TargetTalk

A forum to talk about Olympic style shooting, rifle or pistol, 10 meters to 50 meters, and whatever is in between. Hosted by Pilkguns.com
It is currently Fri Oct 20, 2017 4:50 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 1:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 1:51 pm
Posts: 178
Location: 11264 Egypt
TenMetrePeter wrote:
So given the box restriction and the need to maximise moment of inertia we seem to need a lightish pistol with the grip at the back and weight shifted toward the muzzle.
In fact a bit like every top end pistol out there?


Seems like so !

This is a situation where you are not allowed to 'think outside the box" .


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 8:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 9:37 pm
Posts: 244
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Another solution would be to put the grip right under the muzzle (ignore how the trigger linkage would work - just for the sake of argument), so the barrel projects back over your forearm. That would similarly create a large polar moment, but it would move the CG closer to your shoulder, which would allow you to hold it up more easily.

Now the barrel weight would create a torque tipping your wrist up, instead of down. Dunno the ergonomic impact of that one.

You'd also have to think about the sights - being closer to your eye would present focus issues.

Interesting discussion! It opens up why we do things the way we do.

_________________
Art Neergaard
ShootingSight LLC
www.shootingsight.com
shootingsight@fioptics.com
513-702-4879


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 9:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2016 10:59 am
Posts: 480
Location: A new global Great Britain
" so the barrel projects back over your forearm."

Attachment:
CTu4_ZCUwAA4zWo.jpg
CTu4_ZCUwAA4zWo.jpg [ 15.15 KiB | Viewed 607 times ]


Last edited by TenMetrePeter on Fri Jul 07, 2017 11:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 10:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:31 pm
Posts: 846
Location: New Hampshire, USA
"...put the grip right under the muzzle (ignore how the trigger linkage would work - just for the sake of argument), so the barrel projects back over your forearm."

It's called a bullpup. After you've sorted out the trigger (electric can do that) you can decide what to do about the cylinder. Either it makes prohibited contact with the wrist / forearm, or it puts the bore axis & sights so far above the hand as to introduce a whole new set of problems. If Cesare hasn't come up with a way to do it it probably isn't worth doing, at least with the rule book currently in force.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 5:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 7:53 am
Posts: 348
As a reminder for you proponents of bullpup designs, don't forget Rule 8.4.1.1.a

Quote:
Neither the grip nor any part of the pistol may be extended or constructed in
any way that would allow it to touch beyond the hand. The wrist must remain
visibly free when the pistol is held in the normal firing position.


Most bullpup firearms are designed to rest against the trigger arm...that would be a definite "no-go" under the ISSF rules.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 4:26 am
Posts: 25
The points made by J-team are difficult to ignore ["A lighter pistol is more effected by triggering errors (and yes, even the best in the world make slight errors occasionally with the trigger technique), weight has a dampening effect"].

I've owned a LP400 carbon for two and a half years. Wanted a lighter pistol because it's always easier to increase and redistribute extra weight when required. At 900g, it seemed easier to shoot well; but mistakes were severely punished. Consequently, I've added the pair of muzzle weights, wrapped 47g of thin sheet lead around the barrel (under the carbon jacket); hollowed-out the grip a wee bit and added some lead there as well. Current weight is 1030 with a full cylinder. Still not a heavy AP, and I'm not convinced it needs to be any heavier for me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 09, 2017 9:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 9:37 pm
Posts: 244
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Gyroscopic stabilization!

_________________
Art Neergaard
ShootingSight LLC
www.shootingsight.com
shootingsight@fioptics.com
513-702-4879


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 09, 2017 11:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:49 pm
Posts: 5230
Location: Ruislip, UK
ShootingSight wrote:
Gyroscopic stabilization!

Rule 8.4.1.6
Movement or Oscillation Reduction Systems. Any device, mechanism or system that actively reduces, slows or minimizes pistol oscillations or movements before the shot is released is prohibited.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 09, 2017 11:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:20 pm
Posts: 5018
Location: Scottsdale AZ
Damn, David, you're just no fun!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:49 pm
Posts: 5230
Location: Ruislip, UK
Someone's got to (try to) keep you lot in line.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 12:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 1:51 pm
Posts: 178
Location: 11264 Egypt
David Levene wrote:
Someone's got to (try to) keep you lot in line.


You mean put a damper on creativity ?


Elmas


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 12:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 2:48 am
Posts: 1180
Location: New Zealand
Elmas wrote:
David Levene wrote:
Someone's got to (try to) keep you lot in line.


You mean put a damper on creativity ?


Elmas


Within the rules = Creativity

Outside the rules = Cheating


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 12:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:55 pm
Posts: 833
Location: Australia
Quote:
Any device, mechanism or system that actively reduces, slows or minimizes pistol oscillations or movements before the shot is released is prohibited.


This is partly tongue in cheek David, but has anyone ever suggested that barrel weights could fit into that category? I it seems to be universally accepted that weights have a reducing, slowing or minimising effect on pistol movement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 12:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:49 pm
Posts: 5230
Location: Ruislip, UK
deadeyedick wrote:
Quote:
Any device, mechanism or system that actively reduces, slows or minimizes pistol oscillations or movements before the shot is released is prohibited.


This is partly tongue in cheek David, but has anyone ever suggested that barrel weights could fit into that category? I it seems to be universally accepted that weights have a reducing, slowing or minimising effect on pistol movement.

I've never heard of it. Surely barrel weights are passive. If all else fails, what's the spirit and intent of the rule?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 10, 2017 7:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 6:04 pm
Posts: 1435
Location: Massachusetts
I think the key word is "actively". If it just sits there, it's OK.

I've actually help test a prototype gyro stabilizer for military sniper rifles. I was shooting standing, and it cut my wobble about 50%. It tended to argue with you if you had to change your aiming point, but once you settled, it was quite effective.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group