this pertains to adjustable sights as well really.....I see on here and the ruger forum and on pics anywhere on the net people saying you can shoot 44 mag and 44 specials in any 44 mag gun. Hmmm the idea is 44 spec for practice 44 mag for the woods dangerous game etc. My problem is factory 240 mags shoot one foot low 44 spec one foot high in my Vaquero at say 25 yards. So how is it you can shoot 44 spec for practice when its a foot high? I don't have a adjustable sight gun to see if there is enough sight travel to shoot mags and specials out the same gun but I doubt the sights got the travel to work in say a Mod 29. In a small Tarus (gag) 5 shot gun its got to be worse. The Vaquero shoots 300gr Laser cast with 13 gr AA#7 using the original front sight. Its dead on at 50-60 feet and about 1050fps. So how do you guys handle that problem?

__________________
US ARMY
Viet Nam 70-71

I don't do it, but here's some points to consider.

The shorter the sight radius (distance between front and rear sights) the more impact at target a click of the sights will have, all other things being equal.

A lighter bullet will shoot lower than a heavier bullet, all other things being equal.

A bullet at higher velocity (less time in the barrel that is recoiling upward) will shoot lower than a slower bullet, all other things being equal. I haven't tried this, but it has been suggested before.

You need to test these with your gun and your ammo, but you can change the impact of your bullet by varying the parameters.


Charlie

yeah Charlie I tried to file the sight on the vaquero and even though going slow screwed it up so its got a new sight. i just dont think you can adjust a mod 29 that much to shoot both can you?

__________________
US ARMY
Viet Nam 70-71

If you look at a slow motion video of a handgun being shot, you'll notice the bullet is long gone out of the barrel before there is any upward recoil. That would indicate a lighter bullet at the same velocity should impact at the same place as a heavier bullet. I haven't actually tried that scenario, but I can assure you barrel time is not the reason, as I used to think, for light bullets shooting higher.

45 ACP Revolver vs Pistol Recoil Slow Motion - YouTube

A lighter bullet & then play with the speeds of the lighter bullet. It's a common practice to do with 9mm's & fixed sights.

I've done the same thing with 44spl bulldogs that I've owned in the past along with s&w 29's.

A 300g bullet in the mag gives you a ton of wiggle room for light bullets in the spl. Try some bullets in the 180-215g range, they should get you there.

You could actually do the same thing with mag cases, light loads & light bullets, that will save you from buying new brass.

Were you loading those 300g bullets in 44spl cases?

Paul,
While the video you reference is interesting, it in fact does not support your premise at all. If it were shot at 60,000fps against a grid background where you could actually measure what you claim then it might be compelling, but it still would not explain real world results.

The dynamics of a pistol's recoil differ significantly from that of a shoulder fired weapon, rifle or shotgun. If you draw a line from rear sight to front sight and extend that line to the target, then draw a line through the center of the bore and extend that down range you'll notice that on any pistol, even a 22, the bore line points significantly below the sight line. That's why companies like Freedom Arms sells front sights of various heights. For example, when I bought my 475 Linebaugh from them I had to go to a taller front sight to center the group so I could shoot 420grain mid-range loads. Why? Because of what is called dwell time. All other things being equal, the bullet on this load spends more time in the barrel, than a load that uses a lighter but faster bullet, and the gun has more time to rotate around it's pivot point in your firing hand. By the time that load leaves the barrel the gun is pointing ever so slightly higher and thus prints higher. The taller front sight compensates for this.

However Paul, to support your point, all other things are never equal. Most of my guns are fixed sight big bore guns and one of the ways I "sight" my guns in is through hand loading. Various loads (bullet weights, powder charges, powder types) will print differently, even with the same weight bullet and approximate velocity. I experiment with various loads until I get the group printing where I want with a load that performs within my set parameters. Pretty illustrative of what the original post was talking about.

To "solve" this problem, what I've done in the past is load a heavier bullet in the 44 Special and a lighter bullet in the 44 Mag, pushing both to velocities that give me the performance I want. I can then fine tune the loads to get them somewhat to the same point of aim...if I'm patient enough. But since I'm not normally that patient, I usually develop one load for each of my guns and leave it at that.
Keith

In theory there is no difference between practice and theory but in practice there is.

Maybe this video is a little more compelling?
Firearm cycling slow motion / ciclo das armas camera lenta - YouTube

Sorry, Paul. Not really and for the reasons described above. Laws of physics just don't back up your premise.
Keith

Well, considering all semi-autos are designed to only allow bolt movement after the bullet leaves the barrel and reduces pressure, I think your physics may need a little adjustment. There's also a matter of mass that has to overcome inertia before there is any actual movement, as in blow back semi-autos and just in general for a 1-4 pound gun.

I'm going to need a slow motion video of that slow motion video, because I couldn't tell.

Paul,

No matter how long/hard you beat a dead horse it is still dead! Regardless of what your videos seem to show. it just isn't so. You can easily see this for yourself if you have a revolver on hand. Makes no difference what caliber or make you will see exactly the same thing, albeit heavier calibers will be more exaggerated.

Simply lay a straight-edge over the sights and look at the gun from the side. What you will see is the barrel points down at an angle from the sight line. In other words, the barrel is pointing at a place significantly lower than the sights when sighted on a target! If there was no upward movement of the barrel before the bullet exited how do you explain that the bullet can hit at the point-of-aim when at the moment the hammer drops the barrel is pointed sometimes as much as 2 feet below the line-of-sight at 25 yards?

If this were not true then neither bullet weight nor velocity would have any noticeable effect on point-of-impact vs. point-of-aim at any reasonable distance

If you continue to hold fast to your initial assertion we will have to assume you are of the ilk who simply refuses "to be confused by facts"!

Exactly the same thing applies to semi-automatic pistols but it is more difficult to see as the angle of the bore is concealed within the slide.

On a autoloader you could say it takes force to drive the slide backwards to unlock the barrel and that would create recoil. It would be interesting to compare revolvers and autoloaders to see if there are any differences.

Good observation. I shoot revolvers and 1911s in bullseye, often in the same day. I can feel a very noticeable recoil pulse from the slide of the 1911 giving the gun a distinctly different feel from the Model 14 I shoot at the end of the day. Both have about the same overall recoil but the revolver has a very "clean" pop of recoil in the palm of my hand. The 1911 has a soft initial push followed immediately by a harder and heavier hit to my hand when the slide hits the buffer at the end of its travel. There is a third pulse when the slide rams the next round into the chamber but very soft in comparison to the other two.

The best comparison using the same ammo is between my 1911 and my 5" 625 Model 1989 with the full lug barrel. Both guns have about the same heft, but he recoil of the revolver, even though heavier, is easier to manage because its very short in duration and straight back into the hand. Muzzle rise is also less and the followup shot is much easier even though I shoot double action.

Keith

It isn't a matter of beating a dead horse, because you know perfectly well the same bullets with different powders will place the POI in a different place. Did the sights change to accomplish that? Is it just velocity that changes things?

A straight edge doesn't tell you anything, try using a level and see if you get the same results, like this:


The dowel in the barrel has the same gap between it and the level its entire length.

You must be looking at a different photo then the one you posted. Try measuring the gap, the difference is evident even with the naked eye.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

There's a simple answer. There's no point in trying to adjust the sights everytime you swith ammo. The point of impact when practicing w/44 Spl. is irrelevant. You only need to be concerned about the group size no matter how high or low it is.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

I did measure the gap, that's why I said it was the same 1" all the way the length of the dowel. You're just seeing an optical illusion from the differences in the background.

Can't be the same forever, the two points must intersect somewhere. The bullets always falling so the sights must angle downward in relation to the bore to meet the bullet POI.

Try this video of a .45 shooting and place your cursor on the barrel and see if the barrel moves when the bullet exits the barrel. This should be the English version.

kurzzeit.com - Startseite

I do see the gun move back a bit in a straight line. The fulcrum point in relation to the bore axis would be another factor along with how rigidly the gun is mounted. Quite a few significant variables to take into account. I haven't spent any time exploring it first hand but have assumed from what I've read on ballistics that heavier bullets impact higher due to recoil. It seems counterintuitive when you take into account the timing and need to overcome inertia.

If anything, the barrel will be oriented slightly up in relation to the sights to compensate for gravitational pulls/trajectory. I'm not sure if every bullet crosses the line of sight twice, but I'm pretty sure it does if there is any appreciable range involved.

Recoil that goes straight back has no bearing on raising the POI, that's just the barrel starting to unlock after the bullet exits.

Paul, you're beating dead horse that cannot be supported by simple observation. Take any centerfire caliber you choose and you'll find that lighter bullet will ALWAYS shoot lower than heavier bullets at the same power level. How much is partially dependent on the shooters recoil management and some is dependent on the offset between the bore axis and the rotational axis of the shooters hand but it's true it every case where the bore is above the axis of rotation for the shooters hand.

If you don't believe this, it is quite easy to prove. Sit down in front of a benchrest and put your hands on a sandbag. Then fire the gun at a LARGE target at about 30 feet and allow the gun to flip up as freely as possible while retaining good retention of the gun. Then fire another round at that same point of aim while controlling the muzzle rise and recoil. What you will find is that the uncontrolled shot will impact the target much higher than the contolled shot. If your theory that a gun doesn't move while the bullet was in the barrel this would not be the case. Because, by your theory, the gun doesn't move until AFTER the bullet has left the barrel.

BTW, the technical term for this is Bore Transit Recoil and it's one aspect of shooting a handgun that makes it so much more difficult than shooting a rifle. Because until you gain the skill of consistent recoil management you'll keep throwing flyers as your management of the recoil varies. It's also the reason why many who are fairly good with a short barreled handgun struggle with accuracy issues when they try a longer barrel, longer barrels increase the transit time and increase the effect of Bore Transit Recoil.

Now, pertaining to the original question. In some cases, such as 38 spl/357 Magnum, maintaining the same bullet weight and using ammo loaded to standard pressure levels will yield POI in regards to elevation that are quite close. Not identical but close enough for Service grade accuracy. As to why, the lower pressure caliber will have a decrease in velocity such that the transit time is extended enough to cause the barrel to rise higher enough to match the rise of the heavier recoiling but faster moving Magnum. Given the similar difference in energy levels between the 44 spl. and 44 Magnum I would expect similar results. However, Bore Transit Recoil is a complex reaction and barrel length, handgun mass, and recoil management all come into play. So you can't expect perfect overlap in the POI, just that at 30 feet you'll probably see hits within 2 inches.

This statement is true in rifles but I can say confidently this is not true in any revolver I own. That includes a Rossi .38 snubbie, a model 64 .38 4-inch, a model 29 .44 mag 6.5-inch and a model 686 .357 6-inch. The model 64 and Rossi have fixed sights, the model 29 and 686 have adjustable sights. All four have a sight line above boresight. The 686 sights are adjusted to hit POA at 15 yards with my 158 GR handloads. The model 29 is "new to me" and I have only shot it a few times so I don't know where it hits, but the previous owner had the sights adjusted above boresight as well.

The picture I posted above is a 4" M629-2 and it certainly isn't pointing lower than the sights. Most people make the assumption the barrel is pointing lower due to its shape instead of putting a level on it like I did.

Free recoil is the way I shoot a rifle, without front hand support on the forearm. Like with this 100 yard group with a 7mm Mag.



Of course, some will argue with empirical data, like the .45 acp being shot and the bullet can be seen exiting before there is any movement of the barrel. BTW, you do know you can do that video almost a frame at a time and measure to a given point each time to see when the movement occurs. It moved about 1/16" after the bullet made its exit.

Even on the screen you can measure the gap between the dowel and level and see that there is about 1/8" more gap at the extreme end compared to at the muzzle.

Why do you insist on trying to tell people that what they can obviously see for themselves is not correct? For that matter, how do we know you didn't run the rear sight up as high as it will go just trying to prove your point!! It seems odd you have, apparently, avoided showing the rear sight.

Here are some pictures I just took. I specifically chose 3 fixed sight guns to emphasize that sight adjustment is not a factor. The 4th is my M-24. These have been flipped 180 degrees, they were shot inverted on a table top. On the M-10s pay particular note to the relationship of the top frame edges to the table top, and the gap at the front of the frame compared to the rear of the frame being in contact with the table top. The length of the frame demonstrates the angle which the barrel is pointed down relative to the sight line. Just eye-balling it looks like about 2 1/2 degrees. Certainly you understand that the frame top strap is parallel to the bore line!

If you can still say the barrel is not pointed BELOW the line of sight you are only lying to yourself.

Attached Images

	M-10b.jpg (46.5 KB, 53 views)
	M-10C.jpg (20.6 KB, 50 views)
	M-36a.jpg (36.0 KB, 51 views)
	M-24.jpg (34.6 KB, 52 views)

Amazed at how much of a angle there is. Looks like the only way the sights could intersect the bullet travel is muzzle rise. I'll have to give it a try myself. Dynamic.

Tried that straight edge test on my autos and found much less angle.

Yes, my Commander also has the muzzle oriented upwards in relation to the sights.

I'm trying to figure out why there is a difference between revolvers and semi-autos and the only thing I can figure out is the barrel to cylinder gap (besides obvious design differences) acts as a reverse compensator. Meaning the top strap catches the gases from the BC gap and starts upward recoil before the bullet exits. Like in this picture.
BBHFarm Gallery :: Reloading :: ahd

As suggested, I went out and shot two loads today. One was a 105 gr LSWC from a Lee mold and the other was a 358429. I used 3.5 gr of W231 on both loads with the same lot of brass and primers. I have to admit, it was sort of a waste of time, because my 8 3/8" M27-2 w/red dot didn't like the 358429 at all.

The two shots side by side on the left of the target are the 105 gr bullets and even though I wobble a lot in my advancing age, they are touching. The same can't be said for the heavier (168 gr) bullet, which is the 4 shots scattered all over the place.



Since a couple of the heavier bullets are lower than the lighter ones, I don't know that it can be said they shoot higher.

I chose this load to get two that were similar in velocity ~675 fps, but even then the recoil energy was .97 ft lbs vs 2.14 ft lbs and the recoil velocity was 4.99 fps vs 7.42 fps, lighter vs heavier in both sets of numbers.

Without a Ransom rest, I don't know that anything conclusive can be determined by what I was attempting.

Once a bullet starts moving forward, the gun starts recoiling - both reactions to the same action. Why would the gun recoil ONLY after the bullet left the barrel?

Paul, I did examine that first video you posted. Now a couple of comments on that particular video. One is that it's a low resolution video, low enough that in combination with the shutter speed used the bullet cannot be clearly observed leaving the barrel, at least I coudn't see it. However, the flame flash that occurs AFTER the bullet has left the barrel is clearly visible. The first appearance of that flash takes place WELL AFTER the gun shown starts moving in recoil and the barrel is pointed in an upwards direction. Another issue is that this video is highly compressed, which means that Frames have BEEN DROPPED during the compression. If we could actually see the original UNCOMPRESSED video it might be possible that we could see the bullet actually exiting the barrel.

Now, lets go back to High School Physics. Newtons Third Law states that for every Action there is an equal and opposite Reaction. It's also worth noting that Newton and every scientist since has NEVER found that the Reaction is delayed. That Reaction starts at the same time as the Action and is directly proportional to the Action. What you are proposing is that the bullet gets a "free ride" while it is accelerating down the barrel. In classic Physics that just can't happen, perhaps it can in Quantum Physics but we aren't talking about String Theory or Strange Quarks here, we are talking about a simple bullet that can be held in your hand. Remember that old formula, Force = Mass times Acceleration? That bullet has Mass, and it's going from a dead stop to something between 700 and 1500 feet per second, which means that it is Accelerating while moving down the barrel. As a result there WILL be a reaction Force applied to the frame while that bullet is transiting the barrel, it's what we call Recoil. Because that barrel on most firearms is above the Pivot Center of the shooters hand and wrist it will generate what is called a Couple in Engineering terms, which is very simply a Torque component of the forces generated. End result of all this is that under Recoil most firearms move in a rearward direction while at the same time the muzzle rises.

There are some exceptions to this, for example with the Chiappa Rhino revolver the barrel is aligned with the bottom chamber of the cylinder. Because of this the force line produced by the bullet accelerating down the barrel is nearly aligned with the wrist. End result is the force line passes very close to the pivot center of the wrist joint which results in a very low Couple, or Torque Reaction component. There were also some Palm Grip concealed handguns that had the barrel held between the middle and third fingers that achieved the same effect. However, IMO the sight line on the Chiappa Rhino is offset too far above the barrel for optimum accuracy and those Palm Grip antiques didn't have any sights at all. IMO in 10 or 20 years the Chiappa Rhino will just be an interesting footnote in firearms history and not widely used.

Because at some point some firearms maker will figure out how to shape a gun barrel with a slightly parabolic curve so that the reaction forces of the bullet acting on the curve balance with the torque reaction due to the offset of the barrel to the wrist pivot center.

An argument of significance.

I didn't do well in high school physics, so give me some numbers like the actual amount of gun movement that comes from .97 ft lbs of recoil energy. I've looked at a lot of slow motion videos today and most show bullet exit prior to slides moving or upward recoil, like here:
http://www.bbhfarm.com/albums/Reloading/ahh.png
and here for a revolver:
http://www.bbhfarm.com/albums/Reloading/ahi.png
and here:
http://www.bbhfarm.com/albums/Reloading/ahj.png
and this video
Slow-motion video of guns fired underwater | Doobybrain.com

Only that last link provide a video, the others were all stills.

With the revolver if you go frame by frame you can catch the initial cavitation discharge of the water column exiting the barrel. I can only make an assumtion at this frame but IMO it's just after the bullet has exited the cylinder. If you jump between this frame (2:15) and the one immediately proceeding it (2:14) you'll see the barrel rises about 1/4 to 1/2 degree at this point. Unfortunately, the next frame (2:17) is post bullet exit from the barrel where the bullet can clearly be seen. At that point it is obvious that the muzzle has risen by at least 5 degrees.

Now consider that muzzle deflection between (2:14) and (2:15). While 1/4 degrees doesn't seem like a lot, that is a whopping 15 minutes of angle. This means the deflection in POI at 100 yards will be 15 INCHES. Divide 15 inches by 4 and you have a deflection of 3 3/4 inches as the bullet is ENTERING the barrel. While that sounds extreme, that is because the only thing restraining the gun is the flat base it's mounted to and the water enclosing the whole rig.

It's why I suggest that you try shooting from a rest with two consecutive rounds. One with the muzzle flip unrestrained and one with the muzzle flip restrained. I've done this as an experiment and have seen the results, the change in elevation is HUGE.

BTW, the reason I tried it was because I was having problems with consistent recoil management with my 6 1/2 inch 610 shooting 40 caliber ammunition. My thought was to let the mass of that long heavy barrel control the recoil, thus eliminating my recoil management issues. Only took me two shots to decide that was a dumb idea, sailed both rounds over the target in spite of aming at that very bottom of a 12 inch target. BTW, range was 25 yards. After that excercise I concluded that there just aren't any shortcuts to gaining consistent recoil management and put in two years of work with the 610 to get where I wanted to be. A side benefit of doing this is that I also got a lot better at shooting my shorter barreled handguns.

I'm also curious where you got that 0.97 ft.lbs. recoil energy number. Physics here again. According to the Law of Conservation of Energy, Energy In EQUALS Energy Out. Most 38 spl. range loads generate about 200 ft.lbs. of Muzzle Energy. That means that the total energy expressed by recoil will also be 200 ft.lbs. Now, it's been almost 40 years since I did any work with the SI system of units of measure but I still remember that one failing of the English system of measures is that in some cases the units used to describe a measurement can be VERY confusing. One of these confusions is that Energy is defined using the same units as Torque, the ft.lbs. However, they are not really the same units. It's an area where the Metric System, or SI is vastly superior, under SI energy is defined as Joules and torque is a Newton Meter. In addition, IIRC in the English system Work is also sometimes expressed as ft.lbs./S and sometimes as Horesepower. I suspect that 0.97 ft.lbs. number your are reporting is actually a unit of Work, not energy. IIRC it should also actually be ft.lbs./SECOND. Bascially, it's a unit of Mass being acted on by a Force over a period of Time. Forty years ago I could probably have done the calculations involved, unfortunately after 40 years I just have no idea where to even start. I also have a vague memory of a conversion factor of 32.2 feet per second being required to convert Lbs. Force to Lbs. Mass. Bottomline, the English system of units is a complete hash and drove me absolutely nuts trying to keep it straight when I was in Dynamics. What's sad is that I aced Dynamics, however if you don't use it you lose it. Back then I also took German and about all I can remember of German today is how to say hello or ask a girl to dance.

Finally, I would suggest that you stop poking around the internet trying to prove your point. The simple fact is that anything you find will be compressed too much to yield any real information. Frames will have been dropped during compression and those missing frames are nearly essential. In addition, you need videos shot with Lab Grade high speed cameras, 600 frames per second won't cut it when you need 60,000 frames per second to illustrate a high speed event like a gun firing. You're also flogging a dead horse. Barrel do move while the bullet is in the barrel, in some cases a lot. I still remember my father telling me that when a Battleship like the Missouri fired a full broadside with every gun it would shove the whole ship 3 feet sideways in the water.

And with that very lucid discussion point, let's close down this thread.
Keith

I havent been here awhile wow lots of responses. my original idea was "Is there enough travel in adjustable sight 44 mag to shoot specials or mags and adjust the sight when switching to shoot poi at say 25 yards? maybe I didnt get that across but that was what I was trying to find out.

__________________
US ARMY
Viet Nam 70-71

Yes,there should be.I have a 4 inch anaconda that is my main 44 spcl/ 44 mag shooter and iirc ( haven't shot it in a year)I have the sights adjusted so a 44 mag round hits poa at 25 yards and 44 special needs a 6 o'clock hold of about 4 inches.

I checked out the vid clips, all but one failed to have the requisite resolution to illustrate anything at all that being the business end of an auto displaying rearward movement as the bullet was taking the tour of the barrel. Even this was not definitive as no other part of the gun could be seen.
Seeing as you've settled on these as evidence I'll just assume there really isn't much out there in the way of useful footage.

__________________
it just needs more voltage

s2harry-easy (more expensive) solution is 2 identical pistols in 44 special and 44 mag, or Ruger with adj sights, or just use same load for practice.

If using different power loads and different weight bullets, not only will your elevation change with different loads, your windage can change as well. If you are practicing at close range with rapid shots, the POI difference is not as significant.

If uou are desiring longer range accuracy, as you have found out, the difference can be huge. Even if not using 44 specials for practice, you may want to test your load from 7 to 100 yards to get general idea of trajectory. The trajectory may suprise you.

"I havent been here awhile wow lots of responses. my original idea was "Is there enough travel in adjustable sight 44 mag to shoot specials or mags and adjust the sight when switching to shoot poi at say 25 yards? maybe I didnt get that across but that was what I was trying to find out."

Depends on bullet weight, sights, model of revolver. Chances are better if you use same bullet weight at lower velocity. I had to file down the sights on Ruger BH SA and add Bowen rear sight to be able to adjust from 200 gns at 850 fps to Corbon 300 grain plus p 45 lc loads. That would be extreme example.