Basically, adding weights does 3 things.
1, It changes the weight distribution(CG).
2, It changes the mass of gyration affecting the period of gyration of the muzzel, in both frequency and amplitude.
3, It increases the overall weight of the pistol .
In general, to slow down the frequency and amplitude of the muzzel movement, it is desireable to have the added mass (weights) as far foreward as humanly and mechanically possible. The normal routine of adding weight , and then sliding it back and forth for ballance, is not optimum , for as u slide it back for ballance, the muzzel WILL GYRATE MORE. Is this perceptable? In a game where the world champion can be determined by 1/10 OF 1 point, ANY mechanical or mental edge is important! Acording to physics, the correct method to get the ballance, and the maximum benefit of the gyrating mass (slower and less muzzel movement) is to determine a mounting method that puts the weight as far foreward as possible, and ALWAYS mount it in that position. This optimizes the use of the required weight , giving minimum muzzel movement for a given mass.
BALLANCE should be independant of position , and is best achieved by varying the AMOUNT OF WEIGHT APPLIED, NOT its location. This also allows for the lightest overall weight of the system(pistol)for a given CG and muzzel mass.
Obviously , adding a heavy weight near the trigger guard to correct the CG, would not be nearly as affective as addding a much lighter weight 12" further foreward,and would adversly affect the total weight and would do little , if anything, towards slowing dowm muzzel movement! Hope this helps in your quest for an optimal weight system. And yes, adjusting the CG and adding mass to the muzzel WILL help, if properly applied. Properly fitting grips which allow u to better controll the total weight also help. (shameless plug, lol) regards, seaton :)
seaton2-at-frontiernet.net.50058.0
Correct positioning of weights for optimum results.
Moderators: rexifelis, pilkguns
-
Mako
Great POST Gripman! .nt
: Basically, adding weights does 3 things.
: 1, It changes the weight distribution(CG).
: 2, It changes the mass of gyration affecting the period of gyration of the muzzel, in both frequency and amplitude.
: 3, It increases the overall weight of the pistol .
: In general, to slow down the frequency and amplitude of the muzzel movement, it is desireable to have the added mass (weights) as far foreward as humanly and mechanically possible. The normal routine of adding weight , and then sliding it back and forth for ballance, is not optimum , for as u slide it back for ballance, the muzzel WILL GYRATE MORE. Is this perceptable? In a game where the world champion can be determined by 1/10 OF 1 point, ANY mechanical or mental edge is important! Acording to physics, the correct method to get the ballance, and the maximum benefit of the gyrating mass (slower and less muzzel movement) is to determine a mounting method that puts the weight as far foreward as possible, and ALWAYS mount it in that position. This optimizes the use of the required weight , giving minimum muzzel movement for a given mass.
: BALLANCE should be independant of position , and is best achieved by varying the AMOUNT OF WEIGHT APPLIED, NOT its location. This also allows for the lightest overall weight of the system(pistol)for a given CG and muzzel mass.
: Obviously , adding a heavy weight near the trigger guard to correct the CG, would not be nearly as affective as addding a much lighter weight 12" further foreward,and would adversly affect the total weight and would do little , if anything, towards slowing dowm muzzel movement! Hope this helps in your quest for an optimal weight system. And yes, adjusting the CG and adding mass to the muzzel WILL help, if properly applied. Properly fitting grips which allow u to better controll the total weight also help. (shameless plug, lol) regards, seaton :)
makofoto-at-earthlink.net.50063.50058
: 1, It changes the weight distribution(CG).
: 2, It changes the mass of gyration affecting the period of gyration of the muzzel, in both frequency and amplitude.
: 3, It increases the overall weight of the pistol .
: In general, to slow down the frequency and amplitude of the muzzel movement, it is desireable to have the added mass (weights) as far foreward as humanly and mechanically possible. The normal routine of adding weight , and then sliding it back and forth for ballance, is not optimum , for as u slide it back for ballance, the muzzel WILL GYRATE MORE. Is this perceptable? In a game where the world champion can be determined by 1/10 OF 1 point, ANY mechanical or mental edge is important! Acording to physics, the correct method to get the ballance, and the maximum benefit of the gyrating mass (slower and less muzzel movement) is to determine a mounting method that puts the weight as far foreward as possible, and ALWAYS mount it in that position. This optimizes the use of the required weight , giving minimum muzzel movement for a given mass.
: BALLANCE should be independant of position , and is best achieved by varying the AMOUNT OF WEIGHT APPLIED, NOT its location. This also allows for the lightest overall weight of the system(pistol)for a given CG and muzzel mass.
: Obviously , adding a heavy weight near the trigger guard to correct the CG, would not be nearly as affective as addding a much lighter weight 12" further foreward,and would adversly affect the total weight and would do little , if anything, towards slowing dowm muzzel movement! Hope this helps in your quest for an optimal weight system. And yes, adjusting the CG and adding mass to the muzzel WILL help, if properly applied. Properly fitting grips which allow u to better controll the total weight also help. (shameless plug, lol) regards, seaton :)
makofoto-at-earthlink.net.50063.50058
-
Jim P.
It is good to hear someone who knows say that...are there ot
As an engineer I couldn't figure out why a weight should be on the pistol in the middle position or rear position.
I.e. if you're going to hold up the weight (fatigue) you want as much "polar moment of inertia" (pmi)(what you mention)as possible.
Of course you could get this "pmi" with a weight on a stick (straight down) or straight back (or at any angle, actually) Though your pistol wouldn't fit in the box. In any case the weight would be as far out on the stick as possible. If you did this (straight back for instance) wouldn't you use different muscles to hold the pistol in alignment.
So my thinking was, people who have the weight “other than all the way out:” want a heavy gun (polar moment of inertia about your shoulder - not sure about this being any advantage) but don't want to use those muscles that pull the barrel up. I.e. they have strong shoulder muscles, pretty strong arm muscles, but weak "muzzle up" muscles. Probably not possible except for an injury.
Thanks for the info.
Jim P
.50094.50058
I.e. if you're going to hold up the weight (fatigue) you want as much "polar moment of inertia" (pmi)(what you mention)as possible.
Of course you could get this "pmi" with a weight on a stick (straight down) or straight back (or at any angle, actually) Though your pistol wouldn't fit in the box. In any case the weight would be as far out on the stick as possible. If you did this (straight back for instance) wouldn't you use different muscles to hold the pistol in alignment.
So my thinking was, people who have the weight “other than all the way out:” want a heavy gun (polar moment of inertia about your shoulder - not sure about this being any advantage) but don't want to use those muscles that pull the barrel up. I.e. they have strong shoulder muscles, pretty strong arm muscles, but weak "muzzle up" muscles. Probably not possible except for an injury.
Thanks for the info.
Jim P
.50094.50058
-
Sandy Santibanez
Yes, however......
I would like to address some practical aspects.
With my weight system there are advantages in the application of the engineering theories involved.
1. There is little or no cost involved so experimenting with weight/balance is cost effective.
2. The plastic sleeve weighs 3g or less when trimmed. It grips well but can be moved easily on the cylinder so that experimenting for optimum weight/balance can be tried and tested.
3. The wheel weights are 7g each and are easy to cut and attach in fractions and/or multiples on the sleeve.
4. The weights can be positioned at lowest center gravity under the cylinder. If you cant your pistol they can be placed on the side so as to keep the center of gravity as low as possible.
5. Since fatigue can be a factor during a match, it is easy to change the balance (perceived weight) during a match by easily sliding the weight back fractions of an inch without releasing your grip on the pistol.
6. Some shooters like a heavier pistol and do not necessarily want all of the weight out on the end of the barrel. It just feels and shoots better for them. Perhaps it is physical, perhaps it is mental.
As humans we respond to many external stimuli and variables. We change the sights up, down, and even the width of the rear sight during a match depending on how the shots are grouping, the level of illumination, direction of the light, visual contrast, blood sugar, on how we feel at the time, etc. Grip are adjusted, the size of the irises are adjusted, if your back or shoulder gets tired, feet position may be adjusted, jackets removed or added to adjust body temperature, etc.
Why not the weight/balance adjustment since we are not an immutable part of a given equasion? Function and practical application that is easily adjustable to the many variables involved should be used with the theories.
For example of some limitations on my LP-10.
1. The weights are just over 10 grams each, and if that is your optimum weight, fine, however all the weight is on one side. I am not sure what the engeneering calculation for that is.
2. If the optimum wight is not a multiple of 10g (adding more weights) then you must cut or grind the metal weights, which is not easy to do to.
3. The weights are at barrel hight which is not optimum (tight-rope walkers keep the balancing weights below their feet on a tight-rope).
4. A shooter tends to not make changes since it is not easy to do.
5.The manufacturers components are fairly expensive so shooters are even more reluctant to make changes even if they think they should.
There is more, but I shall desist. As you know, I am very pragmatic. We can pursue this over a good Chardonnay when I see you again.
Sandy
tenx-at-san.rr.com.50114.50058
With my weight system there are advantages in the application of the engineering theories involved.
1. There is little or no cost involved so experimenting with weight/balance is cost effective.
2. The plastic sleeve weighs 3g or less when trimmed. It grips well but can be moved easily on the cylinder so that experimenting for optimum weight/balance can be tried and tested.
3. The wheel weights are 7g each and are easy to cut and attach in fractions and/or multiples on the sleeve.
4. The weights can be positioned at lowest center gravity under the cylinder. If you cant your pistol they can be placed on the side so as to keep the center of gravity as low as possible.
5. Since fatigue can be a factor during a match, it is easy to change the balance (perceived weight) during a match by easily sliding the weight back fractions of an inch without releasing your grip on the pistol.
6. Some shooters like a heavier pistol and do not necessarily want all of the weight out on the end of the barrel. It just feels and shoots better for them. Perhaps it is physical, perhaps it is mental.
As humans we respond to many external stimuli and variables. We change the sights up, down, and even the width of the rear sight during a match depending on how the shots are grouping, the level of illumination, direction of the light, visual contrast, blood sugar, on how we feel at the time, etc. Grip are adjusted, the size of the irises are adjusted, if your back or shoulder gets tired, feet position may be adjusted, jackets removed or added to adjust body temperature, etc.
Why not the weight/balance adjustment since we are not an immutable part of a given equasion? Function and practical application that is easily adjustable to the many variables involved should be used with the theories.
For example of some limitations on my LP-10.
1. The weights are just over 10 grams each, and if that is your optimum weight, fine, however all the weight is on one side. I am not sure what the engeneering calculation for that is.
2. If the optimum wight is not a multiple of 10g (adding more weights) then you must cut or grind the metal weights, which is not easy to do to.
3. The weights are at barrel hight which is not optimum (tight-rope walkers keep the balancing weights below their feet on a tight-rope).
4. A shooter tends to not make changes since it is not easy to do.
5.The manufacturers components are fairly expensive so shooters are even more reluctant to make changes even if they think they should.
There is more, but I shall desist. As you know, I am very pragmatic. We can pursue this over a good Chardonnay when I see you again.
Sandy
tenx-at-san.rr.com.50114.50058