Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25

Thread: Snap shots and rifle weight

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    8
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Both lose

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    9,328
    Feedback Score
    28 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by QuickStrike View Post
    Then they're probably both gonna get shot IMO.
    This is true.
    The only time such tight numbers are relevant is with CNS hits.

    Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
    Jack Leuba
    Director of Sales
    Knight's Armament Company
    jleuba@knightarmco.com

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    54
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by QuickStrike View Post
    Then they're probably both gonna get shot IMO.

    The difference in snap shot time from weapon weight doesn't seem that much.


    Edit: I guess it would come down to who is luckier.
    I do know that in the old west, Gunfighters quickly figured out that the gunfighters with long barreled revolvers seemed to die a lot faster than gunfighters with shorter barrels and as a result the 4-3/4barrel became the barrel length of choice.

    Someone needs to do a study on this. Get a slow motion camera to detect the first movement of the rifle barrel to eliminate the reaction time factor and see how long it takes to get the rifle up and fire. I'll bet there's a significant difference in how long it takes to get the rifle up with an extra 1-1/3 lb of weight on the barrel.

    Just enough to make me want to keep my 7" rail on my M4 carbine

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    9,328
    Feedback Score
    28 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSixPack View Post
    I do know that in the old west, Gunfighters quickly figured out that the gunfighters with long barreled revolvers seemed to die a lot faster than gunfighters with shorter barrels and as a result the 4-3/4barrel became the barrel length of choice.

    Someone needs to do a study on this. Get a slow motion camera to detect the first movement of the rifle barrel to eliminate the reaction time factor and see how long it takes to get the rifle up and fire. I'll bet there's a significant difference in how long it takes to get the rifle up with an extra 1-1/3 lb of weight on the barrel.

    Just enough to make me want to keep my 7" rail on my M4 carbine
    It's not about weight, it's about getting that longer barrel out of the holster and rotating forward.

    Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
    Jack Leuba
    Director of Sales
    Knight's Armament Company
    jleuba@knightarmco.com

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,001
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSixPack View Post
    I do know that in the old west, Gunfighters quickly figured out that the gunfighters with long barreled revolvers seemed to die a lot faster than gunfighters with shorter barrels and as a result the 4-3/4barrel became the barrel length of choice.

    Someone needs to do a study on this. Get a slow motion camera to detect the first movement of the rifle barrel to eliminate the reaction time factor and see how long it takes to get the rifle up and fire. I'll bet there's a significant difference in how long it takes to get the rifle up with an extra 1-1/3 lb of weight on the barrel.

    Just enough to make me want to keep my 7" rail on my M4 carbine
    From all I have read Wyatt Earp carried a revolver with a 7 1/2" barrel.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Where The Wind Never Blows, Wyoming
    Posts
    2,200
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSixPack View Post
    I do know that in the old west, Gunfighters quickly figured out that the gunfighters with long barreled revolvers seemed to die a lot faster than gunfighters with shorter barrels and as a result the 4-3/4barrel became the barrel length of choice.

    Someone needs to do a study on this. Get a slow motion camera to detect the first movement of the rifle barrel to eliminate the reaction time factor and see how long it takes to get the rifle up and fire. I'll bet there's a significant difference in how long it takes to get the rifle up with an extra 1-1/3 lb of weight on the barrel.

    Just enough to make me want to keep my 7" rail on my M4 carbine
    You're obsessing about rails again, aren't you Joe?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    683
    Feedback Score
    0
    seb5
    Well I guess the millions of GI's in WWII were real wimps walking all over Europe and the Pacific with those heavy M1's ! Funny I think they got the job at hand done quite well carring all that heavy gear! As been said it's the guy who has the fight mentality in your senerio who is going to win. In your senerio the shot is most like going to be from the hip and who hits the other guy first wins. Doesn't matter what weapon they are carring.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    223
    Feedback Score
    0
    Id say it would come down to luck of the draw if everything else is equal. Its the Indian not the arrow kinda thing. Although the dude rocking the M1 gets + 100000 "MERICA points tho.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    54
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ryr8828 View Post
    From all I have read Wyatt Earp carried a revolver with a 7 1/2" barrel.
    Good thing Doc Holiday knew Wyatt couldn't beat Johnny Ringo with that heavy long barreled pistol.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    XXX
    Posts
    1,944
    Feedback Score
    0
    With the Garand you can take the bad out a 700 yards
    Last edited by SteveS; 11-29-12 at 15:02.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •