Got technical questions about firearms? ask the sport shooter!

[Todderbob]

@Martini_Enfield

Not all of it is good quality, non-corrosive ammo though.

I am familiar. :rolleyes: (Not rolling my eyes at you, but at the irony of making that statement to me. Fucking 1980’s Bulgarian surplus 7.62x54R deserves a pit thread of it’s own.)

@Martini_Enfield

Each gun owners circumstances and preferences are different, but do bear in mind that I live in a country where you can’t own a gun for self-defence and you can’t use a handgun for hunting (start a different thread if you want to get into a discussion of it all), and handgun shooting competitions are nearly always undertaken either in broad daylight or with adequate floodlighting- so there’s no reason for people to be mounting torches under their handguns for any reason besides “They think it looks cool”.

Yeah, if you’re doing it for pure looks, you’re a bit silly in my opinion.

@Martini_Enfield

Unless you live somewhere that spotlighting is legal, in which case “having someone on the 4WD with a spotlight, illuminating your target and the area behind it” is another way of making firearms useful at night.

I assume spotlighting is “flashing” (shining a light at a deer and walking up real close to shoot it?). I’m not too expert in that, as I’m not a hunter of anything but paper and clay.

@Sehmket

So, I’m hitting more in the middle of the target than the edges at about ten yards when I’m doing single-action, but my double-action shots look like swiss cheese - holes all over the place. What’s the best way to improve my aim on single action? And how do I work up to having any aim at all on double-action?

You’re jerking. More accurately, you’re jerking inconsistently.

First thing you need to do is be more consistent, practice and get a regular pattern. If you’re consistently shooting lower left, the course of action is different than if you’re consistently shooting lower right (and different if you’re left or right handed).

@Sehmket

I’ve also been keeping an eye out for a gun that’s “mine” instead of “ours.” But, when I go shopping, due to the fact that I 1) am a mid-twenties female, and 2) have quite small hands, I often get directed to the “ladies” guns. These are inevidably pink - generally a disgusting, bright pink. Now, I get where manufactuers are comming from - women like color, and want options other than black or silver. But… what’s wrong with blue? Or green? Or something that might appeal to more people? Why not make replaceable grip plates in colors/patterns? Is there no demand for things other than black and pink in handguns? I’ve seen rifles with wooden stocks where the stock was stained to highlite the grain of the wood and then stained with a dyed stain that puts a beautiful color on it - they’re usually quite striking, things you’d be happy hanging on the wall because they’re pretty as well as functional. Is it because handguns AREN’T something you hang on a wall, while rifles may be? Or is there some aspect of gun culture going on here that I don’t understand?

Here is a site with a lot of aftermarket grips. Don’t necessarily buy from them, as I have zero experience with them, but there are some options there (others at places like midway).

@appleciders

So I’ve never shot a gun of anything more intense that paintball caliber, but I feel like target shooting could be fun. I have access to a ten-acre lot on a hillside, excellent for target shooting- what should I do to familiarize myself with guns, what should I be shooting, and what should I know in order to keep my (hypothetical) family safe?

All the stuff MacTech said.

As for what you should do to make it safer, the standard answer is build a berm/bank, this may require a back hoe, and is relatively simple. Build a tall, thick mound of dirt. A hill 6 feet thick will catch any projectile you’re likely to be shooting. You’ll want it to be between 10 and 15 degrees higher than your probable targets.
The realistic answer is – it depends on your terrain. Put up a few pictures of the yard and we’ll be able to give you a better answer.

@FE3O4ENAIL

Why are similarity in ammo design?

Why not? Use the most efficient thing, and use it often.

@FE3O4ENAIL

Long tapered cylinders of with different diameters and lengths.

You’re referring to rifle rounds, which are typically called “bottleneck” rounds, for obvious reasons.

They’re designed in the way you describe to allow the manufacturer to fit more gun powder behind the bullet itself, allowing it to accelerate to maximum velocity. The reason they’re not purely cylindrical is because that would require a larger bullet, which would require a longer round to accelerate to optimum velocity, or the same sized bullet with a longer round to accelerate to optimum velocity.

@FE3O4ENAIL

Why did trounds fail?

Because of inefficiency in manufacture, by my best guess.

@FE3O4ENAIL

Where are the spherical shells?

Non-existent, as far as I can tell.

@FE3O4ENAIL

One could build a strong action to withstand the pressure of a shell with the minumum surface area.

You don’t need a minimum of surface area.

As for Spherical shells: they would be amazingly inefficient.

Where would the primer be located? How would you ensure that the bullet itself is facing the barrel of the gun, rather than the bottom of the chamber (as spheres are prone to do)? How do would you make an ejection mechanism? What’s your solution for a far less efficient system of storage? Or, reloading, because the empty sphere would be far more likely to be squashed or damaged than a cylindrical one?

Really, what advantages does a minimum of surface area offer? A chamber with slightly more surface area isn’t a problem, as long as the firearm itself is ergonomic. There’s no inherent benefit to “minimum surface area.”

@MacTech

Blackpowder guns generally shot a round ball projectile, I’d imagine the accuracy of a round ball projectile compared to the current bullet profile would be a little less accurate, I’ll let other black powder shooters chime in on this one

Bullets are the shape they are (not cartridges, bullets), for the same reason that footballs (American) are the shape they are – stability in air.

Baseballs can be thrown with a curve, footballs cannot. You do not want a bullet curving in mid air.

[Dancer_Flight]

@Arnold_Winkelried

Two questions:
Where would one find the kind of guns that they use in the Olympics? I saw a picture of one once and they looked very different from “normal” handguns.

The Summer Olympic pistol shooters tend to use Pardini, Hammerli, or Walther target pistols. Note that the barrel (of the Pardini) is low in the frame, (almost as low as your index finger) to minimize muzzle lift during firing. The pistols are also very adjustable in trigger weight, take up length, trigger over-travel, and in how well the pistol grips you.

Biathlon shooters generally use the rifles made by the companies given by MacTech. The Anshutz use an action called a Fortner action, which is a hinge type action with a straight line pull operated from a bolt handle just above the trigger, then pushed forward by the thumb at the back of the rifle. This action isn’t especially robust so can only be used for .22lr, but it is very rapid and doesn’t require breaking your grip with the rifle.

-DF

[engineer_comp_geek]

@FE3O4ENAIL

I was looking for some basic reasons why a ball shell is a no starter.

For the same amount of lead (or whatever you want to make your bullets out of) a cylinder will have a much smaller cross sectional area than a sphere. That means that a cylinder has to move less air out of its way than a sphere does. This means less air resistance for a cylinder.

A more ideal shape from an air resistance point of view would be a teardrop, but that doesn’t work so well from the gunpowder side of things, so a cylinder with a conical shaped front works out to be a good compromise.

Bullets also take advantage of rifling. The spin helps to make them stable. A black powder rifle can fire a cylindrical/conical bullet and can also fire a round ball without modification to the rifle, and when you do a side by side comparison out of the exact same rifle you find that the conical bullet is more accurate. The reason why is simple aerodynamics. Conical bullets don’t go end over end very easily, but a sphere can tumble much more easily, and once it starts to tumble it’s going to curve just like a baseball.

Round balls fired out of smooth bore muskets were the worst. Not only did the ball naturally tumble, but it tended to randomly hit one side of the barrel or the other as it went down which would impart even more spin to it. They would go straight for maybe 50 to 75 yards. Where they went after that was anyone’s guess. It was said that you could stand 200 yards from a single musketeer and not fear being shot by him. At that distance, you were lucky to be able to hit the broad side of a barn.

Rifling helps. If you fire a round ball out of a rifle you might get somewhere around 200 yards of accuracy. Fire a conical bullet out of the same rifle though and you’ll get 300 yards or more out of it.

There has been some variety in bullets over the years, though. There were the trounds (triangular rounds) that have already been mentioned. There was also the Whitworth rifle, which had a hexagonal barrel and fired hexagonal rounds, and it had a fearsome reputation as a sniper rifle back in its day. The main problem with the Whitworth rifle was the same problem that all rifles had back then. Black powder fouled the barrel, and after a couple of shots it was almost impossible to load it.

Whitworth Rifle:
http://civilwartalk.com/images/weapons/whitworth.gif
Whitworth bullet:
http://www.lrml.org/historical/whitworth/images/gunsandsteel2b.gif

My 1853 Enfield (and most Civil War era rifles) fires a Minie Ball. The Minie Ball isn’t a ball at all. It’s conical, and it has an expanding skirt on the back end of it. The expanding skirt means that the round is small enough that you can load it into a black powder musket even after it has fired quite a few shots and the barrel is a bit fouled. When fired, the skirt expands (due to pressure from the powder exploding) and the round gets a good grip on the rifling which gives it the spin it needs for stability.

Minie balls became obsolete after the Civil War. During the war they found that a muzzle loading musket was good for 3 or 4 rounds per minute (that had been the fire rate of muskets for the last couple hundred years). However, soldiers armed with breech loading cartridge rifles could fire 10 rounds per minute, a significant improvement. We’ve been firing cartridges ever since.

[FE3O4ENAIL]

@Todderbob

You don’t need a minimum of surface area.

As for Spherical shells: they would be amazingly inefficient.

Where would the primer be located? How would you ensure that the bullet itself is facing the barrel of the gun, rather than the bottom of the chamber (as spheres are prone to do)? How do would you make an ejection mechanism? What’s your solution for a far less efficient system of storage? Or, reloading, because the empty sphere would be far more likely to be squashed or damaged than a cylindrical one?

Really, what advantages does a minimum of surface area offer? A chamber with slightly more surface area isn’t a problem, as long as the firearm itself is ergonomic. There’s no inherent benefit to “minimum surface area.”

Bullets are the shape they are (not cartridges, bullets), for the same reason that footballs (American) are the shape they are – stability in air.

Baseballs can be thrown with a curve, footballs cannot. You do not want a bullet curving in mid air.

You know that I am typing on a keyboard layout that was designed to keep manual machines from jamming, even though that is no longer a concern?
Cartridges developed from a paper tube filled with powder to a metal tube.
I was doing some out of the box thinking as to a better cartridge design that did not follow historical lines, just as there are better keyboard layouts that do not follow a typewriter.

The point of minimum surface area is that a gun is a pressure vessel. The strongest pressure vessels are round. My understanding of gun design is that faster bullets need more ,slower burning powder because the pressure vessel aspect of the action can’t be made strong enough to contain the pressure of a smaller amount of fast burning powder that could create the same amount of energy.

You raise very important design problems that would need to be solved. I never said that a round shell would BE better, I was wondering from a "lets start with a clean sheet of paper"point of view.
The primer would be opposite the protruding bullet. The action woud be a clamshell with the spent shell being pushed out of the chamber by the next one feeding in. Armies don’t reload so that isn’t a concern for design practicality.

To be clear, I am not posting about projectile shape. You would want a boattail bullet as you do for current shells.

You ask about storage. If a round shell could use an extremely fast burning powder, since the pressures developed would be contained by the action, then possibly the ammo would be smaller and therefore the same amount of firepower would fit in an ammo can.

If you think a round cartridge is far out I won’t go into the grenade on a stick idea.

[Bayesian_Empirimancer]

@engineer_comp_geek

What was in your small but respectable firearms collection before its unfortunate boating accident?

I spend most of my time at the range shooting a reproduction 1853 Enfield rifle-musket. What is your opinion of black powder rifles? Most of the folks I know won’t go near them because they are such a pain in the backside to clean. Personally I kinda enjoy cleaning it. It’s part of doing things the old fashioned way.

How is your eyesight? Ever since I turned 40 mine has gone way downhill. I started shooting 50 yards because at 100 I wasn’t hitting the target all the time any more.

How are the ranges you go to? The one I go to is very professional. The range officers don’t put up with any nonsense. If you act like an idiot, you’re out. They have been criticized for being “range Nazis” but personally I like the way they run things. I certainly don’t want to go to a range where people with weapons in their hands are acting like a bunch of drunken yahoos.

To Bayesian Empirimancer:

I know many people who started with bow hunting before they ever hunted with a gun. You can start with either. You don’t need one to do the other.

Dear hunting? :eek: I hope you meant “deer”.

I don’t hunt, but I do know that there is a lot of debate about what the minimum caliber you should use for a deer is. Some states have minimums, so you want to check local laws and regulations first. Other than that, some folks say .243, some folks say .270. As for what is “optimal” that depends on the shooter. And, as with most things, with some people if you ask what is best you are basically starting a religious argument.

Opps, Freudian slip

[Todderbob]

@FE3O4ENAIL

You know that I am typing on a keyboard layout that was designed to keep manual machines from jamming, even though that is no longer a concern?

Yes.

@FE3O4ENAIL

Cartridges developed from a paper tube filled with powder to a metal tube.

That’s both accurate and inaccurate. It’s not specifically wrong, but it’s also not completely right.

While cartridges did develop after that, and originate from the paper tube design, they are not soley descended from that.

@FE3O4ENAIL

I was doing some out of the box thinking as to a better cartridge design that did not follow historical lines, just as there are better keyboard layouts that do not follow a typewriter.

I understand, and I was just asking the necessary questions of a radical paradigm shift.

@FE3O4ENAIL

The point of minimum surface area is that a gun is a pressure vessel. The strongest pressure vessels are round. My understanding of gun design is that faster bullets need more ,slower burning powder because the pressure vessel aspect of the action can’t be made strong enough to contain the pressure of a smaller amount of fast burning powder that could create the same amount of energy.

Rounds are specifically designed and loaded to burn as long as the bullet is in the barrel. This offers the best possible acceleration.

9mm rounds actually slow down when being fired from carbine-type weapons, because the bullet itself is slowed down by the barrel. 9mm’s were designed to be propelled only the first 4-6 inches of the barrel, after that… it’s all friction.

On the other hand, Standard .223 rounds are designed to be fired from an 18 inch barrel, so you lose velocity (and get more muzzle flash) out of a 16 inch barrel.

@FE3O4ENAIL

You raise very important design problems that would need to be solved. I never said that a round shell would BE better, I was wondering from a "lets start with a clean sheet of paper"point of view.

I know, and I was asking about the consequences of it.

@FE3O4ENAIL

The primer would be opposite the protruding bullet. The action woud be a clamshell with the spent shell being pushed out of the chamber by the next one feeding in.

The clamshell design offers a 180 degree line for failure of the cartridge, which results in a critical failure. Often, injuring or maiming a person. I can attest to similar situations, first (left) hand.

@FE3O4ENAIL

Armies don’t reload so that isn’t a concern for design practicality.

Armies do, however, make significant money from selling their once-used brass (at least, the American Army). While not extremely significant, from an overall budget perspective, the money would be missed.

@FE3O4ENAIL

To be clear, I am not posting about projectile shape. You would want a boattail bullet as you do for current shells.

Okay, I wasn’t sure. Thank you for the clarification.

@FE3O4ENAIL

You ask about storage. If a round shell could use an extremely fast burning powder, since the pressures developed would be contained by the action, then possibly the ammo would be smaller and therefore the same amount of firepower would fit in an ammo can.

A fast burning powder isn’t inherently better. Bullets have an optimum speed, if you exceed it, you have stability issues.

A clamshell chamber sounds far more likely to fail than a standard M16 Chamber Design (and slower to reload, a disadvantage for Selective Fire) and round cartridges seem to offer no tangible benefits.

The chamber on most firearms is relatively thick metal, locked in back by a rotating bolt, also thick metal. They’re well reenforced, and the only time you notice real, critical failures in them is when they’re functioning improperly or gouged.
If you could make a Clamshell designed action, and round-round to go with it, I’d be willing to give it a shot (or at least… tell you how to effectively test it :D). It’s worth exploring, if you have the time and effort – just because I think it’s a non-starter doesn’t mean it actually is. Maybe I’m just blinded by the current.

@FE3O4ENAIL

If you think a round cartridge is far out I won’t go into the grenade on a stick idea.

I’m not sure I want to… :eek:

[Meow_Max]

@engineer_comp_geek

I don’t hunt, but I do know that there is a lot of debate about what the minimum caliber you should use for a deer is. Some states have minimums, so you want to check local laws and regulations first. Other than that, some folks say .243, some folks say .270. As for what is “optimal” that depends on the shooter. And, as with most things, with some people if you ask what is best you are basically starting a religious argument.

81 mm mortar. Extremely effective on Deer, Moose, Llama, Elephant, Trees …

Its kind of the universal caliber for hunting.

[FE3O4ENAIL]

“If you could make a Clamshell designed action, and round-round to go with it, I’d be willing to give it a shot (or at least… tell you how to effectively test it ). It’s worth exploring, if you have the time and effort – just because I think it’s a non-starter doesn’t mean it actually is. Maybe I’m just blinded by the current.”
Maybe in a few years I could tackle that.
My current build is to mate an AR10 lower to a M1A barrel/gas system. I should need a custom barrel extension . It seems workable otherwise.

[Martini_Enfield]

@Todderbob

I assume spotlighting is “flashing” (shining a light at a deer and walking up real close to shoot it?). I’m not too expert in that, as I’m not a hunter of anything but paper and clay.

Never heard the term “flashing” in a hunting context, but yes, “Spotlighting” (also known as “Lamping” in the UK) is shining a spotlight or powerful lamp at an animal (usually rabbits, hares, foxes, and other pests) to dazzle/stun it, and then shooting it.

It’s not usually done for deer hunting around here, though.

[figure9]

Not a technical question but my 10 year old really wants to try target practice with a gun. Can I take him to a range? Does he need any kind of permit? Is it possible to rent a gun at most ranges, or do you have to own your own gun?

[ExTank]

@figure9

Not a technical question but my 10 year old really wants to try target practice with a gun. Can I take him to a range? Does he need any kind of permit? Is it possible to rent a gun at most ranges, or do you have to own your own gun?

The first thing is: where are you? State laws vary considerably, as do some county and municipal laws. Whether or not you or the boy need a permit depends almost entirely upon where you are at.

Gun Laws By State.

Federal And State Firearms Laws.

I’d also check your state’s website for any additional info.

Some ranges rent guns, some you have to bring your own; you’re going to have to do some local research to find out. But most gun stores should be able to tell you about your local ranges. Personally, I wouldn’t trust a gun store that didn’t know where at least one decent range was in my area.

But range(s) with rentals, if there are any in your area, may not have something suitably sized for your boy.

Other than that, you should drill yourself and your boy, on Jeff Copper’s 4 Rules, listed above in one of MacTech’s posts, until you know them by heart.

Gear up (eye & ear protection) and go have some safe fun.

[PatriotGrrrl]

@MacTech

Sehmket, another great board to hang out on and get more info on guns and shooting sports in general is The High Road, think of it as The Straight Dope for shooting sports fans, it’s a very nice , mature messageboard.we shooters love is introducing people to our favorite sport

It’s a STOLEN message board. The real* The High Road*, run by Oleg Volk who created the original board, is now at http://www.thehighroad.us/ while he fights the thief in court.

Dunno about anyone else, but I’m not into getting firearms advice from those who consort with thieves.

ETA: I’m not talking about piracy, either, but a rogue admin locking the owners out of the site and domain so he could make money off it.

[Todderbob]

@figure9

Not a technical question but my 10 year old really wants to try target practice with a gun. Can I take him to a range? Does he need any kind of permit? Is it possible to rent a gun at most ranges, or do you have to own your own gun?

You live in Chicago, no?
You don’t need a permit to shoot a gun, even in Chicago. But, you’ll probably have better luck going slightly outside of Chicago. Other than taking your son to a gun safety course before he ever goes on the range (you should attend to), there’s not a ton of preparation necessary.

Most ranges should have a few guns to rent, especially if they’re also a gun store. Tell them your situation, and ask them if they have a .22 rifle for rent. It’s prudent to start him off with a rifle, not a pistol, because rifle’s are much safer firearms (since the barrel is longer, it’s harder to accidentally point it at yourself, or somewhere it shouldn’t be through carelessness – with pistols, people turn around without paying attention and “sweep” the barrel).

In fact, most ranges will either have a Range Officer or store employee come out and help you with your form, if it’s your first time and you ask nicely.

[MacTech]

@PatriotGrrrl

It’s a STOLEN message board. The real* The High Road*, run by Oleg Volk who created the original board, is now at http://www.thehighroad.us/ while he fights the thief in court.

Dunno about anyone else, but I’m not into getting firearms advice from those who consort with thieves.

ETA: I’m not talking about piracy, either, but a rogue admin locking the owners out of the site and domain so he could make money off it.

PatriotGrrl, I didn’t know that THR.org had such an inauspicious history, I hope the “consort with thieves” comment was not directed at me, that’s not a very “high road” attitude if it was…

all my knowledge so far has been practical hands-on knowledge I gained on my own

in interest of fairness, again, the other forum’s URL is [URL=http://thehighroad.us]thehighroad.us

[Martini_Enfield]

@PatriotGrrrl

It’s a STOLEN message board. The real* The High Road*, run by Oleg Volk who created the original board, is now at http://www.thehighroad.us/ while he fights the thief in court.

Dunno about anyone else, but I’m not into getting firearms advice from those who consort with thieves.

ETA: I’m not talking about piracy, either, but a rogue admin locking the owners out of the site and domain so he could make money off it.

I’ve never posted at or had anything to do with THR, but I’m pretty sure both of them have been around so long that most posters there are highly unlikely to be familiar with its controversial backstory. This is certainly the first I’ve heard of it, and THR ends up getting mentioned in pretty much any “Gun Advice” thread on pretty much any messageboard I’ve ever posted at.

Back on topic, though: There are low-recoil shells available for shotguns and if you’re going to be spending any length of time at the range, they’re well worth getting.

[Todderbob]

@Martini_Enfield

Back on topic, though: There are low-recoil shells available for shotguns and if you’re going to be spending any length of time at the range, they’re well worth getting.

Low Recoil rounds are typically, but not always, birdshot. A lot of indoor ranges wont let you shoot birdshot, they’ll let you go no smaller than #4, because of the spread pattern and likelyhood of damaging their facilities.
You can make pretty much any shotgun round “reduced recoil” by firing it out of a Semiautomatic shotgun, though. A lot of the recoil is absorbed by the action in cycling. Although, this bit is just a shameless plug for the fact that I think my Remington 1100 is superior in every way (except one*) to a pump action.
*You actually can’t shoot reduced recoil rounds out of most semiautomatic shotguns, as they wont cycle the action. This means you can’t shoot Less-Than-Lethal rounds, low-recoil birdshot, etc.

[GaryM]

@toofs

GaryM, I really need to get involved in IDPA shooting. I have a Beretta 96G Elite II .40S&W, 6 factory magazines with rubber magazine pads, Blade Tech holster and Blade Tech double mag pouch. What else do you recommend, and any thoughts you can add to a prospective new IDPA participant?

Sorry, I was away for a while and didn’t see your posting.

Sounds like all you need now is eye and ear protection as well as a cover garment. Most folks use vests or large sized shirts depending on the season. There are some regulations regarding holsters and mag pouches such as the holster can’t be set off from your body too much and the mag carriers have to cover a certain percentage of the magazine itself. The IDPA rule book is available here http://idpa.com/Documents/IDPARuleBook2005.pdf and yes, it’s a PDF. Most events require 100 to 120 rounds of ammo.

Most clubs will let you shoot a match of two before requiring you to join the IDPA organization unless it’s a sanctioned match. My club will be hosting the Missouri State Match in May, but other than that, none of our monthly matches are sanctioned. We have anywhere from 12 to 40 shooters at a match. At last years State Match we ad over 80 shooters.

I usually use a Springfield XD40 Tactical in 40 S&W. It’s had some trigger work done on it and I like it a lot.

There’s a list of clubs on this page.

At my club we always try to ensure that new IDPA shooters have a good time. We take them aside before we start and explain all the range commands and procedures. If there’s more that one we generally group them together for special attention and some coaching.

Give IDPA a try and you’ll probably be back

[MacTech]

Just to prove even a long-time shooter can be a newbie as well, I went to the range this afternoon, there were two other regulars there, inbetween shooting sessions we chatted, about stuff in general, family stuff, politics (always a subject of healthy discussion at target ranges), and other miscellania, basically a chat session that just so happened to have firearms there

As per usual, we spent more time trying out each other’s toys, my fellow shooters tried out my Ruger Blackhawk with the .45 Colt cylinder, they loved it’s smooth, comfy recoil, and the big honkin’ holes it put in the paper targets (200 grain semi-wadcutters, they punch a nice sharp-edged hole through the paper target, looks like a hole from a paper punch, a BIG paper punch)

One shooter offered me a go on his Smith and Wesson 617 6-shot .22 (is it possible to fall instantly in love with a gun? it had a buttery smooth trigger, and was the most accurate handgun I have shot, EVER…)

The other shooter had me try out his Ruger LCP .380 pocket pistol (that little thing sure barks LOUD!), not a good gun for a beginner, even though it’s a palm sized gun, it’s louder and has a snappier recoil than even my big .45 caliber handguns, yes, the little .380 had a harsher recoil than my .45ACP 1911, and my .45 Colt revolver

He also let me try out his single-shot .50 caliber black powder flintlock pistol, let me tell you, now THAT gun put a grin on my face, it’s a completely different kind of shooting, with modern firearms, you get a quick bang, or depending on caliber, a nice, meaty BOOM, and your bullet hits the target, no delays, a simple “point and click” interface.

Flintlock black powder, OTOH, has two distinct phases, when you pull the trigger, you get the WHUP! and a big sideways fireball from the powder in the flash tray (the equivalent of the primer in a brass cartridge, a fine grained black powder charge that starts the reaction going) and moments later, you get a mighty KA-WHOMP! as the main powder charge ignites, forcing the bullet out the barrel, followed by a copious plume of white smoke!

You can’t help but grin…

And even more amazingly to me, during this, there was almost NO recoil, NONE!, heck, my Ruger Mark II 22/45 .22LR pistol had more recoil than that big honkin’ flintlock pistol

ME LIKEY BLACK POWDER!!, hard to believe it’s taken me 30 years to finally get some trigger time behind a BP firearm…

…and even better still, according to the BATFE (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (should be a general store, not a givernmental agency…) ) Black Powder guns do not qualify as “firearms”, and therefore can be purchased over the counter with no need to fill out Federal Form 4417, they are no more restricted than a kids BB gun or an adult air rifle

Me need a BP gun now, they are just too much fun!

[Martini_Enfield]

@MacTech

Me need a BP gun now, they are just too much fun!

They’re a lot of fun to shoot, but bear in mind they’re a lot of work to maintain and feed, too. You’ve got to get the right percussion caps, the right powder (yes, there’s different types of Black Powder and modern substituties), the right projectiles, the right cylinder grease, and you’ve got to clean them quite a bit or they jam up.

It’s more work than just walking into the local sporting goods store and buying a box of cartridges, a reel cloth, and a bore snake and being ready to go, in other words.

[Todderbob]

@MacTech

…BATFE (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives …

Who’s bringin’ the chips?

Black powder is great fun, but I can’t live with the stuff. Far too… persnickity for me.