9 ms·

Interesting to note that the required 3.7 oz converts to roughly 100 grams. Quite a lot of mass to impose on gun designs, I imagine. I don't have any experienc

by unwind 11y ago

Interesting to note that the required 3.7 oz converts to roughly 100 grams. Quite a lot of mass to impose on gun designs, I imagine. I don't have any experience with gun-smithing so I don't know how much metal is strictly technically required, but I imagine it to be less or the legislature wouldn't be necessary to begin with, of course. Also, the minimum metal mass is probably a moving target (heh).

hga 11y ago
Eh, if you like you hand(s), you really want a fair amount of mass so it's just not your hand, arm, etc. providing the inertia resisting recoil. Also makes a difference for followup shots. But there is a niche for the single shot or so derringer, or quasi "zip guns" like the Defense Distributed or original Liberators. Just not my kind of thing, I carry a full albeit aluminium alloy frame, 4 inch barrel M1911 that weights 1.75 pounds empty, which is very much at the other end of the spectrum except for being narrow, which is important for concealablity.
- viraptor 11y ago
  Now I wonder how hard would it be to create a weighed wrist guard style item which snaps firmly onto custom extra-light gun. Still takes the recoil, but technically not a part of the weapon. Maybe someone can explain why it's a bad idea.
  - hga 11y ago
    Not so much a bad idea but one with very limited applications, like squeezing through TSA security guidelines and actual practice, and then wanting to/to be able to fire a lot of rounds afterwords. Not ideal in general if for no other reason than more complicated ergonomics. I recently read an interesting observation that the shape and weight of a full sized service pistol got established more than a century ago; that, plus e.g. my observations of how many ill trained people in the US still manage to effectively and responsibly wield handguns in self-defense suggests we've achieved an ergonomic optimum. So radical deviations like your idea are not likely to be good even before we examine details, like how you don't want to limit yourself to only one wrist, it probably decreases the gains from the bracing that can be applied by your other hand, the coupling mechanism is likely to be problematic, slow if nothing else, etc.
  - Zak 11y ago
    The pressure-containing and mechanical operating components of a gun need to withstand a considerable amount of physical stress. Removing too much material will result in a gun that is not very durable and potentially dangerous to its user. Furthermore, in most semi-automatic pistols, the mass of the slide is part of the system that keeps the cartridge in the chamber until the pressure has dropped to a safe level. Reducing mass there requires a stiffer spring, longer slide travel or both. The smallest commercially made gun I could find currently available weighs 4 ounces: http://northamericanarms.com/firearms/s/s.html http://northamericanarms.com/firearms/s/s.html Being very low-powered, I doubt it has unbearable recoil, but it doesn't appear to have much in the way of practical use. Maybe concealment in undergarments?

by unwind 11y ago

hga 11y ago

Eh, if you like you hand(s), you really want a fair amount of mass so it's just not your hand, arm, etc. providing the inertia resisting recoil. Also makes a difference for followup shots. But there is a niche for the single shot or so derringer, or quasi "zip guns" like the Defense Distributed or original Liberators. Just not my kind of thing, I carry a full albeit aluminium alloy frame, 4 inch barrel M1911 that weights 1.75 pounds empty, which is very much at the other end of the spectrum except for being narrow, which is important for concealablity.

viraptor 11y ago
Now I wonder how hard would it be to create a weighed wrist guard style item which snaps firmly onto custom extra-light gun. Still takes the recoil, but technically not a part of the weapon. Maybe someone can explain why it's a bad idea.
- hga 11y ago
  Not so much a bad idea but one with very limited applications, like squeezing through TSA security guidelines and actual practice, and then wanting to/to be able to fire a lot of rounds afterwords. Not ideal in general if for no other reason than more complicated ergonomics. I recently read an interesting observation that the shape and weight of a full sized service pistol got established more than a century ago; that, plus e.g. my observations of how many ill trained people in the US still manage to effectively and responsibly wield handguns in self-defense suggests we've achieved an ergonomic optimum. So radical deviations like your idea are not likely to be good even before we examine details, like how you don't want to limit yourself to only one wrist, it probably decreases the gains from the bracing that can be applied by your other hand, the coupling mechanism is likely to be problematic, slow if nothing else, etc.
- Zak 11y ago
  The pressure-containing and mechanical operating components of a gun need to withstand a considerable amount of physical stress. Removing too much material will result in a gun that is not very durable and potentially dangerous to its user. Furthermore, in most semi-automatic pistols, the mass of the slide is part of the system that keeps the cartridge in the chamber until the pressure has dropped to a safe level. Reducing mass there requires a stiffer spring, longer slide travel or both. The smallest commercially made gun I could find currently available weighs 4 ounces: http://northamericanarms.com/firearms/s/s.html http://northamericanarms.com/firearms/s/s.html Being very low-powered, I doubt it has unbearable recoil, but it doesn't appear to have much in the way of practical use. Maybe concealment in undergarments?