1000 yards w/ 9mm

KSCessnaDriver said:
He shows why banning automatic firearms is a joke, as he can fire a semi-auto just as fast.
Click to expand...

Ummm... I hate to break the news, but they want to ban auto loading guns too. Real bad they do. What's Jerry's RPM with a Thompson Contender? That's the future that the progressives see for the private ownership of hand guns. Only in .22 long rifle at secure range with the weapon stored there under lock and key of course.
 
Dav8or said:
Ummm... doesn't .44 magnum, or .45 Long, .357 magnum, .38 Special and many, many others already do this? I think they shoot 9mm because it's a little cheaper than most other rounds.
Click to expand...

I thought you meant why a revolver. As for 9mm, commonality of ammo across one's arsenal would be the only reason I would do it, you can get 9mm in bulk cheaper and easier than any comparable caliber from what I have seen.
 
JBHusted said:
Well, I'm not sure it's "real" or not. Jerry is a machine. Not really human.

And he seems to have a blast doing it!
Click to expand...

He is a character for sure. He gets paid to promote S&W products and every shot is 'incredible' :wink2:

Here he shoots a itty-bitty .380 S&W Bodyguard at 200 yards.

http://youtu.be/5Fwb-9aYDa0

A lot of people can't hit a man-sized B27 target at 10 yards with that type of pistol (short sight radius, stiff double-action trigger). If you watch the video, you notice the technique: A first guess and then walking it in with corrections based on target widths. As long as the gun shoots reproducible and your trigger pull is reproducible, it doesn't matter what kind of firearm it is, you just walk the hits until you are on the target.
 
weilke said:
A lot of people can't hit a man-sized B27 target at 10 yards with that type of pistol (short sight radius, stiff double-action trigger). If you watch the video, you notice the technique: A first guess and then walking it in with corrections based on target widths. As long as the gun shoots reproducible and your trigger pull is reproducible, it doesn't matter what kind of firearm it is, you just walk the hits until you are on the target.
Click to expand...

Very true. However a gun that is consistent and a shooter that is consistent, working together is what's rare.
 
Last edited:
I have no trouble believing he made it in 2 shots for two reasons, first the dude has put enough rounds through guns under enough conditions, he has developed a built in ballistics computer and sighting system. His brain just kind handles pointing up the tragectory line he visualizes he needs and will get. It also took two shots.

Number 2 he was genuinely surprised when he hit it. It's pretty obvious that it was a bullet fragment that got the balloon on a ricochet.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Is it possible, it was coming down at that steep an angle?
Again, I know nothing about any of this.
Click to expand...

I used to belong to a shooting club that shot .22 single shot rifles (I have an Anschutz Model 54) at a 200 yard range. With the right light and a spotting scope, you could see the .22 bullet coming into the target. It seemed like an extreme angle, but I take some of that to be optical distortion.
 
Henning said:
Number 2 he was genuinely surprised when he hit it. It's pretty obvious that it was a bullet fragment that got the balloon on a ricochet.
Click to expand...

Dude, he hit the metal plate and got with in striking distance enough to get the job done. More than good enough for me! They never would have rolled cameras if they A) didn't think he could do it and B) they had already tried it and done it.
 
Dav8or said:
Dude, he hit the metal plate and got with in striking distance enough to get the job done. More than good enough for me! They never would have rolled cameras if they A) didn't think he could do it and B) they had already tried it and done it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, shooting pistols is not easy, I would go through thousands of rounds without ever hitting that damn thing.

1,000 yards is a long damn distance to be hitting anything smaller than a really big ass barn with a 9mm pistol.

I mean, ****, that's over half a mile.
 
I've done steel targets out to 100 yards before with a pistol. Probably took me 8 or so tries, but we were also walking back 25 yards at a time, starting up close. You really have to have your fundamentals in check to make it work, more than the gun itself being accurate (not that having a custom made pistol won't help, though). I don't think I can even see a balloon at 1,000 yards.
 
Dav8or said:
Dude, he hit the metal plate and got with in striking distance enough to get the job done. More than good enough for me! They never would have rolled cameras if they A) didn't think he could do it and B) they had already tried it and done it.
Click to expand...


I will play the pessimist here.......

The video just showed him, but you can bet there were a few others there running the cameras and with SIMPLE camera shots and 5 minutes of editing, I too could produce that same conclusion without any trouble...

Shot one..... Show me taping a balloon on a steel target.

Shot two... hop in a ATV and drive 5/8 of a mile downrange.

Shot three.. Show me holding a gun in my hand and bolstering that I can hit the balloon...

Shot four.. Fire one shot and look perplexed...

Shot five.. Fire second shot and show the balloon being popped from a close up cam of the target... Very easiely done by someone with a BB gun standing next to the close up camera.

Shot six.... get a 22 and fire it at the target at close range to show a impact point....

Take footage and edit it together on any computer, create a short video and post it on youtube....


Easy Pleasy.....



Did he do it..... I say 15% he did..

Did he do it on the VERY second shot... .000001% chance of that.

Did he know that his shooting skills will help make the video believable to other shooting fans.. 90% chance of that.

Remember, this is the internet..... where someone with a Go Pro, a 300 dollar laptop and a way to post to Utube can make anything look possible.....

Ben ( Flame suit on...:redface:) Haas.....

Shot five...
 
We used to play games like that with pellet rifles as a kid, god knows not to 1k yards, more like a little over 100, crack.............plink.

Fun times.



I like how the spotter had to tell him he hit it.
 
Dav8or said:
He didn't hit the balloon, but he did hit the steel plate close enough to the balloon to break it. That's good enough for me. I'm impressed. I could shoot all my life with that gun and never hit the plate.
Click to expand...

I think you misunderstood me. After 1000 yards at a rainbow trajectory that XTP (jacketed hollow point) would be falling pretty quickly. I'd expect it to glance off the plate, not fracture. I find that part of the video interesting. It would be fun to have a range that needed a Ranger, too. I enjoy my handguns but I'd rather sit in the back yard shooting coke cans with a pocket pistol or spent 1# propane bottles with a big pistol, or make a tether on a tree and shoot a moving target. Different strokes for different folks.
 
I just don't get the point of making a revolver chambered for 9mm.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I just don't get the point of making a revolver chambered for 9mm.
Click to expand...

Commonality of ammo is all I can figure. If it ever comes down to it and you really need these weapons for survival, then you want everything in 9mm, 5.56, 7.62, or .50BMG, because that is the ammo that will be available to the last.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I just don't get the point of making a revolver chambered for 9mm.
Click to expand...

Modern 9MM ammo performs better than .38 Spl in similar sized firearms. 9MM is also plentiful, and relatively inexpensive partially because it is our standard military handun round. I believe 9MM retains about the same energy as a .357 Magnum from a short barreled revolver with much less muzzle blast, and much less recoil. I will have to verify that however.
 
Point being I'm not going to use a revolver if I'm shooting 9mm, and if I'm shooting a revolver, it's because I'm shooting a heavier round like a .357 or .44 magnum. I only own one revolver, a S&W model 629. I have a couple Colt Series '70 .45 autos, and several 9mm autos.
 
Sac Arrow said:
Point being I'm not going to use a revolver if I'm shooting 9mm, and if I'm shooting a revolver, it's because I'm shooting a heavier round like a .357 or .44 magnum. I only own one revolver, a S&W model 629. I have a couple Colt Series '70 .45 autos, and several 9mm autos.
Click to expand...

That's certainly a viable viewpoint, however there are some people who want revolvers, and there is an industry willing to supply the market.
 
Henning said:
That's certainly a viable viewpoint, however there are some people who want revolvers, and there is an industry willing to supply the market.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.
 
Okay I can thing of one advantage: The rounds would presumably be carried preloaded in those clips. I suppose that would take less space and would be faster to use than a conventional revolver speed loader.
 
Sac Arrow said:
Fair enough.
Click to expand...

The primary advantage to revolvers I see is you don't leave evidence, at least not shell casings. Also they are easier to modify for a suppressor unless you have an auto that is rigged for one, and they make less noise since you can wrap them and fire still. With a good suppressor and a towel around your hand, 9mm would be pretty quiet, with 8 shots I can really cause some consternation at a shopping mall.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I just don't get the point of making a revolver chambered for 9mm.
Click to expand...

To make 1000yd balloon popping videos? I don't guess they'll sell many of them. Doesn't matter what I think. Somebody will enjoy them. Freedom at work.
 
Henning said:
The primary advantage to revolvers I see is you don't leave evidence, at least not shell casings. Also they are easier to modify for a suppressor unless you have an auto that is rigged for one, and they make less noise since you can wrap them and fire still. With a good suppressor and a towel around your hand, 9mm would be pretty quiet, with 8 shots I can really cause some consternation at a shopping mall.
Click to expand...

That's a stupid comment, even coming from you.
 
Stewartb said:
That's a stupid comment, even coming from you.
Click to expand...

Why? Guns are about killing, hand guns are about killing people. The most effective way to kill people is through stealth, the easiest way to keep from getting caught is to do it in the most public, confusing situation possible.

If it wasn't for killing people, I would have little use for guns.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I just don't get the point of making a revolver chambered for 9mm.
Click to expand...

Ammo commonality is all I can think of. Ballistics maybe, but that's a stretch out of a shorter barrel.

Henning said:
Commonality of ammo is all I can figure. If it ever comes down to it and you really need these weapons for survival, then you want everything in 9mm, 5.56, 7.62, or .50BMG, because that is the ammo that will be available to the last.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There are a whole bunch of guns I'd like to own, but at some point, you have to say I already have enough different types of ammo. 22LR, 223, 5.45x39, 7.62x25, 7.62x39, 7.62x51, 7.62x54R, 9mm, 38/357, and 12GA is more than enough to try to keep track of.
 
Henning said:
[...] With a good suppressor and a towel around your hand, 9mm would be pretty quiet, with 8 shots I can really cause some consternation at a shopping mall.
Click to expand...

Henning said:
Why? Guns are about killing, hand guns are about killing people. The most effective way to kill people is through stealth, the easiest way to keep from getting caught is to do it in the most public, confusing situation possible. [...]
Click to expand...

To go from using a handgun in a combat situation to a shopping mall killing spree with a revolver and a makeshift suppressor, however seems to be quite a stretch… :rolleyes: :hairraise:
There are also quite a few people out there, who shoot just for fun and who don't even use their guns for home / self-defense.
For ultimate stealthiness, one would want to use a round which still carries sufficient punch with a subsonic load. In this case, 9mm might not be the first choice. :wink2:

As all my handguns are 9 mm, it would therefore be convenient to also use the same caliber in a revolver. To have to use a clip however keeps me away from getting one of these. But boy, these S&W revolvers have nice single action triggers! So much better than any semi-auto trigger I have ever shot.
 
Last edited:
Also, for what it's worth, S&W is hardly the only company building 9mm revolvers. Ruger is on it as well
 
German guy said:
But boy, these S&W revolvers have nice single action triggers! So much better than any semi-auto trigger I have ever shot.
Click to expand...

Try a 1911 which has had some care and attention to detail.
 
Jerry holds a number of world records. Many of his S&W promo videos look like they're edited but many aren't.

He's very open about his misses on a number of the videos and publishes those too. You can find them.

He prefers revolvers over semi-auto but he's very good with just about anything he picks up.
 
German guy said:
True. To go from using a handgun in a combat situation to a shopping mall killing spree with a revolver and a makeshift suppressor, however seems to be quite a stretch… :rolleyes: :hairraise:
There are also quite a few people out there, who shoot just for fun and who don't even use their guns for home / self-defense.
For ultimate stealthiness, one would want to use a round which still carries sufficient punch with a subsonic load. In this case, 9mm might not be the first choice. :wink2:

As all my handguns are 9 mm, it would therefore be convenient to also use the same caliber in a revolver. To have to use a clip however keeps me away from getting one of these. But boy, these S&W revolvers have nice single action triggers! So much better than any semi-auto trigger I have ever shot.
Click to expand...

Who said shopping mall spree? The easiest way to assassinate someone is in public, shopping malls are hard to secure, busy, offer great medium range open fields of fire from advantageous angles all over the place, and have multiple paths of egress.

To truly 'silence' a handgun, it needs to be bolt action, but a wrapped revolver gets you really close with a multi shot capability. Suppressed automatics still make a fair amount of noise. With extra shots available from a quiet weapon, you can hit structure in a field opposite yourself to draw attention away from yourself.

As for a semi auto trigger, try a Sphynx, amazing.
 
Henning said:
Why? Guns are about killing, hand guns are about killing people. The most effective way to kill people is through stealth, the easiest way to keep from getting caught is to do it in the most public, confusing situation possible.

If it wasn't for killing people, I would have little use for guns.
Click to expand...


As someone who make suppressors for a living I can tell that you know little or nothing about this whole subject. Suppressing revolvers is a waste of time and its only done in the movies and on special russian pre WWI revolvers that use a gas seal for the cylinder. Gas leakage between the cylinder and barrel is huge even when there is a minimal gap of just a few thousandths of an inch. This means more noise out the sides than out of the barrel. Think about leaking exhaust in airplanes that have mufflers. You can hear a leak even when cruising along at speed. Sound is all about high pressure and temperature gas hitting the atmosphere. Suppressors only work on revolvers in the movies where the soundtrack isn't real anyway.
We suppress many auto handguns with pretty good results but I have yet to hear or see one that is anywhere near as quiet as hollywood makes them out to be. On the other hand in a country which forces us to put mufflers on lawn equipment and to wear hearing protection at work it seems silly that they require registration and taxes on mufflers for firearms. Putting a can on a pistol is usually pretty simple and normally only requires a threaded barrel to be installed. Since suppressors are very popular there are threaded barrels available for most popular pistols.

Lastly, your statement that handguns were only made for killing is way out there. If its true than there is a serious misuse of handguns going on because I don't know anyone killed with a handgun or anyone who has killed anyone with one yet I know thousands who have them. They've been wasting their time using them for target shooting and silly stuff like that. Millions of handguns in the US alone yet the number of people killed with them is less than those poisoned intentionally. Most handgun killings are by police officers in the line of duty. What about stabbings, car killings, beatings etc.....seems there are a lot of ways to misuse a product yet we want to control only some of them. My personal opinion is that we stop all sports that use blunt implements like baseball bats, golf clubs etc because they were designed only to kill. At least that is what they are used for in real life. I do know of people bludgeoned to death with baseball bats and I even know someone who killed another with a golf club......


Just more silly thoughts like yours.


Frank
 
BiffJ said:
As someone who make suppressors for a living I can tell that you know little or nothing about this whole subject. Suppressing revolvers is a waste of time and its only done in the movies and on special russian pre WWI revolvers that use a gas seal for the cylinder.
Click to expand...

Special, pre-WWI? I think you have the wrong idea of the M1895 Nagant. Yes, its old, but it's hardly only pre-WWI. They were made until after WWII. My example is a 1938 build. Recently AIMSurplus had a bunch of WWI Nagants for I think it was $200. Great little revolvers. Sure, DA sucks, but the single action isn't terrible. Surplus ammo is cheap, and so is new production.
 
That's amazing!

I can do 1000 yards with a 223 (sub .5 MOA) and have found the max range of 700 yards with a 22 for fun (of course very unreliable, but possible if you had to).
 
BiffJ said:
As someone who make suppressors for a living I can tell that you know little or nothing about this whole subject. Suppressing revolvers is a waste of time and its only done in the movies and on special russian pre WWI revolvers that use a gas seal for the cylinder. Gas leakage between the cylinder and barrel is huge even when there is a minimal gap of just a few thousandths of an inch. This means more noise out the sides than out of the barrel. Think about leaking exhaust in airplanes that have mufflers. You can hear a leak even when cruising along at speed. Sound is all about high pressure and temperature gas hitting the atmosphere. Suppressors only work on revolvers in the movies where the soundtrack isn't real anyway.
We suppress many auto handguns with pretty good results but I have yet to hear or see one that is anywhere near as quiet as hollywood makes them out to be. On the other hand in a country which forces us to put mufflers on lawn equipment and to wear hearing protection at work it seems silly that they require registration and taxes on mufflers for firearms. Putting a can on a pistol is usually pretty simple and normally only requires a threaded barrel to be installed. Since suppressors are very popular there are threaded barrels available for most popular pistols.

Lastly, your statement that handguns were only made for killing is way out there. If its true than there is a serious misuse of handguns going on because I don't know anyone killed with a handgun or anyone who has killed anyone with one yet I know thousands who have them. They've been wasting their time using them for target shooting and silly stuff like that. Millions of handguns in the US alone yet the number of people killed with them is less than those poisoned intentionally. Most handgun killings are by police officers in the line of duty. What about stabbings, car killings, beatings etc.....seems there are a lot of ways to misuse a product yet we want to control only some of them. My personal opinion is that we stop all sports that use blunt implements like baseball bats, golf clubs etc because they were designed only to kill. At least that is what they are used for in real life. I do know of people bludgeoned to death with baseball bats and I even know someone who killed another with a golf club......


Just more silly thoughts like yours.


Frank
Click to expand...

The gap is why you have to wrap, but yeah, still noise. Like I said, to 'silence' you need a bolt action.


I wouldn't call it 'misuse' since practicing shooting skills does nothing to harm the weapon and developes the skills to implement the weapon in its primary roll, to kill. That is why it was invented, no other reason. I'm not sure why there are people who cannot accept this simple fact.:dunno:
 
Last edited:
BiffJ said:
Lastly, your statement that handguns were only made for killing is way out there. If its true than there is a serious misuse of handguns going on because I don't know anyone killed with a handgun or anyone who has killed anyone with one yet I know thousands who have them. They've been wasting their time using them for target shooting and silly stuff like that. Millions of handguns in the US alone yet the number of people killed with them is less than those poisoned intentionally. Most handgun killings are by police officers in the line of duty. What about stabbings, car killings, beatings etc.....seems there are a lot of ways to misuse a product yet we want to control only some of them. My personal opinion is that we stop all sports that use blunt implements like baseball bats, golf clubs etc because they were designed only to kill. At least that is what they are used for in real life. I do know of people bludgeoned to death with baseball bats and I even know someone who killed another with a golf club......


Just more silly thoughts like yours.


Frank
Click to expand...

If handguns are for killing people mine must be defective. They haven't hurt anyone. Now, they've certainly claimed their share of targets, both paper and steel. :D
 
Ghery said:
If handguns are for killing people mine must be defective. They haven't hurt anyone. Now, they've certainly claimed their share of targets, both paper and steel. :D
Click to expand...

My 1911 used to bite me but then I changed the grip safety so it wouldn't do that anymore...
 
Ghery said:
If handguns are for killing people mine must be defective. They haven't hurt anyone. Now, they've certainly claimed their share of targets, both paper and steel. :D
Click to expand...

It's an old argument. Some people have it stuck in the head that guns are for killing. They haven't grasped the concept of target shooting, etc.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Exactly. There are a whole bunch of guns I'd like to own, but at some point, you have to say I already have enough different types of ammo. 22LR, 223, 5.45x39, 7.62x25, 7.62x39, 7.62x51, 7.62x54R, 9mm, 38/357, and 12GA is more than enough to try to keep track of.
Click to expand...

gasp!

The only time you have too much ammo is when the place is on fire... :D
 
Bob Noel said:
It's an old argument. Some people have it stuck in the head that guns are for killing. They haven't grasped the concept of target shooting, etc.
Click to expand...


Don't get sucked into Henning's trolling. He's done it many times before on this topic.
 
Kinda delussional, but whatever, no big deal. It just makes me wonder why people choose to lie to themselves about such an obvious issue? :dunno: Is it because you are afraid to admit to yourself that your fear lead you to buying a gun and becoming proficient with it? :dunno: Is it because you don't want to believe that you may one day kill a person?:dunno: I just try to figure out why, and that's all I can figure. Life is easier if you just own your fears and admit to them, then you can get beyond them.

The first step to solving a problem is admitting to yourself you have one.:rofl:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top