Originally Posted by
kekko
A 3rd question: how much difference did recoil-less guns make? I'm guessing that there must be a record of top scores at 10 m pistol shooting through the years, but I haven't been able to Google it. I've read on here that scores haven't changed much since CO2 pistols came along, but what about before that?
Regards,
John
I'm not aware of recoiling records, the earlier comps in the '70's at 6yds run by the old NARPA association did have target classes for them. There have been recoiless match pistols around since the early 60's so I doubt any one of top standard would have used a recoiling out of choice.
There is no reason though why a top quality recoiling pistol should be any more inaccurate, .22 free pistols shoot as high scores as air on a more difficult target for example.
The problem with a quality recoiling pistol is not the accuracy but the difficulty, the recoil punishes any slight variation in grip or hold whilst any slight failure in trigger technique is compounded by the recoil. I have a savagely recoiling Walther LP 53, bought new in the '70's for full bore pistol practice, which is capable of holding the 10 at 10mts which I occasionaly shoot when I'm feeling maschocistic. A good shot is still a ten but a bad technique shot that would be an 8 with a recoiless is punished by a flyer well into the white. So the simple answer is I don't know for sure but suspect that a top level shot would not shoot a lot different with a recoiling against a recoiless as long as the gun was a quality piece.
Robin
Walther KK500 Alutec expert special - Barnard .223 "wilde" in a Walther KK500 Alutec stock, mmm...tasty!! - Keppeler 6 mmBR with Walther grip and wood! I may be a Walther-phile?