On Thursday, February 20, 2014 5:06:50 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 2/20/2014 3:31 PM, wrote:

There is bounce. That's my point. The "bouncing" is occurring on the inside of the cavity. A ball dropped from one end of a cavity to the other is going to bounce.



The mallet head striking an object bounces. The shot hitting the

opposite end of the mallet when the mallet bounces back "helps" to

cancel out the head bounce back.

It helps to cancel out the mallet bouncing back. I'm not arguing this point. We agree here.

There is bouncing in either case that results in an energy loss. This doesn't address the deadblow's claimed increase in efficiency.

Hundreds (arbitrary) of shots smacking into the bottom of a cavity or a shot filled cavity are going to bounce and bang around. The sum loss in energy from the bounce back (including any collisions between each other) of each shot is going to be significant.

If you were to compare the efficiency of a deadblow's strike and a mallet of equal mass and size (shot filled w/ no empty space), and take into account the above, I wouldn't expect an increase in efficiency from the deadblow.