever. Titanium? Gimmicky in the other direction, IMO. As far as magwells, I'll take plastic. That is not, however, necessarily how I like my 2011s setup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Marques Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 I had one in a G17 and a 15# spring. Didn't cause me any jams, did reduce the recoil a bit, versus a plastic guide rod-could be the weight difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Ditto, Had one about 10 yrs ago in a sig 220. Nothing, Nada I thought it was a waste of my $, Yep EricW I fell for that crap! Ivan Don't feel bad, I almost did too. Fortunately, a guy that lived nearby was an early adopter and I got to shoot his gun before my hard-earned dinero swirled down the bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Topic drift mode: on. One "new" innovation that seems to reduce recoil is the 2-spring recoil system that Glock uses on their smallest guns (i.e. Glock 26/27); I was surprised as to how little these guns seem to recoil. Appears to me the be a sort of Glock factory "recoil master" - though I believe the Glock 26/27 preceded the recoil master by a few years. Could such a system be developed for Sigs & full-sized Glocks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted November 8, 2004 Share Posted November 8, 2004 Topic drift mode: on. One "new" innovation that seems to reduce recoil is the 2-spring recoil system that Glock uses on their smallest guns (i.e. Glock 26/27); I was surprised as to how little these guns seem to recoil. Appears to me the be a sort of Glock factory "recoil master" - though I believe the Glock 26/27 preceded the recoil master by a few years. Could such a system be developed for Sigs & full-sized Glocks? It already is: http://www.sprinco.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 One "new" innovation that seems to reduce recoil is the 2-spring recoil system that Glock uses on their smallest guns (i.e. Glock 26/27); I was surprised as to how little these guns seem to recoil. This system was actually developed years ago by Larry Seecamp. It wasn't intended to reduce recoil, but rather to allow auto pistols with really short barrels - and correspondingly short recoil springs - to work by de facto stuffing more recoil spring in the same amount of space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kline Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 I tried shooting one in my 226 and 226ST and havent felt any difference in recoil at all. I will be sending it back and sticking with the standard rod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now