Gun stories (tall tales) from strangers

Carl N. Brown said:

And I heard that the US Navy used .30-06 M1 Garands converted to 7.62 NATO (.308 Win) by inserting a chamber spacer and jamming the spacer in place with a proof load. Sometimes the spacer would get loose and be ejected with a round, and the next .308 Win rounds fired in the gun would come out looking like .30-06 with the neck trimmed way back to the shoulder of the case. (I could say who, where and when I heard that story, but I'd have to kill myself first to maintain secrecy and that hurts.)

Click to expand...

That's a legit story. The M-14 unexpectedly took 13 years to be adopted. USN had a huge pile of KW-ordered Garands on hand for training. Then, 7.62nato gets adopted. So, they looked for a cheap solution. Bronze (brass, maybe?) inserts were tried. They were supposed to be "set" with near-proof loads. What none of the engineers had accounted for was the ox-like brute strength of Boots. They either shot the inserts loose, or pounded them out while cleaning (and, amazingly, did not go to the DI and say "Er, I busted sumpin here." So, USN rebarreled their Garands as quick as they could.

At work , I'm now retired but when I was working , People would tell me the most unbelievable stories to a point I installed a mirror on the wall . As they were telling me the story I would look in the mirror , the guys I worked with would laugh because our private joke would be " Do I look that F en stupid looking for them to think I could believe that ". It must be me because at the range the guy shooting next to me said When I was in the service I could put 5 shots in a 5" bull at 600 meters open sights with his M14 . Didn't have a mirror to check how I looked , I just nodded but at 200 yards his rifle was having problems grouping with a scope that day . They are out there and I'm a nut magnet. Now thinking of it even when I was in my 20's worked out with weights , a guy came up to me and said , you lift , I said yes , he was around 135 lbs. and told me he could do a standing press strict , 600 pounds . I just said Wow . I guess it started happening in my younger years too.

herrwalther said:

If I had a firearm for every time I heard a military BS story, I would have an armory that would make Charlton Heston's look like a quaint collection.

Click to expand...

If you're thinking of the picture I am then that wasn't Charlton Heston's collection.

Heard this one just the other day. "I'm no good if I try to shoot targets, but I can hit an antelope at 400 yards using iron sights on my .303."

This from someone who should have known better than to tell the story to a table of LE and competitive shooters. He claimed to have been a cop, chased a guy at night into a playground where the suspect "only surrendered because he could see my finger tightening on the trigger." Oh, and at the time he had the guy lit up with a maglite.

Merle1 said:

There is a tiny bit of truth here - some loads do not stabilize until past 100 yards, so....

Click to expand...

NO, there is NO truth to that. A bullet starts out in a straight line from the barrel. Whether it stabilizes or not, it will not magically turn itself back toward the target and make the group smaller.

What can happen is that parallax can be incorrectly set at 100 yards and set properly for 300 yards. Then you might get a group that is smaller than expected at 300 yards or, by pure luck and not many groups shot, you may be under the mistaken opinion that the gun shoots better at 300 than at 100 yards.



That is the best 3 shot group I've ever shot. I wish I could take the credit for it. It was shot with a barrel I couldn't count on to do better than 2 to 2.5 inches at 100 yards. It was pure luck.

Grumulkin said:

NO, there is NO truth to that. A bullet starts out in a straight line from the barrel. Whether it stabilizes or not, it will not magically turn itself back toward the target and make the group smaller.

What can happen is that parallax can be incorrectly set at 100 yards and set properly for 300 yards. Then you might get a group that is smaller than expected at 300 yards or, by pure luck and not many groups shot, you may be under the mistaken opinion that the gun shoots better at 300 than at 100 yards.

View attachment 804451

That is the best 3 shot group I've ever shot. I wish I could take the credit for it. It was shot with a barrel I couldn't count on to do better than 2 to 2.5 inches at 100 yards. It was pure luck.

Click to expand...

not likely, since I also see it with iron sights....

Coyote3855 said:

Heard this one just the other day. "I'm no good if I try to shoot targets, but I can hit an antelope at 400 yards using iron sights on my .303."

This from someone who should have known better than to tell the story to a table of LE and competitive shooters. He claimed to have been a cop, chased a guy at night into a playground where the suspect "only surrendered because he could see my finger tightening on the trigger." Oh, and at the time he had the guy lit up with a maglite.

Click to expand...

Sometimes 3d targets do make it easier to get your mark,at least in my case it does. I personally find it much easier to hit my mark with my compound bow when I shoot at a 3d deer target vs a 2d image of a deer/bullseye printed on a shooting block type target . When I get to 35 yards or more is where I see the difference start anything under 35 yards or so 3d vs 2d doesn't matter. I don't have the greatest vision, so the depth of a 3d target definitely helps me especially when practicing at 50 yards.

Now 100 yard target shooting with a rifle vs live target at 300+ yards with irons is a different story. His story is most likely BS like you said.

Merle1 said:

Grumulkin said:

NO, there is NO truth to that. A bullet starts out in a straight line from the barrel. Whether it stabilizes or not, it will not magically turn itself back toward the target and make the group smaller.

What can happen is that parallax can be incorrectly set at 100 yards and set properly for 300 yards. Then you might get a group that is smaller than expected at 300 yards or, by pure luck and not many groups shot, you may be under the mistaken opinion that the gun shoots better at 300 than at 100 yards.

Click to expand...

not likely, since I also see it with iron sights....

Click to expand...

I’m with @Grumulkin. How is it physically possible for a bullet to have smaller groups (as measure by MOA, not in actual inches) at longer ranges?

Even if a bullet was more unstable at 100 yards then at 200 yards, in order for it to shoot less MOA at 200 it would have to be magically (or mechanically) drawn back towards the target by some extra force. Otherwise, all the bullet would do is make a bigger hole at 100 yards than at 200 yards since it was less stable at 100 yards. But since we measure groups from the center of the bullet hole, that wouldn’t make a difference.

Theohazard said:

I’m with Grumulkin. How is it physically possible for a bullet to have smaller groups (as measure by MOA, not in actual inches) at longer ranges?

Even if a bullet was more unstable at 100 yards then at 200 yards, in order for it to shoot less MOA at 200 it would have to be magically (or mechanically) drawn back towards the target by some extra force. Otherwise, all the bullet would do is make a bigger hole at 100 yards than at 200 yards since it was less stable at 100 yards. But since we measure groups from the center of the bullet hole, that wouldn’t make a difference.

Click to expand...

Because it hasn't yet stabilized at 100 yds - as evidenced by slightly elliptical holes. It only seems to happen with long,heavy boat tails.

Merle1 said:

Because it hasn't yet stabilized at 100 yds - as evidenced by slightly elliptical holes. It only seems to happen with long,heavy boat tails.

Click to expand...

Sure, but that doesn’t mean the bullet is more accurate in terms of MOA at 200 yards than at 100 yards. That’s physically impossible. It simply means the bullet makes smaller holes at 200 than at 100. But since we measure groups from the center of the bullet hole, the size of the hole doesn’t matter in terms of group size.

In order for an unstable bullet like you’re describing to make an MOA change from 100 yards to 200 yards, that would mean the bullet stabilized at 100 and then changed direction slightly on its way to 200. But unless there was some outside force physically re-directing it towards the target, that direction change would be random, making the bullet LESS accurate at 200 yards, not more.

cw308 said:

Now thinking of it even when I was in my 20's worked out with weights , a guy came up to me and said , you lift , I said yes , he was around 135 lbs. and told me he could do a standing press strict , 600 pounds . I just said Wow . I guess it started happening in my younger years too.

Click to expand...

I lifted weights a lot through college and the few years after, it was always amazing the numbers people threw out there. 6’3” 280 was playing weight for me, but there’s a ton of 200# guys with no calluses on their hands In bars and such that could easily outlift me. Then there’s the armwrestler guys, they are really good, but broke a guys arm so they don’t do it anymore. (I have heard of that, but it’s usually some really jacked guys going at it) My wife says I must have “sucker” on my forehead since people are always telling me wild stories or asking for money.

I sent some friends a Snapchat the other day of some polishing work I was doing on an AR-15 trigger. I quickly got a response from a guy wanting some help accurizing his. He could only do a 4” group at 600 yards. He though maybe his 2# trigger was the problem and wanted a lighter one. Also mentioned maybe needing better ammo than the tula. I told him to drop it off I’d like to play with it for him, but have yet to see it.

If you think a bullet "goes to sleep" and gets more accurate in angular dispersion as it goes along, have I got a deal for you.
Ballistician Brian Litz says if you claim your rifle and ammo will demonstrate this phenomenon on his range on demand he will pay your fare to get there. If it does, he will pay your way home.
The trick is, it will be done with the SAME bullets. He sets a thin paper target at 100 yards and a target at 300 yards. Shoot through the 100 yard target and hit the 300 yard target. If the groups at 300 are smaller in MOA you win.
He has had no takers since posting the challenge in 2014.

There was a guy on one of the benchrest boards who set this up with an Oehler Accoustic target at 100 and an aiming point at 335 and saw no converging bullets. Efforts were made to debunk him and he did not test a whole lot of loads, but he held to his report

I get a kick out of people describing their shooting abilities and their choices of targets. The targets vary by region. When I worked down south the preferred target was a cigarette pack. "I can hit a cigarette pack at 100 yards all day with my rifle." Oil cans were popular in 60's. My favorite was when a friend stated that he could hit a Skoal Can at 30 yards with his bow. This was a guy who nearly always made a Texas heart shot on his deer. I helped track several of them. When he made that statement I had to gouge a little. I said, "I guess you shot that last one in the arse because it didn't carry it's Skoal can on it's shoulder."

Well, I finally figured out why we didn't win in Vietnam. 90% of the "vets" I have met were snipers or door-gunners.

I did enjoy listening to a guy at my FFL talking about how the higher the pistol caliber, the more expensive the magazines were.

I almost lost it listening to a guy at the LGS. About 30 years old, retired Marine Lt. Colonel, F-18 squadron commander in Iraq.

He told us that whenever the Iraqi Migs came up, they had to call the Air Force in because the 50 calibre machine guns on the F-18 wouldn't penetrate the armor on the Migs.

I asked him what kind of Migs he was facing.

"Well, Russian, of course. nobody else makes Migs."

I asked what number, like, you know, Mig 15s, 17s, 21, etc. He informed me the Iraqis had the very latest Migs. Probable Mig 21s.

At this point, I told him he was a lying sunuvabitch. Never saw him in a local gun store again!

At a gun show once and a guy told his son " the Communists developed the 7.62X39 round so they could use our captured 308 ammo in their AK 47's and SKS rifles." Sure hope the kid grows up smarter than his old man.

One gunboard (Not this one.) moderator was firm in his opinion that the 7.7 mm Arisaka was designed so that a desperate Jap could force a 30-06 round into the chamber. Whether to carry on the battle or shoot himself to avoid capture was not stated.

jmace57 said:

I did enjoy listening to a guy at my FFL talking about how the higher the pistol caliber, the more expensive the magazines were.

Click to expand...

Not altogether a lie. .25 and .32 feel the cheapest, your archetypal .45s have some of the least expensive magazines available, 9mm tends to be a bit more expensive (you have to fit twice as many for the same effect, after all), and 10mm might cost you an arm and a leg.
Of course, with 10mm you could blow someone else's arm and leg off to pay for them.

I'm a 20+ year veteran weight lifter. Tall tales are far more common in gyms than in gun stores. Too common in either though

And 10mm glock mags are cheaper than any sig or HK mag. Of course comparing a 10/22 mag to a .50 DE mag the bigger caliber will certainly be higher.

Well yeah, but that's across brands.
After all all, Glock is just plastic, while Sig has to ship them all from Germany, and HK is always even more expensive because they're the finest rock-solid clockwork to ever launch a chunk of lead and/or they think you suck and hate you.

my Sig branded 226 mags are mec-gar (Italian) or checkmate (American) made. Glock 20 mags are made in austria, or at least were.

luger fan said:

At a gun show once and a guy told his son " the Communists developed the 7.62X39 round so they could use our captured 308 ammo in their AK 47's and SKS rifles." Sure hope the kid grows up smarter than his old man.

Click to expand...

Sure they did, Just had to wait over half a century to use them.
https://www.businessinsider.com/rus...s-ak-308-rifle-with-76251mm-nato-round-2018-8

luger fan said:

At a gun show once and a guy told his son " the Communists developed the 7.62X39 round so they could use our captured 308 ammo in their AK 47's and SKS rifles." Sure hope the kid grows up smarter than his old man.

Click to expand...

I was led to believe for many years, from the service on, that the Soviets could use our 556 rounds in their rifles. Supposedly, they had an adapter for the chamber that the commie troops carried on them.

cheygriz said:

they had to call the Air Force

Click to expand...

LoL. Said no Brownshoe, Ever.

Mind, most fighter jocks are a bit too full of themselves, and their amped-up Type A personalities typically mean they just cannot admit to having caught the second largest fish or the least number of ducks on that last outing.

Now, if you want to hear tall tales (or catch a faker out) ask them to tell of their "scariest trap." If the tale begins "No [excrement], This really happened to a buddy of mine..." then, it's all fish tale, just legit, plausible fish tale, with elements from several events condensed into the one outlandish one. (Like the one a Turkey driver told me of a deck rolling so much, he landed on only the one main mount, and had to retract the wings to prevent a ramp strike--possible, barely, and the LSO debrief would probably still be going on.)

It's a [not polite] move, but in LGS where I know them, and they know me, I've slid a coin on the counter just to see who notices.