My inquiry was based on the observation of a fellow shooter that another's Citori XT hardly kicked and a recent review in December/January editon ClayShootingUSA on the Antonio Zoli Kronos and how all the shooters testing this gun commented on the low perceived recoil. The benefits of a well fitted gun and additional weight to tweek the Mass times velocity equation are not lost on me. But we all know some guns kick less than others. Why is it? I have extended forcing cones in most of my guns and some extension and possibly an overbore (tribore barrel) in my FabArms Sporting Clay and I have less perceived recoil than my Belgium Browning. What took me back was the recoil I felt in the Rizzini Veritex which is a new target gun which seemed to fit me and which should have all the cone and bore work done at the factory. But it slapped me.
But is it more than this?
I have an acquaitance who told me when he went through the Berreta factory he saw workers selecting stock blanks. As they sorted blanks the supervisor would look at a blank and say "that's a kicker" or "that will be a soft shooter", or how ever they say it in Italian. Is it just luck we find the shoft shooter, even within the same model, or could we actually say all such models are "soft shooters"?
Hi Mike,
Gun reviews are often just reworded factory release bulletin BS. If the manufacturer claims his new wonder gun will shoot around corners, the "gun expert" writer will likely report it that way. The only way that Italian supervisor could honestly claim this blank will be a kicker and that one will be a soft shooter is if there's a big difference in weight between the two pieces of wood. Even then, if the difference between the finished stocks is only a few ounces, the difference in true recoil will be small. Felt recoil is a real thing but the term is very often misused by the mfgr. or barrel jockey to explain the unprovable and physically impossible.
