We all know that recoil is a factor of the weight of the bullet and the velocity with which it leaves the barrel. We also know that the powder charge must be added to the weight of the bullet because it too is exiting the barrel.

For this discussion let us assume the weight of the gun is the same for all cartridges and not a factor in the difference between a standard cardtrige and a magnum.

With that as a base line.....Why does it seem to me that the magnums recoil inordinately more than their non magnum counterparts.....such as:

280 VS 7mm Mag
.30-06 VS .300 Mag
etc!

IMO the extra velocity we get from the magnums don't create the extra recoil.....Am I right in thinking all the extra powder is the real culprit?

Better yet do the Magnums really recoil inordinately more as it seems they do?

Seems you can't have the extra velocity without the extra powder, so why try and separate them when they equal the same thing?

quote:

Originally posted by djpepper:
Seems you can't have the extra velocity without the extra powder, so why try and separate them when they equal the same thing?

You're so darn right.....to which I must change the question....

Do the magnums really recoil as much more than the non magnums as it appears? It seems that way to me!

Larger case required more powder for the same velocity. More powder more recoil. Take the 280-7mag. Equal velocity with say RL22 the 7mag uses 11% more powder. The calculators say it would generate 8.7% more recoil along with a quicker recoil pulse. Thus the feeling of more recoil from the mag.

No free lunch. You burn more powder you are going to normally feel it.

The laws of physics apply always. I agree that magnums recoil inordinately greater than their non magnum counterparts and Ramrod explained it quite well. It's not just a little extra powder, it's quite a bit more.

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:
Larger case required more powder for the same velocity. More powder more recoil. Take the 280-7mag. Equal velocity with say RL22 the 7mag uses 11% more powder. The calculators say it would generate 8.7% more recoil along with a quicker recoil pulse. Thus the feeling of more recoil from the mag.

No free lunch. You burn more powder you are going to normally feel it.

I agree.

I also believe that the weight of the powder charge has more effect per grain than the weight of the bullet(at least that is what the recoil calculators say).

In other words, adding 10 grains of powder(keeping bullet weight and velocity the the same) has more effect on recoil than adding 10 gains of bullet weight(while keeping powder weight and velocity the same).

I believe it is the amount of powder/type of powder. I also believe it is the extra velocity. For every action their is a equal and opposite reaction. To put it simply their is more than one variable in the equation.

Put another way, you have a much greater volume of gas exiting the same diameter bore, so more thrust.

adding 10 grains of powder and 200 feet per second, is like shooting a bullet that is 10 grains heavier 200 fps faster.

Also, many of the magnums use faster powder, which sometimes make more of a jab than a push so it just feels heavier.

As others have stated, you've got higher velocity PLUS more powder. Both contribute to more recoil. Basically most 'magnums' are further along the 'diminishing returns' curve. Also note that the report and muzzle flash can affect 'perceived' recoil. So with more 'actual' recoil due to bullet velocity and powder, plus louder report and greater muzzle flash and 'magnums' can seem as though there is ALOT more recoil.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
We all know that recoil is a factor of the weight of the bullet and the velocity with which it leaves the barrel. We also know that the powder charge must be added to the weight of the bullet because it too is exiting the barrel.

For this discussion let us assume the weight of the gun is the same for all cartridges and not a factor in the difference between a standard cardtrige and a magnum.

With that as a base line.....Why does it seem to me that the magnums recoil inordinately more than their non magnum counterparts.....such as:

280 VS 7mm Mag
.30-06 VS .300 Mag
etc!

IMO the extra velocity we get from the magnums don't create the extra recoil.....Am I right in thinking all the extra powder is the real culprit?

Better yet do the Magnums really recoil inordinately more as it seems they do?

It's both.

It's the weight of the "ejecta" coupled W/the velocity.

Newton's law, equal & opposite reaction.

The weight of the powder is also ejected albeit in a gaseous, not solid form.

The extra 10, 12, etc grains of powder of the above examples are also included in the ejecta weight.

Don't believe it? Shoot a 1 1/8oz load of shot out of a ML shotgun over 84gr (3 drams)of black powder & see if there is more recoil than a 1/1/8 oz load of shot shot over a 19gr (3 dram "equivilent")charge of smokeless W/the same weight gun.

The percieved recoil of the smokeless load will be sharper (spread over a shorter time span)& perhaps seem to be as much or more than the BP load, but shoot 100 rds of skeet every week W/a 6 1/4# 12ga dbl bbl ML & you WILL feel the difference.

Add 12grs of ejecta (7% to 9% increase) weight @ 150 fps higher Mv as when comparing the standard/magnum CF cartridges above there will be a considerable difference in recoil.

What wildcat junkie said. If you're gonna shoot a heavier bullet with more powder, Mr Newton is gonna get his.

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
What wildcat junkie said. If you're gonna shoot a heavier bullet with more powder, Mr Newton is gonna get his.

Even if you propel the same weight bullet @ the same Mv, a cartridge that burns more powder to acheive the same performance level is going to have more recoil.

This is exactly why the more effecient short, fat magnums achieve equal performnace W/(slightly) less recoil.

It might not be hugely significant, but it is real non-the less.

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:
I also believe that the weight of the powder charge has more effect per grain than the weight of the bullet(at least that is what the recoil calculators say).

In other words, adding 10 grains of powder(keeping bullet weight and velocity the the same) has more effect on recoil than adding 10 gains of bullet weight(while keeping powder weight and velocity the same).

I have not studied the recoil calculations but this statement seems perfectly compatible with my experience.

The formula - (Lyman 45th edition).

Wg x Vg = (W1 x Vp) + (W2 x Vc)

Where:

Wg = Weight of gun (lb )
W1 = Weight of bullet (lb)
W2 = Weight of powder chg (lb)
Vg = Recoiling velocity of gun (fps)
Vp = Muzzle velocity of bullet (fps)
Vc = Effective velocity of powder charge

Example - 30-06 Spr:

Bullet weight = 180 gr
Muzzle Velocity = 2700 fps
Weight of powder charge = 56 gr
Grains per pound = 7000
G=64.348 (64.328 is the acceleration of gravity times 2)
Weight of gun = 8.5 lb

The basic kinetic energy equation: E = ½*Mg*(Vg)^2


Free Recoil = [(weight of the bullet x muzzle velocity) + (weight of powder charge x 4700)]squared
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
64.348 X weight of gun in pounds


Free Recoil = [(180/7000 x 2700) + (56 x 4700)]squared
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
64.348 X 8.5


Free Recoil = [(180/7000 x 2700) + (56 x 4700)]squared
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
64.348 X 8.5


Free Recoil = 11,455.207
--------------------------------
546.958


Free Recoil = 20.94 Ft-Lb


The reason why an equal amount of powder charge as oppsosed to bullet weight adds more to recoil is because it get multiplied by a higher velocity than the velocity of the bullet - 4700 fps vs 2700 fps. This then explains why a faster cartridge in the same weight of gun will yield higher free recoil. Case in point,compare a 30-06 Spr vs 300 Win Mag - there is a bouble wammy - the MV is higher for one, and on top the powder charge is more.

By manipulation one can determine the role that the rifle weight is playing as well:

A gun of 9.5 lbs has a factor of 611.306 -------> Index = 1.266 (26.6% more)
A gun of 8.5 lbs has a factor of 546.958 -------> Index = 1.133 (13.3% more)
A gun of 7.5 lbs has a factor of 482.610 -------> Index = 1.000 (Base)

As these figures are used as a divisor in the formula, so the recoil will drop as the gun gets heavier as indicated above - the factor goes up, but the recoil goes down.

Warrior

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
....Why does it seem to me that the magnums recoil inordinately more than their non magnum counterparts.....such as:

280 VS 7mm Mag
.30-06 VS .300 Mag
etc!...

Yes, the excellent Magnums do have a bit more Recoil - but - I'll guess it seems "inordinately more"(to you) because you shoot the other Rifles more.

More powder matters.. I once built a small cannon from 416L stainless steel. Really hard stuff. It had about a 3/4" bore and the stock was about 2 1/2" thick. I would shoot blank rounds stuffed with wadding just to make noise and have fun. One day I added a bit more powder than the usual charge and Im lucky the thing didnt go off like a grenade! The center of the steel swelled up like a bruised body part! The diameter was probably close to 1/2" bigger..

For steel that hard to do that the pressure had to be beyond tremendous! Dont underestimate the significance of more powder!

Recoil or the back kick is caused by the gun's backward momentum, which exactly balances the forward momentum of the projectile. The back kick is transferred to the shooters shoulder, and the way the recoil is felt also depends on the Recoil Velocity, which could be described as either a "soft" or a "sharp" punch. A soft recoil is spread over a longer period of time being at a lower acceleration, whereas a sharp recoil is spread over a shorter period of time, being at a higher acceleration. That is why we also look at Recoil Velocity as a separate statistic.

Here is a sample of some hunting cartridges with a certain load combination at typical rifle weights for the given cartridge.

Cartridge ---------- Bw x Velocity --------- Gw ------- Recoil Energy ------ Recoil Velocity
30-06 Spr ------- 180 gr @ 2700 fps ---- 8.0 Lb ------ 20.3 Ft-Lb ----------- 12.8 fps
300 Win Mag --- 180 gr @ 2960 fps ---- 8.5 Lb ------ 25.9 Ft-Lb ----------- 14.0 fps
338 Win Mag --- 250 gr @ 2700 fps ---- 9.0 Lb ------ 33.1 Ft-Lb ----------- 15.4 fps
9,3x62 mm ----- 286 gr @ 2360 fps ---- 9.0 Lb ------ 28.0 Ft-Lb ----------- 14.1 fps
375 H&H -------- 300 gr @ 2530 fps ---- 9.0 Lb ------ 37.3 Ft-Lb ----------- 16.3 fps
416 Rem--------- 400 gr @ 2400 fps --- 10.0 Lb ------ 52.9 Ft-Lb ---------- 18.5 fps
458 Lott -------- 500 gr @ 2300 fps ---- 10.0 Lb ----- 70.4 Ft-Lb ---------- 21.3 fps

Most people is immediate aware of the difference in felt recoil between a 30-06 and a 300 Win Mag, despite the heavier weight of the latter:

Recoil energy jumps from 20.3 to 25.9 or 27.5%, and
Recoil velocity jumps from 12.8 to 14.0 or 9.4%.
The felt recoil encapsulates both factors - increased recoil energy and recoil velocity; they cannot be separated.

Looked at in absolute terms the jumps in recoil figures appear small, but in relative terms it is significant.
Jumping from .308 to .375 to .458 translates to significant increases in recoil.

A .338 Win Mag in a light weight stock stock can in deed be quite brutal when fired from the bench.

Flinching is an unfortunate by-product of recoil that is too high for the individual shooter's threshold.

Warrior

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
I'll guess it seems "inordinately more"(to you) because you shoot the other Rifles more.

Interesting comment.....and yes...I do shoot the non magnums 50-1 over magnums.

Warriors table is very interesting.
What I want to know is,
Given an equal bullet weight and velocity, which has the greater recoil?
If there is a desire to use a powder which fills the case as much as possible, is using a magnum sized case working against you in the recoil department?
Where does case geometry come in? I hear a bunch about "case efficiency" so, there must be an optimal design/volume/shoulder/case to bullet dia. ratio etc.
Take a 30cal. 180gr. bullet at 2800fps.
30'06, 300H&H, 300 WM, 300Hoffman, 30 Newton etc....
Which is the best (or least) as far as recoil?

quote:

Originally posted by Ken Cline:
adding 10 grains of powder and 200 feet per second, is like shooting a bullet that is 10 grains heavier 200 fps faster.

Also, many of the magnums use faster powder, which sometimes make more of a jab than a push so it just feels heavier.

Magnums use slower burning powder,so you can give the projectile a continuous push down a longer barrel.

The answer is very simple. Little bang = little kick. Big bang = big kick.

when it comes to magnum recoil, one of the biggest factors is case ineffieincy. It takes a lot more powder to get the same velocity out of a bigger case, as compared to a smaller case.

With the big Weatherby and ultra-magnums, efficiency drops off to the point of diminishing returns. They can squeeze out more FPS, but the recoil and blast go up unproportionately. At least that's been my experience.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
I'll guess it seems "inordinately more"(to you) because you shoot the other Rifles more.

Interesting comment.....and yes...I do shoot the non magnums 50-1 over magnums.

Now if you begin shooting a 22LR or a 223Rem more(50-1) than the 280Rem, before long you will notice the 280Rem has "inordinately more" Recoil. (No charge for these highly useful insights. )

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
(No charge for these highly useful insights. )

I once had a duck and all it ever said was "just put it on my BILL "

Everybody's threshold limit of recoil is different, but each individual should determine his own limit, and the question then becomes how to define that limit. Opinions may vary, but here is one view .... that limit is broadly speaking that one should find the recoil tolerable to shoot 3 volleys of 3 rounds off the bench in quick succession without any excessive discomfort and flinching.

Most people can not do the above with a 458 Lott off a bench (500 gr @ 2300 fps).
Very few people can do it with a 416 Rem (400 gr @ 2400 fps).
Most people will no not go higher than a 375 H&H (300 gr @ 2500 fps).
I have seen people that cannot shoot a 300 Win Mag without a flinch(180 gr @ 2960 fps).

Warrior

You'd be amazed and become a HUGE FAN of a good muzzle brake if you have shot the same magnum rifle with, then without one!

My .264 without the brake will rock your world, with it it's like shooting a .22-250!

I have messed with muzzle-brakes and found the sound too damaging to my ears. I once fired it without earplugs and my ears were ringing for a few hours. So, I sold it before it could go again on a hunt with me, as I do not wear any ear protection when I hunt. I place a lot of emphasis on my hearing when I walk and stalk in the bush. Never again and not meant for a hunting application imho.

Warrior

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:
You'd be amazed and become a HUGE FAN of a good muzzle brake if you have shot the same magnum rifle with, then without one!

My .264 without the brake will rock your world, with it it's like shooting a .22-250!

would you be so kind as to post a photo or two of your muzzle brake?

Here is a fairly simple recoil factor formula. It does not measure foot pounds it is just a guide for comparison. With calculator it is pretty simple. Bullet weight (in grains) + powder charge (in grains) times muzzle velocity(in fps). Divide this by 3500 and divide by rifle weight (in pounds). Yes magnums using more powder kick more.

I think the main reason cartridges like the 300 Winchester etc appear to have far more recoil than 30-06 is because the 30-06 is at a threshold.

With small bore magnums I think there is also an illusion in the sense they kick more than what someone expected given the small bullet.

I have found with letting people try rifles for the first time they find a 375 kicks less than the thought but a 458 kick much worse than they thought. A 378 Wby without the brake and they feel like they were in a car accident and probably because the recoil is far worse than they imagined.

RECOIL VERSUS ACCURACY
by Ganyana

There are many facets as to how well an individual can shoot a particular rifle, but perceived recoil and muzzle blast are probably two of the biggest detractors from good shooting.

I was reading of a survey conducted amongst African Professional Hunters as to what they considered to be the most suitable calibres for their clients to bring to Africa. Obviously for use on dangerous game the .375 H&H and.458 Win. featured prominently, but for everything else all the long experienced PH's specifically stated "not magnums". In addition Bob Milek in a recent Guns & Ammo article speculated that the "all round rifle" for the USA excluding the big bears was a non-magnum 7mm or 30 cal., citing excessive recoil as his main objection which in turn leads to a lack of practice, particularly at the further ranges, which in turn leads to poor shooting. As a result of this I began asking the local PH's about client marksmanship, and how they handled weapons of a particular size class. An interesting and disturbing answer emerged - most clients can't shoot a 7mm Magnum well, let alone one of the .300 magnums. The other side was, however, that those clients who arrived carrying a 7x57 or a .308/30-06 usually shot more than tolerably well. A side comment that came from several of the PH' s was that it isn't so much recoil that causes flinching as muzzle blast. I decided that this warranted further investigation.

There are many facets as to how well an individual can shoot a particular rifle, but perceived recoil and muzzle blast are probably two of the biggest detractors from good shooting. Notice though that I said PERCEIVED recoil. I have a lightweight 7x57 that used to HURT when I fired it. Shortening the length of pull by 1/2" and altering the comb angle slightly removed all pain out of shooting that rifle. Similarly I have an 81b 9,3x62 with a steel butt plate that is a pleasure to fire, and not too bad even from the bench, simply because it fits. At the opposite extreme I have a .303 fitted with a very efficient muzzle brake, recoil is negligible and in fact if the rifle isn't held firmly it tends to buck DOWNWARDS on firing.

The down side is, of course, that the muzzle blast is horrendous and to the uninitiated, very off putting. The third factor affecting perceived recoil is the speed with which the recoil force is delivered to the firer. The higher the velocity of the bullet, the sharper the perceived recoil will be, and the sharpness of recoil can be as off putting as total recoil. John 'Pondoro' Taylor notes in his book African Rifles and Cartridges that the 'medium bore magnum cartridges were often much less pleasant to fire than any of his heavy rifles including the .600 Nitro express and .500 Jeferies, entirely due to the sharpness of the recoil. I took several of my rifles out to the range and asked a variety of those present at the range to fire a group and give me their comments. I specifically didn't ask the very experienced shotists to try them, but all of those who took part were reasonable shots and obviously keen enough to be at the range and practising. The comments were virtually predictable, and the effects of recoil are plainly visible in the photographs.

All of this brings me to the conclusions that: Every shooter has his own personal tolerance level of recoil and muzzle blast. Above these personally developed intrinsic tolerance levels, potential accuracy decreases rapidly. It also brings me to the conclusion that most hunters, both local and foreign are using rifles that produce either recoil or muzzle blast in excess of what they are capable of practically handling. Muzzle blast and tolerance to it appears to be largely independent of actual recoil, and it affects the shooter from whatever position he fires from. Provided that the recoil doesn't actually hurt the shotist as well, tolerance to muzzle blast will develop reasonable quickly with practice. It is simply a matter of conditioning the brain to realise that the shockwaves don't hurt (assuming you are wearing ear protection) and are merely a little disconcerting. Everybody learning to shoot has to be taught to keep their shooting eye open when they fire, even if it is only a .22 and building a tolerance to increasing muzzle blast is simply a continuation of this learning process. It does, as I have said, take practice.

Tolerance to recoil is a different problem. If it is held properly and fits reasonably, no rifle with less recoil than a .378 should hurt anyone when shot from the standing position. The body is sufficiently flexible to roll with the recoil, so effectively transferring much of the recoil force to the hips and even feet rather than concentrating it on the shoulder. It is noticeable in fact the lighter you are the better you roll. To zero a rifle properly, however, you cannot shoot standing, or even sitting, only prone or from a proper rest. It is here that the effects of too much gun quickly show up. Flinching develops in short order and people tend to give up their zeroing or practice session long before they have achieved their goals. There is no substitute for practice in good marksmanship, and if you cannot put in enough shooting from the bench to test the accuracy and zero of any given load in your rifle, and to do so out to your maximum hunting range, how can you practice shooting from practical field positions if you are not absolutely certain whether a hit or miss was due to you or your rifle/ammo.

The other important point in recoil tolerance is, as mentioned, the speed of recoil. Ask any experienced rifleman which rifle is the least pleasant to fire, a .378 Weatherby or the .460 Weather by. The universal conclusion is that the .378 has the more vicious recoil despite producing 20% less foot pounds of actual recoil. The reason is simple, the faster the bullet the sharper the felt recoil. A good way of comparing sharpness of recoil is to consider the difference between a push on the shoulder by a large man verses a punch on the shoulder by a small man. The push from a large fellow might make you take a pace backwards but it will not hurt while the punch from the small man probably will, even though the total energy expended on your shoulder is the same. The black powder elephant guns of old produced much more recoil (in foot lbs) than the modem equivalents(An lllb, 10 bore BP gun produces 127ft lbs whereas a 9lb .458 Win. produces 60 foot lbs of free recoil) yet are much more pleasant to shoot since the recoil arrives on your shoulder as a relatively long hard shove, rather than a short sharp kick. Compare the photographs of the difference in recoil between the. 404 and the .4'50 Martini carbine. Both produce 62 ft lbs of free recoil, yet the difference in effect on the firer is obvious. Quantifying sharpness of recoil, however, is a very difficult problem, and I have found no way of producing a mathematical formula that really fits the hard, shoulder determined, facts.

All of the serves to show that presenting recoil simply in terms of foot pounds (or kilojoules or whatever) for a particular rifle/ cartridge combination does not present the whole story. It can be shown (by feel) that the higher the velocity of the bullet, the greater the muzzle blast, and the sharper the recoil win be, and that since these two factors affect recoil tolerance at least as much as the total free recoil, an individual shotist will reach his (or her) recoil tolerance threshold quicker with a high velocity rifle. Above that threshold, proper practice is no longer either possible or even desirable, since flinching will be the only result.

Marksmanship is only possible with practice. Are you practising enough to be proficient at normal hunting ranges? And if not, is this due to excess recoil?

the question is better understood by stating
"which cartridge gives the least recoil to propel a bullet of .x" of ygr of zvelocity"

it has nothing to do with magnums, per se..

for example, a 375 winchester can NOT throw a 300gr .375 bullet 2500 fps .. just can't, in a desirable parameteric. therefore, if 300gr at 2500 is your goal, we begin with, say, the 376 steyr (yes, it CAN, but at 65k pis and 25" barrel) .. or say the 375HH is the least case capable ...

if the question is, does 100fps matter, between a 7x64 and a 7rem mag.. nope .. but you can buy 7rem at every walmart.

recoil? gentlemen, a 7remmag doesn't HAVE appreciable recoil. I have loads in the same bullet weight, in the same gun, that have more recoil difference than a 7rem HAS

does a 7remmag recoil more than a same weight/design 7x57? sure.. that's math ...

but does it matter? Look, if you have a bodily ailment that doesn't allow you to shoot a 7rem, don't justify it on anything other than facts...

i spent A YEAR not shooting bigbores after an ATV wreck .. but i sure could shoot my 7x64 and it kills critters grave yard dead...

`

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:
You'd be amazed and become a HUGE FAN of a good muzzle brake if you have shot the same magnum rifle with, then without one!

My .264 without the brake will rock your world, with it it's like shooting a .22-250!

would you be so kind as to post a photo or two of your muzzle brake?

I understand the "bad rap" muzzle brakes get. They usually are badmouthed by folks who don't have them and are shooting next to someone who does! That was me for a while. The noise is increased and the force of the air and shock waves radiating outward toward me really was "off-putting".

When you have a muzzle brake on any rifle whether it be a high recoiling magnum or even a tame caliber like my 6.5 Creedmoor, it does nothing except make shooting a more pleasant experience for the guy who counts...YOU! I definitely think it will increase your ability to shoot accurately since you're not thinking about the punishment you are gonna take. It also allows you to shoot much more and get more practice which will improve your skill. As for noise and muzzle blast, you have to wear hearing protection anyway so it makes no difference.

To me, having a brake is an easy decision to make for just about every rifle I own. I see nothing but "pros" to having one!



Here is the brake on my .264 WM. It is Score High's Hunting Brake






The 7mm RUM has the Hunting Brake as well






The Creedmoor has his Tactical Brake







My .223 A-Bolt with BOSS is Braked






The Tactical Brake on my Model 70 .300 WM target gun

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:


Better yet do the Magnums really recoil inordinately more as it seems they do?

I know its been touched on but what you consider inordinate is the lynchpin of your question.

So take your 300 winnie vs '06 example. The winnie recoil energy is 30% more than the '06 assuming the rifle weight is the same. Inordinate? thats up to you (I agree).Then throw in the fact that you only get a 7% increase in velocity and a little over 10% increase in muzzle energy and it may seem a little more inordinate.

Essentially all a muzzle break does is to change the direction of muzzle gas escaping......from straight away from the shooter to perpendicular to the shooter. The net result is considerable less "ejecta" in the recoil equation!

I've seen brakes before but really didn't pay attention....

Thanks for posting the photos!

Muzzle Brakes?

Sissy wheels on something the owner can't handle and very irritation for the people next to him on the range.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Here is a fairly simple recoil factor formula. It does not measure foot pounds it is just a guide for comparison. With calculator it is pretty simple. Bullet weight (in grains) + powder charge (in grains) times muzzle velocity(in fps). Divide this by 3500 and divide by rifle weight (in pounds). Yes magnums using more powder kick more.

That is a simple formula that will give an idea of the recoil for most cartridges. Unfortunately it has a built in error factor that makes it useless for this discussion because "grain for grain, the powder has more effect on recoil than the bullet weight."

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Here is a fairly simple recoil factor formula. It does not measure foot pounds it is just a guide for comparison. With calculator it is pretty simple. Bullet weight (in grains) + powder charge (in grains) times muzzle velocity(in fps). Divide this by 3500 and divide by rifle weight (in pounds). Yes magnums using more powder kick more.

That is a simple formula that will give an idea of the recoil for most cartridges. Unfortunately it has a built in error factor that makes it useless for this discussion because "grain for grain, the powder has more effect on recoil than the bullet weight."

Yes, because the velocity of the escaping gas is higher than that of the bullet. Somewhat more accurate models use either a fixed velocity for the gas (e.g. 4000 fps) or a factor by which the bullet velocity is multiplied by (e.g. 1.5).

Different powders used in the same cartridge will sometimes result in more kick also. For example, in my 7mm rem mag I have two powders I've developed loads for with the 140 gr. accubond bullet. One is RL-25 and the other IMR-7828. Both give identical velocity, 3200 fps measured over a chronograph, and both use roughly the same powder weight, one's 72 grs and the other 70 grs, I can't remember which is which right now. However, the RL-25 load kicks noticably harder than the IMR-7828 load. Same bullet, same brass, same primer, loaded to same velocity, essentially the same powder charge but the RL-25 load kicks a lot harder. I don't know why, but I know it does.