Balance point of a weapon

[Punkypink]

An interesting discussion about the weight distribution of guns came up in the MP5K alternatives thread. It was claimed by some people, including Stealthbomber, that the balance point of any gun is where the pistol grip is.

 

However on several other gun sites I find information to the contary. Especially interesting are sites where I constantly come across people asking where the balance of a build project should be. For eg:

 

I am in the process of building a 6br for informal benchrest competitions. What I was wondering was where should the balance point on the rifle be for it to track in the bags well? I am using a Remingotn 700 SA with Krieger HV taper barrel 28" long. Weight is not a limitation as I said it is informal competitions.

 

I am thinking if the balance point can shift along a rifle, surely that pertains to how the forward weight and the rearwards weight counter each other, rather than it simply being where the trigger hand is.

 

So, especially to all you gun-knowledgable friends across the pond, could you shed some light on just how one determines what the balance point of a gun is, and how do we determine the weight distribution of any given weapon?

[RC-1138]

An interesting discussion about the weight distribution of guns came up in the MP5K alternatives thread. It was claimed by some people, including Stealthbomber, that the balance point of any gun is where the pistol grip is.

 

Clearly never held an M16A4....

 

EDIT

 

Or an M249 or M240B. Actually baring SMG's most full sized rifles are always barrel heavy. Balance point does not always equal the pistol grip, see exhibit one:

 

 

If you think that silly plastic stock outweighs the remainder of that barrel, heat shield, integrated bipoid and metal box of a receiver....

[Punkypink]

As in, I think that the reference point he takes to be wherever the pistol grip is, rather than saying the pistol grip is the point where the gun is perfectly balanced 50:50 weight-wise.

 

But I best quote him directly because I don't want to risk misrepresenting what he says.

 

You don't hold a gun by the magwell (unless it's an uzi). You hold it by the pistol-grip.

 

Summat like an Uzi or MP7 is perfectly balanced for one-handed use.

A gun like an L85 or P90 is rear-heavy.

Guns like G36s and MP5ks are front-heavy.

 

Arguing about things which are common sense is a little pointless so let's just get over it and move on, eh?

 

Sorry, you don't seem to get it.

 

I'm TELLING you that the reference for balance of a weapon is considered to be the pistol grip.

 

You then consider if the gun tries to lean backward or forward from the pistol grip.

That's how the rest of the world does it so now you've learned something perhaps we can all move on?

 

Is that how we consider the weight distribution of a weapon?

[hwagan]

I'd guess the 'balance point' is the point at which the rifle will balance itself on some sort of pivot... I'd guess having the balance point between your 2 hands on the weapon would be the best place to have it. I don't have a clue about any of this, just what i think... But surely putting a big heavy RAS on a perfectly balanced gun is going to shift the 'balance point' forward? I really don't know.

 

On a totally unrelated topic, punky; Were you and a bunch of SWAT looking guys at Ace combat yesterday?

[Punkypink]

I'd guess the 'balance point' is the point at which the rifle will balance itself on some sort of pivot... I'd guess having the balance point between your 2 hands on the weapon would be the best place to have it. I don't have a clue about any of this, just what i think... But surely putting a big heavy RAS on a perfectly balanced gun is going to shift the 'balance point' forward? I really don't know.

 

On a totally unrelated topic, punky; Were you and a bunch of SWAT looking guys at Ace combat yesterday?

That what I felt the balance point is too, but apparently I'm wrong, so Stealth tells me (in big caps ). Personally I'd love to know whether that is true, because logically the balance point of anything should be the point where the weight on either side of the point negates each other. However that apparently is not how the rest of the world does it as far as guns are concerned.

 

Anyways, no I wasn't at ace combat yest.

[RC-1138]

I don't quite get what he's saying. In dealing with real firearms when something is "balanced" it means that the barrel and stock are in or about an equilibrium around your strong hand (whatever grips the trigger). I assume he means by balance point he means where you're doing the aiming from, or at least which hand is doing the most work, which again I point to the M240B, unless you're prone on the Bipod (which SHOULD be how you fire it, but I've seen guys kneeling/standing sorta), your forehand is doing the heavy movement.

 

EDIT

 

I think I get what he's saying, he's just using poor terminology. I think, and he'll correct me if I'm misunderstanding I'm sure, aiming is done from the pistol grip and you "balance" you're point of aim from the pistol grip. That's half true. Machine guns usually are not handled in such a way. SMG's, AR's, and Shotguns perhaps, but on a LMG or MMG your point of aim is achieved slightly differently.

[Azulsky]

I would agree with Stealth, the ideal balance point on a weapon is the pistol grip, so its typically used as a reference to determine whether a gun is front or back heavy.

 

More precisely for small weapons you want to be able to grip them by the pistol grip and have freedom of manipulation with just that arm without having to constantly counterweight it as one handed operation is sometimes necessary

 

However most weapons blow this rule out of the water, MG's, many modern carbines(with the gizmos attached), and sniper rifles are all front heavy

[ktk_ace]

That what I felt the balance point is too, but apparently I'm wrong, so Stealth tells me (in big caps ). Personally I'd love to know whether that is true, because logically the balance point of anything should be the point where the weight on either side of the point negates each other. However that apparently is not how the rest of the world does it as far as guns are concerned.

 

Anyways, no I wasn't at ace combat yest.

 

If the pivot of a gun is on the pistol grip

 

that is the balance point of the gun, as it directly affects the feel and usage of the gun.

 

 

The M240 on post #2 clearly uses the overhead handle to do most of the aiming thus its pivot point is there.

 

the pistol grip on the M60 is clearly used for support and pulling the trigger in that firing stance.

[RC-1138]

The M60 on post #2 clearly uses the overhead handle to do most of the aiming thus its pivot point is there.

 

the pistol grip on the M60 is clearly used for support and pulling the trigger in that firing stance.

 

M240B

[Danke]

I think you're using the wrong wording here and that may be what's causing the kerfuffle. Balance point implies that the weapon will be balanced there.

 

Consider the weapon to be a lever. The pistol grip will be its fulcrum or pivot. In most cases it will be out of balance as the weight on each side of the pivot will not be equal. Perfect balance is a bit of a red herring also. If it was very desirable then shooting sports like skeet would be running bullpups instead of the traditional muzzle heavy setup.

 

Weapons like the UZI and MP7 were made to be compact in the event they were used in a confined space like a vehicle. The packaging that gives them the balance to hold in one hand is a byproduct of that design, not a feature they were designed to have.

 

They would not have folding stocks or foregrips if one handed use was a goal rather than a byproduct.

[Punkypink]

What about the guy talking about building a rifle?

 

What does he mean when he says "What I was wondering was where should the balance point on the rifle be for it to track in the bags well?"

 

Since the point he holds the rifle is seemingly fixed, does that suggest that he is talking about balance point in a way that suggests where he wants the point where the weight is 50:50 to shift? I'm thinking about weight distribution here in the same way that weight distribution is seen in cars, i.e. a fixed midpoint, and then weight distribution is expressed in ratios. Thus, a front heavy car would be one where the weight distribution is 52:48 when measured from the midpoint.

 

In terms of aiming, assuming we're talking about aimed firing, most weapons like ARs and SMGs are not aimed with just one hand. If anything, when aquiring targets one tends to pivot around the waist, partially to ensure a stable firing platform. Shouldn't the weapon's weight distribution then pertain more to where the weight sits when held as it should be?

[ktk_ace]

M240B

 

corrected.

 

Addons affect the balance and distribution of a firearm , thats why most sniper rifles or heavy MG's need to have a sandbag / bipod to take the load off the person operating it in prone position.

 

Its a balancing act imho.

[Danke]

You are discounting recoil in the real deal items. If they weren't muzzle heavy they would walk off target on each shot. That's an issue with something as "small" as 9mm.

[RC-1138]

In terms of aiming, assuming we're talking about aimed firing, most weapons like ARs and SMGs are not aimed with just one hand.

 

Actually expert shooting is. You're forehand (off hand) does basically nothing but support the weapon. In fact new CASV Marksmanship training doesn't even call your off hand the off hand, they call it the monopod, and teach new shooters to treat it like a bolt in the ground (or thigh or ribs). You do 100% of your aiming (MG's not withstanding) with your firing hand as that's the hand that's going to effect where you're shot goes (pulse, breathing ect.)

[ktk_ace]

Shouldn't the weapon's weight distribution then pertain more to where the weight sits when held as it should be?

 

As for real firearms, the ammo and recoil is part of the equation too.

 

Too light a firearm with too big a calibre, and the recoil becomes near uncontrollable for follow up shots to the untrained person.

 

Too heavy and people will start to nag about the weight.

 

Too front heavy and it becomes counter intuitive to maneuver it quickly (ala sniper rifles / MGs)

 

Too back heavy and recoil becomes a problem too.

 

 

interesting tidbit:

 

The Kriss Super V was developed from a Russian competitive shooting pistol that was banned from the Olympics:

it was too accurate due to the way the barrel and magazine is placed.

 

 

[Punkypink]

So, if you have a weapon that exerts more downward force on the firing hand than the support hand, assuming a conventional layout, is that a rear-heavy weapon, or is it still considered a front heavy weapon?

[The General]

Balance point and pivot point. Two different things being confused here.

 

Simples if you use common sense.

 

Thats not very likely though, so I will step back and watch this thread hit 50+ replies.

[ktk_ace]

You are discounting recoil in the real deal items. If they weren't muzzle heavy they would walk off target on each shot. That's an issue with something as "small" as 9mm.

 

Its a common sight in airsoft too.

 

Rattling of the air chamber piston /spring on more powerful AEGs, particularly extremely light armalites , and the problem of recoil manifests.

 

Even more pronounced on a GBB on a warm summer day.

[Punkypink]

By the way, one of the problems with the SAR-21 is a sudden extreme weight shift backwards during the recoil. Apparently so extreme that even properly shouldered, the entire butt will slip down and contribute to unacceptable muzzle climb.

 

Back to the question:

 

So, if you have a weapon that exerts more downward force on the firing hand than the support hand, assuming a conventional layout, is that a rear-heavy weapon, or is it still considered a front heavy weapon?

 

 

[RC-1138]

So, if you have a weapon that exerts more downward force on the firing hand than the support hand, assuming a conventional layout, is that a rear-heavy weapon, or is it still considered a front heavy weapon?

 

This seems more like real firearm based in discussion (which I'm sure the mods will love :S ) but most real guns don't exert downward force. Usually it's straight backwards pending on where the stock is in releation to whatever the mechanism is. That is, guns like the M-type and evolutions thereof are call in line, as in the stock is in line with the mechanism and barrel, so all the forces go directly to the rear. Muzzle climb is not the result of recoil per se but rather the human body bending backwards (thus forcing the barrel up) in response to recoil. Guns like the AK that do not have in line stocks do apply force at a different angle, rather a little downward, but still pretty much directly into the shooter.

[ktk_ace]

So, if you have a weapon that exerts more downward force on the firing hand than the support hand, assuming a conventional layout, is that a rear-heavy weapon, or is it still considered a front heavy weapon?

 

hold it like a pistol with your arm extended.

 

An armalite/G36C will have its muzzle starting to point down towards the ground.

 

A P90 will have a slight elevated muzzle aim towards the ceiling.

 

A UZI/MAC-10 will be a straight ahead muzzle aim.

 

 

as for the real world SAR-21 ...

 

The constant recoil system in it is taken from the ultimax 100, resulting in very soft recoil feel for a bullpup .

 

the moving mass inside is extremely large and rearward based , resulting in a slower but very big shift in weight from the pistol grip to the butt.

 

 

The real world Steyr AUG has the piston system's weight (which is already much lighter than the SAR-21's system) positioned right above the trigger , resulting in very little moving mass but a higher velocity piston action, resulting in a bigger "kick" directed rearwards.

 

 

Not all bullpups are the same.

 

 

 

I think i said a little too much.. uh oh...

[Punkypink]

This seems more like real firearm based in discussion (which I'm sure the mods will love :S ) but most real guns don't exert downward force. Usually it's straight backwards pending on where the stock is in releation to whatever the mechanism is. That is, guns like the M-type and evolutions thereof are call in line, as in the stock is in line with the mechanism and barrel, so all the forces go directly to the rear. Muzzle climb is not the result of recoil per se but rather the human body bending backwards (thus forcing the barrel up) in response to recoil. Guns like the AK that do not have in line stocks do apply force at a different angle, rather a little downward, but still pretty much directly into the shooter.

sorry, by downwards force, I am of course, refering to that scourge of our childhood flight fantasies: gravity. Combines with mass to form weight.

 

So what I'm saying is, if there is more weight over the trigger hand than the supporting hand, assuming a conventional layout, is this a front heavy weapon?

[Punkypink]

hold it like a pistol with your arm extended.

 

An armalite/G36C will have its muzzle starting to point down towards the ground.

 

A P90 will have a slight elevated muzzle aim towards the ceiling.

 

A UZI/MAC-10 will be a straight ahead muzzle aim.

I know thats what you think, but I'd like to see what others think too, as well as whether that is a more informative indicator of the precise weight distribution of a gun than the ratio method.

[RC-1138]

Pends where the trigger is lol. If you you have more weight over you hand in lets say an M4, you man not have a balanced weapon but it's probably not front/back heavy. If you have lets say an SA-80 and most of the weight is to the rear, ect.

 

As far as I've ever been taught and experienced in shooting real guns my whole life, a balanced weapon is when holding a weapon in a prone position does not cause your barrel to want to face towards ground or point in the sky. The pivot point is where you do the aiming from and 90% of the time that's at the trigger, point of aim is achieved by moving whatever the pivot point is and that's about it (hence why bipods are much more accurate than freeshooting) and the most accurate firearms actually tend to be barrel heavy for unreleated reasons

[GuzziHero]

Clearly never held an M16A4....

 

EDIT

 

Or an M249 or M240B. Actually baring SMG's most full sized rifles are always barrel heavy. Balance point does not always equal the pistol grip, see exhibit one:

 

If you think that silly plastic stock outweighs the remainder of that barrel, heat shield, integrated bipoid and metal box of a receiver....

 

If a unit commander saw you holding an LMG by the quick-change barrel handle, he would probably PT you till you died!!!!

 

Balance point is where the balance point is. Not always dead centre of the gun (KART EBR, CA CQB are good examples, they are very front weighted).

 

I personally feel the ideal balance point is 1/3rd of the way between the grip and the end of the barrel.