Quote:
Originally Posted by settingsteel
Thats from the technical standpoint...comparing those materials referenced....so then would not wood be the best choice? I won't go into the details of why since that has been pondered...but to answer your question JTKW I think its just another way to keep the economy flowing...new idea, a new want, a new toy....and believe you me- us spearos are gadget galore getters...ask Marwan  .
I think your reasoning in part is quite sound JTKW I actually implement in all my guns a CF Belly I added 2 CF stips lamed inside the stock, but stopped, cause you really don't need it (overkill), but alot of guys insist on having it in there anyways (and are happy to pay the "whole lot more $ to have it)...which kinda proves my point. |
I'm not going to debate the other relative merits of wood guns, but if you take Teak or Iroko as an example, you're looking at a specific gravity of 0.65 kg/dm3. That means it floats, which carbon fibre of course does not.
However, the carbon fibre barrel is hollow, whereas the woodie is not. When you calculate the relative bouyancy of a barrel with the same outer diameter using the different materials discussed, wood loses by a small margin to aluminium, but both lose badly to carbon fibre. The CF barrel also has a lower swing weight by a large margin and with short guns, you don't need mass to absorb recoil.
Attached is a spreadsheet to work all this out. Enter lengths, densities, thicknesses and inner diameters and the spreadsheet will do the rest.
Edit: specific densities for
woods,
metals and
carbon fibre
Attachment also seems to have failed, so here's a
mediafire link