> On Jun 2, 10:00 pm, PhaedraCeleste yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>

>> On May 26, 11:53 pm, veritas yahoo.com> wrote:

>

>>> On May 26, 7:40 pm, "Mike Painter" sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>

>>>> Michael Price wrote:

>

>>>>  >>> He is wrong. A musician can play great music and not know much

>

>>>>>>> about it.
>>>>>>> A shooter can be a great shot and not know the physics involved.

>

>>>>>>> He is NOT a ballistics expert as the people on the site I posted
>>>>>>> are. Mathematics does not use theory, it uses proof and somebody
>>>>>>> who actually was what you claim him to be would know and be able to
>>>>>>> use the right words. It's worse than saying a weapon has a clip
>>>>>>> when it has a magazine or not knowing why teh colt revolvers click
>>>>>>> four times.
>>>>>>> It is easy to demonstrate that those diagrams are right.
>>>>>>> Bore sight on a target at your 100 yards and fire at it. Use a
>>>>>>> laser. Mark the spot.
>>>>>>> Your flat trajectory for 100 yard bullit with a 3000 fps muzzle
>>>>>>> velocity will be about 3 inches below the mark.

>

>>>>>   I make it 1/2 * 32 f/s^2 * (300f / 3000f/s)^2 = 16f/s^2 * (.01s^2)
>>>>> =. 16f *12 in/f= 1.92 inches.

>

>>>> Yep. I used a large value of one when I rounded it up. I was supposed to
>>>> write about 2"

>

>>>>>> No, I talked with the co-owner, he said, "Who the hell have you been
>>>>>> talking to? First of all that is not how the formula works, and the
>>>>>> answer is 1.2". Drop a 5 lb ball from a building, and a 2 lb ball.
>>>>>> They hit the ground at the same time. Everybody knows that. Well,
>>>>>> those are "dropped" not fired.

>

>>>>>   This is irrevelent, things fall if they are not supported and things
>>>>> fired
>>>>> are not supported.

>

>>>> I posted a story about this from my high school days. A ball is released by
>>>> a magnet as a projectile leaves the barrel of a "gun" on the other side of
>>>> the room.
>>>> The gun is bore sighted on the ball. Both projectile and ball drop at the
>>>> same rate so the ball gets hit every time. The (Jesuit priest) physics
>>>> instructor used objects big enough and velicities slow enough so you could
>>>> see it happen.

>

>>>> Not however that the "formula" mentioned may have included drag and 1.2 is
>>>> closer to 1.92 than the "zero drop for 100 yards claimed"

>

>>>>>> They are not different bullet calibers and shapes, and different
>>>>>> powder charges.

>

>>>>>   So what, they're not on a different planet and therefore they fall
>>>>> at the same rate (less air resistance which is insignificant for falls
>>>>> of
>>>>> a few seconds).

>

>>>>>> I don't know why you would have a conversation with someone like
>>>>>> that, but he is wrong, and doesn't know what the hell he is talkng
>>>>>> about. Don't shoot with him, as he doesn't know "squat" about
>>>>>> guns, and obviously doesn't shoot.

>

>>>>>   Why because he disagrees with someone who you think knows physics
>>>>> but doesn't?

>

>>>>>> If you shoot with him, keep an eye on him, because that doesn't even
>>>>>> make any sense. You would have to make a .170 to come up with that
>>>>>> velocity, or a varmit .22 with your own powder charge to come up with
>>>>>> that a 3000 fps speed. What the hell are you doing now to ask those
>>>>>> kind of questions?"

>

>>>>>   What the hell does that have to do with it?

>

>>>>>> I explained, and he said, "Well, the guy doesn't
>>>>>> know squat about guns, stay away from him until some one gives him
>>>>>> some instruction. He doesn't know anything about guns, he'll just get
>>>>>> you hurt"

>

>>>>>   And why should we believe him?  Why should we even believe he
>>>>> exists?

>

>>>>>> Sorry Mike, but this guy is a little blunter, and 3000 fps
>>>>>> is awfully high. Better luck next time, I can't argue with them.
>>>>>> They are experts, and we are not. Ken Hogan

>

>>>>>   You are not.  We however are expert enough to know high school
>>>>> physics which you evidently flunked.

>

>>>> I picked 3000 fps because It worked nicely with the 300 feet in 100 yards
>>>> and I could do the math in my head.
>>>> Had I use the .45 at 850 fps or so and a distance of 100 feet teh drop would
>>>> have been about 2.66 inches.
>>>> Backlit by jeep headlights at night you can actually watch the .45  and see
>>>> the arch  it travels over relatrively short distances. I've fired hundreds
>>>> of rounds doing this.- Hide quoted text -

>

>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

>

>>>> - Show quoted text -

>

>>> Every day I strap on a Glock .45 loaded with Gold Dot Personal
>>> Pertection 230 grain bulllets, bullet type GDHP.

>

>> as I'm not familiar with guns and the like thus I'm not sure of the
>> specs of what you described but if you do that every morning I find
>> that to be very interesting (if not a bit erotic ;) I really have
>> little knowledge of guns, munitions and the like, haven't had contact
>> with such since my college days when I used to go to skeet shoots-
>> PULL! lol (and skeet never seems to be in season around here anyhow!
>> lol) my most recent involvement with any sort of guns was with in a
>> literary writing "Before You Know Kindness" not a great book but
>> entertaining beach fare

>

>> seriously though, I was looking into a Kimber-any insight...?- Hide quoted text -

>

>> - Show quoted text -

>
> No, it depends on what you are going to use it for as to what you get.
> First, have you handled automatic pistols before?  If not, and still
> want one, my suggestion is a Glock .45, either a 30 or I think the new
> one is a 36.  The recoil is something you can handle, and it will have
> plenty of knock down power.  Use .230 grain hollow points, I use
> Speer, but most of the hollow points are good.  The only thing about a
> Kimber is that it is delicate, and will jam, you have to clean it
> often.  It is pretty, and a Glock is ugly, but you can drop a Glock in
> mud, leave it, and pick it up and fire it.  A Kimber will jam easily.
> As Tommy Lee Jones said, "Get rid of the sissy silver gun and get a
> Glock."  But if you are not willing to practice once a month, learn
> how to break it down and clean it and become it's buddy, you don't
> need an automatic at all.  A revolver, a .38 special or a .357 magnum
> is your best bet.  It is simple to use, if you get a .357 magnum,
> which I recommend, don't get a really short barrel.  A 4" barrel will
> give you a kick you can handle.  I have a collector's model of a .357
> magnum with a 2-1/2" barrel and it sounds like a .44 magnum going
> off.  You can reduce the kick even more by shooting .38 specials in
> the .357, and it's cheaper to shoot.  That is what I would get if you
> have little experience with pistols.  If it is strictly for home
> defense, and you never intend to take it out of the house, the best
> weapon to have is a 12 ga. pump shotgun with .000 buckshot in the
> shells.  When you jack that pump and a person keeps coming, there is
> no doubt they are crazy.  Nobody can mistake the sound of a 12 ga.
> having a shell pumped into the chamber.  The sound is unmistakable.
> So, what are you planning to use this weapon for?  To take with you,
> or home defense, or both?  It all depends.  Let's hear back on that.
> Ken Hogan- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -