Why go titanium comp but hybrid barrel?

[B_RAD]

Why not do steel comp and bull barrel and save some $$$$$. Yeah, I know hybrid barrel setups need a track removed from the slide but I'd bet the same amount of weight could be removed elsewhere. 

 

Seems confusing why we don't want weight out at the furthest point?  I guess balance?  Just sick and hopped up on cough syrup. So,...my thinking might be off?

[jnr88]

I think your only looking for the combination of your load, bullet type, springs, grip, etc. that let the gun track repeatedly. Whatever works for you. From shorties to full long dust cover they all work for someone.

[B_RAD]

From what I'm understanding, the purpose of hybrid barrels is to increase non reciprocating weight and  lowering the reciprocating weight at the same time. 

 

Though, if the goal is to get the center of mass more towards the middle of the gun then I guess it makes sense. 

 

 

Edited December 22, 2018 by B_RAD

[Gooldylocks]

 
 
Though, if the goal IS get the center of mass more towards the middle of the gun then I guess it makes sense. 
 
 

FIFY

That is the exact reason. Lower slide weight, more static weight, and centered. My gun is balanced about the front of the trigger guard. A steel magwell would move it back even further.

[B_RAD]

10 minutes ago, Gooldylocks said:

 

 

FIFY

That is the exact reason. Lower slide weight, more static weight, and centered. My gun is balanced about the front of the trigger guard. A steel magwell would move it back even further.

 

Yeah. Starting threads between naps and cold medicine. Not good for English!

Edited December 22, 2018 by B_RAD

[racer-x]

The other advantage of the Schuemann HybriComp barrel is the ports are actually angled nozzles instead of just holes in the barrel.

 

On 5/27/2005 at 12:04 AM, BrianH said:

The first Schuemann Hybrid was a cast rib with integral front sight that you welded or silversoldered onto the top of the barrel; you then cut the slot in the slide and installed a special "tall" bomar. Sights were higher than hell but it worked great.

The reason it worked better (as Wil described it to me back in '91 or so) is the nozzle is supposed to CONSTRICT the gas as it exits the port. that's what pushes the gun down. You can't machine that feature into a barrel without burning each port with an orbiting EDM, so when he started machining the hybrid barrels for Caspian he made them flush with the top of the slide and reversed the taper to make it machinable.

A Nevada gunsmith named Mike Martolin shot one for years and would just stomp everyone in the northwest whenever he showed up, shooting a 5 inch super. I shot his gun at a match once and loved it, but never got up the nerve to build one.

[zzt]

15 hours ago, B_RAD said:

From what I'm understanding, the purpose of hybrid barrels is to increase non reciprocating weight and  lowering the reciprocating weight at the same time.

 

Hybrid barrels increase reciprocating weight.  Lightening the slide reduces it.  I cannot see a justification for a hybrid bull barrel and a comp, unless there are poppels and not large ports in the hybrid section.  The lightest reciprocating setup you can use is a bushing barrel with a Ti coned comp.

[teros135]

Don't hybrid barrels decrease reciprocating weight (the slide), by cutting a slot in the slide for the barrel island?  This is in addition to any slide cuts, of course.

[zzt]

Yes, but the hybrid bump adds it back and then some.  The barrel is part of the reciprocating mass, so you have to consider it.

[B_RAD]

17 minutes ago, zzt said:

Yes, but the hybrid bump adds it back and then some.  The barrel is part of the reciprocating mass, so you have to consider it.

Not sure I agree. I know it moves but very little and it moves in a way that keeps it centered.  The slide slamming back seems more impactful than the barrel unlocking.  

 

Just the way I see it. 

Edited December 22, 2018 by B_RAD

[teros135]

33 minutes ago, zzt said:

Yes, but the hybrid bump adds it back and then some.  The barrel is part of the reciprocating mass, so you have to consider it.

 

B_RAD beat me to it, as I was writing. 

 

I'm not an engineer, but it seems that a 10 oz (or so) slide moving ~1.9" and back in less than .10 second in the horizontal plane would have a tad more energy - and effect on recoil - than the back end of a barrel moving horizontally only a tad and vertically about 1/4 inch at the back end as it de-links and re-links.  The added barrel mass from the hybrid island is in the front, the part that isn't moving so much.  Perhaps someone among us with the requisite skills could provide some data for this. 

 

[zzt]

Shoot a bull barrel/comp back to back with a coned comp and you will immediately feel the difference.  It is night and day.  It is the initial rearward movement of the slide/barrel/comp that we are concerned with here.  Anything that lightens that mass and/or eases passage is generally a good thing.  That's why people flute barrels, lighten slides, use Ti comps or Ti coned comps.  They also use firing pin stops with a huge 'curve' so it hits the hammer way high up.  Once you have that worked out, the only thing you have to do is decide on a recoil spring for your load.  You want one light enough that the slide travels all the way to the rear, dwells there long enough for the next round in the mag to rise enough to be stripped, and then puts everything into battery without (hopefully) dipping the barrel.

[zzt]

teros, everything, the entire upper moves rearward under the initial impulse.  Add mass anywhere in the upper and it slows down rearward movement, increases muzzle rise and changes recoil feel.  Lighten anything and the reverse happens.  By the time the barrel is on the rest you have already determined what is going to happen.  From that point on, the weight of the slide moving rearward may affect your choice of recoil spring, but that's it unless you allow it to slam to the rear.

[TONY BARONE]

Is that why the big builders are using tungsten sleeved barrels to increase muzzle rise?

[teros135]

Yeah, the barrel moves about 1/4" (and of course the slide is moving, too, and the guide rod/spring).  Then the barrel stops moving backwards and links down.  By that point the bullet is already gone.  The slide, all 10 oz of it, keeps moving rapidly another 1.65", stops suddenly by the guide rod flange hitting the frame, and suddenly reverses and slams forward again.  I'm trying to figure out how the barrel and guide rod assembly have the same effect on recoil that the slide does.  Lightening the slide should help that, and of course springing it properly. 

 

We know some folks put tungsten sleeves on the barrel to try and delay the first few microseconds of recoil, and maybe that helps.  Of course, the sleeve makes the gun a bunch heavier and more balanced toward the muzzle, too.  The hybrid island may have a bit of that effect, but probably not as much because it weighs less. 

 

Have to ask, if the titanium comp has such as negative effect on recoil, why do so many top-level builders use them? 

 

To answer the OP's question from my own perspective, I use titanium comps to keep the gun from being too nose-heavy and to move the balance point back toward the trigger guard (a bit).  Some have said the steel comp helps control recoil for pairs at distance (maybe 25 yds or more) but don't have any discernible effect closer in.  For me, I can't really tell.  I do know the hybrid gun with titanium comp, which is pretty heavy anyway, helps recoil control doing pairs.  It's also sprung pretty well and is stroked but has buffs.  I think that, overall, it's what works for you is the best setup, and the really trick setups might be noticed mainly by the really practiced (and perhaps gifted) shooters. 

[teros135]

23 minutes ago, TONY BARONE said:

Is that why the big builders are using tungsten sleeved barrels to increase muzzle rise?

 

To increase muzzle rise?  Why? 

[zzt]

A Ti comp has a positive effect on recoil, not negative.    You don't put a Tungsten sleeve on a barrel to delay slide movement by a scosh.  You do that by reducing the radius on the firing pin stop.  A Tungsten sleeve barrel increases the weight and it is the weight alone that reduces muzzle rise.  

 

If the first 1/4" or so of movement doesn't count for much and it is only the slide influencing recoil, why does the 2 oz difference in a bull barrel/comp vs. bushing barrel/cone comp make such a difference in otherwise identical guns?  Think about it.  After the barrel is resting on the bed, there is no other difference, because the guns are otherwise identical.    Other than making the gun 2 oz heavier, that extra weight only comes into play when the barrel is unlocking.  It stop when the barrel rests.

Edited December 22, 2018 by zzt

[teros135]

36 minutes ago, zzt said:

You don't put a Tungsten sleeve on a barrel to delay slide movement by a scosh. ... A Tungsten sleeve barrel increases the weight and it is the weight alone that reduces muzzle rise.  

 

The Akai and Limcat folks may have a different take on this.  They, and maybe the engineering folks, may want to chime in.  

[Fo0]

I see it mentioned here so I ask

 

by reducing the radius on the firing pin stop to delay the first few microseconds of recoil - how does it affect the dot and flatness compared to recoil

[B_RAD]

2 hours ago, zzt said:

A Ti comp has a positive effect on recoil, not negative.    You don't put a Tungsten sleeve on a barrel to delay slide movement by a scosh.  You do that by reducing the radius on the firing pin stop.  A Tungsten sleeve barrel increases the weight and it is the weight alone that reduces muzzle rise.  

 

If the first 1/4" or so of movement doesn't count for much and it is only the slide influencing recoil, why does the 2 oz difference in a bull barrel/comp vs. bushing barrel/cone comp make such a difference in otherwise identical guns?  Think about it.  After the barrel is resting on the bed, there is no other difference, because the guns are otherwise identical.    Other than making the gun 2 oz heavier, that extra weight only comes into play when the barrel is unlocking.  It stop when the barrel rests.

So are you saying a heavier barrel minimizes or increases muzzle rise?

Edited December 23, 2018 by B_RAD

[teros135]

28 minutes ago, Fo0 said:

I see it mentioned here so I ask

 

by reducing the radius on the firing pin stop to delay the first few microseconds of recoil - how does it affect the dot and flatness compared to recoil

 

I've done it both ways, very small radius (1/64", like the old Bullseye folks) and very large, gradual curve (like many builders these days).  The small radius hits the hammer very low, close to the fulcrum (pin), which makes the slide work harder to get it started moving, then it finally takes off.  It creates a harsher dot movement and more muzzle rise, compared to the softer and gentler hammer movement created by the radiused FPS.  

[zzt]

Any weight you put anywhere on the upper delays slide action by a tiny amount.  That causes the muzzle to start rising a tad sooner than it otherwise would.  That's not why they added weight.  Akai is quite clear on their reasoning.  The oversize, heavy Tungsten sleeve is designed to put weight up front.  Extra mass up front reduces muzzle rise, because the same rotational force has more to move.  So it is slower and moves less.  Yes, you give up a tiny bit of that because of the extra reciprocating weight, but the muzzle does rise less.  They also lighten the slide significantly, so secondary muzzle rise is reduced.  It is where they put the extra weight and where they remove it that counts.

 

Don't confuse Limited and Open guns.  Some of the forces at work are different.  Also, don't confuse muzzle rise with recoil.  Take otherwise identical guns with the same comp configuration.  The gun with the bushing barrel, cone and Ti comp will hit your hand softer, but have more muzzle rise.  The bull barrel with the extra 3 oz of steel hanging off the front will rise less, but hit your hand harder.  I shoot both.  Splits are faster with the bull.  Transitions are faster with the cone.  I like the softer feel, but I like faster splits more.

 

Added later: to clarify, here I'm talking about perceived or felt recoil, not actual.

Edited December 23, 2018 by zzt

[B_RAD]

I keep hearing transitions are faster because of this or that. I'll admit, my experiences are limtied but I can't see how a half inch shorter gun is faster. It may feel faster but it's probably a feeling and not anything actual. Even if the gun is lighter, is it faster?  Or does it feel faster? Is that because it takes more effort to move the heavier gun, but that doesn't mean its slower. I may splitting hairs but just saying each option can be just as fast.  

 

I'll admit, I've switched guns and divisions so much the last two years, that may be why I can't feel much differences between all these different options. I'm having Don build me a full size w/bull barrel, steel grip open gun. Maybe after 20k thru that and I'll be able to tell a difference when I shoot something different?

 

 

Edited December 23, 2018 by B_RAD

[mlmiller1]

Im a limited shooter so this is my viewpoint.

Not only does it take more effort to move heavier gun, it takes more effort to stop the heavier gun.  Plus the further out on the gun the weight is, the more leverage that weight applies to your grip both starting & stopping movement.  However transitions are only half the consideration.... recoil for splits is when you want more weight further away from your grip to reduce muzzle rise.... Oh boy, now what do you do?  You find the compromise that works best for you.  Give up some here to gain some there... There is 1 more thing to think about on weight distribution.  Slide closing.

3 years ago after shooting glocks exclusively for 15 or 16 years I went to an sti edge stock gun.  Definitely an adjustment.  I shot the stock edge for a few months when I bought a 2nd used edge for a backup.  Turns out this gun has a very lightened top end.  I ran 1 mag thru it & my stock edge became my backup. Lol.  Felt better & I shot better w the light slide.  Well couple months ago the light slide suffered a fatal fracture.  Lightened too much.  I went back to the stock edge.  I went from a lot of 2A to A, low C or A, low D.  I thought I was seeing my sights on 2nd shots but I was at least partly just feeling it I guess. Heavy slide slamming shut driving muzzle down as I was breaking 2nd shot.  Ok poor operator skills I know but it showed me lighter slide is a better fit for me.  I am now about to have stock edge  slide  lightened & a new slide lightened & fit on the other gun.  My compromise is a lighter slide.  You have to determine yours.  

[zzt]

m got it right.  BTW, try a lighter recoil spring if it won't hurt the gun.  Alternately, try a progressive recoil spring.  They close the slide more softly.

 

The same applies with Open guns.  The trouble with Open is you are limited to 10 oz slides if you want them to last a while.  Even then you have to be careful where the cuts are.

 

B, where you really see the difference in transitions is Steel Challenge.  The cone gun is measurably faster than the bull gun.  For USPSA I can't say.  I know splits are faster with the bull, because I can measure that in practice.  Whether the faster transitions with cone even out the slower splits for USPSA I can't say.  Too many variables on the course.