View Full Version : Fastest Shotgun? Six Shots in Under .7 Seconds HD VIDEO
Putting the M4 Benelli through it's paces, demonstrating just how quickly you can get shots off with it, noticeably faster than the full auto AA12 shotgun. Now, where can I get a belt feeding system for it??
At 2:13 you can watch me get off six shots in under .7 seconds. I'm sure there are guys who can do it faster, perhaps much faster than that. Somebody tried to tell me the Winchester semi-auto whatever was faster, and linked me to a vid where the shooter got off 12 shots in 1.44 seconds. My math is not the greatest but....seems to me that under .7 x 2 is faster than that.
Just sayin'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dibSfoBtGU
I hate to rain on your peraid, but...
Watch this.
http://youtu.be/c2QPvuEk5dg
And I hate to rain on your parade....
But I got off six shots in under .7 of a second, with a stock Benelli M4, no modification to the trigger or action.
He got off 12 in 1.442 seconds with a heavily modified Winchester.
I never had calculus, but I think six in under .7 is a faster cyclic rate than 12 in 1.442.
6 in .7s is 0.1166666666666667s per shot
12 in .1142 is 0.0095166666666667 per shot.
Close enough.
You should use a shot timer, thats the only way to know for sure.
No, actually, my video editing software lets me track speeds in 100th of seconds....under .7 seconds is an accurate statement.
Of course, if you want to tell my I'm a liar...ok, go ahead.
:dirol:
6 in .7s is 0.1166666666666667s per shot
12 in .1142 is 0.0095166666666667 per shot.
Close enough.
Whoops....he shot 12 in 1.442 seconds, not .1142 seconds.
Decimal points matter.
:)
No, actually, my video editing software lets me track speeds in 100th of seconds....under .7 seconds is an accurate statement.
Of course, if you want to tell my I'm a liar...ok, go ahead.
:dirol:
Yeah ok...:sarcastic:
I figured you would, you seem like that kind of person.
:rolleyes:
I figured you would, you seem like that kind of person.
:rolleyes:
Not everyone has the same editing software you have...
You are claiming that your shotgun can shot this fast, then give us this number that you can not prove. Yeah in the video the gun shoot fast, but the number seams made up...
Prove me wrong:blink:
Like I said, I figured you were this kind of person.
I have nothing more to offer. I'm simply stating, and showing, what happened.
Believe me, or not.
Not everyone has the same editing software you have...
You are claiming that your shotgun can shot this fast, then give us this number that you can not prove. Yeah in the video the gun shoot fast, but the number seams made up...
Prove me wrong:blink:
Knock off the juvenile banter. Thanks.
Does this video serve any purpose at all? Your other videos weren't groundbreaking either, so I thought I would ask.
QUESTION: "Does this video serve any purpose at all?"
ANSWER: Yes.
An M4Carbine.net staff member sent me the following comment about my video:
"Thanks for the video, keep up the good work." SHIVAN
YMMV, as always.
TonyRumore @ Tromix claimed his Saiga 12 ran at 900 rounds/min... that is about twice as fast as either of these. (http://forum.saiga-12.com/index.php?/topic/42393-saiga-12-vs-usas-12/#entry385798)
Now, I do not know why you need a shotgun that can fire that fast....
I carried a M1014 in the 'Corps and I really would recommend it to anyone though, for what it is worth.
JBecker 72
07-21-12, 18:50
I don't see how you can honestly claim that this shotgun is faster than the SX3 based on the video you posted. Now if you tested the M4 vs the SX3 head to head, round for round with the same shooter using the same measuring device it would be a different story.
Please be scientific about this before you make claims that this weapon is faster. I'm sure Benelli would claim the fastest cyclic rate if they could. Besides isn't the M2 a faster gun than the M4?
Other than that cool video and good shooting.
I have two questions:
1) Do you have a sight picture for each press of the trigger? In the slow motion at the very beginning it appears that the optic gets above the bill of your cap and a sight picture wouldn't be possible.
2) When you do the side to side "sweep" viewed from the stationary camera, why is your finger in the trigger the entire time?
Alaskapopo
07-21-12, 19:48
And I hate to rain on your parade....
But I got off six shots in under .7 of a second, with a stock Benelli M4, no modification to the trigger or action.
He got off 12 in 1.442 seconds with a heavily modified Winchester.
I never had calculus, but I think six in under .7 is a faster cyclic rate than 12 in 1.442.
Now your changing the rules. Who cares if its modified. Secondly you need to use a shot timer in your video I don't see the number.
Pat
Not everyone has the same editing software you have...
You are claiming that your shotgun can shot this fast, then give us this number that you can not prove. Yeah in the video the gun shoot fast, but the number seams made up...
I can verify it. I am measuring .751
Because the file is so heavily compressed it's a little hard to find that last shot, but I am 99% sure I have it. If it's not .751 it's .752
This would be from the initial attack of the first shot to the attack of the last shot. A shot timer would be no more accurate. Unless you believe you are watching a video that has been altered the shots take .751 seconds from first to last.
BTW, I'm measuring the last string. Maybe one of the other strings was faster. I'm not trying to split hairs, nor prove / disprove anything other than his claims are verifiable.
When you do the side to side "sweep" viewed from the stationary camera, why is your finger in the trigger the entire time?
Because I could..there was no danger, nobody was behind the camera, plus, I like to drive Safety Nazis just a little bit nuts.
:moil:
You should use a shot timer, thats the only way to know for sure.
Just to clarify something.... his video camera is recording the audio at 48,000 samples per second. That's standard for video.
A shot timer is probably sampling at 44.1K or even less as the audio quality is really not an issue. So the camera is probably more accurate if you really wanted to split hairs.
Also when he says his video software resolves to 100th of second, I believe he may mean 1,000th of a second as that is pretty much standard. 0.000 resolution on the timeline. You can actually see the audio down to that level. Actually you can see the audio to higher resolution but the numbers only change at that resolution.
At any rate... the only point being... the software is probably more accurate than a shot timer and a worse case scenario it's no less accurate.
Thanks, very helpful.
And, yes, I did mean 1,000th, not 100th.
All I know, as my video has proven, is that the M4 is one wicked fast shotty, and I'm tired of hearing people claim it is not.
Case closed.
JBecker 72
07-21-12, 22:56
I can verify it. I am measuring .751
.751 is not under .7, and I think that's the point some of us were trying to make. The OP is stating his weapon fires faster than is physically possible and when provided with facts and hard data he went on the offense.
One reason I love this forum is because we can cut through the bullshit and get the facts instead of feelings and emotion.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk 2
JBecker 72
07-21-12, 22:56
Thanks, very helpful.
And, yes, I did mean 1,000th, not 100th.
All I know, as my video has proven, is that the M4 is one wicked fast shotty, and I'm tired of hearing people claim it is not.
Case closed.
Wicked fast, and fastest are not the same.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk 2
Whatever you say, Slick.
It's all good.
:big_boss:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.