Carbon v Titanium

Remind you of anyone?
http://space.newscientist.com/articl...ery-slope.html

Keeping this on topic:
To be "packing" when riding, which is better, carbon fiber or
titanium?

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m..._61620970/pg_4

http://www.magnumresearch.com/news_d...hootimes02.asp

And no, paintball giuns don't count.

DR

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:38:15 -0800 (PST), DirtRoadie
wrote:

Remind you of anyone?
http://space.newscientist.com/articl...ery-slope.html

Keeping this on topic:
To be "packing" when riding, which is better, carbon fiber or
titanium?

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m..._61620970/pg_4

http://www.magnumresearch.com/news_d...hootimes02.asp

And no, paintball giuns don't count.

DR

Dear DR,

The carbon-fiber bull-barrel defeats the purpose of a target
bull-barrel. The mass of the unnecessarily thick metal barrel reduces
wavering because more force is needed to jiggle the heavy barrel.

In bicycle terms, it's roughly the equivalent of choosing heavy aero
rims for race consisting of a steep climb to a finish line at the top
of the pass.

The classic examples are the Luger and P-38, muzzle-light naked-barrel
pistols that are surprisingly poor at formal target-shooting when
compared to heavier full-slide automatics and revolvers with their
weight forward of the trigger, ejection rods, and even massive
"vented" barrel ribs.

In contrast, steel-silhouette rifle shooters often cut a few inches
off the ends of their normal barrels because the shortened barrels
offer slightly less surface for the wind to grab and knock sideways,
right where the leverage is greatest, and the slightly shortened
barrels still offer all the practical accuracy needed for the sport.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel