DT11
- Thread starter Hamster
- Start date
Help Support Clay, Trap, Skeet Shooting Forum:
Reducing recoil with a barrel? Really? If that's the case then Beretta ought to tell Ferrari the secret so they could re-profile their V10's combustion cylinders. Less vibration would prolly make things a whole lot easier where margins are measured in nano seconds.
I swear I used to think the same, still can't quite grasp why this could be, BUT through reading up on the subject and deciphering between the good, bad and the rhetorics, you will come to the sane conclusion that you canne change the laws of physics.
P
** Pending Removal **
Guest
Glad you got chance to have a good chat with them.
Next thing is to try one and make your own mind up on the recoil reduction (note that I say again 'recoil reduction' and not recoil reducer).
Thanks, just trying to unstandard those experienced shots perspectives.
I am making my own mind up through research and experimentation. Seems the only real thing in it outside of prolonging the recoil impulse is gun fit.
P
** Pending Removal **
Guest
That counts me out then......(Laugh out loud)
I will email you when I have got it and used it.....to tell you what I think of it.
Last edited:
Skeet UK
Well-known member
I'm not arguing their case, but by having a larger bore, for most of the barrel length WILL reduce the acceleration of the shot charge etc, as gasses will seep past. As I said, this will result in reduced velocity thereby reducing the recoil over all and will also lengthen the initial pulse, which is where the perceived reduction comes from. To be fair, it is probably minimal in reality and more placebo than actual felt reduction.
As you are clearly familiar with Newtonian physics, I would expect that to be apparent to you.
I can't comment greatly on the Ferrari V10, but I doubt they want loose fitting pistons as this would also result in a loss of power and probably increased vibrations!
Something else to consider (not directed at anyone)...is that the recoil pulse, isn't one pulse, it is several because several things are happening, during the shot.
So possibly being able to feel the difference between choke constrictions, is certainly plausible...much of the shot is running into a wall at high speed...it is the same effect as the forcing cones have, at the other end. So the energy dispersed during constriction...has to go somewhere and not all of it will be in constricting the shot column.
We should not doubt the intricacies of our own bodies and how sensitive they may be.
So apart from all that jazz...how damn sexy is that DT11 though? Gotta love the styling!
Last edited by a moderator:
P
** Pending Removal **
Guest
You lot should get out more (smile) and test your theories (laughs out loud).....like I am about to do.
Time to get out of bed now and go shooting.......and when I get back campers I hope we have something 'really' interesting to read and 'jaw' about.
Toddles
Time to get out of bed now and go shooting.......and when I get back campers I hope we have something 'really' interesting to read and 'jaw' about.
Toddles
I agree Skeet UK, you have to trade one thing for the other. As a side note the so called forcing cones thing and its effects on recoil reduction are also largely untested. There are plenty of people (some who ought to know better) who think it reduces recoil but again nocandoo if you apply physics and logic to it.
It may well lead to a reduction in velocity compared to before but in itself it can't undo physical laws. If anything it has been logically argued that removing metal reduces the overall weight of the gun itself which can add to perceived recoil ! (This only applies in before and after cases, not if the gun left the factory as such.)
It may well lead to a reduction in velocity compared to before but in itself it can't undo physical laws. If anything it has been logically argued that removing metal reduces the overall weight of the gun itself which can add to perceived recoil ! (This only applies in before and after cases, not if the gun left the factory as such.)
Skeet UK
Well-known member
Quite right. It would not reduce recoil directly, it is possible that it would render a slightly smoother shot, that is all, but as you say...is this counter-acted by the weight reduction from material removal...so a smoother shot, but slightly increased recoil!
The recoil pulse(s) can be represented as a waveform with the vertical deflection determined by recoil pressure and horizontally showing elapsed time (pulse length). The total recoil energy as determined by Newton's 2nd & 3rd laws is represented by the area under the graph. As long as nothing changes the mass, acceleration and velocity of the ejecta the total recoil energy will always be the same for the same gun/shell. Whether it's forcing cones or some add on, all that a (wrongly titled) recoil reducer can do is change the shape of the waveform by reducing the peak vertical deflection and (usually) increasing the pulse length. The total area under the graph has to remain the same.
Skeet UK
Well-known member
Exactly. This why KickEeze and so on, don't do what many people think. Though KickEeze are probably the best of a bad bunch.
Even the PFS, works in the same way. Both use springs. In the pad it is a rubber spring, in the PFS it is a Bevelle spring.
Springs do not dissipate much energy, they store it, then give it back to you.
If Sorbothane is used, it can dissipate some of the energy...but not much.
The PFS does this very well, as it releases it more slowly, so making the recoil seem to dissapear.
So a longer recoil pulse (or series of pulses) is more comfortable, but the energy is still there.
A shock absorber (conventional or otherwise), or series of them, is the only way to help dissipate recoil, by converting it to heat.
Last edited by a moderator:
ips
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 15,642
I am a beretta man through and through, I have had at least 10 prob more call me a tradisionalist but I hate the blue go faster stripe. To me it looks tacky and in my opinion is a backward step for beretta as the DT10 was and is a fantastic gun (apart from the DT10X which is way to heavy and only any good if your a 28stone american red neck shooting ATA)
The DT11 is (and feels) heavier than the DT10 and the current Uk imported trap models are very low in the comb.
The DT11 is (and feels) heavier than the DT10 and the current Uk imported trap models are very low in the comb.
That's enough reason.
Glad somone said it was blue, I thought it was something I am not saying. My eyes and colours, can't find a red shell if I drop it on the grass.
hnachaj
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2011
- Messages
- 396
Recoil is always ejecta, poweder charge and velocity. But percieved recoil is something else! There are ways to reduce the wave form. My DT11 has at least half the percieved recoil of my DT 10L. It had simalar recoil to the Dt10L shooting seel shot at last Saturday's shoot that beat up my friend ' s CG! and I won it but felt that went through a 100 FITASC shoot and not an English Sporting! The tri barrel system and Optima choke s, do reduce percieved racoil!
Henry
Henry
I'm with you on this IPS, I don't like the blue stripe either! I had an early DT10 trap gun which I shot well with for about five years, after I had major surgery done on the stock and triggers! It was the old model with a black action, I never felt that they looked as good with the silver action that the later guns had. I did see a DT10X just once, it looked like a total monster, but it's owner shot DTL well enough with it. Browning once made a gun called a GTI, nice black action, but it had GTI in red letters on it!, Totally wrecked the look od the gun as far as I was concerned, I think they changed it to gold letters later on. I personally prefer the look of the old 682 guns too, before they had that strange image put onto the side, the plain guns looked far batter that the current 682's. But all these things are down to personal taste I guess!
Similar threads
