{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
10/20/2015 11:12:15 AM
1
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the bigger the weapon, the more recoil absorbed into, yes? I also understand you can put designs into the weapon to minimalize recoil?
Looked it up, granted that's a large round for a pistol. However in a pistol,I imagine less of the blast is contained in the barrel- the bullet would leave the barrel and I imagine the blast spreading out more in the area in front of the pistol, whereas it would theoritically "kick" more in a longer barreled gun as the blast would have a harder time getting into the air(it has to launch the bullet out the longer barrel), where the blast "wants" to be-path of least resistance.
The .32 would be designed to a pistol's size nowadays, where a 7.62x54 would be a rifle...it'd be odd converting them, no?
Then again bear in mind I'm still pretty fresh to all Gun-stuffs, so I may just have some things wrong.
English
-
Yea the shorter the barrel the more of the accelerant gets burned outside of the barrel (which essentially wastes that potential energy) and since it escapes as it ignites it does not add to the recoil. It had one heck of a fireball yea. The mosin nagant has an over all length of 4-5 FEET (tho 1/3 almost is the shoulderstock) so cutting the barrel down to 10 inches eliminates a LOT of recoil; also makes the round slower and with out better ballistically treated and rifled firing system; also makes it less accurate. (The competition pistol i fired had everything you could think of to compensate for acc loss though)
