...Everything a man buys for aesthetic reasons is intended to impress a woman?darthbob88 wrote: In short, what I am saying is that whoever buys this gun will do so with the express intention of impressing gun-ignorant women with what manly men they are.
.60 caliber Nitro!
Moderator: Beowulf
- Uraniun235
- Emperor's Hand
- Posts: 13772
- Joined: 2002-09-12 12:47am
- Location: OREGON
- Contact:
"There is no "taboo" on using nuclear weapons." -Julhelm
What is Project Zohar?
"On a serious note (well not really) I did sometimes jump in and rate nBSG episodes a '5' before the episode even aired or I saw it." - RogueIce explaining that episode ratings on SDN tv show threads are bunk
"On a serious note (well not really) I did sometimes jump in and rate nBSG episodes a '5' before the episode even aired or I saw it." - RogueIce explaining that episode ratings on SDN tv show threads are bunk
-
- Jedi Knight
- Posts: 884
- Joined: 2006-11-14 03:48pm
- Location: The Boonies
By the spiked yamsack of Ares, I was not expecting a response to that little gem so late in the thread. Still, I suppose I was a bit hasty with that statement. My reasoning was: A pistol which only gives you one shot is clearly impractical for most purposes of hunting and target shooting*. Therefore, in order to justify purchasing it, it must have some utility aside from mere practicality. As an 18-year old male, the first answer that came to mind was a simple one: WOMEN! Like cool sports cars and flashy suits, its major utility is to attract members of the opposite sex. My reasons are clear, logical, and simple. And wrong. Just par for the course.Uraniun235 wrote:...Everything a man buys for aesthetic reasons is intended to impress a woman?darthbob88 wrote: In short, what I am saying is that whoever buys this gun will do so with the express intention of impressing gun-ignorant women with what manly men they are.
*As noted later, it could just be a warped sense of fun that motivates people to buy it.
This message approved by the sages Anon and Ibid.
Any views expressed herein are my own unless otherwise noted, and very likely wrong.
I shave with Occam's Razor.
Any views expressed herein are my own unless otherwise noted, and very likely wrong.
I shave with Occam's Razor.
- Major Maxillary
- Youngling
- Posts: 130
- Joined: 2006-08-29 11:13pm
- Location: Three clicks left of center.
If it has a stock and a rifled barrel about 20" long, it's a rifle.LeftWingExtremist wrote:Where does one draw the line between pistol and rifle anyway, that thing is big enough to be a small rifle.
stock + short rifled barrel = carbine
no stock + very short barrel = pistol
no rifling = musket/hand cannon
LeftWingExtremist wrote:penis penis penis penis.
Did somebody say penis theory? Because I think I just heard somebody say penis theory!darthbob88 wrote:penis penis penis penis.
Back to the topic; I would like to get a die and mold set for this round. simply because I like the idea of being able to put a inch wide hole through an engine block.
As far as power is concerned, nothing beats the old super cartridges like .45-70 and .600 nitro.
Seriously, never get into a gunfight with a buffalo hunter.
There is no such thing as 'too much firepower' because there is no such thing as 'negative dead'.
-
- Jedi Knight
- Posts: 884
- Joined: 2006-11-14 03:48pm
- Location: The Boonies
Ahem, sir, I believe I used the term "trouser snake", rather than its medical synonym. Still, I maintain that there is no practical utility for a pistol that only gives you one shot, and that it might logically serve, ah, less utilitarian purposes. Purposes such as displaying one's manly virility, or perhaps simply for the entertainment of shooting such a huge pistol. See my most recent post in this thread.Major Maxillary wrote:LeftWingExtremist wrote:penis penis penis penis.Did somebody say penis theory? Because I think I just heard somebody say penis theory!darthbob88 wrote:penis penis penis penis.
Indeed, this thing shoots .600 nitro. And I agree, a buffalo gun is too much for fighting with. Although, that sentiment seems at odds with your siggy.Back to the topic; I would like to get a die and mold set for this round. simply because I like the idea of being able to put a inch wide hole through an engine block.
As far as power is concerned, nothing beats the old super cartridges like .45-70 and .600 nitro.
Seriously, never get into a gunfight with a buffalo hunter.
This message approved by the sages Anon and Ibid.
Any views expressed herein are my own unless otherwise noted, and very likely wrong.
I shave with Occam's Razor.
Any views expressed herein are my own unless otherwise noted, and very likely wrong.
I shave with Occam's Razor.
- Major Maxillary
- Youngling
- Posts: 130
- Joined: 2006-08-29 11:13pm
- Location: Three clicks left of center.
darthbob88 wrote:Ahem, sir, I believe I used the term "trouser snake", rather than its medical synonym. Still, I maintain that there is no practical utility for a pistol that only gives you one shot, and that it might logically serve, ah, less utilitarian purposes. Purposes such as displaying one's manly virility, or perhaps simply for the entertainment of shooting such a huge pistol. See my most recent post in this thread.
I just find it annoying when everyone goes on about how owning big guns = penis envy, which has never been proven.
There's no utility for science fiction, either. Or fireworks, or a car that can go faster than the maximum speed limit. it's all just entertainment.
shooting stuff is fun, especially when you're shooting off a big gun.
Indeed, this thing shoots .600 nitro. And I agree, a buffalo gun is too much for fighting with. Although, that sentiment seems at odds with your siggy.
You misinterpereted me; I meant don't get into a gunfight against any buffalo hunters. with a .45-70 Shiloh Sharps Long Range Express there ain't no such thing as cover. this fact is doubly so for a .600 nitro elephant gun.
Sure you only get one shot, but you know what? That's all you need.
There is no such thing as 'too much firepower' because there is no such thing as 'negative dead'.
- Winston Blake
- Sith Devotee
- Posts: 2529
- Joined: 2004-03-26 01:58am
- Location: Australia
Well, technically we've already got them, except for the rocket part.Hawkwings wrote:So when do they up the ante to .75 caliber? And make the round an armor-piercing rocket?
The 'FRAG-12'. A high explosive round family designed to be fired from 12 gauge shotguns, i.e. .73 caliber. One round type is called High Explosive Armour Piercing.
I say fire those from a standalone XM26 LSS shotgun (5-round magazine, supposed be mounted under rifle barrels) with a fully collapsible para stock, and that's pretty close to a bolter.
Now, if you want a ridiculously large caliber handgun, I think an XM320 underbarrel 40mm grenade launcher fired one-handed would be near the limit. That'd be a 1.57 caliber 'pistol', able to punch through 2 inches of armour steel.
Robert Gilruth to Max Faget on the Apollo program: “Max, we’re going to go back there one day, and when we do, they’re going to find out how tough it is.”
- Major Maxillary
- Youngling
- Posts: 130
- Joined: 2006-08-29 11:13pm
- Location: Three clicks left of center.
Basically an AG36 minus the failed weapons program.XM320
with the low pressure rounds it wouldn't be too hard. I fired an M203 in basic, and the recoil is around the same as a .454, give or take.
of course, theM203 has some metal parts, the AG36 is mostly plastic. since it's lighter, expect more recoil.
There is no such thing as 'too much firepower' because there is no such thing as 'negative dead'.
- CaptainChewbacca
- Browncoat Wookiee
- Posts: 15746
- Joined: 2003-05-06 02:36am
- Location: Deep beneath Boatmurdered.
re: AG36- I WANT ONE NOW!
Seriously, what would you do if someone pointed that at you? It'd shoot through bulletproof glas like nothing, methinks.
Seriously, what would you do if someone pointed that at you? It'd shoot through bulletproof glas like nothing, methinks.
Stuart: The only problem is, I'm losing track of which universe I'm in.
You kinda look like Jesus. With a lightsaber.- Peregrin Toker
You kinda look like Jesus. With a lightsaber.- Peregrin Toker
-
- Jedi Knight
- Posts: 884
- Joined: 2006-11-14 03:48pm
- Location: The Boonies
My thinking was that a pistol with a bore that big, which only fires one shot at a time, that provides almost-overkill, can serve no practical purpose. As an 18-yo male, with too little blood in my hormone stream, the first explanation I came up with was women! My reasoning was clear, simple, and wrong. Nothing new to see here.Major Maxillary wrote:darthbob88 wrote:Ahem, sir, I believe I used the term "trouser snake", rather than its medical synonym. Still, I maintain that there is no practical utility for a pistol that only gives you one shot, and that it might logically serve, ah, less utilitarian purposes. Purposes such as displaying one's manly virility, or perhaps simply for the entertainment of shooting such a huge pistol. See my most recent post in this thread.
I just find it annoying when everyone goes on about how owning big guns = penis envy, which has never been proven.
There's no utility for science fiction, either. Or fireworks, or a car that can go faster than the maximum speed limit. it's all just entertainment. shooting stuff is fun, especially when you're shooting off a big gun.
Ah. So. Wow. Think you've got enough stopping power there? I will concede that point, but I maintain that that hand-cannon serves purposes aside from practical ones.Indeed, this thing shoots .600 nitro. And I agree, a buffalo gun is too much for fighting with. Although, that sentiment seems at odds with your siggy.
You misinterpreted me; I meant don't get into a gunfight against any buffalo hunters. with a .45-70 Shiloh Sharps Long Range Express there ain't no such thing as cover. this fact is doubly so for a .600 nitro elephant gun.
Sure you only get one shot, but you know what? That's all you need.
<snip pic of .600 nitro>
This message approved by the sages Anon and Ibid.
Any views expressed herein are my own unless otherwise noted, and very likely wrong.
I shave with Occam's Razor.
Any views expressed herein are my own unless otherwise noted, and very likely wrong.
I shave with Occam's Razor.
- Major Maxillary
- Youngling
- Posts: 130
- Joined: 2006-08-29 11:13pm
- Location: Three clicks left of center.
standard DP ammo would kill any armored car., against people in direct fire; you'd get a shaped charge fragmentary explosive lodge in your gut, if it hit something hard and it goes off it'll probably reduce everything above the waist into hamburger.CaptainChewbacca wrote:re: AG36- I WANT ONE NOW!
Seriously, what would you do if someone pointed that at you? It'd shoot through bulletproof glas like nothing, methinks.
The round exerts more footpounds than a .50 BMG, so yeah, I got plenty of power to do just about anything you need it to do. plus; it's ten calibers larger than a .50 bullet so you can fit more explosives into it.darthbob88 wrote:Ah. So. Wow. Think you've got enough stopping power there? I will concede that point, but I maintain that that hand-cannon serves purposes aside from practical ones.
It's very practical; if you need defense against large bears and rowdy road warriors on technicals in California nothing'll beat it.
because it's both more powerful than .50, and it's still legal in all 50 states.
There are more powerful rounds, but not many.
Utility be damned!
There is no such thing as 'too much firepower' because there is no such thing as 'negative dead'.
- The Yosemite Bear
- Mostly Harmless Nutcase (Requiescat in Pace)
- Posts: 35211
- Joined: 2002-07-21 02:38am
- Location: Dave's Not Here Man
I kinda liked the joke about california law defining a fire arm as a chemical reaction projectile. While a linier induction weapon is considered an illegal exotic weapon under federal law. If you wanted to steal from sherlock holmes, a spring, pnumonic, or hydro/vapor expansion projectile is actually not covered under existing laws. (not that they weren't around when the laws were passed, they are just too inefficiant compared to chemical reaction, and with a severe physical limiter on a spring propulsion device) however with modern technology a flash vapor product using distilled water, and a non corrosive tubing can not compete with cordite based propulsion, (to the point that popular mechanics has suggested it for would be amature rocketry/space enthuiests.)
The scariest folk song lyrics are "My Boy Grew up to be just like me" from cats in the cradle by Harry Chapin
- Winston Blake
- Sith Devotee
- Posts: 2529
- Joined: 2004-03-26 01:58am
- Location: Australia
Huh? I find .50 BMG as delivering 17 000 J, whereas .600 NE only does 10 000 J. It's not just energy either, it's got more momentum too.Major Maxillary wrote:The round exerts more footpounds than a .50 BMG, so yeah, I got plenty of power to do just about anything you need it to do.
Robert Gilruth to Max Faget on the Apollo program: “Max, we’re going to go back there one day, and when we do, they’re going to find out how tough it is.”
- GrandMasterTerwynn
- Emperor's Hand
- Posts: 6787
- Joined: 2002-07-29 06:14pm
- Location: Somewhere on Earth.
I believe we've left the .600 NE behind now. Major Maxillary is talking about a grenade launcher, if I'm following his participation in the thread correctly.Winston Blake wrote:Huh? I find .50 BMG as delivering 17 000 J, whereas .600 NE only does 10 000 J. It's not just energy either, it's got more momentum too.Major Maxillary wrote:The round exerts more footpounds than a .50 BMG, so yeah, I got plenty of power to do just about anything you need it to do.
Tales of the Known Worlds:
2070s - The Seventy-Niners ... 3500s - Fair as Death ... 4900s - Against Improbable Odds V 1.0
2070s - The Seventy-Niners ... 3500s - Fair as Death ... 4900s - Against Improbable Odds V 1.0
No, that's the other half of his post; that sentence did refer to the nitro cartridge (although I suspect he mixed it up with the .700 NE)GrandMasterTerwynn wrote:I believe we've left the .600 NE behind now. Major Maxillary is talking about a grenade launcher, if I'm following his participation in the thread correctly.Winston Blake wrote:Huh? I find .50 BMG as delivering 17 000 J, whereas .600 NE only does 10 000 J. It's not just energy either, it's got more momentum too.Major Maxillary wrote:The round exerts more footpounds than a .50 BMG, so yeah, I got plenty of power to do just about anything you need it to do.
Anyway, WB, could you be so kind and post your entire calculations (sticking to SI units, if possible)?
- Winston Blake
- Sith Devotee
- Posts: 2529
- Joined: 2004-03-26 01:58am
- Location: Australia
AMX wrote:Anyway, WB, could you be so kind and post your entire calculations (sticking to SI units, if possible)?
Taking the weaker M33, their energy value comes out right, and equates to 17 kJ..50 BMG source wrote:The U.S. M33 .50 BMG military load uses a 668 grain FMJ-BT bullet at a muzzle velocity (MV) of 2910 fps with muzzle energy (ME) of 12,550 ft. lbs. The U.S. M2 military load uses a 720 grain FMJ-BT bullet at a MV of 2810 fps and ME of 12,600 ft. lbs.
Wikipedia gives 10.29 kJ for the muzzle energy of the .600 NE.
Robert Gilruth to Max Faget on the Apollo program: “Max, we’re going to go back there one day, and when we do, they’re going to find out how tough it is.”
- Winston Blake
- Sith Devotee
- Posts: 2529
- Joined: 2004-03-26 01:58am
- Location: Australia
Now, the Apache helicopter's 30mm autocannon often fires HEDP rounds. These have the same penetration (2 in) as the 40x46mm HEDP.CaptainChewbacca wrote:re: AG36- I WANT ONE NOW!
Seriously, what would you do if someone pointed that at you? It'd shoot through bulletproof glas like nothing, methinks.
So forget bulletproof glass, it could kill main battle tanks. The catch is you'd have to pull a Luke Skywalker to get close enough and hit the weakest spot (rear of turret), and even then the T-72 is a relatively old tank.Center for Army Lessons Learned (CALL) Handbook O2-8 wrote:The 30mm gun systems were very lethal and destroyed targets at ranges out to 4 kilometers when accurate. One T-72 turret (rear portion) was penetrated by 30mm HEDP rounds.
Robert Gilruth to Max Faget on the Apollo program: “Max, we’re going to go back there one day, and when we do, they’re going to find out how tough it is.”