Dot_mdb
August 4, 2004, 01:54 PM
Is it physically and mechanically possible for a semi-auto to be shot as fast as Jerry Miculek shoots his Model 627; that is 8 shots in 1 second?
Bill
Bill
Speed Shooting: Autos VS Revolvers
If you enjoyed reading about "Speed Shooting: Autos VS Revolvers" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Erich
August 4, 2004, 02:02 PM
Well, while the cyclic rate of those CZ Skorpions (admittedly not a semi-auto) is pretty impressive, if you're talking about the usual carry semi-auto, I would think not.
ducktapehero
August 4, 2004, 03:15 PM
FWIW Bob Munden can shoot his SAA faster than his 1911.
Ian
August 4, 2004, 03:40 PM
IIRC, the record for speed shooting is held by Ed McGivern, for 5 shots from a revolver (can't remember which type) in 0.4 seconds. That's a cyclic rate of 750 rounds/minute. While a machine gun can beat that, I doubt a semi-auto shooter could.
JohnKSa
August 4, 2004, 09:20 PM
I think the guys mentioned are at the edge of what's HUMANLY possible.
However, a typical semi-auto pistol has an inherent cyclic rate that is much faster than a human can pull the trigger. So, MECHANICALLY it's possible for a semi to be shot faster than that. About twice as fast, actually.
However, a typical semi-auto pistol has an inherent cyclic rate that is much faster than a human can pull the trigger. So, MECHANICALLY it's possible for a semi to be shot faster than that. About twice as fast, actually.
jc2
August 4, 2004, 09:39 PM
Kind of long on opinion and short on facts, aren't you?
Justin
August 5, 2004, 12:11 AM
It's my understanding that Jerry Miculek broke Ed McGivern's record several years ago.
JohnKSa
August 5, 2004, 12:23 AM
Kind of long on opinion and short on facts, aren't you?:D Before your quote there were about 3 'I thinks', I think. And most of the folks who've posted so far fit the description 'you'. Maybe you could let us know which opinion is pokin' at you and I'll bet someone will help you scratch that itch. ;)
Zak Smith
August 5, 2004, 01:15 AM
There was a demo on American shooter where Bob Munden "fanned" his SA revolver. The splits were faster than his 1911 cycled.
-z
-z
MrAcheson
August 5, 2004, 09:24 AM
Ever seen the video of a glock going full auto? Its a guy in a ski-mask with either an illegal machine pistol or one that has a slamfire problem. All the rounds from the fullcap mag were in the air at once. You can probably do a search on THR or TFL and find it. Thats way more than 8 shots in a second.
You need to have the right semi-auto since the cyclic rate of the slide is important. The 1911 is not a good choice since the slide is big, heavy, and slow. You want a lighter slide in a snappier cartridge. The other issue is trigger reset and timing. You need to pull the trigger just as the gun goes back into battery. Too slow or too fast and you waste time. You don't have that problem with a revolver.
You need to have the right semi-auto since the cyclic rate of the slide is important. The 1911 is not a good choice since the slide is big, heavy, and slow. You want a lighter slide in a snappier cartridge. The other issue is trigger reset and timing. You need to pull the trigger just as the gun goes back into battery. Too slow or too fast and you waste time. You don't have that problem with a revolver.
goalie
August 5, 2004, 09:31 AM
Full auto has nothing to do with the discussion, since trigger reset and squeezing are taken out of the equation in a full-auto firearm.
c_yeager
August 5, 2004, 09:57 AM
Well i believe Jerry's record comes out to something like 450prm. Which is pretty dang fast. And bear in mind that is with 8 shots to 4 separate targets (2 each). So not only is it fast fire, it's aimed fire. I doubt that any amount of equipment is going to make a difference here.
But, i think the telling thing is that the fastest shooter in the world uses a revolver. If he could shoot faster with a semi he would. (or someone else would in order to take his record).
But, i think the telling thing is that the fastest shooter in the world uses a revolver. If he could shoot faster with a semi he would. (or someone else would in order to take his record).
JohnKSa
August 5, 2004, 10:16 PM
Full auto has nothing to do with the discussion, since trigger reset and squeezing are taken out of the equation in a full-auto firearm. Well trigger reset and squeezing are physical (human) issues, but the original question also asked about the mechanical possibilities.
Given that only 3 folks in the last century or so have been able to demonstrate the proficiency described in the posts above, I think it's safe to say they're somewhere near the limit of what's physically possible for a human. Jerry's record works out to something less than 500rpm.
But based on the cyclic rates of full auto versions of various pistols (1100rpm and up) it is MECHANICALLY possible to get a typical semi-auto to fire faster than the human revolver record holders. Obviously you're going to have to make some mechanical contraption to pull the trigger very rapidly.
Just to throw in another twist--it may very well be possible to get a revolver to fire at a rate approaching the cyclic rate of a full auto by using a mechanical device to pull the trigger. I think the problem would be that at some point things are going to start breaking. The limit is going to be hit when you find out how much you can stress the relatively small parts that have to start and stop the movement of the cylinder between each shot.
Given that only 3 folks in the last century or so have been able to demonstrate the proficiency described in the posts above, I think it's safe to say they're somewhere near the limit of what's physically possible for a human. Jerry's record works out to something less than 500rpm.
But based on the cyclic rates of full auto versions of various pistols (1100rpm and up) it is MECHANICALLY possible to get a typical semi-auto to fire faster than the human revolver record holders. Obviously you're going to have to make some mechanical contraption to pull the trigger very rapidly.
Just to throw in another twist--it may very well be possible to get a revolver to fire at a rate approaching the cyclic rate of a full auto by using a mechanical device to pull the trigger. I think the problem would be that at some point things are going to start breaking. The limit is going to be hit when you find out how much you can stress the relatively small parts that have to start and stop the movement of the cylinder between each shot.
HSMITH
August 6, 2004, 12:07 AM
A revolver is capable of faster fire than a semi-auto. It has been for many years and will continue to be that way until the auto makers find a way to fool physics. A revolver is only limited by trigger reset speed, the trigger can be pulled as fast as humanly possible, trigger reset on a revolver is MUCH faster than the slide cycle of a semi-auto.
Glamdring
August 6, 2004, 01:03 AM
Fastest gun type AFAIK is Gatling. Unless you count roman candle style gun (modern one is called firestorm IIRC).
JohnKSa
August 6, 2004, 01:25 AM
A revolver is capable of faster fire than a semi-auto.Well, that wasn't really the question. The question was "Can a semi-auto fire as fast as Miculek shoots his revolver?"
It may be possible to make a revolver fire as fast or faster than a semi-auto, but given that a typical semi-auto is capable of cycling at over 1000rpm and Miculek is not even achieving 500rpm, the answer to the initial question is yes.A revolver is only limited by trigger reset speedThat's HALF the limitation. The cylinder rotation is also a factor. The trigger pull must spin the cylinder. Physics says that unless you apply infinite force it takes time to accelerate something. It also says that the more quickly you want to accelerate something the more force you must apply. Therefore getting the cylinder started spinning will take time and force. At some point, one of two things will happen. Either the shooter's finger will no longer be strong enough to apply any higher level of force to make the cylinder accelerate faster, or a part will no longer be able to take the strain of starting and stopping the cylinder and the gun will stop working.Fastest gun type AFAIK is GatlingYes, but unlike a typical revolver, the revolving cylinder of an electrically fired Gatling gun doesn't start and stop for each shot. The timing is set up to fire the cartridge when it is lined up with the bore so the cylinder never has to stop.
It may be possible to make a revolver fire as fast or faster than a semi-auto, but given that a typical semi-auto is capable of cycling at over 1000rpm and Miculek is not even achieving 500rpm, the answer to the initial question is yes.A revolver is only limited by trigger reset speedThat's HALF the limitation. The cylinder rotation is also a factor. The trigger pull must spin the cylinder. Physics says that unless you apply infinite force it takes time to accelerate something. It also says that the more quickly you want to accelerate something the more force you must apply. Therefore getting the cylinder started spinning will take time and force. At some point, one of two things will happen. Either the shooter's finger will no longer be strong enough to apply any higher level of force to make the cylinder accelerate faster, or a part will no longer be able to take the strain of starting and stopping the cylinder and the gun will stop working.Fastest gun type AFAIK is GatlingYes, but unlike a typical revolver, the revolving cylinder of an electrically fired Gatling gun doesn't start and stop for each shot. The timing is set up to fire the cartridge when it is lined up with the bore so the cylinder never has to stop.
Sunray
August 6, 2004, 01:35 AM
It ain't the gun. It's the man. Both of those guys do a lot more shooting than any of us. Miculek took more than one run at the speed record. He'd tell you himself it's practice. The firearm is only part of it.
goalie
August 6, 2004, 01:53 AM
Let me clarify:
When you fire full-auto you hold the trigger to the rear. You do not pull the trigger to fire the weapon each time. That is why comparing the cyclic rate of a full-auto to how fast you can fire a semi-auto is pretty much irrelevant. To fire a semi-auto, you not only have to deal with the cyclic rate of the slide, but you have to reset the trigger and squeeze it again as well.
Apples and oranges.
When you fire full-auto you hold the trigger to the rear. You do not pull the trigger to fire the weapon each time. That is why comparing the cyclic rate of a full-auto to how fast you can fire a semi-auto is pretty much irrelevant. To fire a semi-auto, you not only have to deal with the cyclic rate of the slide, but you have to reset the trigger and squeeze it again as well.
Apples and oranges.
abdrdude
August 6, 2004, 04:44 AM
I had the pleasure of seeing Jerry Miculek in person at one of the OKC ranges about two weeks ago. I can honestly say that he is VERY fast with both a revolver and a semi-auto. He shot several revolvers and two autos, the S&W 1911 and one of the other S&W police style autos. The man is talented.
Mr Miculek is one of the friendliest people that you will ever meet. I spoke with him after his demonstration and asked several questions. One question was whether he came by his gift of speed naturally or was this something that he developed over time. He stated that he "used to be a lousy handgun shot", but developed his speed and accuracy through much practice. His worst groups were far better than most of could obtain from a bench-rest at slow speed. I gained a lot of shooting wisdom from him that day. Scott
Mr Miculek is one of the friendliest people that you will ever meet. I spoke with him after his demonstration and asked several questions. One question was whether he came by his gift of speed naturally or was this something that he developed over time. He stated that he "used to be a lousy handgun shot", but developed his speed and accuracy through much practice. His worst groups were far better than most of could obtain from a bench-rest at slow speed. I gained a lot of shooting wisdom from him that day. Scott
jc2
August 6, 2004, 08:56 AM
Given that only 3 folks in the last century or so have been able to demonstrate the proficiency described in the posts above
That's a mighty big assumption. Only three people have chosen to go the the showmanship route and become well-known. That by no means only three people have been able to achieve that level of performance, does it?Well, that wasn't really the question. The question was "Can a semi-auto fire as fast as Miculek shoots his revolver?"
You deliberately misquoted the question (and twisting to serve your purpose), didn't you? The original question was Is it physically and mechanically possible for a semi-auto to be shot as fast as Jerry Miculek shoots his Model 627; that is 8 shots in 1 second?"
No, it is not possible--and semi-auto means ONE round for ONE pull of the trigger. It does not mean multiple rounds for multiple rounds from a single pull of the trigger which is the only way to achieve those 1000 rpm some are hung up on. The typical service autoloader--1911, SIG, Beretta, S&W, Glock, etc.--cannot be shot as fast a typical service revolver, period.
The other factor some are choosing to ignore is accuracy along with that speed--the round for round accuracy of a full-auto at a sustained 1000 rpm leaves a great deal to be desired. In terms of physical limitations of the weapon, you cannot sustain 1000 rpm for any length of time before the weapon self-destructs--far quicker than revolver will when fired at max cyclic rate.
That's a mighty big assumption. Only three people have chosen to go the the showmanship route and become well-known. That by no means only three people have been able to achieve that level of performance, does it?Well, that wasn't really the question. The question was "Can a semi-auto fire as fast as Miculek shoots his revolver?"
You deliberately misquoted the question (and twisting to serve your purpose), didn't you? The original question was Is it physically and mechanically possible for a semi-auto to be shot as fast as Jerry Miculek shoots his Model 627; that is 8 shots in 1 second?"
No, it is not possible--and semi-auto means ONE round for ONE pull of the trigger. It does not mean multiple rounds for multiple rounds from a single pull of the trigger which is the only way to achieve those 1000 rpm some are hung up on. The typical service autoloader--1911, SIG, Beretta, S&W, Glock, etc.--cannot be shot as fast a typical service revolver, period.
The other factor some are choosing to ignore is accuracy along with that speed--the round for round accuracy of a full-auto at a sustained 1000 rpm leaves a great deal to be desired. In terms of physical limitations of the weapon, you cannot sustain 1000 rpm for any length of time before the weapon self-destructs--far quicker than revolver will when fired at max cyclic rate.
JohnKSa
August 6, 2004, 09:12 PM
Only three people have chosen to go the the showmanship route and become well-known. That by no means only three people have been able to achieve that level of performance, does it?Sure, it's possible that there are people out there who are capable of breaking world records but just don't feel like doing it with witnesses. Unfortunately until they change their minds I think my statement stands exactly as I posted it. "...only 3 folks in the last century or so have been able to demonstrate the proficiency described in the posts above"No, it is not possibleIf the slide is capable of cycling at 1000rpm+ then if the trigger is operated that fast the gun will fire that fast. We're not talking rocket science here. twisting to serve your purposeMy purpose? What kind of purpose are you imagining that I have? Surely you don't mean my involvement in the great shadow conspiracy to discredit revolvers and revolver shooters? :rolleyes:
This is an internet forum. People post opinions and information here and read information and opinions here--to be entertained and informed. Maybe you come here with some other "purpose" in mind, but that doesn't mean everyone's head works that way.The other factor some are choosing to ignore is accuracy I'm thinking that it MIGHT JUST be possible that people aren't addressing accuracy because the original question didn't mention accuracy. But you never know--it might be because of their... :uhoh: "purpose." :uhoh:
This is an internet forum. People post opinions and information here and read information and opinions here--to be entertained and informed. Maybe you come here with some other "purpose" in mind, but that doesn't mean everyone's head works that way.The other factor some are choosing to ignore is accuracy I'm thinking that it MIGHT JUST be possible that people aren't addressing accuracy because the original question didn't mention accuracy. But you never know--it might be because of their... :uhoh: "purpose." :uhoh:
Onmilo
August 6, 2004, 10:54 PM
Speed is directly related to cyclic rate of the firearm being used.
There are no semi-automatic pistols available that are capable of cycling faster than a Smith and Wesson revolver, at least not yet.
The fastest cycling semi-auto pistol going right now is the Glock in .357 Sig.
There are no semi-automatic pistols available that are capable of cycling faster than a Smith and Wesson revolver, at least not yet.
The fastest cycling semi-auto pistol going right now is the Glock in .357 Sig.
Island Beretta
August 9, 2004, 01:04 PM
..check out what KC Eusebio using a semi-automatic did to beat Jerry Miculek using a revolver in the steel challenge..think he set a course speed record..mechanically the gap as narrowed between semiauto and revolver speed but I don't think anyone has been able to max either out.
Correia
August 9, 2004, 05:52 PM
Quote: "But, i think the telling thing is that the fastest shooter in the world uses a revolver. If he could shoot faster with a semi he would. (or someone else would in order to take his record)."
Interesting thing though, when Jerry shoots in 3gun matches he uses a semi-auto.
Interesting thing though, when Jerry shoots in 3gun matches he uses a semi-auto.
TaxPhd
August 9, 2004, 07:54 PM
"You deliberately misquoted the question (and twisting to serve your purpose), didn't you? The original question was Is it physically and mechanically possible for a semi-auto to be shot as fast as Jerry Miculek shoots his Model 627; that is 8 shots in 1 second?"
No, it is not possible--"
Are you sure? I have timed splits on my race gun of .10 and .11. Aren't those faster than 8 shots in a second?
Scott
No, it is not possible--"
Are you sure? I have timed splits on my race gun of .10 and .11. Aren't those faster than 8 shots in a second?
Scott
RJ357
August 9, 2004, 08:21 PM
.Are you sure? I have timed splits on my race gun of .10 and .11. Aren't those faster than 8 shots in a second?
A split is time between two successive shots (I've never used a timer)?
That rate then, if continued, would be about 10 shots in a second.
8 shots in a second is about .14 sec between shots
A split is time between two successive shots (I've never used a timer)?
That rate then, if continued, would be about 10 shots in a second.
8 shots in a second is about .14 sec between shots
JohnKSa
August 9, 2004, 09:16 PM
I don't think anyone has been able to max either outConcur. IMO, the human is the limiting factor in both cases.
rusbil
August 10, 2004, 11:34 AM
in a huge, heavy revolver. For over 20 years now, the top IPSC guys have been getting .11-.12 sec splits with 1911's, and hitting the same sized marks, at twice the distance, with smaller, lighter guns, and with .45 ball type recoil. So, yes, the autoloader does outperform the revolver.
Also, Miculek fired 100,000 rds a year, for 7 years, getting able to do his "record. The guns and ammo were free from S&W, and he got paid to do nothing but shoot, by Clark Custom Guns. The IPSC guys managed to beat Miculek, practicing on their own time and money, and typically learn to do so in 1 year and a few thousand rounds. That's practical, the revolver stuff is not.
Walt Goeff, a multimillionaire, Paid Mcgivern to do nothing but cast bullets, load, and shoot, for many years, ya know.
Also, Miculek fired 100,000 rds a year, for 7 years, getting able to do his "record. The guns and ammo were free from S&W, and he got paid to do nothing but shoot, by Clark Custom Guns. The IPSC guys managed to beat Miculek, practicing on their own time and money, and typically learn to do so in 1 year and a few thousand rounds. That's practical, the revolver stuff is not.
Walt Goeff, a multimillionaire, Paid Mcgivern to do nothing but cast bullets, load, and shoot, for many years, ya know.
Correia
August 10, 2004, 11:48 AM
rusbil, Jerry is a great IPSC shooter as well. See my earlier comments. And he has won or placed near the top at several national level 3gun matches. The man is not a one trick wonder.
And those .1 second splits aren't coming from guns with .45 ball level recoil. They are coming out of open class STI widebody compensated raceguns in .40 s&w. I don't know of too many people who get .1 second splits out of limited (IPSC) or CDP (IDPA) guns and manage to hit anything past conversational distance.
If I get .2 - .25 splits out of my limited type gun with 165 PF loads and still hit the target I'm having a good day.
And those .1 second splits aren't coming from guns with .45 ball level recoil. They are coming out of open class STI widebody compensated raceguns in .40 s&w. I don't know of too many people who get .1 second splits out of limited (IPSC) or CDP (IDPA) guns and manage to hit anything past conversational distance.
If I get .2 - .25 splits out of my limited type gun with 165 PF loads and still hit the target I'm having a good day.
rusbil
August 10, 2004, 11:52 AM
staying in the 10" A zone, at 10 yds, with 38 Super comp guns, at .11-.12 second splits, just like I said. Back then, the recoil factor was 175, which is right up there with .45 ball performance in a 4" ccw gun. The fact that you can't match them is irrelevant to the fact that they did just what I said that they did.
TaxPhd
August 10, 2004, 12:49 PM
"They are coming out of open class STI widebody compensated raceguns in .40 s&w."
Correia,
You ned to shoot more IPSC. Nobody shoots .40 cal in Open, there is no future in it. .38 Super/Supercomp, but never .40. ;)
The purpose of showing split times is simply to show that the gun is capable of being fired that fast. Can it be done for eight shots? I can't do it. For three or four shots, yes, but I fall apart after that.
RJ357,
"8 shots in a second is about .14 sec between shots."
Actually, it is a split time of .125.
Scott
Correia,
You ned to shoot more IPSC. Nobody shoots .40 cal in Open, there is no future in it. .38 Super/Supercomp, but never .40. ;)
The purpose of showing split times is simply to show that the gun is capable of being fired that fast. Can it be done for eight shots? I can't do it. For three or four shots, yes, but I fall apart after that.
RJ357,
"8 shots in a second is about .14 sec between shots."
Actually, it is a split time of .125.
Scott
Correia
August 10, 2004, 01:23 PM
Scott, can't help it, I'm a 3gunner at heart. IPSC confuses me what with the spandex shorts and coat hanger holsters and whatnot. ;) I thought that the current shiz-nit in Open was .40 rather than the .38 supercomp. (moot point, I get my but kicked by IPSC guys with open gun in whatever caliber they are in whenever I shoot steel against them).
Rusbil, let me go back to what you just barely said. You said it yourself. COMP guns. You are comparing a tweaked out heavy revolver to a compensated race gun and saying that the comp gun is more practical than the revolver. Neither one is practical for anything other than gameing.
Robbie, Brian, and Jerry, and the other grandmasters like them are so far above the rest of us slugs that it doesn't matter one whit. We have guys winning the USPSA nationals with minor caliber Glocks and IDPA CDP with a freaking DA/SA Sig 220. Miyamoto Mushashi killed people with a wooden sword, but I ain't going to question him about it.
If Jerry's record could be beaten by somebody shooting an auto, good for them. Is it theoretically possibe? Sure. Somebody should do it then.
Rusbil, let me go back to what you just barely said. You said it yourself. COMP guns. You are comparing a tweaked out heavy revolver to a compensated race gun and saying that the comp gun is more practical than the revolver. Neither one is practical for anything other than gameing.
Robbie, Brian, and Jerry, and the other grandmasters like them are so far above the rest of us slugs that it doesn't matter one whit. We have guys winning the USPSA nationals with minor caliber Glocks and IDPA CDP with a freaking DA/SA Sig 220. Miyamoto Mushashi killed people with a wooden sword, but I ain't going to question him about it.
If Jerry's record could be beaten by somebody shooting an auto, good for them. Is it theoretically possibe? Sure. Somebody should do it then.
had
August 10, 2004, 03:22 PM
FWIW Bob Munden can shoot his SAA faster than his 1911.
i saw that on american shooter. he said that the cycle rate on the 1911 is slower than he can pull the trigger. he shot both and was faster with his saa.
had
i saw that on american shooter. he said that the cycle rate on the 1911 is slower than he can pull the trigger. he shot both and was faster with his saa.
had
RJ357
August 11, 2004, 11:13 AM
TaxPhd -
RJ357,
"8 shots in a second is about .14 sec between shots."
Actually, it is a split time of .125.
.125 sec between shots would be for a rate of 8 shots per second.
8 shots in one second has 7 intervals between the shots. The 1 sec divides up into 7 intervals, .14 sec each.
Two shots in 1 sec would have 1 or almost 1 sec between the shots. That would not be a split time of .5 sec. Neither would it be a rate of 2 shots/sec.
(I am assuming that the split time is the time between two succesive shots; I am not familiar with the terms and can't seem to find a definition anywhere)
RJ357,
"8 shots in a second is about .14 sec between shots."
Actually, it is a split time of .125.
.125 sec between shots would be for a rate of 8 shots per second.
8 shots in one second has 7 intervals between the shots. The 1 sec divides up into 7 intervals, .14 sec each.
Two shots in 1 sec would have 1 or almost 1 sec between the shots. That would not be a split time of .5 sec. Neither would it be a rate of 2 shots/sec.
(I am assuming that the split time is the time between two succesive shots; I am not familiar with the terms and can't seem to find a definition anywhere)
Onmilo
August 12, 2004, 10:12 PM
Geez, a split isn't a full run and I'm willing to bet you won't keep that speed up for all eight shots while keeping the shots on target,,,,,,,,,
JohnKSa
August 12, 2004, 10:55 PM
a split isn't a full run and I'm willing to bet you won't keep that speed up for all eight shots while keeping the shots on targetIt DOES establish that at least this particular autopistol is CAPABLE of cycling that fast and can be manually shot that fast.
You imply that rate of fire can't be maintained for an entire string. Do you hold this opinion because you find it to be slower to pull the trigger on an autopistol than on a DA revolver? Because you find it harder to pull the trigger on a Semi-Auto compared to a DA revolver?
You say that it can't be done with accuracy. (Let's forget the fact that the initial post said exactly nothing about accuracy.) Do you hold this opinion because you find it easier to stay on target while pulling a DA revolver trigger than when pulling the SA trigger on an autopistol? Because you find the muzzle rise and recoil impulse to be less on a revolver than on a semi-auto?
You imply that rate of fire can't be maintained for an entire string. Do you hold this opinion because you find it to be slower to pull the trigger on an autopistol than on a DA revolver? Because you find it harder to pull the trigger on a Semi-Auto compared to a DA revolver?
You say that it can't be done with accuracy. (Let's forget the fact that the initial post said exactly nothing about accuracy.) Do you hold this opinion because you find it easier to stay on target while pulling a DA revolver trigger than when pulling the SA trigger on an autopistol? Because you find the muzzle rise and recoil impulse to be less on a revolver than on a semi-auto?
TaxPhd
August 12, 2004, 11:36 PM
RJ357,
I see what you're saying. Your's works if the first shot starts the time. Mine works with the beep starting the time, and the first "split" actually being reaction time from beep to first shot.
I never can resist the chance to give a math tutoring session - but you certainly didn't need one. ;-)
Scott
I see what you're saying. Your's works if the first shot starts the time. Mine works with the beep starting the time, and the first "split" actually being reaction time from beep to first shot.
I never can resist the chance to give a math tutoring session - but you certainly didn't need one. ;-)
Scott
SOT_II
August 13, 2004, 01:12 PM
Ok here is the REAL answer!!!
If we are comparing a semi auto handgun to a revolver, the revolver will be faster mechanically.
If we are comparing a full auto pistol to a revolver, the full auto pistol may or may not be faster based on it's design and ammo BUT the full auto pistol generally will be faster that a revolver by a substantial amount.
Practical Limitations
Now will you or I ever be faster with a revolver than a semi auto? I don't know. I can get faster aimed fire from my semiauto.
Here's a video of a full auto glock, notice the speed differences with the various calibers.
Full Auto Glock (http://www.fss-g.com/fss-g.mpeg)
If we are comparing a semi auto handgun to a revolver, the revolver will be faster mechanically.
If we are comparing a full auto pistol to a revolver, the full auto pistol may or may not be faster based on it's design and ammo BUT the full auto pistol generally will be faster that a revolver by a substantial amount.
Practical Limitations
Now will you or I ever be faster with a revolver than a semi auto? I don't know. I can get faster aimed fire from my semiauto.
Here's a video of a full auto glock, notice the speed differences with the various calibers.
Full Auto Glock (http://www.fss-g.com/fss-g.mpeg)
Island Beretta
August 13, 2004, 04:15 PM
let's look at it another way.
revolver- pulling the trigger cycles the action and turns the cylinder simultaneously and then releases the hammer. By the time you reset the trigger the gun is ready again to be fired.
semi-auto- pulling the trigger cycles the action and releases the hammer. By the time you reset the trigger the gun is ready again to be fired.
We have 2 variables here: 1. finger/trigger speed and 2. locktime i.e. time from when hammer falls to shot detonation.
Mechanically, work can be done on 1 and 2 to get it down to a bare minimum i.e. lighter, shorter trigger pulls and release and faster locktimes. So not a constraint for either designs.
You are still constrained however by the finger/trigger speed of the human operator.. probably a better question would have been which design is easier to fire rapidly (meaning you don't have to burn '000s of rounds annually) and I daresay it would be the semi-auto for me. .
revolver- pulling the trigger cycles the action and turns the cylinder simultaneously and then releases the hammer. By the time you reset the trigger the gun is ready again to be fired.
semi-auto- pulling the trigger cycles the action and releases the hammer. By the time you reset the trigger the gun is ready again to be fired.
We have 2 variables here: 1. finger/trigger speed and 2. locktime i.e. time from when hammer falls to shot detonation.
Mechanically, work can be done on 1 and 2 to get it down to a bare minimum i.e. lighter, shorter trigger pulls and release and faster locktimes. So not a constraint for either designs.
You are still constrained however by the finger/trigger speed of the human operator.. probably a better question would have been which design is easier to fire rapidly (meaning you don't have to burn '000s of rounds annually) and I daresay it would be the semi-auto for me. .
RJ357
August 13, 2004, 08:03 PM
TaxPhd -
Your's works if the first shot starts the time. Mine works with the beep starting the time, and the first "split" actually being reaction time from beep to first shot.
Good point. I should have stated that I was counting time from the 1st shot.
Which raises a question: Just how do these speed shooters time the shots? I had assumed the 1st shot started the timer.
Your's works if the first shot starts the time. Mine works with the beep starting the time, and the first "split" actually being reaction time from beep to first shot.
Good point. I should have stated that I was counting time from the 1st shot.
Which raises a question: Just how do these speed shooters time the shots? I had assumed the 1st shot started the timer.
Ankeny
August 13, 2004, 10:49 PM
Is it physically and mechanically possible for a semi-auto to be shot as fast as Jerry Miculek shoots his Model 627; that is 8 shots in 1 second?
Yes. Like the guys are saying, splits in the teens are really common in IPSC. In fact, there are probably several forum members who have shot a lot of .11-.12 splits.
While it is undeniable that the cyclic rate of a revolver isn't limited like a semi-auto, the debate is mostly academic because darn few shooters can crank a double action revolver as quickly as a 1911 trigger can be manipulated. FWIW, there are few IPSC revolver shooters, even the top 10, shooting revolver splits in the mid teens at an IPSC match, but the semi-auto shooters crank them off all across the country every weekend.
If you will wander over to Brian Enos' web site and do a search, you will find a link to some video of GM Steve Anderson shooting his dot gun at a rate every bit as fast as Jerry's revolver record.
Yes. Like the guys are saying, splits in the teens are really common in IPSC. In fact, there are probably several forum members who have shot a lot of .11-.12 splits.
While it is undeniable that the cyclic rate of a revolver isn't limited like a semi-auto, the debate is mostly academic because darn few shooters can crank a double action revolver as quickly as a 1911 trigger can be manipulated. FWIW, there are few IPSC revolver shooters, even the top 10, shooting revolver splits in the mid teens at an IPSC match, but the semi-auto shooters crank them off all across the country every weekend.
If you will wander over to Brian Enos' web site and do a search, you will find a link to some video of GM Steve Anderson shooting his dot gun at a rate every bit as fast as Jerry's revolver record.
If you enjoyed reading about "Speed Shooting: Autos VS Revolvers" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
