Grand Power Xcaliber Vs Tanfo Stock 2

[busdriver02]

It's fixed to slide when in battery and the chamber is pressurized.

[metalnwood]

Actually the lighter slide should cause less deformation. We're well onto the material science part, and I flushed that stuff years ago.

The powder burning and bullet leaving the barrel happens before the barrel unlocks. So the slide is moving at full speed with barrel still attached. The barrel's momentum does get transfered to the frame, just in a way that doesn't contribute to a tendency for muzzle rise. It acts more through the center of mass of the pistol, unlike the slide.

Most guns with heavy slides are just plain heavy guns.

Less deformation would mean more impact force. The barrel has no relevant momentum. It is just free falling like 2 mm. Other than that, there's a completely negligible amount of friction on the lugs when unlocking.

What is the point? I am getting lost here. You are talking about the force over a very small amount of time. Like I said about the car, peak forces measured in an instant cannot often be felt even if they can be measured with instrumentation.

If we are talking about what people perceive not machines then what is it you are trying to get across?

[Wesquire]

It's fixed to slide when in battery and the chamber is pressurized.

How is it fixed? It is no more fixed than the frame is. Only the friction is relevant. The barrel unlocks with very small amounts of force, entirely negligible.

[busdriver02]

So why have locking lugs then?

Regardless, it's part of the recoiling mass as the bullet leaves the muzzle.

Edited November 17, 2015 by busdriver02

[Wesquire]

Actually the lighter slide should cause less deformation. We're well onto the material science part, and I flushed that stuff years ago.

The powder burning and bullet leaving the barrel happens before the barrel unlocks. So the slide is moving at full speed with barrel still attached. The barrel's momentum does get transfered to the frame, just in a way that doesn't contribute to a tendency for muzzle rise. It acts more through the center of mass of the pistol, unlike the slide.

Most guns with heavy slides are just plain heavy guns.

Less deformation would mean more impact force. The barrel has no relevant momentum. It is just free falling like 2 mm. Other than that, there's a completely negligible amount of friction on the lugs when unlocking.

What is the point? I am getting lost here. You are talking about the force over a very small amount of time. Like I said about the car, peak forces measured in an instant cannot often be felt even if they can be measured with instrumentation.

If we are talking about what people perceive not machines then what is it you are trying to get across?

You can feel the difference in the same way you can feel the difference between shocks that are too stiff and ones that are appropriate.

[busdriver02]

If you don't think barrel movement to the rear plays a part of the puzzle, check out a 1911 with an improperly fit barrel. If the frame doesn't stop it, the link or slide stop will break.

Edited November 17, 2015 by busdriver02

[Wesquire]

So why have locking lugs then?

Regardless, it's part of the recoiling mass as the bullet leaves the muzzle.

Why do you think that the barrel weight is relevant? Pull your slide back. The effect the lugs have on recoil is only a tiny fraction of the force it took to pull the slide back. It is irrelevant.

[metalnwood]

What is the point? I am getting lost here. You are talking about the force over a very small amount of time. Like I said about the car, peak forces measured in an instant cannot often be felt even if they can be measured with instrumentation.

If we are talking about what people perceive not machines then what is it you are trying to get across?

You can feel the difference in the same way you can feel the difference between shocks that are too stiff and ones that are appropriate.

In terms of pistol shooting, you would certainly have a lot more experience than me and even I understand and with limited experience that these things feel different.

I can only say things feel different as a whole though, a different pistol with somewhat different ergonomics, size, weight etc.

I have never had the opportunity to take a single pistol with same size, ergonomics and just change the weight of the slide to see if the feel is significantly different.

[busdriver02]

The barrel's mass is anywhere from 20 to 30% of the slide's mass. That's significant.

[busdriver02]

Ok, I made it to my hotel room and have my laptop back! Check this link out: http://yarchive.net/gun/pistol/1911_dynamics.html

He does a very good job of running though the basic momentum calculations as well as recoil spring calculations and other nerdery. It's old stuff, but good. In case you're wondering who this cat is, lbl.gov (his email address) is Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory.

[johnbu]

My point is making the slide faster/lighter doesn't make the gun snappier. Making the slide slower/heavier doesn't make it softer. At least not directly as a function of slide speed.

Changing total mass of the gun and moving the center of mass does. It just so happens to be heavily influenced by the slide, since it's the heaviest part.

I'd like to know your thought process about that. A fast slide and a slow slide are going to transfer their momentums at different speeds. The light slide is snappier. The cycle speed is faster. Same momentum transferred faster = more snappy. It is that simple. The momentum isn't all transferred the instant the slide hits the rear. It is transferring momentum until the recoil spring overcomes the momentum and pulls the slide forward. The heavier slow slide will be at the rear longer, making the impulse spread over more time i.e. Softer.

Here's a video of me shooting my stock 3. I was experimenting with different grip pressures. However, there really wasn't a huge change in flip from shot to shot. That's because it is a heavy ass gun. Shooting my glock or a grand power... the flip is much much more when my grip isn't on point.

https://youtu.be/7X_chtLsU3Q

Since when is a stock 3 dao?

[Wesquire]

My point is making the slide faster/lighter doesn't make the gun snappier. Making the slide slower/heavier doesn't make it softer. At least not directly as a function of slide speed.

Changing total mass of the gun and moving the center of mass does. It just so happens to be heavily influenced by the slide, since it's the heaviest part.

I'd like to know your thought process about that. A fast slide and a slow slide are going to transfer their momentums at different speeds. The light slide is snappier. The cycle speed is faster. Same momentum transferred faster = more snappy. It is that simple. The momentum isn't all transferred the instant the slide hits the rear. It is transferring momentum until the recoil spring overcomes the momentum and pulls the slide forward. The heavier slow slide will be at the rear longer, making the impulse spread over more time i.e. Softer.

Here's a video of me shooting my stock 3. I was experimenting with different grip pressures. However, there really wasn't a huge change in flip from shot to shot. That's because it is a heavy ass gun. Shooting my glock or a grand power... the flip is much much more when my grip isn't on point.

https://youtu.be/7X_chtLsU3Q

Since when is a stock 3 dao?

Was still waiting on my one piece sear at that point. This was also with the factory recoil spring. Sa/da is perfect now, and there's even less flip.

[rbebeau]

Uh.... my vote of confidence goes to the physics degree.

My few classes in physics, statics, dynamics make me agree much more with him.

It gets better. He also has a degree in applied mathematics.

I didn't think I needed to mention the second degree

[johnbu]

Uh.... my vote of confidence goes to the physics degree.

My few classes in physics, statics, dynamics make me agree much more with him.

It gets better. He also has a degree in applied mathematics.

I didn't think I needed to mention the second degree

So.... it went without saying, so you didn't say it?

[robport]

This whole thing could be solved with a few 3 axis accelerometers, some recording/processing gear and a fixture to support the guns.

From a business standpoint though, it would be risky. You would have to really have confidence that yours is better to fund such tests.

The boundary conditions, the non-linear nature and application of the forces involved (like gas expansion into atmosphere or drag from the hammer spring), fit-up of the components, even the lubrication, make this a problem that is probably better left off paper and put into the laboratory.

IMO, you need to make too many assumptions on potentially relevant issues to simplify it enough to make recoil perception into a simple classical dynamics problem.

[busdriver02]

IMO, you need to make too many assumptions on potentially relevant issues to simplify it enough to make recoil perception into a simple classical dynamics problem.

The real kicker was when it dawned on me that I needed to consider work per unit time for the hammer spring, while converting between linear and polar coordinate formats. That's when I stopped with the actual math.

[Steve Moneypenny]

Math makes my head hurt!

[3gunDQ]

Tanfo is the way I would go.

[Wesquire]

Yall are still overcomplicating this. Weight and bore axis are all you really need. Sure, other variables have an effect...but a much lower effect. The tanfoglio is sufficiently heavier so that the other variables can't overcome it.

[Steve Moneypenny]

I don't feel that it really makes a difference, I've shot both guns, tuned both guns, I like a lighter faster moving gun. I don't see any more recoil out of the X-Cal than i did my tangfo's. I say evaluate each and make a decision based on how you want to shoot.