1911 firing under water test
- Thread starter scubie02
- Start date
- Status
C'mon gunsmoker you know I wanted something documented that has happened. Do you have a write up of that even happening? Maybe we should test guns that have been submerged in sloppy joe in case there is a struggle in the cafeteria 
Or its sarcasm...its hard to tell sometimes
Or its sarcasm...its hard to tell sometimes
seeker_two
Member
3) The six-shot S&W M65 revolver carried by the US SEALS when they insert by sea. No cups required.....
On firing a gun underwater with your head under, it's probably important to consider whether your ears are totally waterlogged or not. Sound goes through the water faster, but your ears aren't full of water, then you've got air between your eardrum and the water, same as if your head is above water. Otherwise, it may be considerably louder. Maybe. Dunno if loud sounds conducted through water can rupture the eardrum the same way as they can in air. Totally different fluids.
Joe Demko
Member
I think it is worth noting that even though the Glock 19 ran flawlessly, it fires a cartridge barely capable of wounding a smelt. The 1911, firing the mighty .45 acp, is able to spin a sperm whale clear around with just a flipper hit.
seeker_two
Member
Joe Demko: Yeah, but if you're ever attacked by a gang of smelt on motorcycles, you'll wish you had a high-capacity underwater Glock instead of your low-cap, soggy 1911....
alucard0822
Member
It would seem to me that the 45 with a thinner/longer barrel and a larger volume of water in the barrel, would be at a distinct disadvantage. How about a retest with a Glock 21 and a Commander size 1911 in 9mm? found it works out to a 5" 1911 in 45 would have .675ci of water volume in the barell, a glock 19 would have .369ci assuming a round is chambered, I imagine the more gas that blows by the bullet the better, it would fill the column of water with bubbles, and lower the pressure.
I remember the mythbusters doing the underwater test, and found a 12ga basically blew up, an M1 garand cycled fine, and the most reliable seemed to be a revolver, that would make sense, basically the gap between the cylinder and forcing cone would act to relieve some of the gas pressure, and they are still about the sturdiest design yet made, and the 12ga basically has the same type of design "problems" underwater as the 45, thin barrell with a large bore. I don't think shooting underwater would ever be that big of a concideration, but in the example a few pages back where a BG is trying to drown you, contact firing underwater may be your only option, however I think 1 well placed 45 at point blank range should do it, or let you escape the hold.
I remember the mythbusters doing the underwater test, and found a 12ga basically blew up, an M1 garand cycled fine, and the most reliable seemed to be a revolver, that would make sense, basically the gap between the cylinder and forcing cone would act to relieve some of the gas pressure, and they are still about the sturdiest design yet made, and the 12ga basically has the same type of design "problems" underwater as the 45, thin barrell with a large bore. I don't think shooting underwater would ever be that big of a concideration, but in the example a few pages back where a BG is trying to drown you, contact firing underwater may be your only option, however I think 1 well placed 45 at point blank range should do it, or let you escape the hold.
Last edited:
MPanova
Member
How do we know what lubricant was used on either gun. There or some lubricants that still work well when wet or completely under water, and there are some that don't. The tests don't seem like apples to apples more like apples to oranges. Another thing could be changing recoil springs to work better in a situation where the slide has a little resistance. Im sure there are things you can do to a gun to make it work better under water. So you can make a quick video of 33 rounds being fired just fine for the internet commandos to drool over 
Peter Gun
Member
actually, in regards to the Mythbusters scenario, the episode i saw was testing if you could hit somebody who was under water from above.
This was quite interesting, and much more likely to be relevant (though not common)
They found the best round was a 30-06 (from a garand) but it still lost a lot of accuracy and was only able to penetrate into ballistic geletin at depths of less than 5 feet. Pistol rounds they found barely penetrated the surface with any significant velocity and .223 fragmented so close to the surface as to be useless. all rounds showed serious deviation from aim on impact with the water.
to make this relevant, if you wanted to shoot something under water, perhaps it is better to submerge the gun first. however, it seems to be almost useless either way.
I choose a spear!!!
This was quite interesting, and much more likely to be relevant (though not common)
They found the best round was a 30-06 (from a garand) but it still lost a lot of accuracy and was only able to penetrate into ballistic geletin at depths of less than 5 feet. Pistol rounds they found barely penetrated the surface with any significant velocity and .223 fragmented so close to the surface as to be useless. all rounds showed serious deviation from aim on impact with the water.
to make this relevant, if you wanted to shoot something under water, perhaps it is better to submerge the gun first. however, it seems to be almost useless either way.
I choose a spear!!!
MPanova
Member
That was a different Mythbusters show alltogether, they have done shooting into water from air, and shooting under water completely. I thought the show they were shooting into that pool the slower rounds did better and the faster rounds seem to fragment on impact and only travel a few inches into the water,
klover
Member
I would like to see someone with a
five seven try it underwater. Let us know what happened, ok?
five seven try it underwater. Let us know what happened, ok?
- Status
