BH209 and less recoil ??

When I shot BH209 in my BC for the first time last month, I was surprised how little of a recoil there was using 120 grains pushing a 260 grain bullet/sabot. I attributed this to the energy burners and the Sims butt pad as the reasoning for cushioning the load.

But an online post from Randy Wakeman stated one of the benefits of BH209 was reduced recoil. I'm still not sure if the lesser recoil from my expeience was from the attributes of the stock on my ML or if it was the powder? But how could BH209 provide less recoil if it produces more velocity (energy ??) than a compariable load of another powder? I've always thought I had a reasonable handle on physics but this one has me scratching my head, thanks.

One possible way there might be less felt recoil is if the push on the bullet, occurs over a longer time period than when using other powders. Basically this is what a recoil pad does i.e. it spreads the 'recoil' over a longer time as it compresses. If the burn of BH209 takes longer than the burn for other powders, this could make for less felt recoil.

It has been written that BH209 is a progressive burning powder. If this is the case, does it mean it takes longer for it to reach peak pressure than other powders, and thus the time of the push on the bullet takes longer?

Ron is correct I think. I found the same concept to be true with 12 ga. clay target reloads. A load with Red Dot--a relatively fast powder--seemed to kick more than a load with Green Dot powder, which is slower burning. The loads carried the same payload and had the same velocity, but the Green Dot load was more comfortable to shoot.

FWIW, I think that BH209 kicks less than an equivalent load of 777 3F, but I have not shot them "side by side" to really compare them.

I think most of the reduced recoil is coming from your BC's design. If you happen to have some loose pyrodex or T7 laying around, try some the next time you are at the range, I'm curious myself to see if you notice a difference.

I would think burn rate has something to do with it too , if the powder has a progressive burn you shouldnt feel as much recoil. I may be way off on this but i had to throw my two cents in.

It's the recoil pad and the well designed stock, anything else is imagined.

Perhaps it's a combination of both
we all precieve recoil differently
if you bought the BC with the energy burners as a selling point then you already believed they work and I'm not saying they don't
if I shoot and forget to put my hearing protection on I feel more recoil
I believe the progressive burn has something to do with it as well
my 30/30 feels different than my 300 savage and that is different than my 30/06

I do agree that there seems to be less precieved recoil with BH 209

saxman1 said:

if you bought the BC with the energy burners as a selling point then you already believed they work and I'm not saying they don't

Click to expand...

Actually, I bought the camo BC because of the 3/4" shorter stock - love the way it shouldered - otherwise I would have been happy with the standard Triumph with the gray Weathershield.

The 3/4" stock, plus $70 off in their sale catalog, plus I'd just gotten a Cabelas Bucks coupon for another $75 off, and I had about $200 worth Gift Cards from Christmas. I was almost embarassed what it actually did cost - nah, not really.

I saw a BC stock with the energy burners pushed in yesterday, and I was disappointed with the design. The energy burners are just 4 small separate rubber tabs hanging on the edge of the stock.
I was thinking that the energy burner system was actually 2 rubber pieces that were connected from one side of the stock to the other, through the butt...boy was I surprised.
At least that way they would have 2 good sized pieces inside that could vibrate and dampen and really do something. Just my 02 on that.

Also, to me BH209 has slightly less of a sharp kick than 777. For me it's middle of the road somewhere between 777 and real BP...close to Pyrodex depending on the Pyro's granulation.

tpcollins said:

saxman1 said:

if you bought the BC with the energy burners as a selling point then you already believed they work and I'm not saying they don't

Click to expand...

Actually, I bought the camo BC because of the 3/4" shorter stock - love the way it shouldered - otherwise I would have been happy with the standard Triumph with the gray Weathershield.

The 3/4" stock, plus $70 off in their sale catalog, plus I'd just gotten a Cabelas Bucks coupon for another $75 off, and I had about $200 worth Gift Cards from Christmas. I was almost embarassed what it actually did cost - nah, not really.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a great deal
You are righ,they shoulder great.

There are formulas for "free recoil" that have powder burn rate in feet per second as a variable. I'm not certain if Western or Hodgdon make that data available...

Calculating free Recoil using non-SI units
Fron the momentum long form:
Momentum long form: vgu = {(mp ? vp) + ( mc ? vc)} / mgu ? 7000 → Etgu = mgu ? vgu? / 2 ? gc
Where as:
Etgu is the translational kinetic energy of the small arm as expressed by the foot-pound force (ft?lbf).
mgu is the weight of the small arm expressed in pounds (lb).
mp is the weight of the projectile expressed in grains (gr).
mc is the weight of the powder charge expressed in grains (gr).
vgu is the velocity of the small arm expressed in feet per second (ft/s).
vp is the velocity of the projectile expressed in feet per second (ft/s).
vc is the velocity of the powder charge expressed in feet per second (ft/s).
gc is the dimensional constant and is the numeral coefficient of 32.1739
7000 is the conversion factor to set the equation equal to pounds.




I don't think there will be much of a mathematical difference until you reach the uppermost end of safe loads where BH209 seems to produce higher velocity per grain of powder. Even then, defining what's a "perceivable" difference becomes a princess and the pea exercise.

Just my $0.02