| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#52
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Oklahoma Earthquakes...
On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 12:07:31 -0500, wrote:
On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 11:04:56 -0500, Poco Loco wrote: On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 10:47:52 -0500, wrote: I am not quite sure why you would want the relatively simply 9mm in a revolver.(but I am not a "small frame .38" fan either) Certainly they have some high performance 9mm rounds at a buck a shot or more but the same companies load a lot more capable 357 for the same price. I suppose a 9mm cylinder for a .38 revolver might be an interesting thing tho. If you are just out for relatively cheep shooting the .0002 smaller bullet in a .38 bore would be insignificant. I don't really want one. 9mm ammo is relatively easy to come by, and is cheaper than .38 for target practice, which is what Hank was talking about. I think. That's what made me look into the 9mm revolver. If I were to get another revolver, it'd be either a big .45 or a .22. I have a few revolvers. My OM Match .38 is what I used to shoot all the time, It is actually somewhat a collector piece, the heavy barrel model with fully adjustable sights. I got it at Ye Olde Hunter for about $40 around 1967, heluva deal. I have an old SNS .38 S&W (caliber, not brand) that is pretty much junk but it was given to me. It was one of my former FIL's "throw down" guns when he was a DC cop. It might be more dangerous for the shooter than the shootee. I also have a Colt frontier scout .22 SAA clone but most of the time I just shot rat shot out of it, Since we eliminated our rodent problems, that is not very often now but it is still loaded with CCI shot. I am really a semi auto guy at heart tho. When my wife's mother died we found an old Harrington & Richardson .32 revolver in the house. The cylinder was so loose I could rotate it a few degrees when closed. Scary. I didn't want to try to shoot it, and my wife wanted it kept in the family. So I ground the firing pin off and gave it to one of her nephews. |
|
#53
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Oklahoma Earthquakes...
Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 00:50:11 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 16:37:13 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/22/2014 3:25 PM, wrote: On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 12:20:23 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/22/2014 12:17 PM, wrote: On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 12:02:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: When you actually look at the FBI standards you start seeing the deficiencies in different rounds. They look at penetration and energ y transfer after going through the various things you may have to shoot through. Most relevant for folks up north is the effect of different kinds of coats. If they plug up the hollow point, you end up with a FMJ. The issue with stopping power is not whether the person eventually dies from their wound. It is whether they kill you before they die. A .22 is one of the most deadly rounds in raw numbers but a surprising number of these people do not even realize they were shot for a while. Shoot 'em in the head and they'll know it for a nanosecond. The .22 is potent in the head because it will enter the skull but not necessarily exit. Bounces around for a bit destroying lots of grey matter. That is largely a myth. There are lots of places you can hit in the head that will not stop a motivated attacker. People walk around with all sorts of things penetrating their brain. Without a significant amount of hydraulic shock, it may give them several seconds to get off a shot at you. If you just hit the soft tissue below the eye line, (half the head) there is very little actual stopping power. I think you missed the point. What I've read (and have seen video tests of on fake head targets) is that a .22 has enough oomph to break through the skull but not enough to continue out the other side. Instead, it ricochets off the inside and bounces around a bit, destroying or damaging more brain tissue than if it went straight through and out the other side. I understand the premise, I only question if it is actually true. If you really had this demonstrated in ballistic gel, the FBI would be carrying .22s and not their Glock 40. Oh come on now. Even the FBI can't expect to get a brain shot every time! Many years ago, I was driving with a friend to Gander Mountain to get two black powder rifles that were on sale and to expand our hobby. On the way a deer jumped in front of the car and was badly wounded. The car was a mess but repairable. We called for a police report and the officer that arrived saw the deer lying at the edge of the road - alive but not able to walk. He walked about 20 feet toward the deer, now 20 feet away, and took out his service pistol and fired. He missed the deer by at least four feet to the side - there was snow on the ground so we had a reference. We offered our assistance but he declined and moved five feet closer and was able to make the shot. Pretty pathetic since it wasn't a moving target. He was from a small PD so I doubt he saw much range time but a miss like that could have been ugly in a different situation. |
|
#54
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Oklahoma Earthquakes...
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 2/23/14, 12:07 PM, wrote: On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 11:04:56 -0500, Poco Loco wrote: On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 10:47:52 -0500, wrote: I am not quite sure why you would want the relatively simply 9mm in a revolver.(but I am not a "small frame .38" fan either) Certainly they have some high performance 9mm rounds at a buck a shot or more but the same companies load a lot more capable 357 for the same price. I suppose a 9mm cylinder for a .38 revolver might be an interesting thing tho. If you are just out for relatively cheep shooting the .0002 smaller bullet in a .38 bore would be insignificant. I don't really want one. 9mm ammo is relatively easy to come by, and is cheaper than .38 for target practice, which is what Hank was talking about. I think. That's what made me look into the 9mm revolver. If I were to get another revolver, it'd be either a big .45 or a .22. I have a few revolvers. My OM Match .38 is what I used to shoot all the time, It is actually somewhat a collector piece, the heavy barrel model with fully adjustable sights. I got it at Ye Olde Hunter for about $40 around 1967, heluva deal. I have an old SNS .38 S&W (caliber, not brand) that is pretty much junk but it was given to me. It was one of my former FIL's "throw down" guns when he was a DC cop. It might be more dangerous for the shooter than the shootee. I also have a Colt frontier scout .22 SAA clone but most of the time I just shot rat shot out of it, Since we eliminated our rodent problems, that is not very often now but it is still loaded with CCI shot. I am really a semi auto guy at heart tho. I've gone the other way. I have one semi-auto pistol left, and it is the one I am going to keep. A friend wants to buy my .45 ACP revolver, and I'll think about using the proceeds from that to buy a S&W 628. That will leave me with two revolvers I use, the other being the .45 Long Colt, and the matched pair of never been fired single action "cowboy" revolvers that live in my safe. Imaginary Vaquero's! |
|
#55
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Oklahoma Earthquakes...
On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 20:43:18 -0500, "Earl! " . wrote:
Poco Loco wrote: On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 00:50:11 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 16:37:13 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/22/2014 3:25 PM, wrote: On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 12:20:23 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 2/22/2014 12:17 PM, wrote: On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 12:02:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: When you actually look at the FBI standards you start seeing the deficiencies in different rounds. They look at penetration and energ y transfer after going through the various things you may have to shoot through. Most relevant for folks up north is the effect of different kinds of coats. If they plug up the hollow point, you end up with a FMJ. The issue with stopping power is not whether the person eventually dies from their wound. It is whether they kill you before they die. A .22 is one of the most deadly rounds in raw numbers but a surprising number of these people do not even realize they were shot for a while. Shoot 'em in the head and they'll know it for a nanosecond. The .22 is potent in the head because it will enter the skull but not necessarily exit. Bounces around for a bit destroying lots of grey matter. That is largely a myth. There are lots of places you can hit in the head that will not stop a motivated attacker. People walk around with all sorts of things penetrating their brain. Without a significant amount of hydraulic shock, it may give them several seconds to get off a shot at you. If you just hit the soft tissue below the eye line, (half the head) there is very little actual stopping power. I think you missed the point. What I've read (and have seen video tests of on fake head targets) is that a .22 has enough oomph to break through the skull but not enough to continue out the other side. Instead, it ricochets off the inside and bounces around a bit, destroying or damaging more brain tissue than if it went straight through and out the other side. I understand the premise, I only question if it is actually true. If you really had this demonstrated in ballistic gel, the FBI would be carrying .22s and not their Glock 40. Oh come on now. Even the FBI can't expect to get a brain shot every time! Many years ago, I was driving with a friend to Gander Mountain to get two black powder rifles that were on sale and to expand our hobby. On the way a deer jumped in front of the car and was badly wounded. The car was a mess but repairable. We called for a police report and the officer that arrived saw the deer lying at the edge of the road - alive but not able to walk. He walked about 20 feet toward the deer, now 20 feet away, and took out his service pistol and fired. He missed the deer by at least four feet to the side - there was snow on the ground so we had a reference. We offered our assistance but he declined and moved five feet closer and was able to make the shot. Pretty pathetic since it wasn't a moving target. He was from a small PD so I doubt he saw much range time but a miss like that could have been ugly in a different situation. Weird. I'll bet he was afraid of the deer. I would've walked up to its head and shot it from about a foot away. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Oklahoma, landlocked and stupid | General | |||
| Loogy Moved to Oklahoma? | General | |||
| Oklahoma!!! | General | |||
| If celebrities moved to Oklahoma... | General | |||
| FS: 1990 18 Ft. Kingfisher in SE Oklahoma | Marketplace | |||
Linear Mode
