- How To Use A Duck Call November 27, 2015
- Snakes In Texas November 25, 2015
- Duck Calls For New Hunters November 24, 2015
- Eyeworm Threat in Bobwhite Quail November 23, 2015
- Mercury Recoil Reducers November 20, 2015
- Shotstring And Patterns November 19, 2015
- Lowest Recoiling Shotgun November 18, 2015
- Dwarfed Benelli November 17, 2015
- Shared Skeet Gun November 16, 2015
- Belgian Obsolescence November 13, 2015
- Jay on Snakes In Texas
- jim rennie on Mercury Recoil Reducers
- Jay on Belgian Obsolescence
- Thomas Johnson on Shotshell Reloading Machines-Part 1
- Steve Jacobs on Triggers And Peking Duck
- Tom Fiumarello on Shifting Cross Dominance
- STEVE WARD on Winchester 1400 Auto
- To and through on The Paradox Of Lead
- d j on Where Has All The Powder Gone?
- Lee Trunnell on Well Worn Hulls
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
I have been hearing about the mercury filled reducers.
My questions are: How well do they work? Are mercury the best ones (vice other types)? How hard to put in a Beretta 686? Do you recommend a brand?
PS I realize I’ve left out a lot of detail–like gun fit, use of gun, loads I shoot, etc. I’m familiar with all those variables and am able to weigh them myself. The recoil reducer is not a variable I’m smart on.
Thanks in advance for your answer. You have a wonderful website!
I’ve never found that mercury reducers do anything much more than add weight. A lead slug does about the same. The theory of the reducers is that they can additionally attenuate recoil as the mercury is slightly time delayed in moving back through an internal orifice. The Griggs recoil reducer did the same thing with a lead plug on a spring. The idea is that you get the same amount of recoil (the laws of physics being as humorless as they seem to be), but you stretch recoil out over a longer period of time so that it becomes a push instead of a poke. That’s the way gas operated semi-autos reduce recoil
Like many things in shotgunning, the mercury reducers work, but I never found them to work much better than the equivalent amount of inert lead. Personally, I also found the sloshing of the mercury to be disconcerting when I moved the gun around. I’m sure many people wouldn’t notice it, but I did. I tried the mercury reducers on some guns and took them out. Then again, I shoot low gun games a lot, so balance and maneuverability are very important to me. I would be less critical if I only shot premounted trap or NSSA skeet.
I ought to mention that, aside from the sloshing, I didn’t find any downside to the mercury reducers. If you are thinking of adding weight to the butt, they are worth a try. You may be able to notice the difference even though I couldn’t. They really aren’t that expensive and might be worth the experiment. Mine are lost forever in a cigar box some where in my cellar gun area. It looks like that government warehouse in the last scene of “Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark”.
Most recoil reducers look about like a cigar tube. They are installed by drilling a large hole in the butt underneath the recoil pad. The hole is in line with the bore for maximum efficiency and reduction of face slap. The reducer is wedged into the hole to keep it from moving and then sealed in with the pad.
Adding weight works well enough for a trap gun where a butt heavy gun doesn’t really matter. When a gun is shot premounted, the balance is far less critical. What you are really doing is adding weight. The ratio of weight added to recoil reduction is roughly 1:1. That is, if you start with an 8# gun producing 17.5 ft/lb free recoil with a particular load, when you add 10% or .8# of weight to the gun you will reduce recoil down to 15.9 ft/lb or 9%. Close enough to 10% for gummint work.
You get a roughly sort of a 2:1 reduction in recoil when you lower shell velocity or payload. Making no change other than dropping down from 1-1/8 loads to 1 oz loads will lower recoil about 19%.
An interesting, though expensive, alternative to the recoil reducer is the “hydraulic” stock. “Soft Touch”, “G-Square” and a number of others make the conversions to your stock for around $600 or so. The stock is basically altered to work like a shock absorber. Most of the conversions add around 6 oz of weight to the butt, but some claim to come out almost neutral. If you can always mount the gun firmly to your shoulder these gizmos really, really do work. The recoil reduction is amazing. If you have a sloppy gun mount and don’t mount firmly to the shoulder, or if your stock is too short, they don’t work very well. You need decent shoulder contact.
By the way, thanks so much for taking the effort to search through the archives before asking your question. It saves us all a little bit of time. And thanks for the comments about the site. Roland and I put a lot of time into it.
The Technoid writing for Shotgun Report, LLC
(Often in error. Never in doubt.)