The Rohrbaugh Forum
Rohrbaugh Products and Accessories => Rohrbaugh R9 (all variations) => Topic started by: jimacp on April 23, 2005, 10:39:40 AM
-
Anyone tried the Federal "Low Recoil" 135 gr. Hydra Shok in their R9? Any comments on this ammunition?
-
What is the downside to low recoil? Is it lower
stopping power?
-
I have never tried anything decribed as ''low recoil'' - neither I suspect will I.
Working on simple ''Newton'' principles I cannot (as yet anways) see how a reduction in recoil does not reduce the useful ft lbs. Action/reaction etc - I can only see a ''low recoil'' round as a ''whimp'' round!! :P
I am readily open to explanation and proof of different.! ;)
-
I don't know whether this is wimp round or not...just saw it advertised and was wondering what the deal is.
-
Not trying to ''knock it'' Jim! I too would like to know what the deal is. :)
-
Advertised at 1050 fps and 331 fp energy. I currently use 124 gr. gold dot. I need to go look at advertised ballistics for it and compare. Will report back.
-
Advertised ballistics for 124 gr gold dot out of Glock 17 are 1166 fps and 374 fp energy. Gold Dot has apparently better ballistics...wonder if the "low recoil" of the Federal makes it worth looking into. I will buy some and report at next range session. Will mix Gold Dot with Federal and see if there is apparent difference in recoil.
-
Interesting to get the comparison Jim.
My GD tests thru R9's 2.9" barrel gave (from memory) about just under 1,000 fps and 287 ft lbs.... 115's and 124's very alike in energy.
-
There is a lot more to how effective a round is than it's velocity. It's also important to know how well a round penetrates, expands and retains weight. Sometimes a round tha penetrates barriers is desired, sometimes not.
HydraShok is a very old design. In its day it was state of the art, but today there are vastly superior rounds, like Speer Gold Dot and Federal's Tactical line. Also, the Winchester RA9T is among the very best available.
The issue with HydraShok is that the bullet is not bonded to the jacket, which hinders expansion and does not prevent fragmentation.
That said, I have no idea what the "low recoil" aspect does, but I prefer to go with rounds that perform well in lab testing (as opposed to "street testing").
-
Exactly!
Go look at the ''deflowered'' Gold Dots on my FAQ site - admittedly - no denim filling the hollow but - they sure as heck do expand well! And pretty consistently too.
-
Thanks for info guys...just what I was looking for. Will continue to use GD and pass on the Hydra shok.
-
The idea of reduced recoil is very appealing.
My shooting hand has suffered various attacks over the years, including damage from weight lifting, 30 years of computer typing, and general wear and tear.
The first time out with the R9S, I felt the Gold Dot 124 gr. rounds gave off an enormous kick.
If anyone else has found a "reduced recoil" solution, please tell about it. I would gladly tolerate a reduction in foot-pounds, in order to increase shooting comfort.
I have heard that 147 gr. shooting may be a little milder.
Bill
-
Bill,
In truth I am not sure that there is an ideal answer. The diff' between 115, 124, and 147 is unlikely IMO to be all that significant.
If tho one was to go to a true subsonic load, I am not even sure if the gun would fully cycle - which would not be good!!! I'm guessing of course and would have to do some handloads to prove that.
Bottom line I think is - keep practice sessions short and then - if ''push ever comes to shove'' - do the business and put up with the recoil. :)
I have not as yet found any ''reduced recoil'' ammo to evaluate.
-
Bottom line I think is - keep practice sessions short and then - if ''push ever comes to shove'' - do the business and put up with the recoil. :)
=======================================
Well said, Chris. Excellent advice, once again.
I'm mainly mad because mismatch has been able to shoot more than me. :D
Looks like it's time to start working out, build a stronger grip, and generally avoid being a girley man.
By the way, your sequence of pictures showing magazine insertion was terrific. You're a heck of a guy.
Thanks for taking the time to show them again.
Bill
-
Bill, thx, you are too kind.
I shall now use my special ''blush'' smiley! ;D
(http://www.acbsystems.com/images/smilies/blush.gif) (http://www.acbsystems.com/images/smilies/blush.gif) (http://www.acbsystems.com/images/smilies/blush.gif)
-
Check out Federal's website. They have a compare feature.
http://www.federalcartridge.com/default.asp?pg=27
Sorry for the physics lecture, but here's why the "Low Recoil" loads kick less:
Federal is using lighter, faster projectiles in those "Low Recoil" loads. They have lowered the bullet weight one or two 'notches' while kicking the velocity up just enough to obtain almost identical muzzle kinetic energy compared to the standard load.
The trick is that the lighter weight projectile has lower momentum by about 8 %. Projectile momentum (and powder charge mass) is what causes the gun to react in your hand. Remember, Newton's laws of motion pertain to conservation of MOMENTUM, not energy. (The difference is (mass x velocity) vs. (1/2 mass x velocity x velocity.) It's a good thing your gun recoils proportional to the momentum of the round and not the muzzle energy. Not many men would be able to hang onto a gun that comes back at you with 320 ft-lbs of energy!!
I'm a retired mechanical engineer and have been studying up on ballistics - exterior, & terminal - for the last few years. I got tired of reading all the B.S. in the gun mags about "energy dump", temporary stretch cavities, frangible bullets, expanding bullets, etc. The physics & medical aspects are really complex. The best references are Duncan MacPherson's (a real rocket scientist!) "Bullet Penetration - Modeling the Dynamics & the Incapacitation Resulting from Wound Trauma", and the writings of Dr. Martin Fackler - a former U.S. Army trauma surgeon.
Steve S.
-
Thx Steve - I too am an old (semi) retired engineer but have spent minimal time on ballistics - plus am ever more rusty on some stuff these days!
A moment's thought of course bears out your mention re much lighter projectile - slightly similar to a 12G 7/8 load vs. a std 1 1/8". As long as energy put into ''the system'' maintains reliable gun function then I can see a slight reduction in perceived recoil - for the momentum reason you mention.
-
Steve & Chris:
As a non-engineer History Major and Second Amendment lawyer type, I thank you for a very informative exchange. (When it comes to physics and chemistry, I need all the help I can get. ;))
-
Well, I broke down and ordered a shooting glove today. Will report back later and describe if it helps with recoil.
http://store.smith-wesson.com/store/item/ia5q/Shooting_Gloves/Smith_Wesson_Right_Hand_Shooting_Glove.html
-
Michigunner,
Thanks for the link to the S&W site. I don't have any shooting gloves. A new gun is a great excuse to buy one.
The other day at my first range session with my R9S, it was pretty hot & humid. I noticed the R9S was pretty slippery in my sweaty hands. (The other two guns I brought with me had checkering on the frontstrap and rubber grips).
Are other Forum members having the same issue?
I kinda wish the front and back strap areas were "stippled".
The next time I go by the local bike shop, I think I'll buy some skateboard tape. Don't want the pup getting away from me.
-
sslater,
I wasn't bothered too much by the heat and slippery feeling.
It was mostly the big jolt that got me. It was no surprise, because that much power in a small place is bound to be noticeable.
I figured the glove might be worth trying. Otherwise, I may practice with the left hand.
Bill
-
The front being stippled is a good idea. However, the stippled back strap could wear out pockets and clothing. Just a thought. Tom
-
Other option - tho not yet done it on R9 - is bit like I have on my BHP - skateboard grip tape.
Carefully cut strips for front and back of grip frame will make huge difference. I doubt very much the adhesive would permanently mar the anodizing and the grip advantage is considerable if hands wet.