Recoil Management

Just checking to see if anyone has installed a Mercury recoil reducer and can describe the before and after.

Just my experience, you would be much better off finding the lightest powder load in terms of loads that produce your desired FPS. That way a gun designed to weigh perfect between your hands is not distorted in any way

Ive never used one and question whether or not they actually do more than just add weight.

The rifles ive had built for me used lead weights for balance and to provide propper heft for recoil management.

The rifle I am thinking of could use a little weight in the stock, it is a bit barrel heavy, I also see that Park West uses them in there builds -- soooooooooo just checking
btw I have the loads where I like them, nothing wrong with your big bore shooting like a .243 LOL

'simple physics. They work. Add more heft to your gun and the felt recoil will be reduced. Could you be more specific about your rig, caliber, et. al.? Also, part of it is psychological. Yep. Shot a really big gun, then shoot your gun...

If you're shooting a mid-bore .338 and down, no Hg is required. IF precision shooting to 1,000 yds, a muzzle brake will do you some favors, but i have found (building rigs for fam/friends) that there's a great balance between a Hg reducer or 2 and magnaporting that can result in amazing results! A muzzle brake with earplugs and others plugging their ears or standing back-PERFECT!

On heavy recoiling DG guns-more Hg is betterer! lol That one Japanese emporer made a moat of liquid Hg around his palace-and it worked! LOL 'Still there today (as the cost of cleanup is in the billion$!)

My 338 and 375 are fine and I agree on the break and suppressor, my 416 WBY as it is with my hand loads is great for hunting the big stuff , but I am always looking to tweak things, because that's what I do. The Park West I am having built will have one, just looking for info on potential results If I put one in the Weatherby.

Rare Breed said:

Just my experience, you would be much better off finding the lightest powder load in terms of loads that produce your desired FPS. That way a gun designed to weigh perfect between your hands is not distorted in any way

Click to expand...

I thought this might be the place to pipe-in with my experience with powder loads and recoil. I am a handloader, and i carry a nine pound .375 H&H here in prime grizzly country, no recoil reduction tech other than a good quality buttpad. I have a few old boxes of factory ammo around. I do a fair share of drills with dummy rounds and live fire to keep the muscle memory going. Last time i shot offhand a full box of factory ammo (Federal 270 grain cartridges) i noticed the beating i was taking as compared to my own loads. I saved one cartridge unfired from the box. At home i pulled the bullet. The powder was so compacted in there it took a mechanic's pic to get it to pour out onto my powder scale. Pour some out, loosen some, pour it out, loosen some more. It was packed tight to the gills. Of course I knew not what type of powder it was, but nonetheless i referenced the weight of it against various 270 grain loads from my Lyman manual. Of all the powders, the load in this factory round was at max weight for any of them, the highest weight listed in the charts for 270 grain bullets. No wonder i took a beating, i actually had some bruising. (I'm a very fit guy with an above average degree of lean muscle mass.) Anyways, my point is, when i load my own i never go above mid-range in the recommended charges for whatever powder i am using and i never take a beating like that during drills firing off a dozen or twenty rounds of these handloads. "Beware factory loads" being the takeaway for me. I suppose if you're selling factory ammo today, max velocity is a selling point. It's not my cup of tea. Before i do drills with factory ammo, whomever the maker, I now i pull all the bullets and measure out some powder before reseating. Not too much, i want it to be similar to actual field conditions. It makes a difference.

Wieland in his "Dangerous Game Rifles" recommended against mercury reducers based on his experience, citing how they threw balance off which in his experience actually made recoil worse than in a well balanced lighter gun with no reducers.

I looked into mercury recoil reducers because of a labrum tear. The studies I’ve read show that there was no difference between a 16oz MR and a 16oz steel tube.

Sounds like the quickest way to turn a 10.5lb rifle into a 15lb rifle.

But for Americans that’s why gun-bearers never went out of style in Africa.

I bought my 375 ruger at a huge discount from a guy who had done a few things to lighten it up to 7lbs , 1st shot he broke his orbital bone around his eye, called me and said he was done with it forever, I took it home to reverse engineer all he had done to it . To my surprise fiberglass filler missed heavily with #8 lead shot in the hollows of the fiber stock and a heavy dose of #8 shot in the butt stock then filled with foam , did the trick,( the smaller the shot the less airspace, you can easily experiment with what is right for your project )
all my old 10ga shotguns always got a 3/4 PVC full of #8-9 lead shot in the butt
Works great for me over a mercury retrofit reducers.
+ I contacted @Bob Nelson 35Whelen who imo is wizard with squeezing out max speed with more manageable recoil, I personally wouldn’t ever have a muzzle break on a rifle after visiting with a few doctors about how sound effects your body even with double high quality hearing protection

I recently purchased a Ruger Alaskan(2013) in 375 Ruger. Ordered a box of Hornady Outfitter 250gr CX and took it to the range today to shoot. Have an 1895 Trapper in 45-70 for comparison. My elk rifle is a Cooper M92 in 280ai. Long history of shooting shotguns including 10ga, limited 3.5” 12ga in an autoloader. Was attired in a tshirt given the mid 90s temps in south Texas. I was surprised, I shot offhand,on sticks and from the bench. The 375 recoil was not memorable, no more than the 45-70 with 325gr factory loads. I would say comparable to a 12 ga heavy dove load I routinely use. Of everything I have shot the 3.5” 12 was the worst but not bad enough to swear it off. Should I expect at I move up in bullet weight in the 375 the recoil will become less tolerable? The rifle is 8lbs without scope currently,shot irons. Factory Hogue stock.

Have you considered restocking it? Companies like McMillan have several fill weight options. I think they also offer recoil weights/reducers. That way, if it doesn’t work that well, you have an unaltered original stock.

Depends on what you do with it. Shooting my 404J at the range with 400 gr at ~2200 fps is not a lot of fun and my 98 Mauser weighs 10 lbs. Shooting same loads at African game this past week on the sticks was only noticable the very first shot at eland when it drew a little blood ... mine. It's not my 30-06. Gotta hang onto that cannon! I didn't notice two more instant followup shots also in the boiler room. My mind was somewhere else, i.e. making him go down. But I did remember to grip it harder. Shot it two more times over the next two days for buffalo and giraffe and I didn't notice the recoil but I'm sure I got rocked. Both animals took off which absorbed my immediate attention. But no followup needed for them. Neither ran fifty yards before piling up.

I think eight pounds is a bit light if you decide to step up to 300 gr. How long is the barrel? Iron sights or scope?

Incidentally, I'm also no stranger to recoil. But I learned a hard lesson. I do a lot of waterfowl hunting with hot 3" steel loads (I wouldn't accept a 3.5" 12 gauge if someone gave it to me). My left eye is now pretty much useless from three retina detachment surgeries and both eyes have had multiple laser patch jobs. Second detachment was after a morning hunting geese. Then I put that old 870 into retirement and now, to mitigate recoil, I shoot the heaviest auto ever made, 1961 Browning A5 Magnum Twelve. Needless to say the 404 I built three years ago gets shot sparingly. Very sparingly. Eye surgeon says I'm good to go but ... no sense in being totally reckless. Or living in a gilded cage.

Moral of this long meandering tale is a gun that beats the shit out of you at the range can still be very effective in the field. However, if it's beating you up shooting paper, the "practice, practice, practice" montra might be counterproductive. Get it zeroed and shoot something else for practice.

Edit: I will add this: try to make sure your everyday hunting/practice gun and special occasion big bore thumper have about the same trigger weight. Mine don't and I need to fix that (both have Timney triggers so it can be fixed). Plains game 30-06 went off a bit prematurely shooting at nyala after three days hunting big animals with stouter trigger 404. Still dropped it but things could have easily gone wrong.

curt672 said:

Just checking to see if anyone has installed a Mercury recoil reducer and can describe the before and after.

Click to expand...

@curt672 - I installed one 10 years ago on my Benelli SBE II. It was designed to be inserted into the butt stock. It worked and did reduce recoil noticeably BUT was very heavy —- I believe 8oz-10oz and also changed the balance point of that shotgun significantly. Not too bad for waterfowling because you usually have plenty of time to mount your gun however, I would Never use one on an upland shotgun. Overall, I found it unnescessary and especially because I rarely use any loads over 2 3/4” pushing 1 1/4 oz at 1300 - 1400 fps. The only time I could see any advantage of a recoil suppressor is if: 1). Patterning a heavy Turkey load (or Buckshot) where repeated shots are taken. 2). If you believe 3’ & 3 1/2” shells are needed to kill birds (geese/ducks etc..) —- I’ve never found any difference in killing power between 2 3/4” and longer/heavier loads. For Turkey hunting - I’m guilty of putting in a 3” shell and willing to rattle-my-teeth just to gain 5 yrds in pattern/reach for maybe ONE shot a season. Overall, I found my Mercury recoil suppressor worked as intended but think 8oz of “Lead” in that stock might of done the same thing, and the added weight makes it unappealing to me.

HankBuck said:

@curt672 - I installed one 10 years ago on my Benelli SBE II. It was designed to be inserted into the butt stock. It worked and did reduce recoil noticeably BUT was very heavy —- I believe 8oz-10oz and also changed the balance point of that shotgun significantly. Not too bad for waterfowling because you usually have plenty of time to mount your gun however, I would Never use one on an upland shotgun. Overall, I found it unnescessary and especially because I rarely use any loads over 2 3/4” pushing 1 1/4 oz at 1300 - 1400 fps. The only time I could see any advantage of a recoil suppressor is if: 1). Patterning a heavy Turkey load (or Buckshot) where repeated shots are taken. 2). If you believe 3’ & 3 1/2” shells are needed to kill birds (geese/ducks etc..) —- I’ve never found any difference in killing power between 2 3/4” and longer/heavier loads. For Turkey hunting - I’m guilty of putting in a 3” shell and willing to rattle-my-teeth just to gain 5 yrds in pattern/reach for maybe ONE shot a season. Overall, I found my Mercury recoil suppressor worked as intended but think 8oz of “Lead” in that stock might of done the same thing, and the added weight makes it unappealing to me.

Click to expand...

SORRY - I meant Benelli SBE 1

Back in the 1990s when I built my 450 Ackley, I had 2 x mercury reducers in the butt. Since then I have built and shot a decent number of bigger bore rifles and I believe mercury reducers are no better than just adding their equivalent weight to the rifle.

The judgement of what rifle "needs" recoil reduction is up to the inidividual.

I am recoil sensitive so no matter the rifle I try to make it recoil less. One part of the equation is the load you're shooting. But simple physics dictates that a heavier rifle will have less felt recoil. I typically put a mercury reducer in the stock and balance it with tungsten rod in the foreend.

Not everybody has a flinch. But any PH will tell you that way more people have a flinch than admit it. Why not reduce recoil if you can, especially for African hunting where there's always somebody to carry your rifle if it gets heavy.

Garciamarquez1918 said:

The judgement of what rifle "needs" recoil reduction is up to the inidividual.

I am recoil sensitive so no matter the rifle I try to make it recoil less. One part of the equation is the load you're shooting. But simple physics dictates that a heavier rifle will have less felt recoil. I typically put a mercury reducer in the stock and balance it with tungsten rod in the foreend.

Not everybody has a flinch. But any PH will tell you that way more people have a flinch than admit it. Why not reduce recoil if you can, especially for African hunting where there's always somebody to carry your rifle if it gets heavy.

Click to expand...

@Garciamarquez1918 - Agree, and likely Everyone will “flinch” when exposed to enough recoil - enough times….but few admit it. Recoil is never a shooters friend. One of my friends said “recoil on my .300 win mag doesn’t bother me no matter how many rounds I shoot”. We went to sight in a few weeks later - my .22LR and his .300 wm. After 20 rounds we did some “Off hand” shooting at 50 yrds —- his 5 shots w.300wm in 8” circle and mine w/.22lr in 4”….then switched guns and I grouped 6” and him just inside 4”….He still never admitted it was recoil/flinching that caused his poor groups

Yes, have many in multiple rifles, as stated...weight and the action/reaction of the mercury help allot in my opinion.