Skip to comments.AMAZING->PHOTOS->THAT->SHOW->WHAT->IT->LOOKS->LIKE->TO->FIRE->A->GUN->UNDERWATER
Posted on 09/29/2012 4:43:29 PM PDT by smokingfrog
Ever wonder what it looks like when you fire a gun underwater? Firearm enthusiast Andrew Tuohy of VuurwapenBlog recently decided to find out. Taking his .40 Glock 22 into his swimming pool, he captured some high speed videos of himself firing a round using an ordinary Pentax Optio WG-2 waterproof compact camera (which has a 120fps movie recording mode). The photograph above is a still taken from one of the videos.
(Excerpt) Read more at petapixel.com ...
Water really knocks the crap out of the muzzle velocity.
The video shows the bullet traveling so slow you can't believe it. I think it is all in real time.
The bullet really spins as it exits the chamber — I didn’t know that before.
I know people that carry a glock while diving for sharks. Apparently it shoots fine but it only works for one shot because of the water.
There’s a ring or something you can swap out which will allow multiple shots.
I hope his head was out of the water, so his eardrums didn’t blow-out.
Mythbusters did an episode on this showing that movie scenes of shooting into the water and killing people who were submerged was just about impossible.
Looks like the pistol has a left hand twist. I don’t think that’s common.
The video as you scroll down on the website at the link was really interesting. Thanks for posting this.
Thought the fish tank video at the bottom of the link was very cool comparing a revolver with Glock.
I remember. Even with a 50 Cal sniper rifle any thing more than a foot or two underwater would likely be unharmed by the projectile.
Other than the obvious - like a computer program that hunts down and kills spammers - probably the one thing that would drastically improve my Quality of Internet Browsing would be a Firefox add-on that automatically removed the music from any video uploaded to YouTube or Facebook and etc.
SCUBA diving is a lot safer now bump.
Glock 22s have right hand polygonal twist.
Bang sticks are better. They are a 3 to 4 foot stick with a shotgun shell or .357 cal shell at the end. You punch the shark with it and it goes off. Gives you a little more distance from the shark.
You find a “MUST SEE A-10 BOMBING RUN IN IRAQ!!!!!!!!!” video and start watching it only to find some 13 year-old wanna-be-movie-producer dumbass has dubbed “Screaming Babies, Sounds of Anarchy 666!” over it, making the whole damn thing unwatchable.
Why did the title come out that way? The title at the source didn't have all
of the letters capitalized. And what's with the "->" after every word?
I believe that was a Ruger.
Just to PlSS you off I guess......sheeshhhhhh
don’t try this at home, kids.
If you fire a hot load underwater, the gun could explode in your hands. Why? Increase backpressure due to water in the barrel!
Don’t be dumb.
It’s not a Glock.
Apparently the author made the mistake of submerging his head while firing underwater. Now he yells all the time, thinking we can’t hear him because he’s deaf.
Glocks are built to handle it. Some require installing “underwater spring cups”, an official Glock product, but those just help water flow for cycling the action.
FMJ only, though. Hollow points WILL cause devestating backpressures.
Yeah, having a bullet deforming as it's going down the tube is a recipe for disaster.
I would not use a glock. I have seen too many people shoot themselves with “trigger safety” and “grip safety” guns
IIRC, the Mythbusters episode showed that high velocity rifle bullets fragmented on contact with the water, but lower velocity shotgun slugs and pistol bullets retained lethality a few feet down.
Secondhand, 2. (i.e. I know 2 people who this has happened to, but I was not there at the time). One shot himself trying to pull his weapon in a altercation by a mugger while with his wife in a parking lot. Fortunately, when the weapon went off, the bad guy fled...He ended up almost dying.
Look on youtube for gun “Experts” like instructors lecturing with their guns shooting themselves in the foot, leg, etc. It happens!
The answer is "zero".
Pretty much what I expected.
Thank you for your prompt and honest reply.
What I don’t like about the “anti safety” crowd is they always think they are right, and the fact that someone has a safety on their gun seems to bother them.
The typically are not hunters either. I grew up with guns, and have hunted and a safety never slowed me down on any reaction shot. If it does, you have not practiced until it becomes automatic during the draw.
And, BTW, your Handle is correct. Your attitude is showing
Good answers but I’ve got the browsing all down. FireFox with Flashblock works great for what you’re thinking.
I was taking a shot at people who know nothing about the power of sound - or sound design - dubbing music into Flash videos.
The music in the video at the bottom of the article isn’t normalized with the speech: you have to turn the volume up to hear the talking and then turn it down when they drop in the music track. It’s annoying.
I remember that one.
What was amazing was the 50 cal. Sniper Rifle had no depth penetration of the water at all. The round just disintegrated into hundreds of pieces and dropped to the bottom when it hit the water. They said it was due to the energy of the round striking the water which destroyed the bullet.
They found the lower the velocity of the round striking the water the better it did traveling after entering the water.
Mine has never shot me!
What I don't like about your claim to have "seen too many" folks shoot themselves with anything is that it is false. As such, it detracts from whatever point you're trying to make.
The rest of your post, including the personal attack, has no value.
Argue with facts.
Negligent discharge is 100% of time user induced. I don't know, but my guess is that there is a negligent discharge for every gun manufacture.
You can sling "evil glock" insults all day long, and post links of glocks "shooting" people, but it all boils down to operator error / complacentness, not the manufacture of the firearm.
As to the original post, cool stuff, nice to know my glock will shoot underwater, looks as if unless I am less then a foot away from my target it is pointless.
For concealed carry, you can’t control your draw, like you can in a outside holster.
A glock was made for police officers/ military with outside carry.
It works great as such. For concealed, if you are stupid enough to carry a gun with no effective safety, or one what may discharge when dropped, then you won’t be passing many of your genes on.
You can keep your stupid “glock can shoot underwater” because that’s about as useful as the other BS marketing glock does. The funniest one was the “advanced polymer gun” crap. Frankly i don’t care if the non-shooting parts are wooden furniture, or polymer, or metal. If metal, the only problem is weight. As for concealed carry, I try to stay < 20 ounces loaded. I carry frequently. 9mm, and a very accurate make. I also carry a spare mag, and a one had assist open knife.
Glock is not evil — just the wrong tool for concealed carry. This is one reason more and more compact subautos are coming with (1) manual safety and (2) drop safe protection...
Google pocket auto comparision, and there is a very good comparision of every major carry pistol (but not the surplus stuff like markov)
(1)My finger. Like I said before don't touch the trigger it will not go bang.
I carry concealed most of the time, as does my wife. Both of us have them holstered. (neither of us are stupid)
I don't give a rats ass if it shoots underwater. Frankly the only reason I have a Glock is being retired Military I got a really good deal on it.
I practice on my range a draw from carry. I can draw (and chamber if needed) quite effectively every time.
I would not recommend one for a novice shooter, but then again I would not advise a new shooter to carry concealed either.
Too say all negligent discharges are from Glocks, is false. To say all concealed Glock owners are stupid is also false.