There is still a note of discord, however.
1911tuner said:Why didn't anything happen? Why did the slide not move?
I've been thinking about a handgun for my wife, and what will work best for her. Ideally it would be something like the m&p shield or bodyguard. The main issue however, is the stiffness of the slide spring. If either of these two guns had the recoil spring of the sig p238 it would be perfect.
This got me thinking. Why have no handgun manufacturers it seems, used a combination hydraulic buffered spring assembly for the recoil spring. Obviously it would cost more, but to have an easier to rack slide seems like a benefit worthy of additional cost for some.
Just wondering.
That's why GLOOB's insistence that a heavy bullet will let the barrel unlock early won't fly. A heavier bullet is a longer bullet and a longer bullet means more surface area in contact with the barrel and more surface area with the barrel means a higher friction load and a higher friction load means more resistance....and more resistance means slower slide acceleration.
A bullet that has twice the mass only makes it half as far from the starting point by the time the barrel hits the locking lug.
A bullet that has twice the mass only makes it half as far from the starting point by the time the barrel hits the locking lug.
Really? Can you guide me to a specific question? Gimme the post # and the a few lines to go off of.And my hypotheticals really haven't been answered. Danced around a bit maybe...but not answered.
If you wonder how come I get so snarky, it's because I picture this applying to you. Let's try to figure out why two smart adults can disagree on something that appears to be so obvious and self-evident. I really thought I did this with my last post, but I can do this all day. So bring on your hypothetical.And you're still in denial about the bullet's influence on the slide's acceleration.
Really? Can you guide me to a specific question? Gimme the post # and the a few lines to go off of.
If you wonder how come I get so snarky, it's because I picture this applying to you.
If it's working properly, the bullet is already gone and pressures have started to drop, this friction in the locking lugs is not very significant, in the big picture, is it?
The reason everyone ignores it, is because in a locked breech you CAN ignore it. That's the whole point. You said it yourself. Forward friction, rearward friction. In equal measure. Add that up and you get zero.I was just making an observation based on so many others who would like to ignore that influence. i.e. Whatever resistance (through friction) that the barrel offers to the bullet's forward movement...the bullet offers to the barrel's rearward movement...in equal measure.
That would be nothing. I have read everything you have posted. I can see what it is you are missing. And I have pointed it out and explained it. I also recapped the Jim K thing, specifically, and there are no surprises, there. If there are posts of mine you have not read, I would urge you to go back and do so. If you have already read and understood them, then well, there it is. We're at what you might call an impasse.Just go back and read everything that you didn't read earlier.
so this friction in the locking lugs is not very significant in the big picture, is it?
GLOOB said:What you are missing here is that if the locking lugs do not slide apart, the barrel and slide will stop moving. Dead in it's tracks. That momentum is then transferred to the frame and to the shooter.
the friction between the lugs does not stop the vertical movement, it just slows it down.I contend this is plausible. If the barrel lugs slow the unlocking, some but not all of the momentum of the slide is siphoned off to the frame via the cam/locking block. But not enough to stop the slide from cycling.
And so the barrel lugs moving vertically (albeit more slowly) means the barrel is dropping right? And this is possibly happening while the bullet is still in the barrel, yes?
And this has an effect on vertical POI? And the amount of friction on the lugs varies with cartridge pressure? Which varies with say, small variations in powder charge? Thusly changing the amount of slowing, thus making more dispersion in vertical POI? And this is how the Browning tilt-lock design is made to operate, then, in your opinion?
On a new gun, the amount of tilt might be less, due to higher friction? And as the lugs wear in and smooth out, the tilt will increase? And after you clean and oil the lugs, the barrel will tilt even more? So you might have to readjust your sights after cleaning the barrel lugs?
And even if the bullet leaves just before the barrel starts to tilt, this friction affects how fast the slide cycles, still, right? Small increases/decreases in friction will affect how much momentum is robbed by the frame. And so cycling speed variation would be amplified by changes in powder charge?
Do you not think it would be a more elegant solution if the barrel doesn't hit the locking block at all, until after pressures are already low enough for the breech to be unlocked? No barrel tilt affecting the bullet. No friction, oiling, or wear affecting the amount of delay? Just simple conservation of momentum making sure the breech unlocks at the right point, each and every time? Man, I want to think it's elegant. And practical. And that it works without relying on conditional frictions. And I see no reason why this isn't, in fact, the case.
And so the barrel lugs moving vertically (albeit more slowly) means the barrel is dropping right? And this is possibly happening while the bullet is still in the barrel, yes?
When you double the mass of the bullet, the slide will move back nearly 0.2" an inch by the time the bullet exits.
I thought you were suggesting that at 0.1" the friction of the lugs will temporarily retard the slide until such time as the bullet has exited.
Yes, this.By context it sounds like he means the cam-down point
????? Where did this come from? Are you just trying to take my argument and turn it around backwards? Well, this is a square peg, and you're trying to put it into the color green. This doesn't even begin to make sense unless you can show me why you think this? (It makes no sense to me how you wanted to twist my ice analogy by standing on the bank, either. That was kind of scary, wondering how you got there!)because that is the action you have been describing all along: straight blowback.
So you contend. You have made no attempt to demonstrate your reasoning to anyone else. Even where I thought you were trying to support this stance, you went back and retracted your statement to make it into something that is obvious and self-evident and that which we ALL already know and take for granted. And which does nothing to support your belief.No, it will not.