Why not use a shock absorber?

[MyRoad]

Does anyone know of a gun maker that has installed or experimented with a "shock absorber" -- like in cars/motorcycles/bicycles/etc. -- in a buttstock?

Why not? Recoil pads are good, but I bet we can do better. When I was a kid bicycles had basically hard seats and no shocks (I'm 41). By the time I was in college, there were gel seats, and ergonomically designed seats -- comparable to a LimbSaver recoil pad in the gun world. Then they started putting shocks on bikes, and now even the inexpensive bikes are available with shock absorbers. I have to wonder if one company didn't come up with a good design, if all battle-rifle calibers wouldn't eventually have them.

With bicycles, initially people were afraid that the bikes would bounce all over the place, and it would be more difficult to control -- but in reality the opposite is true (with quality shocks), and the bike becomes more stable because it absorbs bumps rather than being jarred by them, returning the wheel on the ground more effectively. In the same way, I could see how follow up shots would be quicker, because instead of the barrel lifting or shoving the shooter, it would stay in a true line.

This thought was prompted because I was looking at a Saiga in .308. It comes with a standard, small, narrow, hard AK buttstock, with little or no recoil pad - and I'm not aware of any aftermarket recoil pads for it. Then I notices that they had collapsable AR-style stocks for these gun. And I started to think that if someone could figure out a way to remove the locking device and put a spring or a calibrated rubber/foam bar in there, that piston design could work like a shock absorber... Obviously not a good idea on a rifle that does not have a LER scope - but most battle rifles at least start out with just iron sights.

I also think that you could use a simple air shock system that would be silent and adjustable.

Any thoughts?

 

[ArmedBear]

Ever seen the video of the .50 BMG pistol? The inventor's wife, who is not big, can fire it without any trouble.

The Knoxx COPstock uses a suspension system, as well. So do Benelli stocks.

Some MTB shocks are just elastomer suspension systems, like a Benelli buttstock.

 

[Correia]

Knoxx has. Look them up in the shotgun forum, and they are bringing out their stocks for rifles also. I wrote a review of one of their stocks in SWAT magazine last year.

And the Saiga .308 is actually a pretty mild to shoot gun. Though on my conversions, I prefer to put an ACE or Lage stock instead of the standard narrow AK stock.

 

[tenbase]

Like this?

Edit: Dang, I'm too slow on the "submit" button.

 

[ArmedBear]

Another interesting system that's been used:

Remington's 1100 shotgun remains popular in part because of its near total lack of perceived recoil, and its popularity led to other popular gas guns, particularly those from Remington and Beretta, since then. Gas guns displace a good amount of weight backwards inside the gun to work the action, at exactly the moment that recoil occurs. This weight shift absorbs a good deal of the recoil. Beretta's Extrema 2 is supposed to make a 3.5" super magnum shell feel like a bird load.

So, back in the '80s, Remington decided to do something different for trap shooters who wanted low recoil for handicap (long-distance) loads, but wanted a gun that didn't need cleaning during a long day of competition, didn't spit shells at neighboring shooters, and would be safe and easy to load single.

Remington took an 870 and put a gas port in the barrel like in a semiauto, and they put a piston in the blocked magazine tube. Instead of operating a semiauto action, the piston just moved a weight backward through the tube. The 870 Competition was a single-shot pump action, since it had no magazine. I've shot one, and it doesn't recoil much at all.

I'm not sure when Remington stopped making them; one in good condition still fetches a decent price. And I don't know of another shotgun or rifle that has used this design, but it sure is an interesting idea.

 

[LiquidTension]

ARs and FALs have had a buffer system in the stock for a long time, what's the difference between that and what you're asking about? Not trying to be a smartass, just trying to get a grip on what you're asking.

 

[tenbase]

I believe the poster is referring to a buffer system for the stock to help cushion recoil. The AR has a buffer in the stock, but it is for the action, the buttstock does not move independently of the rest of the firearm.

 

[Jim Watson]

Yes, there is an outfit that installs a little hydraulic shock absorber in a rifle butt. Kind of ugly, it has to protrude by the length of the stroke, but they make great claims for it, especially if you buy a muzzle brake from them, too.

 

[DoubleTapDrew]

I'm sure it can be done, although it seems like with both you and the gun moving it might be hard for quick follow up shots?

 

[MyRoad]

I'm sure it can be done, although it seems like with both you and the gun moving it might be hard for quick follow up shots?

I hope someday I get to try it and find out, but I think that a smooth lighter push - even with the extra movement - would move the shooter out of line with their target less than an abrupt recoil shove.

And thanks for all the info everyone!

 

[tenbase]

This brings up another question, what sort of effect would a shock absorbing buttstock have on the rifles action? I guess if one were shooting marginal loads there's a chance the action will "short stroke" due to the rearward movement of the receiver...but there should be plenty of surplus energy in a "normal" load...er, did I just answer my own question?

/lays off the coffee

 

[ArmedBear]

Oh, I almost forgot. I've shot a gun with one of these, and shot with people who had them. It's exactly what you're talking about. It's more popular in the shotgun world, where single- and double-barrel break actions, which do nothing to absorb recoil, are common in competition.

It's called a GraCoil. It adds weight to the butt, so it does affect the balance of the gun. People swear by them, though.

http://www.graco-corp.com/gracoil.htm

I'm trying to think if I've ever seen one on a semiauto. I can't say I have. Good question about the "short stroke."

I'm guessing (wildly) that it would be more of a problem with a blowback action (pistol caliber Ruger or AR carbine) or an inertia action (Benelli), than a gas-operated action. On the other hand, a gas-op like a Mini-14, M1, etc. that has a big, heavy piston, might have trouble too.

 

[wanderinwalker]

Now, my question is, how does the movement/telescoping of the stock effect scope eye relief? It would seem to me like it is a good way to get whacked hard, with the whole rifle coming back against that shock absorber. People have eye-relief problems enough as-is, IMO. Scope too close, too far away, buy cheap junk to put on serious-kicking rifles, etc.

Other than that, I love the idea!

Now, something that works well (though differently) can be found on the T/C Prohunter Flex-tech stock. I am not in any way affiliated with the company, but I can't praise this stock enough! My understanding is that it works with both a Limbsaver pad and by cancelling out some of the harmonics and energy through dampers placed in the buttstock.

I've fire about 250 shots worth out of a fairly light .50 caliber muzzleloader (Encore Prohunter Katahdin) and find sitting at the bench for 20+ shots is easy. This rifle, using typical loads around 100gr of loose Goex or Pyrodex or pelletized equivalent, can generate some serious recoil by the numbers (25-40 foot pounds range, depending). But it feels more pleasant than the .260 Mountain Rifle I traded in on it. Go figure! Even with 3-pellet charges, it is survivable, if a little on the brutal side. (That's more like getting hit by a .300 Maggie.)

I don't understand it completely, but I like it!

 

[ArmedBear]

Black powder velocities are lower. That's one reason for the enormous bullets (300-400 grain is a lot for deer). Only with a big bullet do you get the energy you need at 1500-2000 fps at the muzzle.

There are two components to recoil: energy (ft-lb) and velocity (fps).

Black powder recoil is a hard push; smokeless powder recoil from a manual action is a sharp punch. From an autoloader, you can also get more of a push, also, since the motion of the action spreads the recoil out over a longer time.

These give you a good overview:
http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_recoil.htm
http://www.chuckhawks.com/recoil_table.htm

 

[tenbase]

I guess as far as semiauto rifles go, a shock absorbing stock would really only be useful on the stouter calibers anyway (.308 +), and those rounds probably have more than enough oomph to operate the action with the small amount of energy lost to the damper.

Heck, even my little 7.62x39 SKS throws empty casings almost as far as it throws the projectiles