Limp wristing??

No matter how you call it, limp wristling
or what, this failure says to me that gun design is not optimized..say, recoil spring
is too strong to match mass of slide, etc.
Did you ever see pistol manual saying like
that:

"Pistol will function reliably only if
held with two hands, with grip force of
25 lbs. or more, with elbows locked, and
if shot by male only....Females should expect
malfuctions because of limp wristling that
happens because females are different than
males and can't hold our gun correctly...".

You never see that, because it's technical
nonsense.
 
Johnnybravo,

Reliable function of the gun depends upon:

1. Design
2. Manufacturing quality
3. Ammo
4. Maintainance
5. Weather conditions.

It does not, technically speaking, depends
on proper grip/shooting techniques/safety aspects/practice. These factors are important for proper usage of the gun.
 
> The term "limp wristing' is becoming a buzzword catch all phrase for " my gun screwed up."

Hence my skepticism. The idea that most pistol stoppages can be fixed with a firmer grip seems similar to the idea that most toilet problems can be fixed by jiggling the handle. It's a good first step in trouble shooting, but it's not a cure all.
 
I think we all really agree on this one but the symantics are making us seem contrary. In the final analysis:

1. Any recoil opperated autoloading handgun has the potential for grip related feeding problems

2. Nearly all of that possibility is dictated by the design of the gun

3. Poor shooting technique increases the likelyhood of such malfunctions

4. Extreme examples of autoloading handguns are more prone to this phenomenon (such as tiny, high recoil pocket guns)

5. "Limp-wristing" is more a function of not providing firm control of the frame then anything to do with the wrist

6. Insuring that you are using a firm, controlled grip is an important first step in troubleshooting any recoil related malfunctions

7. Any handgun that consistantly has failures (which may or may not be grip related) NEEDS to be serviced

I completely concur with Oris when he says:

>Reliable function of the gun depends upon:
>1. Design
>2. Manufacturing quality
>3. Ammo
>4. Maintainance
>5. Weather conditions.

But I would also add a number six:

6. Proper use of the firearm by the opperator

Again... FWIW, YMMV and all other necessary disclaimers!


J.T.
 
Oris, Take a real physics course buddy it'll do you some needed good. A lack of knowledge of basis physics can be deadly at home, on the highway, anywhere. Another thing that will exagerate the limp wrist problem is if the gun is dirty enough to increase slide frame friction.

The reason I suspect the term is being used more is because we have become a nation of fat weaklings that only work out with a 12ounce curl at happy hour. I remember walking on a college campus in 1990 the clothes were tight and miniskirts were in. There were lean hard fit bodies everywhere.

Now things are completely different. Everybody is soft and overweight, the clothes hide the bodies now. Hell, most of the kids can conceal a couple of ar15 shorties under their summer clothes. -ddt
 
ddt4free,

Could you please explain why Oris' physics are off? I'm a novice so I'd appreciate more information.

As for becoming a nation of weaklings, I agree with you. We are too prone to blame the machine rather than ourselves. There are other factors at work here too. It seems to me, however, that certain designs require a firmer grip. Polymer pistol require a stronger hold than aluminum or steel frame pistols. Perhaps the advent of polymer pistols has made limp wristing a more common event. As more and more people spend hours typing they damage their writs and arm muscles. This also contributes to limp wristing. If you type for extended periods make sure to exercise properly to prevent permanent damage. This will not only help you on the range but in general.


------------------
So many pistols, so little money.

[This message has been edited by Tecolote (edited March 13, 2000).]
 
Boys and girls....please. It takes a lot of things to go right for any gun to just go BANG. When you combine the variations in ammunition (bullet weights etc.) and you toss in the unqiue individual physical charactoristics of each of us, then toss in each unique properties of each gun and magazine, and then toss in the variations of angle that a gun may be fired at, the amount of wear on a gun, condition of all parts and you have a long laundry list of things that can combine to fail. If you think about it, it is amazing they work at all regardless of who made it. WHEW.....guns are like women. No two are ever alike or predictable. But we gotta love em. Right?
 
ddt4free, I will gladly learn more physics if
you could specifically point to any sentence
in my post which is not accurate from the
physics point of view. Please quote my words
and be specific in your opposition.
 
Oris Wrote:
>ddt4free, ...point to any sentence
>in my post which is not accurate from the
>physics point of view.


I think what ddt4free was refering to were these:

>relative movements of slide, barrel, bullet
>and spent case are happening INSIDE the
>physical system of a gun...

This is clearly not true except in the case of fixed mount weapons. If the mount is not fixed, or has a variable rate of movement, then it, too, is part of the physical system of the gun. The grip a handgun opperator maintains is ALWAYS part of the "physical system" of the gun.


>relative movements of gun parts can not be avoided.

Also not true. There are infinite variations between FIXED and "suspended in space" and the opperator has control over all that variation. In EVERY instance of variation there is a different response in energy transfer inside the system of the gun, hence "relative movement" is NEVER the same.


>Whatever the hold is, it is a hold, period.

Also not true. Again, there is an undefinable number of variations in the "fixedness" of the "mount" (your grip). A person could be holding the weapon so loosely that is goes flying out of their hand when shot! I have actually seen this happen by a recruit that was afraid of his 1911.

>Reliable function of the gun depends
>upon...[several very accurate factors deleted]...
>It does not, technically speaking, depends
>on proper grip/shooting techniques...

Again, incorrect. Becasue a recoil opperated handgun relies on the solidity of its "mount" in order to function, proper grip and shooting techniques are imminently involved in a weapon's relability. How well would a Rheinmetal 120mm smoothbore cannon function if it was not attached to a 67ton M1A1? Same principal, smaller bore.

Oris, I really do agree with your gut-level premis that it is a cop-out by the firearm manufacturers to think that "limp-wristing" is an acceptable excuse for feed failures. Likewise I dont think that ANYONE should have to put up with a firearm that they can "limp-wrist". There are many slightly differnt springs out there that the manufacturer can use in place of the one on your weapon. Even if it meant that my autopistol had a service life of 20,000rnds instead of 25,000rnds I would prefer to have it made so that I could not induce it to failure.

There is no excuse for not having a gun serviced that someone can "limp-wrist" into malfunction.

All of that said, however, it does not invalidate the fact that this phenomenon exists, and, in fact, is quite well understood from a physics point of view. It happens, and it sometimes happens a lot.

I personally try to "limp-wrist" every gun that I buy for self-defense and I would send it back in a heart-beat if I could induce it to failure. But I am not everyone, and many people deal with grip related problems all the time.

Hope this helps!

Again, IMHO, FWIW, YMMV and all the rest!

J.T.
 
J.T. King is right. So is Oris, to a degree.

If you place a 1911 pistol into a solid benchrest or a firm, strong grip, the weapon should be designed and tuned to shoot and operate within the parameters of force exerted on the pistol through the grip or mount, insofar as cycling on the available recoil-generated energy is concerned.

On the other hand, if you place that pistol into a shock-absorbing mount that allows the pistol to (1) move backward while the muzzle is allowed to (2) recoil upwards, the resulting dissapation of the recoil energy may reduce that energy to the point where the cycling is affected.

So, a semiautomatic pistol should be tuned by use of the correct recoil, mainsprings, etc., to fit the shooting grip and manner of the gun's individual owner, which must be consistent to ensure its proper operation. Needless to say, pistol selection is the owner's best opportunity to select a pistol that is suited or adaptable to the owner's individual needs.

------------------
Show someone the way
to the NRA
 
J.T.King,

It's a pleasure talking to you. You are
right, but logically speaking, in your arguments you are mixing
absolute theory and practical application
of the theory, or in the other words, science
and engineering. Look again:

"relative movements of slide, barrel, bullet
and spent case are happening INSIDE the
physical system of a gun"

BTW, In this sentence I said nothing about FRAME, and bullet moves RELATIVELY to the barrel,
right? So, although your arguments are correct, you can not say that my sentence is theoretically incorrect, and you
can not use frame/grip/hold in your argument
relative to this specific sentence.


"and unless gun is in some theoretical empty space and can move backwards without any resistance, relative
movements of gun parts can not be avoided"

You used only the last line of this sentence.
Look at the first part. I'm saying exactly what you're saying, except that I do not specify the amount of resistance. Am I theoretically wrong? No.


"Whatever the hold is, it is a hold, period."

Again, theoretically speaking, if hold is there, it's a hold, 1 ton or 1 pound. HOLD
is the event, which is present or not (true
or false statement).

I'm sure you understand what I mean.
 
oris, telecote.

I came off like a real pompous ass didn't I. Sorry!
I was not trying to insult your inteligence as it is obvious that you are no dummy. The only reason I suggest a course in physics is because this is not a forum for physics lessons. I find it extremely difficult to describe the more subtle concepts of physics without diagrams and usually hours of instruction. This is not the time or the place nor do I have the motivation.

I do not find any really sound physics in any sentence in your post. Don't take it too hard. One thing is for sure though, before I really learned physics, I thought I had a pretty good grasp of it as well. Now I know better. F.Y.I. my knowledge is from college courses in astronomy, chemistry, calculus, physics, etc. so I'm not talking out my ass on this stuff. One book I can suggest for fast learning is "the comic book guide to physics". Lots of pictures, easy to understand and designed for adults. If you had a gun(semi-auto) that would function flawlessly without being held at all, regardless of load, you will find one hell of a hard kicking pistol or one that shoots teany little bullets. Physics, it's more than just a good idea, it's the law!

J.T. you tha man! ddt
 
Dear ddt4free, if you suggest I need "comic
guide", it means you still think I'm a dummy.
But that is fine and doesn't bother me at all, 'cause I know who I am.

The funny thing is that it seems that I'm not able prove to you that "bullet, case, barrel and slide move relatively to each other in the physical system of the gun".

Physics and logic aside, you can easily
check it out on practice...

Nice talking to you, buddy.
 
Ok, last post, I promise! :]

Oris... From a purely semantics point of view I agree with most of your nits except the one:

>...bullet, case, barrel and slide move
>relatively to each other in the physical
>system of the gun...

Now let me explain my reasoning point by point:

1. yes, I agree that the Bullet moves the same relative to the barrel given that the barrel stays locked up for a consistant amount of time every shot, regardless of hold.

2. I do NOT agree that the barrel moves the same relative to the slide as the barrel is essentially part of the FRAME, not the slide, either by direct attachemnt (Sig P230, Walther PPx) or by linkage (HK USP, M1911).

3. As previously discussed, the frame (and attached barrel) remains only as stationary as a grip maintains, while the slide will attempt to recoil as far as its force and path of least resistance allows it.

4. Becasue of the infinately variable degrees of mobility inherent in a hand-held frame, there are likewise an infinitely variable number of ways that the slide can move relative to the barrel.

5. Since the casing's movement during extraction is COMPLETELY dependant on the slide's movement relative to the barrel, there is also an infinitely variable number of ways that the casing can move relative to all the parts except the slide.

Here is a perfect illustration of what I am talking about:

Lets take an autopistol and place our thumb over the back of the slide. Now, while pressing forward, lets fire that pistol. (BTW, Do NOT try this at home unless you are a trained spec-ops guy with a mission requiring noise and flash suppression!)

Assuming that you have any decent kind of strength, *the slide will not cycle!* Nor will the casing eject, nor will the slide move in relation to the barrel, nor will the barrel move relative to either part.

In fact, the ONLY thing that will move the same as in a properly opperated handgun is the bullet to the barrel!

So I submit to you that the bullet will always move relative to the casing and relative to the barrel, but the barrel and slide have an infinite number of possible relationships.

Now.

Lets talk "practical application."

If your gun malfunctions on you and the ammo is not at fault then get it serviced!

:]

the usual FWIW, IMHO and YMMV apply!

J.T.
 
J.T.King,

Thanks. I really, really enjoy talking to you. But I built this damn sentence about
"bullet, case, barrel and slide moving in relation to each other" in such simplistic
manner that there is no way you would be
able to deny it unless you go against formal
logic.

I did not specify timeframe or design
differences (you did it correctly), I just
stated that those four elements move in relation to each other. And because I did not specify the sequence of their relative movements, I can easily claim
to be right, because at some point of time
each of these four elements move in relation
to each other:

1. slide moves in relation to
barrel (no matter if the barrel is fixed or
not)

2. bullet moves inside (relative) to the barrel and correspondingly, relative to slide and case

3.etc....

Listen, I know that you know, and I want
to give you a credit of being both knowledgable and logical person...now, please admit that my very GENERAL description of "bullet, case,
barrel and slide behavior" is TRUE,
and not FALSE statement.

PLEEEASE????
 
Thanks, my friend. I knew you could not resist that one.

Now, what about other gentlemen who say
that you're right and I'm wrong? How can it
be if we're both right...?

Oh, well...they can say whatever they want...
 
Oris, I suggest the comic guide only because I own a copy and it is very good. Much better in many ways than a college physics textbook. You can learn alot very quickly from it without having to do much high end mathmatics e.g. calculus.

As for J.T., he's right, I just think he dropped his arguement because there is just no convincing you that the world is not flat.

Some of your opinions are very valid but the justifications you use hold no water. ddt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top