Best recoil-absorbing grips for 686?

[medicstimpy]

Best? Go to a gun show and get a nice set of used factory wood grips and take your dremel tool to customize it to your hands.

Don't waste the money on squishy too small and poor location of the finger grooves with a hogue. They were better than scuffing a mint original wood set and did the job until I found a nice set to modify.

 

[capp325]

Like BC Mike and Bronco Boy, I have to say that I never even considered the recoil of .357 mag to be an issue in my 5" 686 w/stock Hogue rubber grips. In fact, I found it took me a lot longer to get used to shooting .40 S&W out of my P229 than .357 mag out of the 686. .38 special was a joke.

I think there's a reason S&W revolvers come with Hogue from the factory

I don't know about P229, but my .40 S&W BHP has a lot less recoil than my 686 with 125gr magnum loads (though I'm still far more accurate with the latter).

 

[sogetthis]

I don't know about P229, but my .40 S&W BHP has a lot less recoil than my 686 with 125gr magnum loads (though I'm still far more accurate with the latter).

I wasn't talking about an empirical comparison of muzzle flip on the P229 vs. 686

Felt recoil is mostly subjective, and as such you will get different opinions from different people. Obviously the two firearms recoil in different ways. The P229 exerts most of its force straight back into my hand, whereas the 686 muzzle jumps a bit. For a new shooter, like myself, I was surprised that the P229 recoiled that way, and found it much harder to get used to than the way the 686 recoils. That's what I meant. My 686 is a 5" if that makes a difference.

At the beginning, I could pick up the 686 and be very accurate with it. Now that I'm getting the hang of the P229, I can get better groups shooting .357Sig out of it than I can with .357 Mag out of the 686.... However, this might be down to the fact that I'm shooting the P229 a lot more now.

 

[capp325]

The P229 exerts most of its force straight back into my hand, whereas the 686 muzzle jumps a bit.

Actually, the opposite is normally true. Semi-autos tend to have more of a muzzle flip (one way to reduce it is to install a lighter recoil spring) while revolvers push straight back due to their lack of a recoil spring. If you're experiencing more perceived recoil with a P229 than with a 686 shooting full-power magnum loads, there's got to be something seriously wrong with your grip.

 

[sogetthis]

Actually, the opposite is normally true. Semi-autos tend to have more of a muzzle flip (one way to reduce it is to install a lighter recoil spring) while revolvers push straight back due to their lack of a recoil spring. If you're experiencing more perceived recoil with a P229 than with a 686 shooting full-power magnum loads, there's got to be something seriously wrong with your grip.

*Actually* only one out of the two of us shoots both a 5" 686 and a DAK P229 with a 14lb Wolff spring, tungsten guide rod, short trigger AND in the loads I've got here. So.... thanks for your expert advice on my grip.

Why you decided to question the way *I* perceive the FELT recoil in two of my firearms in the first place, is beyond me. Do you come to CGN simply to debate pointless issues?

Try shooting a 229 in .40 before you comment further. Better luck next time.

 

[capp325]

*Actually* only one out of the two of us shoots both a 5" 686 and a DAK P229 with a 14lb Wolff spring, tungsten guide rod, short trigger AND in the loads I've got here. So.... thanks for your expert advice on my grip.

Why you decided to question the way *I* perceive the FELT recoil in two of my firearms in the first place, is beyond me. Do you come to CGN simply to debate pointless issues?

Try shooting a 229 in .40 before you comment further. Better luck next time.

Did someone piss in your serial this morning or something? I don't see why you got all worked up over my original comment in the first place. And I'm not really sure what made you think I was "questioning" the way you perceive recoil. I simply made an observation based on MY experience. Perhaps all the is clouding your judgment.

 

[Gun Lover]

I don't think a recoil spring in a semi auto has much to do with its recoil trajectory, I'd say it's more the product of the relation between the axis of the bore and the grip. If anything, a lighter recoil spring should make a semi kick more, not less.

I don't have any experience with the S229, but I know 1911's will kick more with the same loads, if they have a lighter recoil spring, or at least they feel that way in my hands. In my experience semis tend to kick more in a straight line, because the bore axis is lower in your hand, whereas the revolver will tend to roll up, because the bore axis is higher. But I guess we all feel recoil very differently.

By the way, it’s that rolling up of the revolver that made it harder for me to control it with the Hogue grips, because my middle finger didn’t have much to hang onto to control it, plus the darn finger grooves were all in the wrong place. And that is the reason why, “in my hands”, the Pachmayrs work better.

 

[capp325]

I don't think a recoil spring in a semi auto has much to do with its recoil trajectory, I'd say it's more the product of the relation between the axis of the bore and the grip. If anything, a lighter recoil spring should make a semi kick more, not less.

Many people confuse snap (perceived recoil) with flip (muzzle rise). The two are not the same thing. A gun that produces more perceived recoil will not necessarily cause more muzzle flip than a "softer" shooting gun. In fact, the reverse is likely to be the case. The general rule of thumb is that the more you decrease snap, the more you increase flip. A heavier recoil spring decreases slide velocity and increases the length of time over which recoil is absorbed. The greater the length of the recoil impulse, the greater the muzzle flip (all else being equal). So yes, you can actually decrease flip by going with a lighter recoil spring (at the cost of greater perceived recoil and increased wear on the gun's components of course).

 

[sogetthis]

Many people confuse snap (perceived recoil) with flip (muzzle rise). The two are not the same thing. A gun that produces more perceived recoil will not necessarily cause more muzzle flip than a "softer" shooting gun. In fact, the reverse is likely to be the case. The general rule of thumb is that the more you decrease snap, the more you increase flip. A heavier recoil spring decreases slide velocity and increases the length of time over which recoil is absorbed. The greater the length of the recoil impulse, the greater the muzzle flip (all else being equal). So yes, you can actually decrease flip by going with a lighter recoil spring (at the cost of greater perceived recoil and increased wear on the gun's components of course).

Well I think you just explained exactly what I wanted to say, but without all my noob terminology. I thought you were challenging the fact that my 229 recoils differently than my 686, if I was mistaken then I apologize for flipping out.

The recoil from the .40 just hits me in a different way than the 686. At the beginning, I could put box upon box of Remington Golden Sabre through the 686 and not flinch. But the second I started shooting .40 and later .357Sig through the 229, the first few rounds each time out at the range, I had to watch for a flinch. The concussion blast is very different, and it might just be the fact that its much closer to my face than in the 686 (106mm vs. ~130mm). I can't be sure, I'm still a noob with pistols.

 

[capp325]

The recoil from the .40 just hits me in a different way than the 686. At the beginning, I could put box upon box of Remington Golden Sabre through the 686 and not flinch. But the second I started shooting .40 and later .357Sig through the 229, the first few rounds each time out at the range, I had to watch for a flinch.

This makes sense. Flinching is an anticipatory response to muzzle flip; you're instinctively trying to keep the gun down. With a revolver, the muzzle doesn't rise as much for reasons I explained above, so there's less tendency to flinch.

 

[Cerdan]

Funny, in a thread I started a while ago regarding the sights on my S&W Model 15, I was told that the reason revolvers had such large front sights compared to semi-autos was that revolvers tended to flip up, whereas semi-autos tended to kick back. I was told that "Modern semi-autos are designed so the barrel is lower in your hand. This causes them to not flip up as much. This allows for quicker following shots. It also reduces the need for a higher front sight."

 

[capp325]

Funny, in a thread I started a while ago regarding the sights on my S&W Model 15, I was told that the reason revolvers had such large front sights compared to semi-autos was that revolvers tended to flip up, whereas semi-autos tended to kick back. I was told that "Modern semi-autos are designed so the barrel is lower in your hand. This causes them to not flip up as much. This allows for quicker following shots. It also reduces the need for a higher front sight."

How does a large front sight help with muzzle flip? I'm lost