TargetTalk

Because the pellet has already left the barrel before the effect of a compensator can "kick in", I suggest that any effect of it may be to reveal to you that, in fact, you have blown the shot. It will not help you in any way to shoot better.

Some say accuracy will be improved, but most guns are so accurate that you would just be "gilding the lily" to think it assists you in a higher score.

I hope to stimulate some vituperative rebuttal.

I tend to believe what you state, (IF) the crown is perfect, and the pellet is
perfect, and the pellet weight is matched to the air that is pushing it, and
their is zero barrel movement during pellet travel in the barrel.

But why do so many shooters at the highest levels especially the British
field target shooters insist it makes their shooting more consistent?

Compensator = air stripper. To prevent the cloud of air at the barrel end
from tipping the pellet in any way.

The crown if perfect may negate any need for a compensator.
JMO

Assume two guns, one with and one without compensator (muzzle brake).

Gun 1 can be extremely accurate; so much so that it cannot realistically be improved upon (the state of most guns now).

The compensator of Gun 2 is therefore of no use in improving inherent accuracy...worthless.

One must assume that a compensator must have some other effect, e.g. reducing recoil. Otherwise, what is the point of having one?

Since any effect must occur AFTER the pellet has left the barrel (it's the gas behind the pellet effecting the brake), the only effect I can see is that the shooter can (hopefully) see his sight picture without disturbance at the moment of discharge.

I feel this effect is minimal to non-existant with most guns. So why bother?

Not to be cynical (at least not excessively so), the 10M AP sport attracts gear heads. There are people who think they can buy competitiveness and there are others who want the latest gadget without regard to whether it will genuinely improve their scores; there are probably a number of people whose scores are irrelevant even to them and who just want all the bells and whistles. The top competitors get their guns from sponsors; as long as an add-on does not hurt their scores why would they care?

Russian guns are routinely knocked for their Soviet-style (an oxymoron if ever there was one) fit and finish even as reviewers acknowledge their ability to score competitively with the slicker offerings from Germany and Switzerland. Pilkguns review of free pistols mentions Hammerli, Morini, Pardini and Steyr but calls the Toz 35 "the King".

The bottom line is always the bottom line. If the only function of the compensator is to make a customer more likely to buy this gun rather than that one, then that is sufficient for it to exist.

I'm just waiting for someone to offer an AP with Farfel-Mangle chrome-plated wave guides and dual overhead stravichords.

Roger

"I'm just waiting for someone to offer an AP with Farfel-Mangle chrome-plated wave guides and dual overhead stravichords."

I want, I want! Oops, I wet 'em!

You nailed my point precisely, but I'm waiting to hear from those who "drank the Kool-Aid."

Comeon.. all I need is an integrated gyro..

Heh, heh, very funny, guys! Seriously though, there's something very addictive and satisfying about a gun that remains rock steady during the shot release.

It may be 99% psychological, but if it creates a sense of confidence and does no harm, why not??

mhkhung wrote:Comeon.. all I need is an integrated gyro..

Um, that's actually a good idea. Suppose it's been talked about before. But why not? Oh sure, it'd be cheating, but it'd work, wouldn't it? Probably have some top level shooter nailing a perfect score within a year of the first gyro-pistol. Is there an ISSF rule which might apply I wonder? It's not an external brace to the forearm or elsewhere, doesn't extend the gun beyond the maximum dimensions, and since there are lots of electronic triggers around this is just an extra battery drain. Bet you could make a gyro small enough to fit in the butt of the grip, alongside a battery which would kick in the motor on finger contact with the trigger...

A gyro would be illegal under ISSF rules as it's clearly cheating. If it wasn't captured under a pre existing rule, then it would be under one of the capture all rules regarding fair play and not giving unfair advantage etc (none of which I can remember offhand).

Rob.

RobStubbs wrote:If it wasn't captured under a pre existing rule, then it would be under one of the capture all rules regarding fair play and not giving unfair advantage etc (none of which I can remember offhand).

6.4.2 Shooters must use only equipment and apparel that complies with the ISSF Rules. Anything (guns, devices, equipment, accessories, etc.) which may give a shooter an unfair advantage over others and which is not mentioned in these Rules, or which is contrary to the spirit of the ISSF Rules and Regulations, is prohibited. The shooter is responsible for submitting all equipment and apparel for official inspection and approval to an ISSF-supervised Equipment Control prior to its use in ISSF competitions. Team leaders are equally responsible for ensuring that the shooters’ equipment and apparel comply with the ISSF Rules and Regulations.

Does that mean the guns with compensators would be disqualified when shooting against those without?

Rover wrote:Does that mean the guns with compensators would be disqualified when shooting against those without?

No. 8.9 only says compensators aren't allowed for 25m pistols.

I think you are (deliberately?) missing "....and which is not mentioned in these Rules, or which is contrary to the spirit of the ISSF Rules and Regulations, is prohibited."

By all means try something new, but don't be surprised if the Jury consider it "contrary to the spirit".

Yes, it was deliberate, in the spirit of the thread.

It seems to me I remember many years back that the Russians had their "upside down" guns (Free Pistols?) disqualified. I don't recall the details.

Rover wrote:Yes, it was deliberate, in the spirit of the thread.

It seems to me I remember many years back that the Russians had their "upside down" guns (Free Pistols?) disqualified. I don't recall the details.

do you mean the Sheptarskiy designed MU3 (Rapid Fire Pistol at the 1956 Olympics) which led to the 25m box size and the bore must be above the web of the hand?