Tell me about mercury recoil reducers
- Thread starter Quartus
- Start date
44rugerfan
New member
From what I understand, they are simply a tube filled with mercury, a dense liquid metal. They wiegh around twenty ounces or so, though I am sure they vary a bit. What happens is that as the gun goes off, the bullet is pushed out the barrel at a high speed. Physics dicates that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, and the only reason the rifle stock doesn't go through your shoulder at a high velocity is that it wieghs several times more than the bullet. This is why a 220 grain bullet will "kick" harder than a 150 grain bullet, even in the same caliber. They mercury recoil reducers not only add weight to the stock, but puts that weight to good use. The mercury, being a liquid, doesn't move with the stock as the bullet is fired and the stock moves backwards. It will stay at the same place until all the mercury is at the far end of the tube (the end closest to the barrel). At this point the stock has to work at starting the mercury moving from a dead stop, kinda like pushing a car at a dead stop is harder than pushing one already in motion. Also from what I understand they reduce felt recoil quite a bit. And they will not mess up the looks of the stock like a recoil pad will, although a pad is much less expensive.
Kentucky Rifle
New member
I heard that...
..the "Sprinco" system was more effective than the mercury filled set up. Has anyone tried both for a comparison in the same pistol?
Kentucky Rifle
..the "Sprinco" system was more effective than the mercury filled set up. Has anyone tried both for a comparison in the same pistol?
Kentucky Rifle
Personally I would not recommend the Sprinco type recoil reducers as I have seen them cause problems in both my pistol and others. The problems are two. One is that they sometimes keep the slide from locking back on the last round, and second they can make clearing a double feed type malfunction difficult by inceasing the amount of force necessary to press the slide back far enough to lock it open and attend to the double feed.
Supposedly they will loosen as you shoot them in and the problems will dissappear. Mine did not, even after 300 plus rounds. The mercury guide rods on the other hand do not alter or affect the normal cycling of the pistol. It looks just like a stock stainless recoil guide rod.
I have tried both, and the mercury guid rod is the only one I would reccommend to anyone I care about. In my opiniion, they dampen recoil about the same amount, but the reduction is not obvious unless you are shooting a fairly powerful cartridge or loading. I notice a reduction when shooting 40 S&W or 357 Sig in a Glock frame, but not with a 9mm upper on the same frame with the mercury rod installed. Seems to be the same as the standard factory spring and guide rod.
The reduction in recoil, to me anyway, doesn't really seem so much lessened as it does softened. The sharpness of recoil is reduced and the muzzle does not climb as high. In powerful calibers I think the mercury rod may be worth it but in smaller calibers or heavier frame guns, you may see no appreciable reduction in recoil.
The only folks I know of that make them for pistols is Harrts (sp?), but they are pretty expensive ($70+ retail & $50+ from Brownells)
MY 2 Cents
TEX
Supposedly they will loosen as you shoot them in and the problems will dissappear. Mine did not, even after 300 plus rounds. The mercury guide rods on the other hand do not alter or affect the normal cycling of the pistol. It looks just like a stock stainless recoil guide rod.
I have tried both, and the mercury guid rod is the only one I would reccommend to anyone I care about. In my opiniion, they dampen recoil about the same amount, but the reduction is not obvious unless you are shooting a fairly powerful cartridge or loading. I notice a reduction when shooting 40 S&W or 357 Sig in a Glock frame, but not with a 9mm upper on the same frame with the mercury rod installed. Seems to be the same as the standard factory spring and guide rod.
The reduction in recoil, to me anyway, doesn't really seem so much lessened as it does softened. The sharpness of recoil is reduced and the muzzle does not climb as high. In powerful calibers I think the mercury rod may be worth it but in smaller calibers or heavier frame guns, you may see no appreciable reduction in recoil.
The only folks I know of that make them for pistols is Harrts (sp?), but they are pretty expensive ($70+ retail & $50+ from Brownells)
MY 2 Cents
TEX
I use a Harrts rod in my Glock 23. It is a SS rod filled with mercury and several steel balls. It reduces perceived recoil. When the gun is fired the steel balls begin moving backwards and are slowed by the density of the mercury. This basicly slows and absorbs the recoil over a longer period of time giving the impression of reducing it. At least this is my "outhouse theory" of operation. Anyway it does work for me in 40cal. I didn't see much using it with 9mm however.
Kentucky Rifle
New member
Tex...
I'm very glad to hear from someone who's tried both. Thanks. The guy who told me that he liked the Sprinco's the best had only tried that brand. To me, it just seemed like the mercury filled Haart's would work better. The price the Haart's rod is advertized for in the gun 'zines is $80.00.
KR
I'm very glad to hear from someone who's tried both. Thanks. The guy who told me that he liked the Sprinco's the best had only tried that brand. To me, it just seemed like the mercury filled Haart's would work better. The price the Haart's rod is advertized for in the gun 'zines is $80.00.
KR
Kentucky Rifle
New member
Tom B...
Has the Haart's recoil rod effected the operation of your G23 in any way? Does everything still work the way it's supposed to? Last round lock-back and so forth?
Thanks,
Kentucky Rifle
Has the Haart's recoil rod effected the operation of your G23 in any way? Does everything still work the way it's supposed to? Last round lock-back and so forth?
Thanks,
Kentucky Rifle
Operation has been good however I do not use the supplied spring with the rod. I use Wolff recoil springs in the same weights as if I were using a standard SS aftermarket rod. I have my favorite spring weights for different cal Glocks. There is nothing really with the Harrts to go wrong. It looks just like a standard SS rod. I have only used the Harrts on Glocks so I could not tell you about operation with other pistols.
A buddy of mine shoots a glock in ipsc. He was trying out guiderods to see which one worked best at attenuating recoil. He had a tungsten and a Haarts rod to try out. After shooting them both, he had me shoot them both to get another opinion. We both agreed that the Haarts had a better control of recoil. As to the springco, I have shot some high cap 1911 pistols with them, and personally preferred the feel of tungsten rods.
I experimented a little with a Harrts recoil reduced for the Remington 870. It worked, but it weighed so much that it radically changed the balance of the shotgun. I have used (still use) some of the pistol rods, which have the advantage over the Sprincos and other similar systems that you use the stock springs, but the shotgun model was not a very useful product, IMO. YMMV!