Is there any significant difference in muzzle energy from a 12gauge pump-action vs a 12 gauge semi-auto; given identical ammo, identical barrel length and no chokes on either gun? I have searched for the answer to this seemingly simple question, but haven't found anything that compares/contrasts this. I know that there is generally more felt recoil in a pump-action than semi-auto, but don't know if this actually translates into more muzzle energy.
Muzzle Energy: Pump vs. Semi-auto....
- Thread starter Skans
- Start date
jaguarxk120
New member
No, and if there is the target will not know it.
No, I don't think there is any significant difference ..between a fixed breech gun ( like a pump or Over Under) and a semi-auto...in terms of velocity for a given shell at the muzzle...
In the time it takes to detonate the primer, start the burn on the powder and propel the shot cup a good distance down the barrel -- or even before the shot charge exits the barrel & before the bolt on a semi-auto unlocks -- ( with a shotshell having a muzzle velocity of about 1200 fps...its going to be less than 0.002 of a second before that shot charge exits the barrel..) ...if my math is right .../...
.... and while I have no way to measure the time it takes for the bolt to unlock..and retract.../ its seems like 0.002 seconds would be too quick....for that bolt to unlock and retract ....
In the time it takes to detonate the primer, start the burn on the powder and propel the shot cup a good distance down the barrel -- or even before the shot charge exits the barrel & before the bolt on a semi-auto unlocks -- ( with a shotshell having a muzzle velocity of about 1200 fps...its going to be less than 0.002 of a second before that shot charge exits the barrel..) ...if my math is right .../...
.... and while I have no way to measure the time it takes for the bolt to unlock..and retract.../ its seems like 0.002 seconds would be too quick....for that bolt to unlock and retract ....
Model12Win
Moderator
I'm curious about this too. My H&R Pardner single shot 12 gauge w/ 18.5" bbl sure kicks with buckshot. I also like it because it has more muzzle energy than when I put the same shells into my Remington 1100. The Remington is a softy to shoot with the same exact shells.
Because the Pardner kicks worse than the 1100, it must have more muzzle energy and power.
Makes sense to me!
Because the Pardner kicks worse than the 1100, it must have more muzzle energy and power.
Makes sense to me!
jaguarxk120
New member
Model12win let me be the first before the others get in line.
Have I got a deal for you -- one slightly used bridge------------
Have I got a deal for you -- one slightly used bridge------------
Wrong. On the Model 1100 the gas starts driving the nice steel action sleeve and action bars to the rear, and therefore pushing the rest of the gun forward. The peak recoil force transmitted is greatly reduced. The total energy transferred to the rear is the same, but it takes place over a longer period of time in the gas semi auto. The result is less felt peak recoil. It's not just sense; it's physics.
Anecdotally no difference. Theoretically in a pump all the energy goes out the end of the barrel, (less any heating effect of the weapon). In an auto, any energy used to cycle the action would come from the total energy that otherwise goes out the end of the barrel (and less any heating effect of the weapon).
Considering a 12 gauge has 2-3000 ft lbs of energy, the 5-10 ft lbs it takes to cycle the action is at best a rounding error.
Considering a 12 gauge has 2-3000 ft lbs of energy, the 5-10 ft lbs it takes to cycle the action is at best a rounding error.
No.
Theoretically a gas-operated gun should lose a very small amount of muzzle velocity but my guess is that the loss would be so small as to be lost in the normal velocity variance from one round of ammunition to the next. I can't imagine being able to measure the loss with typical measuring equipment.
Recoil operated guns shouldn't lose any velocity at all unless they're very unusual.
True in a gas-operated gun. Probably not true in a practical recoil operated gun. The gun's going to recoil whether the designer does something useful with the recoil energy or simply lets it pound the shooter in the shoulder.
I guess one could theoretically design a recoil-operated shotgun so that it actually did steal a small amount of muzzle energy, but the designs I'm aware of don't work that way.
Weight
Not at all. The Pardner kicks harder because it weighs a lot less than the 1100. Free recoil and felt recoil are both the product of velocity and mass.
That short barreled Pardner weighs about. 5lbs. A Remington 1100 weighs about 7.5 lbs.
Put same load in each gun - a standard 12 gal field load (1 1/8th oz shot at 1200 fps) and pull the trigger.
The lighter gun has a recoil speed of 33 fps. The 1100 has recoil measured at about 20 fps. The lighter gun moves faster and hits you quicker.
Energy is the same at the other end.
Pete
Not at all. The Pardner kicks harder because it weighs a lot less than the 1100. Free recoil and felt recoil are both the product of velocity and mass.
That short barreled Pardner weighs about. 5lbs. A Remington 1100 weighs about 7.5 lbs.
Put same load in each gun - a standard 12 gal field load (1 1/8th oz shot at 1200 fps) and pull the trigger.
The lighter gun has a recoil speed of 33 fps. The 1100 has recoil measured at about 20 fps. The lighter gun moves faster and hits you quicker.
Energy is the same at the other end.
Pete
Last edited:
The ultralight Partner not only recoils faster into your shoulder, but with more force. Roughly 35 ft lbs of recoil vs about 22 in the heavier 1100. The gas operated gun spreads the recoil out for a fraction of a secod more as the gas is used to cycle the action.
If anything the 1100 has a bit more energy and speed because the barrel is longer.
BlueSmoke14
New member
No difference in ME.
Some difference in comfort to the shooter however.
Some difference in comfort to the shooter however.
Velocity squared times mass/2 = kinetic energy
Velocity times mass = momentum
The bullet and the gun that shot it have the same but opposite
momentum but the bullet has much more energy. That's why you would rather stop the gun than the bullet.
A light gun coming back at you fast has much more energy than a heavy gun hitting you slow, yet they both have the same momentum, that of the bullet they fired. If anything, that lightweight gun shoots the bullet more slowly since more of the gunpowder's energy went towards accelerating the gun backwards. Imagine a gun that weighed much less than the bullet it fired, the gun would become the bullet and the bullet would be what moves slowly, the powder's energy went towards accelerating the gun instead of the bullet.
Velocity times mass = momentum
The bullet and the gun that shot it have the same but opposite
momentum but the bullet has much more energy. That's why you would rather stop the gun than the bullet.
A light gun coming back at you fast has much more energy than a heavy gun hitting you slow, yet they both have the same momentum, that of the bullet they fired. If anything, that lightweight gun shoots the bullet more slowly since more of the gunpowder's energy went towards accelerating the gun backwards. Imagine a gun that weighed much less than the bullet it fired, the gun would become the bullet and the bullet would be what moves slowly, the powder's energy went towards accelerating the gun instead of the bullet.