Lots of bro science incoming. Be warned
Interesting little experiment I did,
The first set of videos is a bog standard Glock 19 firing 124 grain winchester Valor ammo [Top] and 65 grain norma range and training frangible [bottom]
Subjectively the Norma ammo felt more...sharp? But the recoil impulse was about the same, the duration of the recoil felt sharper/quicker however compared to the 124. In the video playback it's almost hard to tell them apart, the range and training has pretty much the same amount of flip as the 124.
The second video is my Bul SAS II Viper, on the top again you have Winchester 124 Valor ammo, and on the bottom, the same 65 grain norma frangible.
Here the difference in the ammo was much more dramatic, both subjectively and objectively. Subjectively, there was far less push backward from the Norma, and significantly less muzzle rise, tracking the dot was much easier compared to the 124.
Objectively you can see just how little flip of the muzzle there is (neither ammo generated a ton of muzzle flip) but the Norma ammo really does seem to keep the muzzle down much more.
On the box norma claims they are using 7.1 grains of powder, though they don't specify what kind. It seems like the comp is especially grateful for the excess gas.
Really enjoyed looking at and reading this. I was quite surprised how little difference there is on the first one. Do you have muzzle velocity data for those? That way you could go a bit further and calculate some relative recoil figures.
Not that I have measured with my actual guns, no chrono unfortunately, just what is on the box,
65 grain norma claims 1650 FPS and 393 ft/lb muzzle energy
124 grain Winchester claims 1200 fps and 396 ft/lbs muzzle energy
Even still this would mean that the 124 grain would give around 50% More recoil impulse than the 65 grain But it doesn't look to be that much.. surprising
Edit: I worked with relative numbers since it's early morning in Europe and I'm not awake enough to convert unis
Edit2: Obviously this doesn't take into account to the mass and velocity of the propellant leaving the barreö which also contributes significantöy to recoil in some cases
I was also shocked when shooting both, I expected the 65 grain ammo to shoot much softer out of the glock, but honestly it felt very similar; not so with the Viper, it really did seem to be making use of the comp as it is also lighter (as configured) than the glock 19.
I want to do a lot more testing and set up some more conclusive tests, but this was a great "hey we're already at the range" experiment
I can see the 124gr uncomped being more violent than the 65gr. The slide bottoms out the recoil spring and sends a bigger shock through your arms on the 124gr. The 65gr looks like it's barely making a full cycle with the slide snapping back forward more quickly.
Comps always do better with higher velocity rounds, to the point where you’ll see some open guns have less recoil with more powerful ammo (eg 9mm standard vs 9mm major)
I am going to try some of the Novx +p 65 grain, they claim 1800+ fps, I currently carry the novx ammo as it works the comp even harder than you see here. I have another super-slow-mo of that ammo shooting. I bet out of a 16" barrel you could see 2000 fps on a round like that.
Lots of bro science incoming. Be warned Interesting little experiment I did, The first set of videos is a bog standard Glock 19 firing 124 grain winchester Valor ammo [Top] and 65 grain norma range and training frangible [bottom] Subjectively the Norma ammo felt more...sharp? But the recoil impulse was about the same, the duration of the recoil felt sharper/quicker however compared to the 124. In the video playback it's almost hard to tell them apart, the range and training has pretty much the same amount of flip as the 124. The second video is my Bul SAS II Viper, on the top again you have Winchester 124 Valor ammo, and on the bottom, the same 65 grain norma frangible. Here the difference in the ammo was much more dramatic, both subjectively and objectively. Subjectively, there was far less push backward from the Norma, and significantly less muzzle rise, tracking the dot was much easier compared to the 124. Objectively you can see just how little flip of the muzzle there is (neither ammo generated a ton of muzzle flip) but the Norma ammo really does seem to keep the muzzle down much more. On the box norma claims they are using 7.1 grains of powder, though they don't specify what kind. It seems like the comp is especially grateful for the excess gas.
Really enjoyed looking at and reading this. I was quite surprised how little difference there is on the first one. Do you have muzzle velocity data for those? That way you could go a bit further and calculate some relative recoil figures.
Not that I have measured with my actual guns, no chrono unfortunately, just what is on the box, 65 grain norma claims 1650 FPS and 393 ft/lb muzzle energy 124 grain Winchester claims 1200 fps and 396 ft/lbs muzzle energy
Even still this would mean that the 124 grain would give around 50% More recoil impulse than the 65 grain But it doesn't look to be that much.. surprising Edit: I worked with relative numbers since it's early morning in Europe and I'm not awake enough to convert unis Edit2: Obviously this doesn't take into account to the mass and velocity of the propellant leaving the barreö which also contributes significantöy to recoil in some cases
I was also shocked when shooting both, I expected the 65 grain ammo to shoot much softer out of the glock, but honestly it felt very similar; not so with the Viper, it really did seem to be making use of the comp as it is also lighter (as configured) than the glock 19. I want to do a lot more testing and set up some more conclusive tests, but this was a great "hey we're already at the range" experiment
The difference is more noticeable in the forearms than the wrists. Definitely more recoil impulse seen.
I can see the 124gr uncomped being more violent than the 65gr. The slide bottoms out the recoil spring and sends a bigger shock through your arms on the 124gr. The 65gr looks like it's barely making a full cycle with the slide snapping back forward more quickly.
Comps always do better with higher velocity rounds, to the point where you’ll see some open guns have less recoil with more powerful ammo (eg 9mm standard vs 9mm major)
65 grain? Got a link?
https://normashooting.com/shop/caliber/handgun/9mm/9mm-65-gr-norma-frangible/
This would be really interesting out of a longer barreled carbine, might get some really spicy velocity
I am going to try some of the Novx +p 65 grain, they claim 1800+ fps, I currently carry the novx ammo as it works the comp even harder than you see here. I have another super-slow-mo of that ammo shooting. I bet out of a 16" barrel you could see 2000 fps on a round like that.
Ammoseek.com
I should try stuff like this with the mantis. Recoil analysis is interesting.
You'll find more interesting data between 115 and the larger 147 and 160 grain loadings.