MA!! Git mah gun.
-
Shyal_malkes
- Cartoon Hero
- Posts: 1804
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:12 am
- Contact:
Yes and no. Again, go back to 1776 or so, a Kentucky Longrifle's *practical* accuracy was high because bullet speed gave a flatter trajectory out to 200 - 250 yards. No glass sights meant YOU had to do the vertical correction...which ain't easy without buckets of practice.
Compare and contrast to the "Brown Bess" - smoothbore, but not a shotgun, was meant for firing bullets. Why a smoothbore? Faster reload. You could cram the next round down the barrel faster. Accuracy was utter crap past 75 yards or so and even then they stank. They were meant for "up close repeated volley fire" tactics.
Colonial rebels who had long-range but slow-loading rifles would use a "hit and run" technique - open up with the rifles, fade back, reload, pull another ambush...avoid a "toe to toe" fight where the reload speeds mattered.
We also adopted their technique at times, using shotguns or Brown Besses of our own...
Anyways. That's what was up with the Bess: it wasn't optimized for power or accuracy, but rather reload speed...3ft smoothbore.
Compare and contrast to the "Brown Bess" - smoothbore, but not a shotgun, was meant for firing bullets. Why a smoothbore? Faster reload. You could cram the next round down the barrel faster. Accuracy was utter crap past 75 yards or so and even then they stank. They were meant for "up close repeated volley fire" tactics.
Colonial rebels who had long-range but slow-loading rifles would use a "hit and run" technique - open up with the rifles, fade back, reload, pull another ambush...avoid a "toe to toe" fight where the reload speeds mattered.
We also adopted their technique at times, using shotguns or Brown Besses of our own...
Anyways. That's what was up with the Bess: it wasn't optimized for power or accuracy, but rather reload speed...3ft smoothbore.
This is pretty much a rehash of what Bigdude just said. (I guess it pays to type faster) =P
Actually, with a well-built (rifled) pistol one can still get remarkable accuracy even from a short barrel. The only way you'll ever see it is if you clamp the thing in a vice. The long barrel not only gives longer time for the projectile to be stabilized in its trajectory as well as being accelerated to faster speeds, but also it gives a longer sighting plane (the distance between the front and rear sights). I always had difficulty accurately shooting anything with less than 7 1/2 inches of pipe sticking out the front...
Another factor in accuracy is how much powder you use when you load. (and this applies to all firearms) You would be surprised at how much difference a small change in charge weight (1%) can affect accuracy. The ideal marksman ensures that all powder loads are identical in weight.
Bore size and barrel length are fairly unrelated to each other. I can shoot .45 colt from a 16" lever gun, to a 7 1/2" revolver to a 1" derringer. But as has been stated earlier, the derringer gives the least accuracy and slowest muzzle velocity (not to mention it kicks like a mule). The revolver motivates a 255 grain lead slug to anywhere from 900 - 1100 feet per second (these are heavy loads for 45 colt BTW). The rifle takes the same bullet (same load) to 1050 - 1300 fps. I never had the pain tolerance to clock the derringer.
As far as kick is concerned, without porting the mass of a firearm can dramatically reduce felt recoil. From my prior example, the derringer is a very painful experience to shoot, it weighs almost nothing, so its like holding the cartridge in your hand and setting it off. The revolver is far more comfortable to shoot with the same powder charge. Finally, I could shoot the rifle all day with heavier loads because the rifle's mass absorbs most of the recoil.
For the Rac-conans to develop effective small-arms they will need a better propellant than black powder, and better steel in their guns to be able to handle the pressure generated by more powerful powders (The old 45 Colt could generate, roughly, about 10,000 PSI in the firing chamber. The modern .454 Casull which is based on the same cartridge and only uses about 3/4 the mass of gunpowder, routinely generates 45,000+ psi(!!!). Yes, it will stop a wild boar...
I'm curious as to how the rac-conans load their firearms. I don't see them with muzzle loaders, trying to pour powder down the snout of a firearm nearly 2 feet taller than they are. Perhaps they have some sort of breech loading system. Although, I guess I should take the hint from the giant funnel on the muzzle RH drew... That would facilitate muzzle loading.
Actually, with a well-built (rifled) pistol one can still get remarkable accuracy even from a short barrel. The only way you'll ever see it is if you clamp the thing in a vice. The long barrel not only gives longer time for the projectile to be stabilized in its trajectory as well as being accelerated to faster speeds, but also it gives a longer sighting plane (the distance between the front and rear sights). I always had difficulty accurately shooting anything with less than 7 1/2 inches of pipe sticking out the front...
Another factor in accuracy is how much powder you use when you load. (and this applies to all firearms) You would be surprised at how much difference a small change in charge weight (1%) can affect accuracy. The ideal marksman ensures that all powder loads are identical in weight.
Bore size and barrel length are fairly unrelated to each other. I can shoot .45 colt from a 16" lever gun, to a 7 1/2" revolver to a 1" derringer. But as has been stated earlier, the derringer gives the least accuracy and slowest muzzle velocity (not to mention it kicks like a mule). The revolver motivates a 255 grain lead slug to anywhere from 900 - 1100 feet per second (these are heavy loads for 45 colt BTW). The rifle takes the same bullet (same load) to 1050 - 1300 fps. I never had the pain tolerance to clock the derringer.
As far as kick is concerned, without porting the mass of a firearm can dramatically reduce felt recoil. From my prior example, the derringer is a very painful experience to shoot, it weighs almost nothing, so its like holding the cartridge in your hand and setting it off. The revolver is far more comfortable to shoot with the same powder charge. Finally, I could shoot the rifle all day with heavier loads because the rifle's mass absorbs most of the recoil.
For the Rac-conans to develop effective small-arms they will need a better propellant than black powder, and better steel in their guns to be able to handle the pressure generated by more powerful powders (The old 45 Colt could generate, roughly, about 10,000 PSI in the firing chamber. The modern .454 Casull which is based on the same cartridge and only uses about 3/4 the mass of gunpowder, routinely generates 45,000+ psi(!!!). Yes, it will stop a wild boar...
I'm curious as to how the rac-conans load their firearms. I don't see them with muzzle loaders, trying to pour powder down the snout of a firearm nearly 2 feet taller than they are. Perhaps they have some sort of breech loading system. Although, I guess I should take the hint from the giant funnel on the muzzle RH drew... That would facilitate muzzle loading.
Always tell the truth, that way you don't have to remember anything. -- Mark twain
The MAIN reason for a Blunderbuss is fast loading. In a shotgun you might get a bit of "extra spread" from the pellet load that way but it won't be major.
(There's such a thing as a "duckbill" shotgun nose that will spread it's load to a flat sideways plane versus throwing round patterns. Or you can get the same effect by holding a shotgun a foot off the ground and "skipping" the load off of concrete or something...a nasty trick taught me by...well, a former criminal and let's leave it at that.
)
Even guns that didn't look like that had a bit of "feed opening" of that sort at the muzzle - including the Brown Bess.
Rifling makes it WAY harder to cram a new round down the barrel of a muzzleloader.
(There's such a thing as a "duckbill" shotgun nose that will spread it's load to a flat sideways plane versus throwing round patterns. Or you can get the same effect by holding a shotgun a foot off the ground and "skipping" the load off of concrete or something...a nasty trick taught me by...well, a former criminal and let's leave it at that.
)Even guns that didn't look like that had a bit of "feed opening" of that sort at the muzzle - including the Brown Bess.
Rifling makes it WAY harder to cram a new round down the barrel of a muzzleloader.
Correct, we shoot muzzleloader about once a month at the club out here. I shoot patched ball (.54" lead ball surrounded by a small cloth patch, the rifling actually engages the cloth and not the ball) and even with "less dirty" blackpowders available today, I still need to run a cleaning patch through the rifle every fourth or fifth shot. If I patched my ball correctly for the tightest fit I'd probably have to clean it every other shot.
Breech loading was a tremendous advantage when it was first developed in that :
1. You didn't have to ram your bullet all the way down the bore, which got increasingly difficult as the bore got fouled.
2. One could successfully reload from the PRONE position. Really nice to do a complex process while behind cover rather than having to stand up in the middle of a firefight.
Breech loading was a tremendous advantage when it was first developed in that :
1. You didn't have to ram your bullet all the way down the bore, which got increasingly difficult as the bore got fouled.
2. One could successfully reload from the PRONE position. Really nice to do a complex process while behind cover rather than having to stand up in the middle of a firefight.
Always tell the truth, that way you don't have to remember anything. -- Mark twain
PERSONAL NOTE:Tbolt wrote:This is pretty much a rehash of what Bigdude just said. (I guess it pays to type faster) =P
Actually, with a well-built (rifled) pistol one can still get remarkable accuracy even from a short barrel. The only way you'll ever see it is if you clamp the thing in a vice. The long barrel not only gives longer time for the projectile to be stabilized in its trajectory as well as being accelerated to faster speeds, but also it gives a longer sighting plane (the distance between the front and rear sights). I always had difficulty accurately shooting anything with less than 7 1/2 inches of pipe sticking out the front...
Man-oh-man is it nice to be on a "fantasy" forum where so many folks are genuinely knowledgeble about firearms.......great feeling!
However, Tbolt, not knowing what your definition of "short barrel" is, I'd like to point out that I have a pre-1968 Belgian Browning "Challenger I" semi-auto .22LR pistol with a 6 1/2" bbl that using a slightly modified Weaver stance and CCI 'Mini-Mag' ammo, I can hit a 15" steel plate repeatedy, and on occasion 10-out-of-10 times at 100yds......and this is with iron sights only.
I also have a 'longer' (14") barreled Remington XP-100 single-shot, bolt action pistol chambered in 7mm BR, with a Burris 10x IER scope that I can put 5 shots in 1 hole at 100yds off of sandbags.......yes I'm "benching" the gun, but I don't need to "clamp the thing in a vice" to get this level of accuracy. On one occasion I won a $1000 bet by hitting 5 Tylenol tablets with 5 shots at that same 100yds......because the gentleman couldn't believe a pistol could be that accurate......and he issued the challenge, not me.
Absolutely......going back to the XP-100....when I got it back in the 80's, there was no commercially loaded ammo available for it, (there is now) and I had to manufacture my own shells out of .308, .243, and 30-06 rifle cases......the process is called "case forming" but I digress....while load developing, powder charge changes as small as .5 grains produced dramatic changes in accuracy....BTW, there are 15.63 grains to the gram, 437.5 grains to the ounce, and 7002.24 grains to the pound so this is a very tiny measure of powder weight. And powder charges are measured by weight, not volume as some folks, none on this forum that I've seen, have been led to believe.Tbolt wrote:Another factor in accuracy is how much powder you use when you load. (and this applies to all firearms) You would be surprised at how much difference a small change in charge weight (1%) can affect accuracy. The ideal marksman ensures that all powder loads are identical in weight.
Another factor in accuracy is bullet seating depth in the powder case and how far from the beginning of the rifling or "leade" the bullet sits in the chamber. I was down to adjusting my bullet seating depth in .001" increments to achive the accuracy I now have in this pistol.
Also, as someone mentioned earlier, powder burning rates are also an important factor in both accruacy and velocity. There are over 200 different grades or "rates" of cannister powder available to handloaders today.....#1 being the fastest burning rate, and #200 the slowest. A basic rule of thumb is that the larger the powder case, the slower the powder needed.
Whadda wimp.....Tbolt wrote:I never had the pain tolerance to clock the derringer.
(just kidding) If you're REALLY into self- abuse....try American Derringer's .44 Magnum model! I'll shoot it....but NOT without a padded glove......(yeah...I'm a wimp too 
)Shaaruuk
We are NOT surrounded.....this is a "target rich" environment!
-
Mikhail Dragoslav
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 289
- Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 3:14 pm
- Location: New York
-
StrangeWulf13
- Cartoon Hero
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 9:03 pm
- Location: Frozen plains of North Dakota...
- Contact:
A nod to the early pioneers in our country's wilderness? They almost sound like names out of something like "Little House on the Prairie".
As for "typical" Rac Conan names... may I point out that we've only seen a fraction of their society? There's still five other villages we haven't seen, and a good number of other swamp folk villages on the outskirts I'll bet. Not to mention the occasional outpost and group of houses that dot the map.
Once you think on that fact, these names don't seem that strange at all.
They almost sound like names out of something like "Little House on the Prairie".As for "typical" Rac Conan names... may I point out that we've only seen a fraction of their society? There's still five other villages we haven't seen, and a good number of other swamp folk villages on the outskirts I'll bet. Not to mention the occasional outpost and group of houses that dot the map.
Once you think on that fact, these names don't seem that strange at all.
I'm lost. I've gone to find myself. If I should return before I get back, please ask me to wait. Thanks.
-
Shyal_malkes
- Cartoon Hero
- Posts: 1804
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:12 am
- Contact:
-
The JAM
- Cartoon Hero
- Posts: 2281
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 1999 4:00 pm
- Location: Somewhere in Mexico...
- Contact:
[...unWARP!!!]
Good evening.
The talk on rifles and projectile distances reminds me of a marksman, he was in either "Ripley's Believe it or Not" or "That's Incredible".
Allegedly, he restored/rebuilt/built-from-scratch-an-identical-model of a rifle model that was used by either Daniel Boone or Davey Crockett, I can't recall which. He also cast his own bullets from molten lead, and mixed his own gunpowder. Then, without a telescopic sight, he used the rifle to shoot a bull's eye on a real-size buffalo cardboard model...
...over 1 km away.
And he hit the target too. You heard the bullet "ping" the metal bull's eye about 5 seconds after the shot.
I think he was trying to demonstrate that some of Crockett's/Boone's talents were not exaggerated, though at 1 km (I'll say 1,200 m), I wonder if a bullet would be still going fast enough to cause damage on a buffalo.
Good evening.
The talk on rifles and projectile distances reminds me of a marksman, he was in either "Ripley's Believe it or Not" or "That's Incredible".
Allegedly, he restored/rebuilt/built-from-scratch-an-identical-model of a rifle model that was used by either Daniel Boone or Davey Crockett, I can't recall which. He also cast his own bullets from molten lead, and mixed his own gunpowder. Then, without a telescopic sight, he used the rifle to shoot a bull's eye on a real-size buffalo cardboard model...
...over 1 km away.
And he hit the target too. You heard the bullet "ping" the metal bull's eye about 5 seconds after the shot.
I think he was trying to demonstrate that some of Crockett's/Boone's talents were not exaggerated, though at 1 km (I'll say 1,200 m), I wonder if a bullet would be still going fast enough to cause damage on a buffalo.
-
Shyal_malkes
- Cartoon Hero
- Posts: 1804
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:12 am
- Contact:
the only way i could see a bullet like that traveling that far in a straight (yes i know it's really arched but hear me out anyway) line was if the barrel was really etched up inside so at to give the bullet the appropriate spin. other wise whatever spin it did get would throw it way off mark.
I still say the doctor did it....
Because a Russian AN-225 would hold much more than a 747. And I prefer custard. If I am going to cheat on my low carb diet I want the good stuff.Astral wrote:Why wouldn't you want a 747 filled with 18,000 gallons of whipped cream?
http://www.aircraft-info.net/aircraft/j ... ov/AN-225/
Pax,
Richard
-------------
"We are all fallen creatures and all very hard to live with", C. S. Lewis
Richard
-------------
"We are all fallen creatures and all very hard to live with", C. S. Lewis
-
Dalak Lutra
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 2:43 am
- Location: Washington
- Contact:
Bah all you guys and your rubish about planes and food, you don't want custard, or whipped cream, you should all be going for rilfes here! You want a AN-225 filled with 1776 Kentucky Rifles and some brown besses, as so you can sell the firearms, but keeping in mind to not sell a healthy chunk of them. Then you can sell the AN-225(unless you plan to fly it), so you can go out and buy a hell of a lot of bullets and maybe some pressent day style firearms, take a stop by your near by maket, or of the like, and buy snacks galore. Then invite us all over so we can all talk about guns and use the ones we have as examples maybe even fire them off at some range near by, and eat whipped cream, custard, sandwiches, beef jerky, etc. Thats better than eating 18k tons of whipped cream or custard, because then you'd just get really really fat. Unless you plan on dumping it all on like some nation...but that'd be just a waste...
Oh and if it wasn't obvious already, I'm back from my time of idleness.
Oh and if it wasn't obvious already, I'm back from my time of idleness.
"If history is to change, let it change. If the world is to be destroyed, so be it. If my fate is to die, I must simply laugh." -Magus
Heh, Heh,... My personal definition of short barrel is anything with less than 7 1/2" inches of barrel length. But I was thinking about accuracy tests done on revolvers with only a 2-3" barrel. They are usually only have fixed (non-adjustable) sights and are considered to be accurate only within five feet. However, when clamped in a vice (or bench rested) they can produce remarkable accuracy, far beyond their intended effective range...Sharuuk wrote:
However, Tbolt, not knowing what your definition of "short barrel" is, I'd like to point out that I have a pre-1968 Belgian Browning "Challenger I" semi-auto .22LR pistol with a 6 1/2" bbl that using a slightly modified Weaver stance and CCI 'Mini-Mag' ammo, I can hit a 15" steel plate repeatedy, and on occasion 10-out-of-10 times at 100yds......and this is with iron sights only.
Shaaruuk
For some strange reason I can bench rest pistol with short barrel (2-6") OK, but let me stand up.... Wheeee, I think I hit the barn!
Sharuuk wrote: I also have a 'longer' (14") barreled Remington XP-100 single-shot, bolt action pistol chambered in 7mm BR, with a Burris 10x IER scope that I can put 5 shots in 1 hole at 100yds off of sandbags.......yes I'm "benching" the gun, but I don't need to "clamp the thing in a vice" to get this level of accuracy. On one occasion I won a $1000 bet by hitting 5 Tylenol tablets with 5 shots at that same 100yds......because the gentleman couldn't believe a pistol could be that accurate......and he issued the challenge, not me.
Shaaruuk
That guy didn't know what he was getting himself in to, the XP-100, and TC Contender / Encore are single shot pistols with outstanding accuracy over almost any range. (Why silohouette shooters love them so much...
) Ths scope is sweet as well. Sharuuk wrote: ....going back to the XP-100... ...while load developing, powder charge changes as small as .5 grains produced dramatic changes in accuracy....BTW, there are 15.63 grains to the gram, 437.5 grains to the ounce, and 7002.24 grains to the pound so this is a very tiny measure of powder weight. And powder charges are measured by weight, not volume as some folks, none on this forum that I've seen, have been led to believe.
Shaaruuk
Another thing that makes reloading for older cartridges,...interesting. Going back to my 45 colt it originally took 40 grains of black powder that filled the case completely. Modern powders only need 5 - 10 grains to do the same job (depending on your choice of powder) but it leaves a LOT of empty space in the case. Worst case scenario: you can double (and even triple) the powder charge which can cause your firearm to explode... Reloading should be performed where you have no distractions. Modern cartridges are built with modern powders in mind and are made with just enough volume to prevent a double charge.
Sharuuk wrote: Another factor in accuracy is bullet seating depth in the powder case and how far from the beginning of the rifling or "leade" the bullet sits in the chamber. I was down to adjusting my bullet seating depth in .001" increments to achive the accuracy I now have in this pistol.
Shaaruuk
Don't forget case length, primer make, bullet crimp, full length vs neck sizing (for bottle neck cases), etc., etc., etc.
(I'd better stop on the loader's geek-speak before someone actually does take a shot at me!
) I love the art / science of handloading!
Always tell the truth, that way you don't have to remember anything. -- Mark twain
-
SolidusRaccoon
- Cartoon Hero
- Posts: 3046
- Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 6:15 pm
- Location: Outer Heaven
Things must have a good reload speed to get off all those shots.
Yes, sir. I agree completely. It takes a well-balanced individual... such as yourself to rule the world. No, sir. No one knows that you were the third one... Solidus. ...What should I do about the woman? Yes sir. I'll keep her under surveillance. Yes. Thank you. Good-bye...... Mr. President.