Remington model 597

[texmo]

hey I have a 8 shot seim auto remmington its a .22 magnium I belive with a tasco scope. Anybody know how much its worth? its had about 30shots fired through it.

[The_Dover]

How much do you want for it?

I need a gun.

[Colapop]

What does the law say with regard to selling/buying firearms? And what constitutes a firearm? Sorry not trying to hijack your thread...

[bugjuice]

I thought remington made hairdryers..?? not really something you want to get mixed up, huh?

my boss is asking for a bullet.. he just doesn't know it yet..

[The_Dover]

What does the law say with regard to selling/buying firearms? And what constitutes a firearm? Sorry not trying to hijack your thread...

Probably same thing it does in regards to drugs, speeding and molesting the livestock, yes that's you Mr Poos. But really do we give a rats arse?

Texmo mate, how much for the gun?

Edit: And have you got any fucking bullets?

[Colapop]

"In today's headlines; The Dover goes postal in downtown Auckland... He claims to have 'seen a cheeky darky'..."

[texmo]

$500 I guess and I got no bullets. you need a firearms licence.

[GR81]

anything similar going on trademe atm you can compare with?

[kickingzebra]

I'll give you a hundy for it ;)

[Colapop]

Can you cut the barrel and stock back for me?

[Jackrat]

$500 I guess and I got no bullets. you need a firearms licence.

I think they sell new for about $800.
Bung it on Trade me an see what happens.
Their a good Quality rifle,but then most Rem's are.

[The_Dover]

Where can I get some bullets?

I need quite a lot of them.

[SARGE]

How much do you want for it?

I need a gun.



funny avatar Ben... little known fact: i applied for the US Postal Service before moving here ...


they said i was FAR too unstable.....:ar15:

[ManDownUnder]

hey I have a 8 shot seim auto remmington its a .22 magnium I belive with a tasco scope. Anybody know how much its worth? its had about 30shots fired through it.

Give the guys at Serious Shooters a call - they'll answer it pretty much straight down the phone. 09) 579 3006.

Have the model of rilfe, age and scope handy...

They're good guys - no BS or sales shite.
MDU

[SwanTiger]

These rifles are usually worth around the $300 to $400 mark brand new so I'd hazard a guess at this one being worth around the $150 - $250 mark considering it has a reasonably okay scope on it.

Someone was telling me that Gun City has or had a couple of 10 shots up for $400 ish on Trade Me.

Good for blasting possums and rabbits, but then so is a .177 air rifle if you're a good shot. So they're pretty much on par with a air rifle in my opinion.

I miss shooting possums, I miss my rifle too ... who is going to offer me a night out blasting possums? :violin:

[texmo]

After looking around its probbly only worth $300-$350, well thats what I would pay for it.

[ManDownUnder]

These rifles are usually worth around the $300 to $400 mark brand new so I'd hazard a guess at this one being worth around the $150 - $250 mark considering it has a reasonably okay scope on it.

Someone was telling me that Gun City has or had a couple of 10 shots up for $400 ish on Trade Me.

Good for blasting possums and rabbits, but then so is a .177 air rifle if you're a good shot. So they're pretty much on par with a air rifle in my opinion.

I miss shooting possums, I miss my rifle too ... who is going to offer me a night out blasting possums? :violin:

A .22 magnum and a .177 rifle are completely different animals and to compare the two isn't doing either justice. I have a 1,000fps air rifle and a .22 LR and they're chalk and chees.

The difference to the .22 Magnum is greater still

[The_Dover]

So what would you recommend for taking down human beings at a reasonably close range? I'm a pretty good shot but probably won't be paying too much attention to where the things is pointing, just sort of mindlessly screaming and squeezing the trigger.

[Colapop]

What's a "Magnum" apart from being a chocolate covered icecream on a stick?



Oh and I beg to differ MDU - You can pick your friends nose. It's just hard, when they squirm around while you hold them down! (:Oops: same can be said in other situations!)

[Lou Girardin]

If it's $800 new, it'll be around $1500 to a Pom without a licence.

[The_Dover]

$1500? Done, I'll pick it up after work Texmo.

Anyone got any spare bullets?

[SwanTiger]

A .22 magnum and a .177 rifle are completely different animals and to compare the two isn't doing either justice. I have a 1,000fps air rifle and a .22 LR and they're chalk and chees.

The difference to the .22 Magnum is greater still

Fair point, everyone has a different opinion I guess.

However, from my experience I haven't noticed much difference. I've shot a few possums (in the head) jumping in mid air and the impact from a .177 slug was enough to send them cartweiling.

Preferences preferences.

In saying that though, I'd preffer any .22 over a air rifle any day.

[Colapop]

That's not bad shooting if you can get them while you were jumping in the air!

[SwanTiger]

That's not bad shooting if you can get them while you were jumping in the air!

Probably just lucky shots, but I have witnesses to those events.

Photographs of the holes in heads too.

Rifle on all occasions was a 450FPS .177 using copper heads (hold togeather better meaning good penetration).

[Cookie]

FFS don't let Dover near it :eek: He sounds WAY too keen.

I work in Downtown Auckland and can live without the traffic hassles he will create if he decides to go all "Rambo" like at the Britomart or something.

[Colapop]

So, not like shooting Magpies with a .303 then (they don't holed together very good!)

[Swoop]

So what would you recommend for taking down human beings at a reasonably close range? I'm a pretty good shot but probably won't be paying too much attention to where the things is pointing,
A cage seems the most popular in NZ.:blip: No intelligence required to get a licence and no need for those pesky "mental stability" referees either...

[texmo]

gun for sale $300 to who ever pms me first must pick this shit up
auckland

[WINJA]

funny avatar Ben... little known fact: i applied for the US Postal Service before moving here ...


they said i was FAR too unstable.....:ar15:]
IS "UNSTABLE" CANADIAN SLANG FOR TUBBY?

[Sniper]

Its about $400 tops

[MSTRS]

To all those that insist on referring to this piece of kit as a 'gun', be advised it is a 'rifle'. That is to say that the barrel has a twist running the length of it's interior (bore) that causes the bullet to spin therefore increasing it's accuracy. A gun has a smooth bore - such as a shotgun or muzzleloading black powder firearm. And a Magnum is any calibre firearm that has a cartridge that carries a significantly greater amount of powder than others of it's calibre.
Sorry for rant guys - I'm working thru anger from an unrelated issue & it's good to vent sometimes.
As you were....

[Sniper]

Good on ya MSTRS

[texmo]

Its about $400 tops
Like I said for sale $300.

[Sniper]

Like I said for sale $300.

I would take it too, but you are too far away

[Colapop]

To all those that insist on referring to this piece of kit as a 'gun', be advised it is a 'rifle'.....
This is my rifle, this is my gun. This is for shooting and this is for fun! *insert actions as required*

[chris]

the impact from a .177 slug was enough to send them cartweiling.

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. You do realise that would mean enough recoil to seriously bruise your shoulder?

[Sniper]

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. You do realise that would mean enough recoil to seriously bruise your shoulder?

Really? So your theory is based on a COMPLETLEY solid stock with no absorbsion qualities whatso ever? Maybe an old flint rifle but most rifles these days are pretty good on the recoiling factor.

[kickingzebra]

And piss the possum right off!!

[chris]

Really? So your theory is based on a COMPLETLEY solid stock with no absorbsion qualities whatso ever? Maybe an old flint rifle but most rifles these days are pretty good on the recoiling factor.
If the Possum was hit with enough force to send it cartwheeling, the same force would be applied to the shooter. It's Newton's third law. If there was no recoil the Possum wouldn't have cartwheeled anywhere, it would simply fall to the ground.

[texmo]

If the Possum was hit with enough force to send it cartwheeling, the same force would be applied to the shooter. It's Newton's third law. If there was no recoil the Possum wouldn't have cartwheeled anywhere, it would simply fall to the ground.
unless this is force is used to something else say a semi auto to reload its next bullet!

[ManDownUnder]

oh I can see this is going to go places...

[chris]

unless this is force is used to something else say a semi auto to reload its next bullet!
Then no equal force will be applied to the possum via the .177 pellet. If a certain force is needed to knock the possum back hard enough to send it cartwheeling, then the same force will have been applied to the shooter.

[chris]

oh I can see this is going to go places...
That's what Isaac Newton said.....

[texmo]

So what your saying is when I shot a fence post with a solid slug shotgun and it turned into tooth picks my arm was blown to bits as well?

[kickingzebra]

I think it might have got you in the ass, i can't be sure though

[chris]

So what your saying is when I shot a fence post with a solid slug shotgun and it turned into tooth picks my arm was blown to bits as well?
Err, no. The shot did the damage to the fence post.

[Sniper]

You are right and wrong chris. Technology these days allows up to 75% of recoil to be absorbed in the butt of the rifle. The larger caliber weapons even have a shock absorbsion system built in. (Bastard to clean) But an aolder rifle, yes you are right, you would feel the recoil alot, same as a shotgun, but newer rifles, you will be in for a surprise

[chris]

You are right and wrong chris. Technology these days allows up to 75% of recoil to be absorbed in the butt of the rifle. The larger caliber weapons even have a shock absorbsion system built in. (Bastard to clean) But an aolder rifle, yes you are right, you would feel the recoil alot, same as a shotgun, but newer rifles, you will be in for a surprise
I'm not talking about recoil, I'm quoting Isaac Newton's third law. It is about force applied. For example, if you kick a football, at the moment your foot connects with the ball, the ball is exerting the same force against your foot; for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

[Sniper]

I'm not talking about recoil, I'm quoting Isaac Newton's third law. It is about force applied. For example, if you kick a football, at the moment your foot connects with the ball, the ball is exerting the same force against your foot; for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Exactly, and Im not disputing that. Im disputing the fact that you are saying that the force of the rabbit being bowled over would be the exact same force applied to the shoulder (recoil) and its not that way.

The force of the pellet hitting the rabbit would be the combined momentum the projectile gains over the range. The force of the recoil is the force/speed of the gases exiting the barrel at that stage. Hence as Texmo said, when he fired a solid slug into the fencepost it was to force of the momentum the projectile gained AFTER leaving the barrel.

Hence the force of the pellet hitting the rabbit would not be the same as the pellet leaving the rifle. HYPOTHETICALLY if it WAS, you wouldn't feel it as rifle butts today are built to absorb the recoil forces

[kickingzebra]

Absorbers spread load over time, rather than minimise load

[texmo]

I'm not talking about recoil, I'm quoting Isaac Newton's third law. It is about force applied. For example, if you kick a football, at the moment your foot connects with the ball, the ball is exerting the same force against your foot; for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
Are you totaly retarded or is this just an act?

[kickingzebra]

I think it is argument for arguments sake, you see, Finn isn't online pissing off the locality, or creating commotion, niether winja, or any other of the good people that make life interesting :)

[Sniper]

Life is interesting Kickingzebra, its few and far between that I come along to share my wisdom

[kickingzebra]

Yes, so the nerds can take the floor, Newton is my idol!!!! Sorry to every other interesting person, perhaps I should have said controversial... Scandalous... jandalless!!

[chris]

Exactly, and Im not disputing that. Im disputing the fact that you are saying that the force of the rabbit being bowled over would be the exact same force applied to the shoulder (recoil) and its not that way.

The force of the pellet hitting the rabbit would be the combined momentum the projectile gains over the range. The force of the recoil is the force/speed of the gases exiting the barrel at that stage. Hence as Texmo said, when he fired a solid slug into the fencepost it was to force of the momentum the projectile gained AFTER leaving the barrel.

Hence the force of the pellet hitting the rabbit would not be the same as the pellet leaving the rifle. HYPOTHETICALLY if it WAS, you wouldn't feel it as rifle butts today are built to absorb the recoil forces
Here's a question. Set up a rifle/pistol/whatever absolutely horizontal. Fire a bullet and at the same time also drop a bullet from the same height as the rifle/pistol/whatever. Which round will hit the ground first presuming there is nothing to block the trajectory?

[kickingzebra]

Prsevration of angular momentum... I am going to punt that the dropped one will hit first.

[chris]

Are you totaly retarded or is this just an act?Oh dear, out of your intellectual depth now and resorting to name calling? Weak.

[Sniper]

Are you serious? Ok, hows this for an answer. The round fired from the rifle/pistol/whatever would hit as it is going faster than terminal velocity of a dropped round. It also is leaving the source at a much faster rate.

You honestly think that applied Newtons law to forced physics will explain recoil? Im not a science graduate, but I know a wee bit

[Sniper]

Prsevration of angular momentum... I am going to punt that the dropped one will hit first.

Wrong and right, we have set up a firing platform to fire directly horizontal, but even if wee take the rotation of the round and the way the bullet moves in flight, the round fired first will still hit the ground

[chris]

Are you serious? Ok, hows this for an answer. The round fired from the rifle/pistol/whatever would hit as it is going faster than terminal velocity of a dropped round. It also is leaving the source at a much faster rate.

You honestly think that applied Newtons law to forced physics will explain recoil? Im not a science graduate, but I know a wee bit
I am serious and I'm not a science graduate either for starters. I understand your comments regarding recoil (but from my first post I have not been trying to explain recoil) but your answer above is wrong. Both rounds will hit the ground at the same time as the force of gravity is a constant and is not affected by the factors you state.

[chris]

Good thread though.

[Sniper]

IBoth rounds will hit the ground at the same time as the force of gravity is a constant and is not affected by the factors you state.

You are wrong there Chris, I understand where you are coming from regarding recoil, but understand that the momentum of the round hitting the rabit is not the same amount of momentum carried into the shoulder.

If I fired a round directly downwards and dropped a round of EQUAL weight and size, the round that has left the barrel is carrying more momentum from the start will hit the ground BEFORE the round dropped from the hand. The reason for this is (and it is common sense) that the round dropped from the hand has to build up to terminal velocity and stay at it, where the round leaving the barrel is moving faster than terminal velocity from the start as well as accellerating and is yet to slow down to it.

You are right, it is a good thread

[kickingzebra]

Is wind etc a factor, because ground effect will come in somewhere.
My .303 should be about say 2500 fps muzzle velocity, use 9.6mss as gravity, and I know that max range (not effective) for .303 is about 7km... I could crunch the numbers, butthat would seem to imply they will both hit the ground in less than a second, if suspended at 1m above ground level. that doesn't bear out, in saying that .303 won't hit max range from that elevation... The real equation is way bigger than any of the simplistic stuff we are alluding to

[MSTRS]

Recoil in an air-rifle would be almost a non-event. The slug is soooo light (esp. in a .177) that the force required to get it moving to around 800fps (which would be towards the upper end of the velocity range in this type of rifle) would almost entirely be absorbed by the weight of the rifle before the recoil would be felt by the shooter. An air-powered weapon does 'jump' upon firing but I would think that this would be more the release of the spring than recoil in the accepted sense. The other difference is that although the projectile is propelled by gases in both air-rifles and rim- or centre-fire rifles, an air-rifle works by rapid compression of air to push the projectile down the barrel, whereas rapid EXpansion of gas propels the projectile down the barrel of rim/centre-fire rifle.

[Sniper]

No, wind is not a factor, we are talking about firing a bullet strait down, hang on...................

Chris, please accept my apologies, I was thinking of firing a bullet vertically instead of horizontally

[chris]

You are wrong there Chris Beg to differ.



You are right, it is a good thread
But getting back to Newton's third law. Do a bit of a Google, I'm sure there are plenty of explanations on the interweb.

[chris]

Chris, please accept my apologies,No worries :)

[bugjuice]

I've just found this remington (http://www.strangepolice.com/images/content/107363.jpg) too, with a few attachments.. nice..

[Finn]

Stop yah bickering you lot. Read this - all is explained...

http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_recoil.htm

[Sniper]

Thanks Finny

[Sniper]

But getting back to Newton's third law. Do a bit of a Google, I'm sure there are plenty of explanations on the interweb.

There are, but I still beg to differ that the force of the round hitting the animal is the same amount of force exerted on the shoulder

[kickingzebra]

Stop yah bickering you lot. Read this - all is explained...

http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_recoil.htm

Thanks Finn, but we were sooo close to a breakthrough, that could have changed the laws of physics as we know them!!! might have made for faster laps at puke... Say, if you were to start off the line, and your forward energy was to be equally applied to the track, which would then inversely apply it to the rider behind you, which would effectively catapault them backwards...

But I digress, aside from the fact I haven't been bothered getting my gun license (.303 is held in trust by a family friend with all the criteria met)

$300.00 is a good deal, and I'd buy it... although, one has to wonder about that Texmo character... How does one come by a gun to sell, but not know what they are worth?? besides, don't you want to do the postal thing yourself?!?

[Sniper]

Hey I apologised for being wrong Zebra :p I can't help it if in my world Vertical and horizontal are the opposite to the normal worlds?

[texmo]

I paid about $800 for it about 9 months ago I got it from a guy who brought it and sold it to me a week later he paid about $1200.

I have been shooting since I was about 4 or 5.

[kickingzebra]

Texmo, that doesn't answer the question, don't you wanna go postal???

Though I suppose scoped 22 magnums aren't really the stuff of gangster warfare, cause if you want to be cool when you pop a cap in someones ass, you have to hold the gun on the side... Mades sighting in the scope a real pain!!

I'm just being a knob, not trying to imply you stole it, hell at $300 with 30 rounds through it, if it ain't beaten and rusted, its a steal of a deal!!

(rule of sales, don't sell it for what its worth, sell it for as much as you can get for it!!)

Sniper, With that sort of physics, wee can easily create a new world order, by simply confounding all opponents! Then they will roll over and hand us the keys of power.. the blue power ranger, and captain planets powers all combined...

Medicine time!!

[ManDownUnder]

There are, but I still beg to differ that the force of the round hitting the animal is the same amount of force exerted on the shoulder

The conservation of energy principle is fully at play here, meaning what goes forward has an equal amount of go back push too.... but there is a big difference in the two, and there are a number of devices employed to minimise the impact on the shooter.


The mass of the rifle slows the impact considerably
Size of the butt spreads the load
Any energy used in cycling the weapon removes some of the energy from the overall felt recoil - and possibly the projectiles travel
Gas vents put on the front of the barrel the deflect any of the gases back/sideways
Additionally, an air rifle often has a reverse recoil.

That is after the initial push against the shoulder while the spring and piston accelerate forward, moving the column of air and projectile with it, there is actually a considerable "pull" the shooter will feel that happens as a result of the piston hitting the stop and the end of it's cylinder. Of course it happens very fast so it's not easy to discern the individual components.

For this very reason air rifles need to have scopes of a different construction, and often need different mounting mnechanisms and they'll creep backwards along the dovetail (every shot the rifle jumps forward, and the inertia of the scope "drags" it back.

Simple really... and when it comes down to it - I'd rather be on the blunt end than the sharp end receiving the energy...

[texmo]

Texmo, that doesn't answer the question, don't you wanna go postal???


What do you think my shotguns are for?

[kickingzebra]

The coolest gun I ever saw, My Grandad (who I scored the .303 off) had this 3 barreled affair, I was little, so can't remember the workings of it, I think it was variation on the double barrel break apart theme, it had a 12 guage barrel, a .22lr barrel, and an air rifle barrel. I kid you not, is that not the coolest?

you can get the possums attention with the air rifle, give him something to think about with the .22, and then let him forget all about everything with the shotty!!

[Drunken Monkey]

Hey Texmo dude is the stock wood or synthetic?

[texmo]

black synthetic and black stainless barell.
black scope

ohhh its the ghost rider of guns.

[Finn]

Simple really... and when it comes down to it - I'd rather be on the blunt end than the sharp end receiving the energy...

You disgusting homo!

[texmo]

picture of the gun in question

[SwanTiger]

Not that I know this for certain, but logic would lead me to believe that the recoil of the gun in question would be "close to" the impact force on the target. The only difference is that the slugs are small and there for all that force is concentrated on a very small surface.

I'd like to know more about that.

[kickingzebra]

Did you read Finns link? (not the homo one!) warning, contains coarse algebraic function, and physical law.... but is very informative

[texmo]

gun is sold
i lost so much money dam it

[scumdog]

Good for blasting possums and rabbits, but then so is a .177 air rifle if you're a good shot. So they're pretty much on par with a air rifle in my opinion.

I miss shooting possums, I miss my rifle too ... who is going to offer me a night out blasting possums? :violin:

Wot a crock - theres no comparison between 22 and a 177 slug gun - even a very good one.

By your reasoning I would be best off with a big stick - still kills possums and don't miss as much.

EDIT: To clarify, 'I' is interchangable with 'you' in the above.

[scumdog]

I am serious and I'm not a science graduate either for starters. I understand your comments regarding recoil (but from my first post I have not been trying to explain recoil) but your answer above is wrong. Both rounds will hit the ground at the same time as the force of gravity is a constant and is not affected by the factors you state.

True. Gravity doesn't know if on bullet is going forwards and one not, it still exerts the same 'pull' regardless.

BTW a 22 short will drop almost 3 feet in a 100 yards if the barrell is truly horizontal when the gun is fired.

((900mm in 90 metres for metric types)

[Lou Girardin]

There are, but I still beg to differ that the force of the round hitting the animal is the same amount of force exerted on the shoulder

As I understand the theory. The rifle recoils much slower than the round travels, but is much heavier. The kinetic energy of both is the same.
Which is why people don't get blown 20 fett backwards when hit by a bullet.

[Finn]

BTW a 22 short will drop almost 3 feet in a 100 yards if the barrell is truly horizontal when the gun is fired.

((900mm in 90 metres for metric types)

Could be very painful for a six foot guy if you aimed for his head...:pinch:

[Lias]

On a completely unrelated note.
Who wants to sell me a sniper rifle without a license :-) I have this cunning plan involving high velocity lead and Comrade Clark :-)

[SwanTiger]

Wot a crock - theres no comparison between 22 and a 177 slug gun - even a very good one.

By your reasoning I would be best off with a big stick - still kills possums and don't miss as much.

You missed my point, homo :tugger:

[Finn]

On a completely unrelated note.
Who wants to sell me a sniper rifle without a license :-) I have this cunning plan involving high velocity lead and Comrade Clark :-)

I don't wish to sell it, but you can borrow my Barrett .50 caliber rifle. It's a bit of an overkill for your intended purpose but it will guarantee results and won't let you down. With a trained sniper it has lethal accuracy out to 2000 metres and does not require any tools to assemble or disassemble.

Disclaimer: Just in case the SIS are reading this, I am joking and in no way support the execution of said communist. However if it did happen, accident or otherwise, I wouldn't be upset.

[scumdog]

You missed my point, homo :tugger:

I was trying to offer an 'out' to you being a poor shot. Dick.:wait:

[Lias]

I don't wish to sell it, but you can borrow my Barrett .50 caliber rifle. It's a bit of an overkill for your intended purpose but it will guarantee results and won't let you down. With a trained sniper it has lethal accuracy out to 2000 metres and does not require any tools to assemble or disassemble.

Disclaimer: Just in case the SIS are reading this, I am joking and in no way support the execution of said communist. However if it did happen, accident or otherwise, I wouldn't be upset.
I'd love to get my hands on an XM109 with a BORS on it.. If you dont know the XM109 is Barrets new rifle that fires 25mm projectiles instead of .50 ammo. It basically a new take on the anti-tank rifle :-)


To enable the shooter to engage targets out to 2,500 meters, Barrett has developed an integrated ballistic computer/ riflescope system known as BORS (Barrett Optical Ranging System). Historically, long range shooting has been a highly technical endeavor in which the shooter had to make a number of calculations before the trigger could be pulled. These calculations included range to the target, the effects of barometric pressure and air temperature, and the type of ammunition loaded. BORS automatically calculates all these variables, and adjusts the sight reticule accordingly. All the shooter needs to do is enter the ammunition type into the BORS (using touch pads on the BORS console) determine the range (either mechanically or through a LRF) and crank the elevation knob on the scope until the proper range appears in the BORS display. The BORS automatically determines the temperature and barometric pressure, as well as the cant or tilt in the rifle itself, and incorporates these enviro-physical factors into its calculations. Once the proper range has been entered, the shooter need only put the target under the crosshairs and pull the trigger.

The Block I version of BORS is available now, while Block II (which will include an integrated range finder) is expected to become available in '05 with Block III (new optics, Night Vision capable, wide angle, stabilized image) becoming available in '06. Lastly, Barrett believes that the BORS system will be completely compatible with the 200mm air-bursting grenade featured on the OICW and that similar ammunition could be developed for use in the XM-109, as well as adapting the BORS to the OICW, to provide ranging and environmental information to the 20mm grenade launcher.

[scumdog]

As I understand the theory. The rifle recoils much slower than the round travels, but is much heavier. The kinetic energy of both is the same.
Which is why people don't get blown 20 fett backwards when hit by a bullet.

Yep, seen a video of a dude getting blasted in the chest while wearing a bullet-proof vest while standing on one leg, two shots from an SLR hardly rocked him
Likewise when he shot himself in the chest with a 44 Magnum revolver, bugger all effect.

BTW HAs anybody seen this video and if the have can they (a) remember it's name and (b) where can I get a copy?

[Bend-it]

Guns AND bikes, man, I'm starting to like this forum real quick (No bright ideas Mr Poos)... Gun bag for the bike, saw the butt off a 12ga semi-auto and we're rolling, Arnie stylez!

[chris]

Yep, seen a video of a dude getting blasted in the chest while wearing a bullet-proof vest while standing on one leg, two shots from an SLR hardly rocked him

for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction

Do you think it's sinking in yet? For a body to fly backwards when being shot, the same must happen to the shooter.

[Bend-it]

Not really... A .22 bullet can fly about 1.5 - 2kms, does the rifle fly BACK 1.5 - 2kms?? The force applies bothways, but does not necessarily result in the same movement.

Force = mass x acceleration.

The force on both the projectile and the rifle is the same, BUT the 'rifle+shooter' combination is much heavier, so only accelerates a small amount (recoil).

The bullet, on the other hand, accelerates much faster, to about 1000ft/sec for a typical .22 projectile (.22 Winchester powerpoint)

[texmo]

for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction

Do you think it's sinking in yet? For a body to fly backwards when being shot, the same must happen to the shooter.
this game is getting old.

[scumdog]

for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction

Do you think it's sinking in yet? For a body to fly backwards when being shot, the same must happen to the shooter.

Don't have to tell ME that but a shitload of others who have grown up not using guns and watching too many vids or dvds and seeing the 'badie' blown off his feet and fly through the air for about 3 metres after getting hit with a shotgun don't know it.

[chris]

this game is getting old.
Nothing to contribute? Then don't post.

[texmo]

Don't have to tell ME that but a shitload of others who have grown up not using guns and watching too many vids or dvds and seeing the 'badie' blown off his feet and fly through the air for about 3 metres after getting hit with a shotgun don't know it.
I once saw a goat get shot with a .22 it was must have gone 30meters after it was shot and killed.

[chris]

I once saw a goat get shot with a .22 it was must have gone 30meters after it was shot and killed.
That's it, I'm outta here :slap:

[texmo]

That's it, I'm outta here :slap:
it was on top of a cliff and fell off it when it was shot.:wavey:

[Drunken Monkey]

Nothing to contribute? Then don't post.

That's a bold call. Why don't you go read the title of the thread and who started it?

[Fishy]

I would love one of these cell phone guns....

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/articles/cell_phone_gun_1.asp

Wouldn't want to mistake it for your normal phone when you're pissed though..

[Sniper]

Do I have to get involved here again? :laugh:

[SwanTiger]

I was trying to offer an 'out' to you being a poor shot. Dick.:wait:

A poor shot? I'll post photographic evidence I could fire any sized slug straight up the centre of your anus.

[Sniper]

A poor shot? I'll post photographic evidence I could fire any sized slug straight up the centre of your anus.

Easy guys, no doubt you may be a reasonable shot swanny, but your theory on ballistics could use a little work. Besides, SD is just wanting to get a new spoon.... :dodge:

[Sniper]

Question for all the Newtons law teachers here.

Is the force of the recoil equal to the force of the projectile striking its target or is it equal to the force of the gases being forced out the end of the barrel?

[The_Dover]

You girls also have to look at the area that the force is applied over and the energy absorbed by shit like possum brains and the rubber pads on the rifle stock, transfer of energy to the self cocking mechanism etc.

[Hoon]

I am serious and I'm not a science graduate either for starters. I understand your comments regarding recoil (but from my first post I have not been trying to explain recoil) but your answer above is wrong. Both rounds will hit the ground at the same time as the force of gravity is a constant and is not affected by the factors you state.

Well no actually you are wrong. In theory they would but in practice you would find that the dropped round will always land before the fired round.
This is due to the curvature of the earth as:

1. The projectile has to fall further as it travels around the earth.
2. As the projectile leaves the barrel, the direction of gravity changes as gravity is a vector with direction (towards the centre of the earth, not just down) and magnitude. So gravity might be constant but its direction on a moving projectile is not.

An extreme example of the above would be if you fired a projectile fast enough, it would fly out of orbit and never reach the ground.

[scumdog]

Question for all the Newtons law teachers here.

Is the force of the recoil equal to the force of the projectile striking its target or is it equal to the force of the gases being forced out the end of the barrel?


Well look at it this way: if your rifle weight was the same as the projectile the recoil would be fearsome..
And if somehow that rifle was fired but the bullet could not move and it could? - then it would come back at the same rate (approx.) as the bullet would have gone forwards.



The bullet has spent a bit of its energy just getting to the target so it would not 'impact' as much.

[Sniper]

Thing is Dover, half the argument is that the force of the recoil is equal to the force of the projectil striking its target


Well look at it this way: if your rifle weight was the same as the projectile the recoil would be fearsome..
And if somehow that rifle was fired but the bullet could not move and it could? - then it would come back at the same rate (approx.) as the bullet would have gone forwards.



The bullet has spent a bit of its energy just getting to the target so it would not 'impact' as much.
Yep, but does that mean that the force is equal to the gases or the round..... You should know, you are on the right track......... :shifty:

[Finn]

Here's a test to prove the theory. Go get an office chair and place it on a smooth floor. Sit in it and find something reasonably heavy. Lift your feet off the ground and throw the object as hard as you can pushing hard outwards from your chest. If the chair doesn't move in the opposite direction then try it again, this time choose a chair with wheels dumbass.

This is actually how a rocket works but demonstrates the same theory.

Do it now.

[Sniper]

Screw you Finn, now I have to go see a phycologist cause they think I have lost it throwing the printer across the room

[Finn]

Screw you Finn, now I have to go see a phycologist cause they think I have lost it throwing the printer across the room

I'm trying in now with my receptionist... Just not quite ready to try and throw her yet but I have got a firm hold...

[The_Dover]

Thing is Dover, half the argument is that the force of the recoil is equal to the force of the projectil striking its target


Yep, but does that mean that the force is equal to the gases or the round..... You should know, you are on the right track......... :shifty:

The energy losses from friction and air resistance will mean that the force transferred through the rifle (recoil) will be greater than the force tranferred from the projectile to it's target.

Thing is the force transferred from the rifle to your shoulder will also experience losses and be spread over a much greater area than a speeding bullet, on a far greater mass.

Otherwise you'd be better holding onto the bullet and throwing the rifle at the fuckin possum.

[The_Dover]

I'm trying in now with my receptionist... Just not quite ready to try and throw her yet but I have got a firm hold...

Finn, put mom down.

[texmo]

Fuck I cant belive this isnt in PD yet.

[Sniper]

I'm trying in now with my receptionist... Just not quite ready to try and throw her yet but I have got a firm hold...

Lucky bugger, I don't even have a receptionist and I have 3 restraining orders.........:yeah:

[Sniper]

Unbelievable that a rifle for sale thread has turned into a Ballistics discussion. Its GREAT!

[texmo]

Well its sold drunken money is buying it gonna pick it up tognight for $500

[scumdog]

Well its sold drunken money is buying it gonna pick it up tognight for $500

Sounds like DM could have scored a bargain, just bif the scope and put a decent one on and he'll have a good rig.

[Drunken Monkey]

Only I'm pretty sure the price is $300...

[kickingzebra]

See tex, baffle them with bullshit, and someone will buy it!!

[texmo]

see you tonight monkay.

I am not the site Enfant Provocateur for nothing zebra ^^;

[beyond]

Interesting thread.
I've done heaps of shooting over the years.
While keeping records for shooting oppossums, got to 35,000 before I stopped keeping records and shot for a few years after. Was doing it to keep fit and used to hunt around 5-7 hours three to four nights a week and then get up for work the same day.

Shot heaps of goats and been deer stalking a few times.

Used a .22 LR, a 22 magnum, remington 260, Ruger 270, Tikka 22-250.

Now if recoil was equal to impact force, I'd be dead or minus a shoulder.
A full grown stag shot at 100 metres with a .270 in the chest, gets tossed backwards on it's arse and the exit wound aint pretty.

At 500 metres, a .270 round hits the target retaining a tonne of energy.
At 100 metres, that energy is around 3.5 tonnes.

Minimium force required to humanely kill a deer, is 1000ft/lbs, regardless of calibre or range.
The .270 can do that at 500 metres. A .243 can do this at 250 metres etc etc.

Ballistics is a massive field of knowledge and quite intricate. There are so many variables, such as wind, temperature, altitude, if you are shooting uphill and downhill etc.

But, if the force of the recoil was equivalent to the force of impact, using a larger calibre rifle, you wouldn't have a shoulder. :)

[Sniper]

Now if recoil was equal to impact force, I'd be dead or minus a shoulder.
A full grown stag shot at 100 metres with a .270 in the chest, gets tossed backwards on it's arse and the exit wound aint pretty.


Finally someone see's where Im coming from

[scumdog]

Finally someone see's where Im coming from

Had a chamois take a 308 in the chest from 20 metres, it raked him from brisket to hind leg where the bullet lodged i.e. ALL the available bullet energy went into him.

His reaction? Stood there and looked at me then turned and trotted away.!!
(2nd bullet sideways through the chest dropped him)

That is only one of many times the animal has failed to react in the correct manner - i.e. being bowled over on it's arse.

As I said earlier, it's the fact the bullet is so light in comparison to the rifle that your shoulder holds up.
Try it with a bullet that weighs the same as the rifle and see what happens.

[Sniper]

I understand SD. But the original comment was that the recoil energy is equal to the energy of the bullet striking the target, which it isn't.

You are right though, and good shot.

[Lou Girardin]

it was on top of a cliff and fell off it when it was shot.:wavey:

Bingo! nice punchline, great timing.

[kickingzebra]

anyone for minced Go At?

[Lou Girardin]

Finn, put mom down.

You're a Pom, you have a Mum.

[The_Dover]

You're a Pom, you have a Mum.

Nah, Finn is a kiwi. It was his mom.

[texmo]

Bingo! nice punchline, great timing.

Well thank you Lou:hug:

[Lou Girardin]

Nah, Finn is a kiwi. It was his mom.

Kiwi's have Mum's too. Step away from the TV.

[scumdog]

.
A full grown stag shot at 100 metres with a .270 in the chest, gets tossed backwards on it's arse and the exit wound aint pretty.

Ballistics is a massive field of knowledge and quite intricate. There are so many variables, such as wind, temperature, altitude, if you are shooting uphill and downhill etc.
But, if the force of the recoil was equivalent to the force of impact, using a larger calibre rifle, you wouldn't have a shoulder. :)

Just a quick note: In the book by Matt and Bruce Grant "The Sharpshooter" (if my memorey serves me well) they do an experipent where they hang a large box of gravel from a pivot (so it can swing like a pendulum) and attached a crude marker and graph to it.

Now this box weighed close to the live-weight of a red deer and was big enough that no bullet would penetrate it.

They fired a variety of bullets at it to see how much it moved, sort of to test the 'blow it off its feet' theory.

They were surprised at how little the box moved.

At the end of it they found they could get the box to move just as much with a cricket ball thrown really hard close up as it did with a shot from a 303 from 20 yards.

Food for thought eh?

[kickingzebra]

Surely that would depend on the type of projectile used... Different ammunition exchanges its energy in different ways

[scumdog]

Surely that would depend on the type of projectile used... Different ammunition exchanges its energy in different ways

But at the end of the day if its all used up on the target then its all used up.

On an animal it can mean the difference between a nasty surface wound (not nice) or over penetrating and going right through. (no good for hunting)

[Lou Girardin]

Just to keep this going, how do recoiless rifles work?

[scumdog]

Just to keep this going, how do recoiless rifles work?

Very well!:msn-wink: :rofl: :killingme

NEVER stand right behind one - you'll only do it once.:yeah:

[kickingzebra]

Im postulating here, but doesn't a recoiless rifle fire a self propelled projectile, not unlike a rocket?

[Sniper]

The recoilless rifle functions very much like a conventional gun. The projectile and propellant are supplied as a single round and loaded into the breech. When fired, however, instead of all the propellant blast driving the projectile forward a large portion is directed in the opposite direction. Since recoil has been mostly removed, much of the weighty and complex gun carriage and recoil damping mechanism can be dispensed with. It is rare for the momentum to completely balance and real world recoilless rifles do recoil noticeably.

[Lou Girardin]

The Germans developed a recoiless rifle in WW2 that fired a charge of shot to the rear to balance recoil. It wasn't very popular with the troops.

[scumdog]

The Germans developed a recoiless rifle in WW2 that fired a charge of shot to the rear to balance recoil. It wasn't very popular with the troops.

As per my comment in post #142.

And they raise quite a flurry of dust - gives the position away to the 'other side'.

[Sniper]

And they raise quite a flurry of dust - gives the position away to the 'other side'.

I would think the volume of fire coming from them would give away their position.

Lou, sure it wasn't a german design the russians used?

[Lou Girardin]

I would think the volume of fire coming from them would give away their position.

Lou, sure it wasn't a german design the russians used?

Perhaps, I wasn't there.

[beyond]

Just to keep this going, how do recoiless rifles work?

You pull the trigger and chuck it away as fast as you can. Timing is critical of course. :)

Seriously, any high calibre rifle has recoil to a certain extent. The heavier the rifle the lighter the kick for that calibre. Some use muzzle brakes which reduce recoil but increaes noise. Instead of getting a sore shoulder, you go deaf, in time.

To reduce recoil to minimum for harder kicking calibres, you can use fancy recoil pads, muzzle brakes and heavier rifles and a semi auto helps to dissipate the recoil to a certain extent as some of the enrgy is used to cycle the next round.

[beyond]

Just a quick note: In the book by Matt and Bruce Grant "The Sharpshooter" (if my memorey serves me well) they do an experipent where they hang a large box of gravel from a pivot (so it can swing like a pendulum) and attached a crude marker and graph to it.

Now this box weighed close to the live-weight of a red deer and was big enough that no bullet would penetrate it.

They fired a variety of bullets at it to see how much it moved, sort of to test the 'blow it off its feet' theory.

They were surprised at how little the box moved.

At the end of it they found they could get the box to move just as much with a cricket ball thrown really hard close up as it did with a shot from a 303 from 20 yards.

Food for thought eh?

Errmmm, huge difference between a box of gravel and some lovely soft deer fillet.

The bullet hits the skin of the deer and immediatley starts expanding into a lovely mushroom shape (yum, mushrooms.) Any way, as it passes through all that lovely soft meat, expanding as it goes, the pressure wave pushes and gathers more and more meat in front of it. The energy is ideally expended while within the animal, but if and when it does break out, a humungous amount of gathered meat goes with it. The energy and shock is enough to bowl the animal over in most cases, except where there is not a lot of meat, i.e. the stomach region.

The closest tests of calibres to mimick large wads of fillet, is the use of large blocks of gelatine. Ammunition manufactures use this in the absence of bodies, to test their rounds for penetration, shock, expansion and energy dissapation. A box of gravel doesn't cut it. Might as well find a brick wall and head butt it instead of giving someone a Liverpool kiss. Same result.

[Lou Girardin]

It doesn't matter if it's lovely soft meat or hard yucky gravel, if it weighs the same, a given round will move it the same amount. (if it doesn't exit)

[scumdog]

It doesn't matter if it's lovely soft meat or hard yucky gravel, if it weighs the same, a given round will move it the same amount. (if it doesn't exit)


If anything a bullet travelling through a 'lovely soft deer fillet' and exiting would move the deer less than the box that absorbed all the energy.


But as Lou says, if all the energy is used up on the target then all things being equal the target should move the same amount regardless of what it was made of.