When showing off your new Elephant rifle goes wrong

[Backyardsniper]

May have to put your purse down for some of my posts.

I will agree that it is sometimes difficult to convey the tone you intend in these posts. The above statement for instance is a pretty commonly used term here at home. For instance if you hit a short drive off the tee box, there is a jar you can't get open, a nut that you can't break loose, then one of your friends who is present may use the, "well you may have to put your purse down" line on you. I can see where the context does not exactly translate to banter over text though. I will own that one.

 

[Arnoldr45]

I'm pretty sure I have a great deal of "safe gun handling experience" I get what you are saying, but some of us grew up with the ability to drink a few beers and still have a little sense about us. I mean do you think we had kids out there running figure 8's around the target while we were shooting?

I’ve been around firearms all of my life, one thing I’ve noticed throughout all if my years of having aquaintances, friends or just hearing about what happened around town; it’s always the idiots who

“know what they’re doing”

Who

“Are experienced and safe”

that kill their buddies, their brother, that blow their cylinder up, almost put a bullet through a friends head, or double an elephant rifle while drinking.

I’m sure no one is trying to pick on you, but please listen to wisdom. You come off as a relatively young fella, perhaps immature in a lot if your replies in this thread. When I was young I knew it all, nowadays I realize how little I know.
You dont want to have to deal with killing a kid, blowing your foot off, etc, so please take safety criticism to heart. These rules exist for a reason, because somewhere out there is someone who has been killed by someone “who was safe” while drinking.

 

[stk]

Not sure how drinking 12-15 beers and playing around with a double rifle (and having an ND because you were drunk) is better than drinking and driving. You knew you were too drunk to drive…but not too drunk to play with guns?

 

[ActionBob]

Nope, you're wrong on that one bud. Average age of attendance was probably 45-55. There was a couple of younger kids but mostly just old dudes quietly sipping beer and talking trash about each other's lack of ability to hit clays

It really is difficult to always interpret the meanings in typed text. There are studies showing that face to face communication is only 7% words, 38% vocal (tone of voice), and 55% non verbal (body language).

Must be the case here as I took that to mean a bunch of 45 to 55 year olds acting like pack of 20 year old smart-ass boys.

Page 12 will be started soon

 

[Backyardsniper]

It really is difficult to always interpret the meanings in typed text. There are studies showing that face to face communication is only 7% words, 38% vocal (tone of voice), and 55% non verbal (body language).

Must be the case here as I took that to mean a bunch of 45 to 55 year olds acting like pack of 20 year old smart-ass boys.

Page 12 will be started soon

That, in this case, is a fairly accurate interpretation. Ha ha

 

[Frederik]

By the tim we hit page 14, Kentucky would be called the Dark Continent.

As a sidenote above was sarcastic!

 

[ActionBob]

I'm gonna say this is a bit different than that. Drinking and driving is one thing. This is a bit of another. Like I said, still not the best format probably but it isn't like tearing down the street at 100 mph when you're having to use one eye to hold it on the road

You are just not "getting it". Ok so those bullets are not doing 100 MPH.... Just what do you have them clocking at? You know that second one for sure went wild. What is within a mile of that area? What could it have hit at a speed well over 100 mph? Even if that is all back woods, how can you be sure someone wasn't walking around out there? What if some Good Old Kentuckian loner goes missing and is found this deer season with a 470 bullet in him?

Ok granted, that's a bit far fetched... I truly hope that is not possible.

But two important points here; 1. Even after all this you are still insisting it is just a funny incident not to be taken seriously, and certainly way different than driving drunk. 2. This thread is going to hit 12 pages. And probably get resurrected from time to time over the years so your "funny incident" will live in infamy.

 

[Backyardsniper]

This will be the KING of necroposted threads. Ha ha.

 

[Backyardsniper]

People will drag this thing up 10 years from now

 

[Frederik]

People will drag this thing up 10 years from now

As long as you dont have the same incident again all good and we all learn from it.

 

[freefall]

Elmer Keith said "If a shot of whiskey helps calm your nerves and allows you to shoot better in a match, have one. If a second one helps more, I don't see the harm. If it takes more than two, you should probably find another hobby."

 

[TOBY458]

Every now and then I fall to my knees and thank a merciful God and all the Saints that I no longer have to work with engineers.

I still do. And pray for the day that I don't.

 

[Scott CWO]

Okay, okay we are beating a dead horse here.

I don’t agree at all with mixing firearms with alcohol and in our camps, drinking alcohol is never allowed until the hunting is over for the day. Period. That said, it doesn’t seem this is getting anywhere because @Backyardsniper hasn’t fully said he won’t do it again and it seems to be commonplace with some of his peers. Unfortunately, it will probably take an accident to get them to stop.

 

[fourfive8]

Nope, you're wrong on that one bud. Average age of attendance was probably 45-55. There was a couple of younger kids but mostly just old dudes quietly sipping beer and talking trash about each other's lack of ability to hit clays

OK. First, I'm not your bud. So you're saying it was 45-55 year olds, sitting around sipping "a bunch of beers", with younger kids shooting BB guns and 22s, when one after 12+ Coors, acting like a giggling 20 something, drags out his brand new, sure enough Elliefant gun to show off...... Now that's better.

 

[Fixfire]

This would result in immediately being expelled from the 3 gun clubs I belong. Zero tolerance policy regarding guns and alcohol. So no, it’s never cool or fun.

 

[Nickcusato]

What kinda 470 double did you pick up? I've never owned one but the CZ in 375 you have up is a great weapon. I bought one new 12 or 15 years ago and its been great on Buffalo. We'll get it to 12 pages.

 

[Backyardsniper]

What kinda 470 double did you pick up? I've never owned one but the CZ in 375 you have up is a great weapon. I bought one new 12 or 15 years ago and its been great on Buffalo. We'll get it to 12 pages.

its a Krieghoff. Pretty good shooting rifle too, now that I'm getting a little more used to it.

 

[Vinootz]

I bet you're a lot of fun at a party

We’ll I know I make people laugh at parties. They seem to be receptive to that. And the ladies are always high fiving, hugging and kissing me (did I forget posing too). None of the aforementioned done from showing off mind you.

 

[Nickcusato]

its a Krieghoff. Pretty good shooting rifle too, now that I'm getting a little more used to it.View attachment 485046

Nice. I've never owned one but Krieghoff seems to make one of the better doubles. I went by their booth at DSC in January 22 and asked if I could handle one. " Of course" guy says. I pick it up ask "How much is this one? It looks great." "$125,000". I've never put something down so fast and so careful in my life. Hope you get that CZ sold. I cant believe its still up. I like the CZ 550 in both 416 & 375. Great DG weapon.

 

[Alistair]

Eish guys - the physics are straightforward albeit not intuitive!

I'll try again...
The Law of conservation of momentum states that m1v1 = -m2v2
I.e. (mass of object 1 * vel of object 1) is equal to and opposite (hence the negative) the (mass of object 2 * vel of object 2)

Let's call object 1 the bullet and powder mass and object 2 the gun. We want to solve for the velocity of object 2 (the gun)
Therefore v2 = -(m1/m2)*v1
v2 is the recoil velocity, or the 'free' velocity of the gun.
Still with me?

V2 = -(39.88g/5000g) * 2000 ft/s
(I have assumed a 500gr bullet and 100gr of powder which equates to 38.88g. Gun weighs 5000g. I have made a big simplification on the velocity of the powder and bullet combo because technically the bullet may be going at 2000ft/s but the powder charge is going at something like 5000ft/s. So the value of m1v1 is actually higher and the recoil velocity would be higher than my simplified answer. But the underlying principle stands - the key factor here is that the mass of the bullet& powder doubles with a double discharge)

Thus V2 = -15.55 ft/s for the single discharge
Hope we're all agreed so far.

If we double discharge, the formula looks like this:
v2 = -((2*39.88)/5000) * 2000 = -31.9 ft/s
Note the "2" in bold above - this is because we have twice the mass of bullet and powder.
We see how the recoil velocity has doubled.
Hope I haven't lost the die hards still following

Now we need to calculate the recoil energy:
I think we're all agreed that the formula for calculating kinetic energy is:
KE = 1/2 mass * velocity^2
Or: recoil energy of gun = 0.5 * mass of gun * recoil velocity * recoil velocity

I hope I can cut to the chase and point out that a doubling (i.e. a factor of 2) of the recoil velocity, once squared, becomes a quadrupling (factor of 4) of the kinetic energy value.

Not intuitive indeed.

In fact, the energy doubles, but the recoil velocity increases by a factor of sqrt2 (1.4ish).

E=1/2mv^2.

E forwards = E backwards (conservation of energy).

1 bullet energy forwards (simplified figures for demonstration, bullet mass = 1, velocity = 2.).

E = (0.5)(1)((2)^2)) = 2

2 bullets energy forwards.

E = (0.5)(2)((2)^2)) = 4

This makes logical sense. You burnt twice as much powder and sent twice the projectile weight downrange at the same velocity.

Recoil velocity. Rifle mass = 10 for ease of calculation. E values bolded.

Rearranging the energy equation for v.

E=1/2mv^2
2E = mv^2
2E/m = v^2
Sqrt(2E/m) = v

1 bullet.

sqrt(2(2)/(10)) = v. v = 0.632

2 bullets

sqrt(2(4)/(10)) = v. v = 0.894

QED. That's what the calculator is doing also.

Unless you can magically create energy from nothing, that has to be the case. There's no way to double the recoil velocity without quadrupling the energy and that simply didn't happen. How can it? You've only burnt twice as much powder and chucked two bullets down range at the same velocity as you previously chucked one. 2x energy, not 4x.