This is getting a bit off thread, but each to their own in terms of pistol balance.
Just because other people are successful with nose heavy pistols doesn't necessarily mean they are right. If it works for them great, it doesn't work for me.
The further you place the mass from the pivot point (in our case the wrist) the more effert it take to rotate it about that point.
This sound like an argument for having a light pistol for the 4 second series.
This sound like an argument for having a light pistol for the 4 second series.
To say that "it might work for some" is a bit naive, look at everyone that is succeeding at RF these days at an international level (Germany and China mostly).
The object is to have the wrist locked in the correct position before you start the lift. Traverse the targets with body movement rather than wrist/arm movement, therefore use the advantage gained with muzzle bias weighting.
I look forward to seeing the name James H appearing in World Cup Finals with his light weight pistol.
Well, it's pretty hard to generalize based on the WC pics of 2006. Petriv seems to shoot a unmodified IZH35, which isn't exactly the heaviest thing on earth. Vogn, the guy from Denmark who captured 6th place at the WCH, uses a AW93 - a pistol I personally thought was completely unsuited for RFP, as I feel that the movement caused by the buffer weight is too slow. Also, we don't see the insides of the Pardini barrel shrouds used by the Chinese, do we? At least the guy who won Zagreb seems to have changed back from the new style shroud to the older (lighter) version with four weights. And Alifirenkos homebuilt doesn't have that bull barrel, either. Heavy weight is obviously of no use if it impaires the way you're getting the pressure on the grip, so it's either off to the weight lifting or/and match the pistol to your actual capabilities - and that is far easier done by starting with a light pistol and adding weights than by using a heavy one and taking it off. Besides, it's not always the best idea for (some of us) amateurs to copy everything from the stars - see the Pardini GPS of the old days, which was way too heavy and got lightened by everybody. And it shot perfectly well, even with 100gr less.
The old (4 weight) Pardini is heavier than the new (6 weight) one until you install the weights. The barrel shroud is steel on the old one and aluminium on the new, don't be fooled by it's size. The IZH35 is heavier than both old and new Pardinis until you add the weights.
So, first you're telling us that everyone is using the heaviest possible gun and then the new ones are lighter than the old ones? Which way did he go now, with his change of barrel weight? What would have been the point, if he just could have taken 2 or 4 bolts out? If he wanted it heavier, he could have put tungsten bolts into the new shroud, so why go to the old one? And, there's an alu version of the old shroud, too. Can't make that out on the video... Besides, we are not only talking about gross weight, but about point of balance. It's pretty clear that the frame of a IZH35 adds some weight, but that's not in favour of your argument, as it's in the grip and won't put any torque on your forearm or help with muzzle jump. In short, I perpetuate that a basic pistol shouldn't be too heavy, offer different options to adjust point of balance and gross weight, and that blind emulation (based on assumptions) of things people with 25'000 shots per year upwards do is not the way to go.
The object is to have the wrist locked in the correct position before you start the lift. Traverse the targets with body movement rather than wrist/arm movement, therefore use the advantage gained with muzzle bias weighting.
But if you're starting and stopping very rapidly as in the rapid fire 4 second series a nose heavy pistol will put much more load on the wrist and will tend to wander off target rather than onto it.
blind emulation (based on assumptions) of things people with 25'000 shots per year upwards do is not the way to go.
There are plenty of deliberate red herrings out there, and I don't remember Schumann using humongous weights on his OSP either, not that it really matters.
I look forward to seeing the name James H appearing in World Cup Finals with his light weight pistol.
Tycho wrote:
............ and that blind emulation (based on assumptions) of things people with 25'000 shots per year upwards do is not the way to go.
Is there some way that this statement can be made to appear whenever people read TT. As you will probably guess, I totally agree with it.
I also agree with it, but of course this flys against the very core of(average) human nature. Its the same Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday phenomom of the car industry. No one wants to consider the practice, just the name association with a winner. If you can say this gun is the same set up that Schumann/Nestreuv/ Sekaric/Wang/insert your favorite shooter's name here then you are obviosly going perform better on the firing line than the rest of your competitors without a similar get up. Right ?
At least the equipment our world class winners are using is fundamentally the same as what the average consumer can purchase. Probabaly 96% or greater. Whereas on the racing circuit I doubt there is 1% once you get past looks or logo. Maybe in some cases the engine blocks are made the by the real company, beyond that, its all custom.
Received my SSP 3 months ago. It wouldn't fire because the firing pin had been cut at the Shot Show. Spent two months trying to get parts with no success. My new one should arrive this week. I'm looking forward to firing it. Remember that the gun is so new that there are no (and I mean NO) parts to be had in the US. It looks sexy though.
Just sort of an Add-On to this stirring & controversial thread---I saw my first SSP, while I couldn't shoot it, the store owner (a friend) allowed me to handle the gun and dry-fire twice. The gun is interesting and feels light to me , the factory adjusted trigger however is IMHO mediocre, at best. The grips did not leave me impressed at all---Walther used to make good grips and recently has begun to produce horrendous grips----but plastic---which felt 'slippery.' For ~ $2000 I would hope that Walther would produce at least a "nice" set of stippled walnut grips with the gun, why have to go another $200 for Rink grips????
The Walther trigger felt OK, but then I like a smooth rollover.
I don't understand, apart from cost reasons, why Walther would make a plastic grip.
Why Hammerli would build the grip into the frame is beyond me.
Tycho,
I am sure that Petriv uses an XRB 76 which was a year 76 modification of the HR3O.
Though I may be mistaken.
He chose that because of the ability to modify the trigger to his liking rather than the different balance of the IZH 35M.
Beat regards,
macca
Macca - you're right. I confused the Ukrainians - Bondaruk is shooting a IZH35 (or something that definitely looks like one). Petriv's pistol is not really visible on the video, but I should have checked the pictures (I'd have seen it then, as I have a HR31 in my collection so I know what it looks like). Mea culpa. But that leads to other questions - what is the technical difference between the HR30 and the XBR76? I seem to remember that the HR31 came off something written XP64, as in Yur'yev's book, but I've never seen a reference to a XBR76. I guess it's another of Razoryenov's specials? I'm hugely interested in all those russian experimentals - they had lots and lots of great ideas that never made it into any serial production...
