TexasCHLforum.com

Has anyone used one of these System Technologies multi-spring Mechanical System?

That looks very similar in function to the recoil spring setup on my Kimber Ultra CDP. http://www.kimberamerica.com/shop/produ ... 25&xSec=21

All I can tell you is that my 3" aluminum framed Kimber has no more recoil than my 3.5" all steel Rock Island. It seems to work in that application.

Its a similar concept to what Glock did with the Gen4 recoil spring systems.

G.A. Heath wrote:Its a similar concept to what Glock did with the Gen4 recoil spring systems.

Trying to understand the distinction here. Baby Glocks have always had double recoil springs. What makes this different?

Compact (mid-sized) and full sized Glocks have used a single captive recoil spring assembly while Gen4 Glocks use a dual captive recoil spring assembly.

G.A. Heath wrote:Compact (mid-sized) and full sized Glocks have used a single captive recoil spring assembly while Gen4 Glocks use a dual captive recoil spring assembly.

Right, but subcompact "baby" Glocks (26, 27, 32) have always had the dual captive recoil spring assembly - at least all the Gen 3 versions I've ever seen have. So what makes this dual assembly in the OP photo (which says its for subcompact Glocks) different enough to reduce recoil? Trying to understand the mechanics/engineering of it I guess.

austinrealtor wrote:

G.A. Heath wrote:Compact (mid-sized) and full sized Glocks have used a single captive recoil spring assembly while Gen4 Glocks use a dual captive recoil spring assembly.

Right, but subcompact "baby" Glocks (26, 27, 32) have always had the dual captive recoil spring assembly - at least all the Gen 3 versions I've ever seen have. So what makes this dual assembly in the OP photo (which says its for subcompact Glocks) different enough to reduce recoil? Trying to understand the mechanics/engineering of it I guess.

I originally read about this on http://www.gunblast.com/Glock26.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Back in the 1980s, I installed "Haarts recoil reduction" on my Glocks
They were steel guide rods, partly filled with mercury, and Wolfe replacement springs.

Might have helped some.

Doing research on various ammo helped more to find what was actually (not just advertised as) lower recoil ammo..

I haven't done any recoil reduction on my Glocks since trying those in the 1980s, wasn't a huge difference..... did switch to more modern ammo.

WildBill wrote:I originally read about this on http://www.gunblast.com/Glock26.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks for the link, that explains it a bit better and seeing it compared to the Glock OEM spring assembly helps as well.

i dont see how your going to reduce recoil and have a light gun at the same time. you need more weight not springs.

alvins wrote:i dont see how your going to reduce recoil and have a light gun at the same time. you need more weight not springs.

I think the intent was to reduce stress on the gun, not the shooter.

I did not see that the product was for the sub compacts, been stuck with other sized guns in my head for the last few weeks. Now that I have the obvious, yet missing piece, to my puzzle I suspect that the spring rates are different than the stock assembly.

G.A. Heath wrote:I did not see that the product was for the sub compacts, been stuck with other sized guns in my head for the last few weeks. Now that I have the obvious, yet missing piece, to my puzzle I suspect that the spring rates are different than the stock assembly.

From what I understood from reading the review was that the smaller spring was supposed to reduce the force at the end of the cycle, when the slide hit the frame. This was to reduce the stress on the frame.

its a glock if it ever has a frame issue call them. the glock folks are as easy to deal with as springfield

You know, if it was a steel frame gun.....