If the debate is over a comp have an effect vs the weight it adds to the muzzle, try shooting it with your comp rotated to direct gas down. That should tell you right away if it makes a difference. Easy enough to try if the comp is installed with a jam nut.
Comp for 9mm pcc
- Thread starter icecold
- Start date
well, makes a lot of sense, but realize you are proposing this to folks that insist a comp is required to manage recoil, and then argue that muzzle flip doesn't exist. you want to complicate the discussion with directional vs non-directional compensators? have fun with that.
Fun test for anyone interested.
After you put 40 or 50 holes into a paper or cardboard target, shoot it with a non compensated PCC from 1ft away. Watch the paper shred into a million pieces. That takes force. I'd rather have that force come out of my barrel upwards not pushing the rifle into my shoulder.
Think of limp wristing a long nozzle air gun. Even 100psi will move your hand. Same concept applies to a pressure washer wand.
After you put 40 or 50 holes into a paper or cardboard target, shoot it with a non compensated PCC from 1ft away. Watch the paper shred into a million pieces. That takes force. I'd rather have that force come out of my barrel upwards not pushing the rifle into my shoulder.
Think of limp wristing a long nozzle air gun. Even 100psi will move your hand. Same concept applies to a pressure washer wand.
I've been reading this with some interest. I have owned legally a Ruger Mark 1 built in the late 50's since about 1982.. it's got a ramp style muzzle break. Right from the factory. It's a 22 long rifle with a tapered heavy barrel.. the muzzle break helps.. it's not the weight on the end of it in my opinion.
I am the first guy to call them a sissy whistle.. they help.. I cannot argue with that point.
I am the first guy to call them a sissy whistle.. they help.. I cannot argue with that point.
Everybody agrees that compensators work as compensators on handguns and short barrel PCCs (EDIT: though it's still an assumption that deserves to be tested). They have much higher gas pressure at the muzzle. (actually as I write this I realize I don't know one way or the other about 22LR though)
Long barrel PCCs have much lower pressure at the muzzle. If there is not enough gas pressure to get a compensator to work as a compensator, then a comp can do nothing more than work as an equivalent dead weight attached to the muzzle. If that's your goal then they're the perfect solution, since there's no better way to attach a dead weight to the muzzle that I know of.
This is a lot of testing that I have done with my PCC in the last little while. I have shot an "open" gun for the last 30 years in IPSC, and applied it to PCC.
Here are some FB writeups that I have made with all my research.
Load development for the "comped" rifle, just using any ammo will make the comp work, but finding the right balance will make the work well beyone expected.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/9f25dvb6DbXokGU5/
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/tjaWGLh4r7Sdoa2G/
Comp vs muzzle break definition
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/hwm2gFsFFJPhsDD3/
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/vzLsMnuDUV74Cefm/
final conclusion;
-comp's work, to reduce muzzle flip
-enable better dot tracking
they dont reduce recoil, if you want that you need a better buffer system, or custom ammo. There is a reason why competition shooter use reloads, unless they are sponsored by ammo manufacturers.
Here are some FB writeups that I have made with all my research.
Load development for the "comped" rifle, just using any ammo will make the comp work, but finding the right balance will make the work well beyone expected.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/9f25dvb6DbXokGU5/
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/tjaWGLh4r7Sdoa2G/
Comp vs muzzle break definition
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/hwm2gFsFFJPhsDD3/
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/vzLsMnuDUV74Cefm/
final conclusion;
-comp's work, to reduce muzzle flip
-enable better dot tracking
they dont reduce recoil, if you want that you need a better buffer system, or custom ammo. There is a reason why competition shooter use reloads, unless they are sponsored by ammo manufacturers.
Again, your testing was with a short barrel PCC. Nobody has disagreed that comps work for that application (though it's still an assumption that deserves to be tested).
For a long barrel PCC, I've never seen any evidence that there is enough gas pressure at the muzzle for a compensator to be more effective at reducing muzzle flip than an equivalent dead weight attached to the muzzle. Honestly, I'd love to be wrong.
(interesting material in your links though)
i did it with my original 18.6" barrel and got very similar results.
the only thing I noticed from a comped pistol to a comped PCC, is the pistol liked a slow burning powder with a light bullet for max gasses. The PCC liked the faster burning powder with the lighter projectile.
That is where the longer barrel lenght showed me.
This is the comp I used, custom made in Alberta
the only thing I noticed from a comped pistol to a comped PCC, is the pistol liked a slow burning powder with a light bullet for max gasses. The PCC liked the faster burning powder with the lighter projectile.
That is where the longer barrel lenght showed me.
This is the comp I used, custom made in Alberta
Alpining How much pressure is Enough pressure"? You have not defined what it is at any length yet.
Here is some data you might want to mull over. Today I went out and chroned a load of 5 grains of CFE Pistol under 124 gr FMJ BDX bullet.
Here are the results:
Rave9 - 18.5" Barrel Vel. in FPS at 7 yards from the muzzle:
High 1,298
Low 1,254
Avg 1,285
FX 9 10" Barrel
High 1,299
Low 1,254
Avg 1,267
To express in the form of Power Factor for the IDPA/ IPSC shooters who might be reading this thread.
Raven9 18.5" Average PF 159 High PF 161 Low PF 156
FX 9 10" Average PF 157 High PF 161 Low PF 156
Given these are handloads I would suggest both barrels provide the same avg velocity and power factor despite the difference in length.
If gas pressure has some affect on the velocity of the bullet , and I think it does, then it would appear there is little significant difference in the driving factor ie pressure given the velocities are for all practical purposes the same.
Now I am no engineer and my last physics class was 65 years ago more or less but the chrono does not lie. Given the volume of the tube ir the barrel is less in the 10" then the 18.5" and the pressure should be less in the 18.5" barrel but there are other things in play. Burning rates of the powder might be one, the barrels are not identical so friction total friction and its effect on the bullet's velocity likely is not the same BUT for government work the evidence is before us. Today using my Chrono set at 7 yards using 10 rds of ammo measured out of these two carbines at 15C at approx 200 ft above sea level those are the numbers.
Both carbines shot dead flat like I figured they would. Recoil was the same for each gun albeit the FX9 is a smidge lighter.
I am going to reduce charges until I reach about 10 points of PF above what is required for each sport IDPA PF135 and IPSC PF 125
Take Care
Bob
ps Full disclosure: My chrono only reports in whole numbers after 1,000 fps. A commercial unit under tighter controlled conditions might well go to eight or nine decimal points where one might find significant variances for statistical purposes but for us good enough is good enough.
Here is some data you might want to mull over. Today I went out and chroned a load of 5 grains of CFE Pistol under 124 gr FMJ BDX bullet.
Here are the results:
Rave9 - 18.5" Barrel Vel. in FPS at 7 yards from the muzzle:
High 1,298
Low 1,254
Avg 1,285
FX 9 10" Barrel
High 1,299
Low 1,254
Avg 1,267
To express in the form of Power Factor for the IDPA/ IPSC shooters who might be reading this thread.
Raven9 18.5" Average PF 159 High PF 161 Low PF 156
FX 9 10" Average PF 157 High PF 161 Low PF 156
Given these are handloads I would suggest both barrels provide the same avg velocity and power factor despite the difference in length.
If gas pressure has some affect on the velocity of the bullet , and I think it does, then it would appear there is little significant difference in the driving factor ie pressure given the velocities are for all practical purposes the same.
Now I am no engineer and my last physics class was 65 years ago more or less but the chrono does not lie. Given the volume of the tube ir the barrel is less in the 10" then the 18.5" and the pressure should be less in the 18.5" barrel but there are other things in play. Burning rates of the powder might be one, the barrels are not identical so friction total friction and its effect on the bullet's velocity likely is not the same BUT for government work the evidence is before us. Today using my Chrono set at 7 yards using 10 rds of ammo measured out of these two carbines at 15C at approx 200 ft above sea level those are the numbers.
Both carbines shot dead flat like I figured they would. Recoil was the same for each gun albeit the FX9 is a smidge lighter.
I am going to reduce charges until I reach about 10 points of PF above what is required for each sport IDPA PF135 and IPSC PF 125
Take Care
Bob
ps Full disclosure: My chrono only reports in whole numbers after 1,000 fps. A commercial unit under tighter controlled conditions might well go to eight or nine decimal points where one might find significant variances for statistical purposes but for us good enough is good enough.
Good to know - Your posts were probably the most useful thing I've ever seen on FB, but unless I'm missing something they were really just about load development with that specific compensator.
(I didn't see you compare using a comp with using an equivalent dead weight attached to the muzzle)
Heck, I don't know. There's got to be some kind of threshold - You wouldn't expect a compensator on a 30" barrel 22LR with subsonic ammunition to have any effect, right?
Frankly, it's not my job to prove that compensators do or don't work**. The lack of evidence that they do work** means something.
(**better than an equivalent dead weight attached to the muzzle, using common ammunition in common long barrel PCCs)
You might expect that "sufficient operating pressure" is something that comp manufacturers would be very concerned with. From what I've seen, if they have this data, then they don't share it. The more cynical among us may come up with unflattering theories about why they don't want to talk about it.
While we don't have the "sufficient operating pressure" data from the manufacturer, we can still use indirect methods to test whether a comp is functioning as a comp and not just a dead weight: Timed splits with a comp vs. with an equivalent dead weight attached to the muzzle.
Alpini g you seemed to gloss over what you see in front of you. You constantly stick to your theme of no evidence when there appears to be no practical difference based upon simple chrono results.
Stick to what we are talking about:
9MM comp
10" vs 18.5" barrel
Muzzle rise.
Take Care
Bob
Stick to what we are talking about:
9MM comp
10" vs 18.5" barrel
Muzzle rise.
Take Care
Bob
Bob - Muzzle velocity is not the same thing as pressure. Someone earlier in the thread posted pressure figures. There's a big difference in pressure at the muzzle between the 18.5" and 10" (and bigger still for a handgun barrel, which is where the comp idea originated).
But sure, I can restate for clarity: What I'm talking about is 9mm 18.5" barrel, muzzle rise with a comp vs. muzzle rise with an equivalent dead weight attached to the muzzle.
By Weight the difference is 3oz. I have no way of measuring the amount of muzzle rise without shooting the gun. When i shoot the gun without a comp the barrel rises when the gun is shot from the shoulder and from a rest. When I shoot the gun with a comp either from the shoulder or from a rest it doesn't. This was from a Raven9 with an 18.5" barrel. The effect was the same when using a 10" barrel.
How much is "big" and how do you know that. The only thing you really know is you are using an 18.5" barrel. My chrono results indicate there does not appear to be any significant variance between bullet velocities. We also know the gasses are exiting the barrel at super sonic speed with and without a comp. The volume of the gas is less with a comp because some/most exits the comp. Your question really asks is there sufficient gas pressure leaving the comp ti hold the barrel flat using the 9MM cartridge.
The only way you can answer what you are asking would be to weigh your comp, mine weighs 3oz, then replace your comp with a three oz weight. Shoot the gun bare of comp and weighted object the shoot it without the dead weight attached. My bet is there will be no significant difference in muzzle rise. My Raven weighs in at 117oz without a comp. My life experiences would tell me there would be no practical difference in muzzle rise when you add 3oz of dead weight or expressed another way, 2.5% of weight to the end of the gun. There is, when i use a 3oz Comp. Why because the gas pressure exiting the comp is sufficient to prevent the muzzle from rising.
Your initial statement conceded a comp on a 10" barreled PCC would work but a comp would not work on an 18.5" barrel. That statement I suggest is simply not true. There may be less pressure at 18.5" vs 10" but in practical terms it seems there still is enough to complete the task.
FYi Compensators according to Mr. Google were first applied to submachine guns in the 1920's not as you suggest, on pistols. The Cutts Compensator was modified for shotguns along with an adjustable choke. The Cutts worked well on 30" shotguns which were common back in the day. They were popular in the 50's and 60's by duck hunters. Popular but not common. Pistol use of Comps arose from competitive handgun shooting in the 1970's in California led by Jeff Cooper & Co. IPSC and USPSA were the principle drivers of the use of Comps back then and this remains true today with each having Divisions making use of the devices.
Take Care
Bob
AlphaCharlieDelta
Member
- Location
- The Wet Coast
I've read all the forums you have read Alpining. I was on the fence for a long time on compensators effect in 9mm blowback rifles... Until I did actual real world testing of a few different compensators. I've tested the gamma, the Tandemkross, the Davinci, a few linear comps, and a few traditional side and top ported 9mm comps... And through all that testing I noticed a distinct noticeable difference on the muzzle rise and dot bounce on the upward ported 9mm compensators. The testing was done in an 18.7" barreled Ruger PC Carbine in a tandemkross upriser angled chassis system with a holosun 510c at 25yrds. Now, if you are trying to control recoil, compensators will not really help you much. But, if you are trying to use them to flatten dot bounce, which is the dot popping around and making the second shot slower to acquire the same impact point, then they do work. I can't measure the specifics because I don't have laboratory equipment to specifically measure the amount of muzzle movement, but in real world application it gives me the ability to make a combination of faster and more accurate splits that are measurable in IPSC/USPSA competition shooting.
Go to a lvl 2 or higher IPSC PCC match...99% of competitive shooters at these matches run a comp. The gains might be micro gains, but when .35 match points is the only thing between second and fifth (as it was at PCC Nationals this year), you will take the micro gains and be thankful for them.
So if you want to spend the money on a comp, and are looking for micro gains to help keep you competitive? Get yourself an upward ported comp like the TK, Davinci, MBX, etc..
If you don't want the micro gains... You do you
If shooting without a comp works for you, more power to you. But trying to tell people who have actually tested comps in real world competition settings that they are "wrong" because of something you read one time in the interwebs? That's called being a troll...
Cheers,
ACD
Go to a lvl 2 or higher IPSC PCC match...99% of competitive shooters at these matches run a comp. The gains might be micro gains, but when .35 match points is the only thing between second and fifth (as it was at PCC Nationals this year), you will take the micro gains and be thankful for them.
So if you want to spend the money on a comp, and are looking for micro gains to help keep you competitive? Get yourself an upward ported comp like the TK, Davinci, MBX, etc..
If you don't want the micro gains... You do you
If shooting without a comp works for you, more power to you. But trying to tell people who have actually tested comps in real world competition settings that they are "wrong" because of something you read one time in the interwebs? That's called being a troll...
Cheers,
ACD
I saw no trolls here, just a discussion in earnest. Correlation does not imply causation etc. For example what else do 99% of top tier competitive shooters run besides a comp?
Micro gains for reducing muzzle rise is a fair conclusion (when using an upward venting comp). The flipside of that conclusion is that comps represent a cost in money, weight and size (for non top tier competitive scenarios).
But that's not exhaustive either, there are many other directions of vent, with micro gains and associated costs accordingly.
It is possible for multiple perspectives to be correct, all without disproving the validity of the other - all depends on use case.
Micro gains for reducing muzzle rise is a fair conclusion (when using an upward venting comp). The flipside of that conclusion is that comps represent a cost in money, weight and size (for non top tier competitive scenarios).
But that's not exhaustive either, there are many other directions of vent, with micro gains and associated costs accordingly.
It is possible for multiple perspectives to be correct, all without disproving the validity of the other - all depends on use case.
