You missed the point entirely. Please read the post again. The only reason I mentioned the Abellan was that testing it was the reason I was at the pool in the first place. I wanted to see how it performed with the bands that came with it. The Abellan came with 14.5 mm small ID and that is all I've ever used on it. They work great and I've had no reason to try any other bands for comparison. But I had been using 16 mm large ID bands on the Wong, so I wanted to see how it performed with 14.5 mm small ID. The difference was dramatic. Besides the great increase n recoil, maybe I should explain muzzle flip/muzzle rise. People who use rear handled guns may not be familiar with the problem. Mid handled guns are very popular in Southern California because we often hunt in poor visibility and thick kelp. We shoot big fish so we need power for penetration, but we also need to be able to swing the gun easily. A rear handled gun that is long enough to have the power will be hard to swing in those conditions.
Well designed rear handled guns place your hand very close to the recoil force from the bands. But with a midhandled gun, the handle is well below the force from the bands, so the gun tries to rotate around the handle. The muzzle rises as the shaft leaves the gun and the rear of the shaft is pushed upward, causing the shaft to shoot low. To minimize this effect, we can increase the mass of the gun and/or try to back up the butt so the gun can't rotate around the handle snd cause the muzzle to rise. I had been using the Wong with three 16mm large ID bands for a couple of years and the recoil was controllable with little muzzle flip. I showed the fish photo simply to show that with the first shot of the gun, it was accurate enough to hit that fish.
Now back to the pool. The 14.5 m small ID were so much more powerful that I bruised my chin and muzzle lift was so severe that the shaft passed under the entire target. Removing one band helped, but the shaft still barely hit the bottom of the target. If I had been shooting at a fish, I would had missed completely and probably not realized why.
To summarize- with the same gun and shaft, the 14.5 mm small ID bands seemed to provide a lot more force that the 16 mm large ID bands, even though the cross sectional area of the 14.5 mm is a lot less and wishbones were exactly the same in both bands. I don't know why- I'm just telling what I experienced.
Bro you are still comparing apples to oranges.
A 16mm band at 280-300% has less power than a 14mm band at 350-380%.
The power increase is not linear with stretch ratio but exponential.
The band diameter has VERY little to do with recoil, muzzle lift but rather the power stored in rubber based on its stretch ratio.
You cant just go out and say oww fuck the 14.5mm had so much more recoil or power than 16mm. Its not about band diam as you try to portrait it.
I can understand your experience but it has no real value.
A comparisons like yours is why there is so much bad information and advises based on human perception in first place instead things that we can measure.
A human perception is very dangerous thing...