Dual recoil spring assembly merits

Not open for further replies.


Jul 14, 2004
Now that dual recoil spring assemblies are becoming more and more common, I have to ask what advantage does it actually have over a traditional single spring set-up which is rated at the same strength?

Physically, in terms of performance there should be no difference. Dual recoil spring assemblies simply divide the job of one strong and long spring amongst two shorter and weaker springs. Logically, dual recoil springs are handy in smaller guns where it is tough to fit a single strong spring, but are they really truly any better to use in full size guns that can fit a single recoil spring rated at the same strength? Glock Gen 4's come to mind, of course but there are many others that use dual springs as well.
IMO: No.

Single springs work just fine and probably last longer if there is room designed into the gun to use them.

I'm with you rcmodel, but over and over people swear the dual RSA's make their Gen 4's have a more tame recoil experience than their Gen 3's. Personally I attribute this to them using stock Gen 3 recoil springs which are probably weaker than Gen 4 RSA's...and also their preconceived belief that the dual RSA's should make a real difference. But maybe I'm wrong.
I think it depends on the design, some dual spring setups allow the second spring to work later in the stroke, softening the impact to the rear. My Delta Elite felt much softer than my 10mm Kimber with equivalent weight springs when I was still shooting 10mm in the Kimber.
Not open for further replies.