Handgun Urban Legends/Myths/Rumors
- Thread starter ryan3465
- Start date
Re: Point Blank Range.
One old traditional definition.
The maximum distance from the gun to the target in which no hold-over need be made to compensate for trajectory taking into account the parabolic arc inscribed by the trajectory at various distances. Given an arbitrary linear distance above and below the line of sight that is deemed acceptable (3" for the sake of illustration), the distance that which the bullet will neither go above or below that arbitrary distance without requiring hold-over or hold-under, at a specific range. If a rifle and load can shoot from zero yards to 250 yards without sight correction (hold-over), the Point Blank Range is said to be "250 yards."
In other words, if a deer is 250 yards or less, shoot right at him.
One old traditional definition.
The maximum distance from the gun to the target in which no hold-over need be made to compensate for trajectory taking into account the parabolic arc inscribed by the trajectory at various distances. Given an arbitrary linear distance above and below the line of sight that is deemed acceptable (3" for the sake of illustration), the distance that which the bullet will neither go above or below that arbitrary distance without requiring hold-over or hold-under, at a specific range. If a rifle and load can shoot from zero yards to 250 yards without sight correction (hold-over), the Point Blank Range is said to be "250 yards."
In other words, if a deer is 250 yards or less, shoot right at him.
Last edited:
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
The modern usage of Maximum Point Blank Range, abbreviated MPBR, can be seen on any of the many online ballistics calculators. JBM Ballistics is a good one. You must enter the maximum desired height above line of sight, which is defined by "target radius". If you enter a target radius of 2", the calculator will show you what distance to sight in 2" high and will tell you the distance at which you will be 2" low, defining that distance as "MPBR".
Whatever else it might mean in another context, I've never seen any other usage in relation to small arms in the civilian world.
Whatever else it might mean in another context, I've never seen any other usage in relation to small arms in the civilian world.
Theohazard
New member
It's not rising on its own; it's only rising because the rifle is sighted in at a certain distance and the barrel is aimed slightly upwards.SgtLumpy said:
Sorry if I misunderstood you and that's what you meant all along, but I see this misconception a lot online. I think it's due to the fact that most rifle ballistics charts show the trajectory of the rounds when the rifle is sighted in at a few hundred yards, so the bullet is rising on the chart for the first few hundred yards. But this is only possible if the barrel is aimed upwards in relation to the sight line; if the barrel were horizontal the bullet would never rise at all. But most people don't make a chart showing the trajectory if the barrel is horizontal because most people don't zero their rifle like that.
In the same vein, another myth is that of the "rainbow trajectory" usually used in reference to older rifles in which the bullet is supposed to follow a very high arc. That may, in a sense, be true in comparison with more modern rounds, but it is mainly due to the way trajectory is shown in the various books and magazines. With space limitations in publications, where 1000 yards is squeezed into an 8" wide page, the arc seems very high.
But in a drawing to scale on the same paper, the maximum height of even a bullet fired from the .45-70 appears quite small, and that of a more powerful cartridge like the .30-'06 is close to invisible.
Jim
But in a drawing to scale on the same paper, the maximum height of even a bullet fired from the .45-70 appears quite small, and that of a more powerful cartridge like the .30-'06 is close to invisible.
Jim
Thank you EVERYONE for your valuable posts and discussions in this thread. I have learned so much and I am truly thankful. I got so many suggestions that I had to pick just a few for the show, but I have written down most all of them and will probably do a "Firearms Fallacies Part II" sometime in the future.
Thank you all so much for the time taken responding & education!!
The Firearms Fallacies episode that I included some of these myths/rumors you all have supplied can be listened to on iTunes or at www.handgunradio.com/005
Thank you!!!!!
Ryan
Ryan
Thank you all so much for the time taken responding & education!!
The Firearms Fallacies episode that I included some of these myths/rumors you all have supplied can be listened to on iTunes or at www.handgunradio.com/005
Thank you!!!!!
Ryan
Ryan
Stevie-Ray
New member
I always thought that was simply a knock against the heavies, such as the .45-70, from the flat shooter afficionados, such as 7mm mag owners. Comparing trajectories to those two, the .45-70 would look like a rainbow.
Bob Wright
New member
Well, I just heard a new one recently:
I was having lunch with the Senior Saints of my church, of which I'm a member. One of the men at my table ventured this one:
If someone shoots a Luger close by you, you can prevent further shots by grabbing the toggle link while it is up and holding it in the open position. This will prevent the bolt's closing and chambering another round.
Yeah. Right!
Bob Wright
I was having lunch with the Senior Saints of my church, of which I'm a member. One of the men at my table ventured this one:
If someone shoots a Luger close by you, you can prevent further shots by grabbing the toggle link while it is up and holding it in the open position. This will prevent the bolt's closing and chambering another round.
Yeah. Right!
Bob Wright
allaroundhunter
New member
Bob,
While technically true, I don't see it being done. I do wish him luck should he ever try, however
While technically true, I don't see it being done. I do wish him luck should he ever try, however
Bob's Luger post reminded me of something I think my g-pa (wwII vet) told me about the 1911....
If you find yourself faced against a 1911 and stick a finger in the barrel, it can't fire.
He said as soon as you stuck your finger in, the barrel would move back just enough not to fire.
Maybe?
If you find yourself faced against a 1911 and stick a finger in the barrel, it can't fire.
He said as soon as you stuck your finger in, the barrel would move back just enough not to fire.
Maybe?
Bob Wright
New member
I think I have a neighbor who may have tried that ~ he's missing the first two joints of his index finger.
Bob Wright
Theohazard
New member
That will work on most semi-autos; if you push on the slide or barrel on a locked-breech semi-auto you'll push it out of battery and it won't fire. But I'm not sure why anyone would put their finger in the barrel to do that, all you need to do is use your open palm against the muzzle to accomplish the same thing.mrray13 said:
That said, it's not really a practical self-defense technique in most situations: All the person with the gun has to do is pull it back towards him so it goes back into battery and it's ready to fire again.
Stevie-Ray
New member
Doubtful on a decent lockup. You'd have to be pushing your finger pretty hard. I have heard to push on the front with your entire palm to engage the slide-out-of-battery safety, and that this has "saved a lot of cops lives." I personally don't know of any cops that have saved their own bacon by doing this, but I suppose it's possible while wrestling for control of a 1911.
Luger issues; Beretta 92F takedown....
The Luger posts reminds me of the myth that you can pull the slide of a 92/96 pistol off in a confrontation. It's a scene in a few action films & Jackie Chan comedies.
The LAPD officers issued early model 92F pistols did complain about the slides but the method is highly complex & not something a street thug or gang member could pull off quickly.
There may be a few clips of the Beretta slide method online.
The Luger posts reminds me of the myth that you can pull the slide of a 92/96 pistol off in a confrontation. It's a scene in a few action films & Jackie Chan comedies.
The LAPD officers issued early model 92F pistols did complain about the slides but the method is highly complex & not something a street thug or gang member could pull off quickly.
There may be a few clips of the Beretta slide method online.
I don't feel that "highly complex" is even remotely accurate. If you are facing the pistol, your right hand goes over the slide, your thumb presses the spring-loaded catch, your index finger sweeps the lever 45 degrees.
I've never tried it with a magazine inserted (for obvious reasons) and I would imagine the mag feed lips might wish to interfere with the slide removal, but not enough to stop the force of it being pulled.
However, the manner in which Jet Li does it (in Lethal Weapon 4) certainly makes it look routine... but then, Jet Li can make a lot of things look routine.
It would be safe to say that it's a myth that it's a "weakness" in the design. Would seem fairly easy to shoot someone who attempted that tactic on you... but to describe that it is some cryptic process is far from reality. It's a simple push, swipe and pull.
I've never tried it with a magazine inserted (for obvious reasons) and I would imagine the mag feed lips might wish to interfere with the slide removal, but not enough to stop the force of it being pulled.
However, the manner in which Jet Li does it (in Lethal Weapon 4) certainly makes it look routine... but then, Jet Li can make a lot of things look routine.
It would be safe to say that it's a myth that it's a "weakness" in the design. Would seem fairly easy to shoot someone who attempted that tactic on you... but to describe that it is some cryptic process is far from reality. It's a simple push, swipe and pull.
LEO's are taught two techniques for close defense. With an autoloader, grab the slide; the shooter may get one shot off but the next won't feed. With a revolver, grab the cylinder; if the gun is cocked the shooter may get one shot, but the gun can't be cocked or fired double action.
Jim
Jim
I might suggest that is a good idea if faced with a criminal population that only had Nagant revolvers.
Every other design will certainly spit high temp gas from the cylinder-to-barrel gap, should it already be cocked. That police flesh will be toasted.
For a wheel-gun that is not cocked, a tight grab on the cylinder will be a bang-stopper. Certainly a move of desperation however, since one must not let go!.
Bart Noir
Technically, you are correct of course. But if you are within reaching distance of a revolver and the guy holding it is willing to kill you, I'm going to also jump in the camp of at least attempting to grab that revolver no matter how much damage the flash gap may impart. It's not like you'll otherwise dodge his shot at the range of two feet or use your extremely good looks & calm voice to convince him not to shoot you.
The damage from a flash gap will mess up your hand from mild to wild, but that damage is going to pale in comparison to a gutshot from a handgun at just beyond muzzle length.
The damage from a flash gap will mess up your hand from mild to wild, but that damage is going to pale in comparison to a gutshot from a handgun at just beyond muzzle length.