What the beef with a high bore axis?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You can get a little idea of that from this vid:



His normal grip doesn't serve him well with the big .500.

In another of his videos, that's now gone from the 'net I guess, he did grip comparisons on a number of revolvers and talked about how he'd lower his grip with a heavy recoiling wheelgun to let it roll more.

But yeah, normally he's got it as high as he can.
 
If you read any of it, you would know this is not true. Go modify your 44 magnum revolver to have a HKP7M8 bore axis and show us how much better it is by shooting 20 rounds.
Click to expand...

In regards to regular pistols which are for security use, low bore axis clearly is an advantage.

There is no point dragging in 44 Magnum or 500 S&W here. Those are not meant to be shot in terms of rounds / sec, so who cares?

There are always exceptions if you find it hard enough, but it does not mean it is particularly meaningful.

If someone needs high bore axis to convert more recoil to muzzle flip to be able to control the gun, then the gun probably is not the best choice for security.

I grip pretty high on my GP100, and have to problem with M&P40. Sure enough P226 has significantly lower felt recoil than my M&P40. However, I am not particularly faster with a P226.

Yes, I do understand the idea of high bore axis converting more recoil to muzzle flip, lowering the rearward component of recoil force since some force is directed upwards. I get that.

But, how many experts have you seen saying, "Yeah, I want a high bore axis 9mm pistol so I can hit more faster and accurate, I will completely dominate IDPA, IPSC with it! ?

And, yes, I have seen Jerry Miculek videos. People, he is just trying to demonstrate what is possible. I seriouly do not think if he needs to get multiple hit fast on a home invader, he'd pick up a 44Magnum or 500S&W.
 
Last edited:
Bore Axis is a complaint used against pistols when there is nothing else to critique. It is usually brought up by gLoCker's justifying their purchase..... There is nothing wrong with a SIG P226 and it is one of the higher bore axis pistols on the market.

Learning to shoot a variety of pistols well, will usually resolve any high bore axis complaints.
 
That says both too much and too little, though. Like a very great many things in shooting (or most other disciplines) the differences are not large, and too much is made of them in general. MOST shooters really aren't either helped or hindered to a significant degree by bore axis differences. Like having slightly better sights, or a slightly better trigger, or a kydex straight drop holster instead of a leather, FBI-cant holster, etc., little things can help you push your edge. Maybe take you from shooting at the 75% level to the 80% level (just a wild approximation) BUT you have to do all the work and put all the 100s of thousands of rounds down range to get to that 75% level in the first place.

When Mario Andretti says that switching from a B37X tire compound to a B38Z tire compound made all the difference, that really means something important to HIM and probably did help him edge out his competition.

But you and I aren't Mario Andretti and aren't pushing our vehicles like that and have a heck of a lot of things to work on before we get to changing tire compounds.

When a USPSA Grandmaster says he prefers a low bore axis, that means something really important to HIM and helps him edge out his competition.

You or I may or may not be able to appreciate the benefits of that difference, but we've still got a great deal of other inefficiencies, flaws, and points to work on which are much more significant, and even grabbing that SIG 226 is probably "just as good" for us, where we are in our path, if it strikes our fancy. The stark reality is not that many of us are ever going to be working on shaving hundredths off our drill times; most are just happy to get out to the range sometimes and run through a box of ammo.
 
Sam1911 said:
When a USPSA Grandmaster says he prefers a low bore axis, that means something really important to HIM and helps him edge out his competition.
Click to expand...

Even at the edge of the envelope, opinions differ, such as another IPSC and USPCA Grand Master who says "bore axis means squat."
 
Certainly so! One may decide other factors of this or that gun are more important than bore axis height and so, for him, it really doesn't matter.
 
The thing I've found in dealing with and watching the top-line professional shooters, is that the gun is arguably the least important part of the package.

Their comments regarding technique are often of much greater value than their comments about the weapons.

As for the gun... it's like the cliches we've all heard: it's not the arrow, it's the indian; it's not the song, it's the singer; it's not the chisel it's the craftsman using it, etc., etc., etc.
 
Let's talk some more physics. Recoil is going somewhere no matter what the design of the gun. Equal and opposite reaction and all that. Neither a high axis or a low axis changes the laws of physics. If it did we might be traveling the stars now.

A high axis gun has a pivot point on the grip depending on where you grab that grip. Since that recoil pushes up it has to push back on top of your hand and forward at the bottom of your hand. If you could see my drawing here you would understand. ;) A low recoil gun pushes more straight back or in some cases to the side. A straight back push is easily absorbed by the elbows compared to a high axis gun that has a lot of flip that must be absorbed by the hand and the muscles that control the hand.

The upshot of this is that most people feel that a low axis gun has less recoil (it doesn't really but the muscles controlling your elbow are generally a lot stronger than the muscles that control the hand.

It's simple physics. Most of us feel less recoil with a low axis pistol. I could show you my work showing force vectors and all that but heck it's been 40 years or so since I actually did that kind of math. But I remember how it works and if pushed I could remember exactly how to do it. Levers, fulcrums, force vectors, our friend Newton and all that stuff plays into this. If you want a detailed explanation call your local high school and ask for the person that teaches physics. Or look it up on the net.

And remember. Bore axis is only one aspect of a pistol. There are countless others. The Sig P series is widely believed to have a very high bore axis, one of the highest in fact and that's even more true of the classic models. But those same guns are considered to be one of the best made pistols of all time. They are often picked as the #1 choice in polls about which pistol is the best in fact. They shoot great. You can learn to deal with muzzle flip and a little recoil never hurt nobody. Well that last one may not be exactly true but it's close. In my experience they are slower to fire second and third shots. And I have other .45's and I've shot many others. But I wouldn't get rid of my P220 for $1000. It shoots great. Who needs second shots when you can hit a vital area on the first shot? Plus it impresses my fans when I shoot it. :D ;)
 
The upshot of this is that most people feel that a low axis gun has less recoil (it doesn't really but the muscles controlling your elbow are generally a lot stronger than the muscles that control the hand.
Click to expand...
I read your whole post. It is interesting, well written, and accurate. But I am not wholly in sync with this point. I think in terms of felt recoil, it works BOTH ways.

A G23 has MORE felt recoil to a lot of folks, including me, than does, say, an FNX40 with a slightly higher effective bore axis. (Actually, it's the grip angle that makes the effective bore axes significantly different between tese two specific guns, IMO.)

I will have to try bending my elbows more when I shoot. Maybe that will make a difference. But for the most part I extend them ALMOST all the way to straight, just about how far I would extend when bench pressing. Just not quite locking. I am generally perceiving recoil in my entire upper body and the palm of my hands. It doesn't stop at the elbows. With a higher bore axis, this upper body recoil is reduced, and more wrist flip takes its place. If anything, I believe the FNX generates more elbow flex due to the upwards revectoring. There's a happy medium in there, somewhere.
In regards to regular pistols which are for security use, low bore axis clearly is an advantage.

There is no point dragging in 44 Magnum or 500 S&W here. Those are not meant to be shot in terms of rounds / sec, so who cares?
Click to expand...
Forget 44 mag, then. I was making a point. Same holds true for 40SW for some folks. Or perhaps even 9mm for other folks. I am assuming you could be a big strong, hulky guy, so I used 44 magnum so that you could relate. To a less hulky and studly beast, a 9mm with a low bore axis might be unpleasant to shoot as would a 44 magnum with a low bore axis to you!

Maybe your hand/wrist/upper body mass and strength puts the rest of us to shame. What works better for you or Jerry Miculek doesn't necessarily translate to everyone else.

As Sam's post shows, even Jerry has his limits of low bore axis. And I bet money he would crush you in a game of mercy.

There are anomalies out there, like me. I have a totally average to light, tall, lean build, but my wrist and grip strength is very high. Due to an injury, I did some rehab, and the grip strength of my injured hand was still in the top 10% of the 25 year old age group at the start of rehab, and I'm in my forties. My uninjured hand is off the chart. After I was measured, my 25 yr old therapist tried to it make sure it wasn't broken. He was in the normal bell curve. :) *I came across a video game once, when I was maybe 14. It had two bars you squeezed, to see how high you could score. I maxed it. I really didn't think too much of it at the time, but it came back to me when they measured me during rehab. I suppose I might be limited more by upper body mass and by how much discomfort the palm of my hand and my joints want to handle. But more importantly, I don't assume that everyone else holds and shoots a gun the same way I do.
 
Last edited:
So there are other people that can't open a jar or do a pushup. Or maybe they are your identical twin, but they use a different shooting form/tension/technique because they simply don't shoot as accurately when they try to do it the same way as you. You have to realize that not everyone is the same.

Saying the lower the bore axis the better is like telling Michael Jordan that he would have a higher shot percentage if he added more arc to his jumper. Or telling Dan Marlje that he shoots like a girl.

Consider the variation in mass and center of gravity between individuals, alone. This makes a difference in how much recoil you want to go straight back, vs up. It's important to maintain your balance between shots, as much as to get the sights back on target as quickly as possible.
 
Last edited:
Actually, it's the grip angle that makes the effective bore axes significantly different between tese two specific guns
Click to expand...

There are lots of differences between different guns that affect things like felt recoil. It's not all pure physics or at least not physics most of us could explain or even understand for that matter. Again the bore height isn't enough to make me choose or not choose a weapon. I have examples from both extremes. I can shoot faster with a low bore axis but clearly others can do just fine with a high axis gun. And I had to modify my stance to be able to shoot a low bore axis gun like I do.

That modification was bending my elbows slightly. As you probably know that's a bad thing according to the book on different stances. It's hard to get a consistent sight picture when your elbows are bent. One time you may bend them more than the next time and when the pressure is on any little chink in your technique is likely magnified a great amount. So locking your elbows is the best choice. You don't have to guess about how much is enough for a locked elbow. That's something I learned early in life and it stuck with me. It was especially true in archery. I was very hesitant to change my stance to accommodate a lower bore axis. At this point I'm glad I did because I can shoot that pistol much faster than I can shoot my high axis guns.

So if you can make your stance work without bending your elbows it's probably best. I tried for a month to make my modified isosceles work with the lower bore axis but I was getting recoil pushing my arms all around and off target. Still I wish I could make it work without bending my elbows. That was at least a small part of why I switched carry guns again.
 
Forget 44 mag, then. I was making a point. Same holds true for 40SW for some folks. Or perhaps even 9mm for other folks. I am assuming you could be a big strong, hulky guy, so I used 44 magnum so that you could relate. To a less hulky and studly beast, a 9mm with a low bore axis might be unpleasant to shoot as would a 44 magnum with a low bore axis to you!

Maybe your hand/wrist/upper body mass and strength puts the rest of us to shame. What works better for you or Jerry Miculek doesn't necessarily translate to everyone else.

As Sam's post shows, even Jerry has his limits of low bore axis. And I bet money he would crush you in a game of mercy.
Click to expand...

Everyone has limits of low bore axis.

However, the point is not about pushing things to the limit.

Just to put things in perspective, then lets consider just the case of 9mm pistols,

Yes, shooting a 9mm Glock or 40S&W Glock feels less pleasant for me, compared to shooting a P226 of the same caliber. So, even I would admit that some higher bore axis gun can be ore pleasant to shoot.

However, what is more "pleasant" often has nothing to do with whether if the user can get an accurate follow up shot faster or not. My M&P recoil is not nearly as pleasant compared to SIG, however I shoot it faster.

Of course, that is my case. I know. It may not be universal. However, there are some components that can be general enough, even though with some exceptions.

Now people on your position would say, "But, there are expert shooters who domiated with high bore axis guns like Beretta or SIG!"

However, that is not a proper comparison, because then those people making the claim brings in a whole bunch of unisolated factors. SIG and Beretta pistols are heavier.

A more proper comarison would be, "Have anyone asked a company to make the exact same pistol otherwise, but only with higher bore axis?"

If Glock made a variant of Glock 17 which has a bore axis height of a P226 with all other features being identical, same grip angle, same weight, trigger, etc., would you buy it?

People on the weaker and smaller side of average shooters, such as petite non-muscular woman, handles low bore axis 9mm pistols just fine.

Actually, I find low bore axis to be more of a benefit for smaller caliber, such as 9mm, compared to 40S&W or larger. (Strictly witin the context of 9mm, 40S&W, 45ACP, 357 Magnum, etc. fired from a full or medium sized pistols.)

Whether if the pistol moves upwards or backwards, disruption is still a disruption. I understand that people who say bore axis does not matter, that is what they are saying. It is true to some extent, but not always. If rearward disruption of shooting platform, and time to get the aim back on target, by low bore axis pistols is same was upwards disruption caused by muzzle flip of high bore axis pistols, then they are eventually the same.

However, when recoil gets lower, the total force that force the whole shooting platform is lower. So, rearward force that keeps the shooting platform in more of a same shape becomes more advantage than upwards force that causes muzzle flip that requires getting the shape back into shooting platform.

For most adult shooters of average size, I believe that resisting against rearward force is lot easier to maintain shooting platform then resisting against force twisting the wrist upwards with 9mm level recoil.


Saying the lower the bore axis the better is like telling Michael Jordan that he would have a higher shot percentage if he added more arc to his jumper. Or telling Dan Marlje that he shoots like a girl.
Click to expand...

I am not into basket ball, but who knows if Jordan actually might have had a higher percentage if he added more arc to his jumper?

But, anyway, no I am not saying everyone and every circumstance are universal.

I am only claiming that in regards to bore axis, as an ISOLATED, factor, I saw situations where it is a benefit that significant portion of people benefited the same way.

Again, some might say "I shoot a high bore-axis P226 better than low-bore axis Glock 17."

But, have you EVER seen anyone who said "I love everything about Glock 17, except that I want a higher bore-axis."


Actually, those expert shooters who said "bore axis does not matter" have made a very misleading statement, because when they turn around and say "Grip as high as you can!" they just cotradicted themselves. If you ask them why you should grip high, they will contradict themselves even more. (Let's ignore Miculek's 500S&W for a momemt. Even he does not grip a Glock or M&P with low grip.)
 
Last edited:
High bore axis? I submit it's an observation that can and has formed the basis of a magazine article making a writer a payday.
 
I am not into basketball, but who knows if Jordan actually might have had a higher percentage if he added more arc to his jumper?
Click to expand...
Well, Michael Jordan has a flat shooting arc. And Dan Marlje shoots like a girl. But that's what works for them, their center of gravity, and their physical anatomy. To question that, because you and your very different physique do better a different way is folly, because these guys are GREAT, and you are not them.

You actually agree that lower bore axis is more beneficial to you in lower recoil calibers. So take the difference in recoil and instead apply it to different PEOPLE who handle recoil differently. The super low bore axis that works for you in a given caliber might not work so good for someone else. If a tall, lanky guy with skinny legs and lower body, who can barely stand up straight as it is without the wind blowing him over... if he shoots a low bore axis 9mm or 40SW, he might need to break his elbows to prevent from tipping off balance. There are other reasons besides discomfort.

Take bore axis and apply it to rifles/shotguns. Have you ever shot a single shot 12 gauge? Pretending there are followup shots to be had, do you think you could shoot it faster if it had a low bore axis like an AR 15? Or would you be off balance (and in pain) and have to reacquire your balance and your target, let alone the minor problem of waiting for the sights to come back down? Well, to some people with lower mass and/or a more unstable center of gravity, this problem manifests earlier, at lower recoil.
 
Last edited:
Take bore axis and apply it to rifles/shotguns. Have you ever shot a single shot 12 gauge? Pretending there are followup shots to be had, do you think you could shoot it faster if it had a low bore axis like an AR 15? Or would you be off balance (and in pain) and have to reacquire your balance and your target, let alone the minor problem of waiting for the sights to come back down? Well, to some people with lower mass and/or a more unstable center of gravity, this problem manifests earlier, at lower recoil.
Click to expand...
I have fired a double barreled shotgun, which is not that much different.

What you posted actually confirms my point.

Just like I would prefer a low bore axis for M&P, Glock, for rifles like AR-15 from 5.56mm, 6.8mm, 7.62mm, I would prefer a straight line bore to stock design(which has the lowest bore axis).

Just like I would not care fore 44 Magnum revolver, bore axis of shotguns really do not matter for me.


Let's make it clear. If you are arguing that higher bore axis makes rearward force lower, than there is no disagreement there.


Would higher bore axis rifle make shooting Magnum rifle rounds from standing position more managable? May be. But, is that a pragmatic solution? So far I have never seen special forces or SWAT asking "Can you make us a 300 Win Mag rifle for CQB, and make it high bore axis so we can control it?"

I agree that each indivduals and their needs would be different.
 
I don't see any reason why pistol makers choose to design a pistol with a high bore axis. It's like creating a Corolla with an SUV high ceiling. Why?...

People who prefer low bore axis pistols can name a few pros. Can high bore axis pistol lovers name any pros for having a high bore axis?
 
Mr.510 said:
Higher bore axis guns have softer recoil and more muzzle flip. Lower bore axis guns have sharper recoil and less muzzle flip. IMHO if you're shooting something with low enough recoil that it almost isn't a factor (9mm) a low bore axis gun is probably better. With guns that have significant recoil a higher bore axis can be an advantage. Read the quote by Bruce Gray that was posted above. I have no idea who he is, but he obviously understands the mechanics of shooting and explains it well.
Click to expand...

I think I agree with this.
 
mattwestm said:
People who prefer low bore axis pistols can name a few pros. Can high bore axis pistol lovers name any pros for having a high bore axis?
Click to expand...

Earlier in this discussion, someone posted a lengthy, somewhat techinical discussion of the topic written by Bruce Gray, a long-renowned professional shooter and arguably THE BEST H&K P7 gunsmith ever. Gray's GRAY GUNS is considered by many to be the best SIG gunsmithing firm in the country.

In that discussion, Gray talked about doing things to increase the recoil-induced barrel flip on some guns, like the H&K P7, to create a more predictable recoil movement. He went on to explain has some very low bore axis guns (like the H&K P7) tended to have more powerful lateral movement that forced the gun OFF TARGET in sometimes unpredictable ways. Others here have argued that depending on the caliber and amount of recoil, some flip helps attenuate heavy recoil...

So, yes there are pros. If a gun's bore axis is too low, it can be too much of a good thing, and if the caliber is too big, a low bore axis can make recoil less manageable (or more painful). For most guns bore axis consequences are probably easily-managed phenomena.

.
 
Last edited:
My XD has a high bore axis. It always seemed flippy to me. After taking a class on a hot day & having issues with it sliding around in my hand I decided to try a slip on grip. All of a sudden I wasn't struggling anymore. I would agree with what has already been posted. Bore axis is but one small factor of how a gun handles. There are several different things that have to come together for a firearm to handle well.
 
I always thought the whole bore axis thing was a little goofy brought up mostly by those that just need to post less on the errornet and do a little more shooting. Especially when it come the recoil of such pistols as the 9mm ones. :confused: Shoot more and post less. :banghead:
 
Rinspeed said:
I always thought the whole bore axis thing was a little goofy brought up mostly by those that just need to post less on the errornet and do a little more shooting. Especially when it come the recoil of such pistols as the 9mm ones. :confused: Shoot more and post less. :banghead:
Click to expand...

Why would it not be relevant to 9mm pistols?
 
The beef is, glock folks think they've got something on Sig and XD they can whine about.


All the while CZ owners laugh at all three.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
Bore axis
Replies
6
Views
794
Shadow 7D
S
Skribs
  • Locked
Why a high bore axis?
2 3 4 5
Replies
104
Views
10K
Sam1911
S
T
  • Locked
Bore Axis
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
Jason_G
J
T
  • Locked
"high bore axis"
Replies
8
Views
778
Boats
B
D
  • Locked
High axis bore? Sigs and HKs.
Replies
9
Views
1K
Bovice
B
Back
Top