Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Different sized popple holes


sean_stw
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm gonna have a shorty slide built for my 2011 and I was thinking about getting two 3/16" popple holes put in the barrel. Last night though I started to think about having staggered holes like say two 1/8" in the barrel and then maybe a 3/16" near the end of the barrel where the comp and barrel are threaded together. I looked around and I couldn't find anything talking about it. I'm sure it's been done but does anybody have any info or experience with doing that? I'm expecting that there's no real bennifit to doing it since I couldn't find anything about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make the gun shoot flatter and possibly lose less gas initially since the smaller holes are closer to the chamber, and near the end of the barrel it opens up with the bigger hole where it can dump more gas and not lose as much velocity but still give some added bennifit to making the gun shoot flat. Like how the binary comp has the smaller 2 ports near the muzzle and has one larger port at the front. Idk if im right but with a lose in pressure you need more volume to accomplish a similar effect as the lower volume but higher pressure. Maybe the gun shooting flatter isnt exactly what I mean but maybe just more efficient, less powder to get the same effect. One big reason I'm thinking about it is im using a commander length barrel and would like not to have to fill the crap out of the 9mm case but id like the gun to shoot as flat as i can get it. 

2 hours ago, Shmella said:

what are you trying to achieve by doing it this way?

 

Edited by sean_stw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a whole thread on popple holes here that has been active recently, may want to take a read through it.

 

That said, the cliff noted version is there are so many variables in open gun design that almost any combination if practiced with will be about equal to any other combination from a performance stand point (points scored per second), you may however find a combination that YOU like the feel of better and liking it will make you happy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are shooting 9mm major with an efficient comp, two 3/16" poppels is the best IMO.  Binary Engineering did a flow analysis using his comp with and without poppels and determined that anything smaller than two 3/16" poppels was a wast of time.  Personally, I would not put a poppel in the comp threads unless the barrel and comp are one piece, or the comp is pinned and welded on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Muzzle devices/cones have been silver soldered in place. Not sure if I would 'pin and weld' knowing that.

 

A progressively larger series of poppels does have logic behind it.

 

Not sure if I buy a knockoff version of CFD applications as truth. Last I heard(when was doing performance engines - flowbenching cylinder heads) that a CFD setup was costing in millions. A dumbed down program may not be the same.

 

However... mileage varies. I will default with Mike Burgess' comment about "many things alter perception of feel/function and all shooters are different".

 

Why not buy a generic barsto barrel, thread it, spin on a cone/comp device, solder it in place and let us know about the poppel sizing by your opinion? Or.. pin and weld if so inclined.

 

You can always enlarge a hole that is 'too small'. Filling it up is the hardship.

 

Alternatively, there is always that extended bull barrel method.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, zzt said:

If you are shooting 9mm major with an efficient comp, two 3/16" poppels is the best IMO.  Binary Engineering did a flow analysis using his comp with and without poppels and determined that anything smaller than two 3/16" poppels was a wast of time.  Personally, I would not put a poppel in the comp threads unless the barrel and comp are one piece, or the comp is pinned and welded on.

I was origonally going to do the two 3/16" popples because of what binary said and also what i heard most other people saying.

 

45 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

There is a whole thread on popple holes here that has been active recently, may want to take a read through it.

 

That said, the cliff noted version is there are so many variables in open gun design that almost any combination if practiced with will be about equal to any other combination from a performance stand point (points scored per second), you may however find a combination that YOU like the feel of better and liking it will make you happy.

 

 

I had read through a lot of threads and i just didnt see anything that had talked about the smaller to larger popples in particular. Like you said though really it's all shooter preference, just because one person likes it one way doesnt mean everybody else will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, sean_stw said:

 

I had read through a lot of threads and i just didnt see anything that had talked about the smaller to larger popples in particular. Like you said though really it's all shooter preference, just because one person likes it one way doesnt mean everybody else will.

My $.02 is if there was some combination of holes, comp size, shape and layout that was actually better than the others, all open guns would be made that way but they are not. Look at the Super Squad there are a variety of comp designs with and without holes on various lengths of bull, hybrid and sleeved barrels with slides of varying weights running 9mm and 38s loaded with a variety of powders and bullet weights. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/31/2020 at 6:25 PM, MikeBurgess said:

My $.02 is if there was some combination of holes, comp size, shape and layout that was actually better than the others, all open guns would be made that way but they are not. Look at the Super Squad there are a variety of comp designs with and without holes on various lengths of bull, hybrid and sleeved barrels with slides of varying weights running 9mm and 38s loaded with a variety of powders and bullet weights. 

 


 

Just curious, do you know if any members of the super squad at the 2019 Open Nats used a gun without popple holes?  If so, was it a full size or shorter?

 

In my experience, popple holes do what comps do.  But, they do it without putting weight further from the shooter (weight which makes the gun harder to transition).  That’s why I like the v12 Tanfo.

 

For the OP, the best way to find out what number and size of popples is most effective for your comp is to go one-at-a-time.  I know this is too inconvenient for most people, but the last thing we want is a gun that dips after muzzle flip with every shot no matter which recoil spring you use.

 

We want the perfect return to center every time.

 

Grauffel, at points, has used a Gold Tanfo with a single larger hole oriented vertically near the comp.

 

The current Gold design uses a staggered setup, but it does so with angle of popple holes instead of size.  The eight closest to the breech use a forward canted design.  The 4 at the comp are perpendicular to the muzzle.

 

In addition to the effect of size on popple holes, the smallest changes to recoil occur when the holes are canted more toward the muzzle and when the holes are closest to the muzzle.  The largest changes occur when the holes are reverse canted (toward the shooter) and the holes are closest to the breech.

 

So, if the gun returns just a little bit high, consistently, when you use the same grip each time - maybe a small hole or two near the end of the compensator is appropriate.  If it seems like you regularly throw shots over the target with fast splits, maybe you need some bigger holes closer to the breech.  It’s all a balancing act.

 

Oh, and also, for horizontal return (the dot moving straight up and down every shot), the holes need to be pointed more to the sides than to the top.  For vertical return (less movement up), they need to point to the top.

 

For me and for a lot of other people, that horizontal return is more beneficial than the vertical return.  Again, why I prefer the v12 instead of, as an example, the vertical holes on most 2011s.

 

Also cool about the horizontal return - you can’t over compensate.  As long as the holes are balanced, your dot will just track straighter and straighter.

 

Now then, all of this is at your own risk.  I’m not a gunsmith and I recommend you only have a licensed and insured gunsmith do this work for you.

 

But all that being said, if I were having popple holes done - I’d use a V config every time.  Akai likes at least 4 in his open guns, fairly close to the breech in comparison to most 2011s.  Does he still post on these forums?

Edited by Whoops!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Whoops! said:


 

Just curious, do you know if any members of the super squad at the 2019 Open Nats used a gun without popple holes?  If so, was it a full size or shorter?

I do not, I'm am 99% sure every one of them ran a 2011 unfortunately Tanfoglios are just not as nice (yes I have one) Eric won with one because he is a better shooter, not because it is a better gun, if they were better there would be lots of them on the super squad every year.  Erics performance is just one more way to show that the gun is not the place to look for better scores.

 

 

So, if the gun returns just a little bit high, consistently, when you use the same grip each time - maybe a small hole or two near the end of the compensator is appropriate.  If it seems like you regularly throw shots over the target with fast splits, maybe you need some bigger holes closer to the breech.  It’s all a balancing act.

Or change to the next higher rate recoil spring cost less than $10 and is not permanent.

 

Oh, and also, for horizontal return (the dot moving straight up and down every shot), the holes need to be pointed more to the sides than to the top.  For vertical return (less movement up), they need to point to the top.

Unfortunately physics doesn't work that way, blasting gas sideways in equal amounts is the same as not doing it at all 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Whoops! said:

 

For the OP, the best way to find out what number and size of popples is most effective for your comp is to go one-at-a-time.  I know this is too inconvenient for most people, but the last thing we want is a gun that dips after muzzle flip with every shot no matter which recoil spring you use.

 

 

Holes would make it dip before, not after. 

 

Edited by echotango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MikeBurgess said:

 

 


Tanfoglio’s are not as nice from a quality of parts standpoint, but they are nicer from a function and engineering standpoint. 

 

I think it’s funny when some say people like JJ and Grauffel could win open with a different gun - because they didn’t and don’t.   JJ didn’t win Nationals until he switched to the Tanfo.  Eric won everything open with a Tanfo.  Even the most recent Asian competition where he was sponsored by CZ.

 

Until we can get Eric and JJ to come on here and say otherwise (I don’t think they will, judging from the last time I spoke with them at the 2012ish nationals) - I’m sure the v-porting Is much of the reason why they chose to use the Tanfo.


Physics does work that way.  The lower pressure area on the sides where the gas is vectored causes a high pressure area in the top and bottom parts of the barrel.  That stabilizes the gun horizontally.  This is simple rocket science.

 

The same way that a low pressure area on top of the barrel will cause a high pressure area on the bottom, and cause the barrel to go down.

Edited by Whoops!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, echotango said:

Holes would make it dip before, not after. 

 


Yes, and that doesn’t matter.

 

The dip before leads to the dip from the original point of aim after the gun is done recoiling.  It’s just a more complicated way of explaining the same thing.

Edited by Whoops!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Whoops! said:


Yes, and that doesn’t matter.

 

The dip before leads to the dip from the original point of aim after the gun is done recoiling.  It’s just a more complicated way of explaining the same thing.

That would be mostly due to grip and recoil spring. Not barrel holes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Whoops! said:


Tanfoglio’s are not as nice from a quality of parts standpoint, but they are nicer from a function and engineering standpoint. 

 

I think it’s funny when some say people like JJ and Grauffel could win open with a different gun - because they didn’t and don’t.   JJ didn’t win Nationals until he switched to the Tanfo.  Eric won everything open with a Tanfo.  Even the most recent Asian competition where he was sponsored by CZ.

 

Until we can get Eric and JJ to come on here and say otherwise (I don’t think they will, judging from the last time I spoke with them at the 2012ish nationals) - I’m sure the v-porting Is much of the reason why they chose to use the Tanfo.


Physics does work that way.  The lower pressure area on the sides where the gas is vectored causes a high pressure area in the top and bottom parts of the barrel.  That stabilizes the gun horizontally.  This is simple rocket science.

 

The same way that a low pressure area on top of the barrel will cause a high pressure area on the bottom, and cause the barrel to go down.

oddly I and others have talked to JJ and he did not think the Tanfo was better 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Whoops! said:

Until we can get Eric and JJ to come on here and say otherwise (I don’t think they will, judging from the last time I spoke with them at the 2012ish nationals) - I’m sure the v-porting Is much of the reason why they chose to use the Tanfo.

 

 

Grauffell said in an interview with Saul Kirsch (in 2002/2003 IIRC) he used to shoot a STI/SV, but changed to a Tanfoglio because he had small hands and the grip fitted him better. Not because he thought Tanfo was a better gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Whoops! said:

Oh, and also, for horizontal return (the dot moving straight up and down every shot), the holes need to be pointed more to the sides than to the top.  For vertical return (less movement up), they need to point to the top.

 

For me and for a lot of other people, that horizontal return is more beneficial than the vertical return.  Again, why I prefer the v12 instead of, as an example, the vertical holes on most 2011s.

 

Also cool about the horizontal return - you can’t over compensate.  As long as the holes are balanced, your dot will just track straighter and straighter.

 

Last I checked x lbf pushing to the right and x lbf pushing to the left is zero lbf of externally applied load.  Unless physics has changed lately and fbd's no longer work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, theWacoKid said:

 

Last I checked x lbf pushing to the right and x lbf pushing to the left is zero lbf of externally applied load.  Unless physics has changed lately and fbd's no longer work.


Your equation is too simple.  You need rocket science / aeronautical engineering principles.

 

In a simplified explanation, A wing flies by encouraging external forces to not apply pressure on one side of the wing.  This is what creates movement or stabilization along one or multiple axes.

Edited by Whoops!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cardinal said:

 

 

Grauffell said in an interview with Saul Kirsch (in 2002/2003 IIRC) he used to shoot a STI/SV, but changed to a Tanfoglio because he had small hands and the grip fitted him better. Not because he thought Tanfo was a better gun.


I would love to have a current, recorded interview with him.  Or, at least encourage him to get on these forums and express his own, current opinion without influence from sponsors.  Same with JJ.

Edited by Whoops!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Whoops! said:


I would love to have a current, recorded interview with him.  Or, at least encourage him to get on these forums and express his own, current opinion without influence from sponsors.  Same with JJ.

So I am a little confused,

in 2017   JJ shot a Tanfoglio to 8th place at 96.4%

in 2018 he shot a Limcat to 1st place Second place was 93.7%

in 2019 he shot a Limcat to second place at 98.7% 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

So I am a little confused,

in 2017   JJ shot a Tanfoglio to 8th place at 96.4%

in 2018 he shot a Limcat to 1st place Second place was 93.7%

in 2019 he shot a Limcat to second place at 98.7% 

 

 


In 2018 he shot an xtreme Gold Team Tanfo to 1st place.

 

In 2019 he shot a custom Beretta 92X to second place.

 

Right?  Can anyone confirm?  I know when I met him in 2012 he was shooting a Limcat and that was when we had the discussion on v ports, as Limcat was the only 2011 builder doing that at the time.

Edited by Whoops!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Fo0 said:

I wonder why JJ and Eric dont post here


Me too.  Couple possibilities, one being they charge for the information they have and another being the sponsors want them to represent in a certain manner.

 

I don’t blame them if either reason is the cause, it’s just good business and I would do the same if I were in their shoes.

Edited by Whoops!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...