1,000 yard target with the 929

[MNruss]

I call BS on "holding it level"

It doesn't look level to me.
It DOESN'T need that much elevation.
Can you identify visually less than 8% elevation?
Remember, it's 238 feet over 1,000 yards.
That's a slope of 0.0793
or 7.93 %
or 4.536 degrees.

My money's on Jerry, too.

Regards
Russ

 

[Voyager28]

I just wish I could see the target at 1000 yards.

Bob

 

[rwsmith]

Yes and.....

There are people out there who dont believe Apollo 11 landed on the Moon...

The truth is Apollo 11 hit the Moon as sure as Jerry hit that balloon

Yes and when it hit the moon the craft disintegrated and killed everyone aboard. The government has spent billions of dollars covering this up, but everybody knows it won't be long until somebody leaks the secret on their deathbed.. The Truth is Out There.

 

[rwsmith]

Long shots....

Once upon a time I read of how cavalry soldiers fired their SAA Colt .45's at distances well beyond normal handgun range, often with good effect. Of course everyone is aware of Elmer Keith and his experience w/ various handgun calibers. I've read his comments regarding available guns and loads of the pre-WWII era. With preparation and practice it was amazing what one could accomplish, especially considering that for the most part the loads were common factory loads using plain lead bullets.

John Segwick, Union General in the Civil War, was killed at long range by sharpshooters. When his officers seemed worried he told them, "Never mind, they couldn't hit an elephant at that range." A few minutes later he got a bullet under his eye. He was the highest ranking Union casualty.

I sure that when that shot was made, people that heard the story said it was BS.

 

[Fackler Rebel]

Big difference

John Segwick, Union General in the Civil War, was killed at long range by sharpshooters. When his officers seemed worried he told them, "Never mind, they couldn't hit an elephant at that range." A few minutes later he got a bullet under his eye. He was the highest ranking Union casualty.

I sure that when that shot was made, people that heard the story said it was BS.

Big difference between that 58 caliber mini ball out of that long Springfield rifle and that 9mm round.

Reb

 

[sac-gunslinger]

and you clearly see from the video that he is holding the gun parallel to the ground.

We do not have a good view of the target in the view of him holding the gun, we cannot infer that he is not holding over the target by what we see in the video.

 

[sac-gunslinger]

Yes and when it hit the moon the craft disintegrated and killed everyone aboard. The government has spent billions of dollars covering this up, but everybody knows it won't be long until somebody leaks the secret on their deathbed.. The Truth is Out There.

Stanley Kubrick apparently admiited that he was paid by NASA to create some video in the studio of some on-moon action but claimed that most of the film came from the astronauts themselves.

Our gummint wouldn't make up lies, would it?

 

[sac-gunslinger]

BTW, just checked Snopes. Nothing on Snopes about this shot so that means it must be true.

 

[PA Guns & Ammo]

Stanley Kubrick apparently admiited that he was paid by NASA to create some video in the studio of some on-moon action but claimed that most of the film came from the astronauts themselves.

Our gummint wouldn't make up lies, would it?

And the Egyptian pyramids were built by aliens. Until anyone can legitimately disprove what he did, then you have zero proof he did not do it.

James

 

[Whitens Moss]

Hate to be the skunk at the garden party but I bet he took hundreds of shots before making that video.

 

[riverrat38]

Hate to be the skunk at the garden party but I bet he took hundreds of shots before making that video.

Hundreds of thousands of shots.

Best,
Rick

 

[Badquaker]

Hate to be the skunk at the garden party but I bet he took hundreds of shots before making that video.

agreed, but that is what he does for a living

Jerry is not human when it comes to shooting.

 

[Bob1943]

A 79.6 yd rise over 1000 yds is only a 4.5-degree angle to the horizontal. That small an angle would be very hard to visually see (eyeball) from that video.

I agree with others, there is no way that Jerry would make this up. I am sure he took a lot of practice shots before turning on the camera.

 

[3rdgeargrndrr]

Was that a youtube vid or advertisment for a 969?
And to those who say it cant be done. Jerry has killed those doubts many times in the past. I can get a 1000 yd shot downhill target if i aimed at the moon.

 

[GF]

But can he do it ... quick draw from the hip?

GF

 

[mc5aw]

It is absurd to think JM would risk his reputation by pulling a ruse.

He makes unbelievable shots, just like Bob Munden.

 

[riverrat38]

Tom Selleck hit a bucket at 900 yds, off hand, with a Sharps Buffalo Rifle in the movie "Quigley Down Under". He was using iron sights, tall ones! The velocity was not much more than JM's revolver. About 1200 FPS.

Best,
Rick

 

[Voyager28]

Well, personally, I don't care if he took 1000 practice shots and shot 10 miles of video tape before he actually hit the target. Hitting anything at 1000 yards with a 9mm is pretty amazing. Wind, spin drift, earth rotation, velocity all come into play. I used a stop watch to time the bullet flight time as close as I could and came up with 3.17 seconds, bang to impact.

Bob

 

[gm272gs]

Tom Selleck hit a bucket at 900 yds, off hand, with a Sharps Buffalo Rifle in the movie "Quigley Down Under". He was using iron sights, tall ones! The velocity was not much more than JM's revolver. About 1200 FPS.

I'm going to take a SWAG and say you're not serious, what with movies, squibs, and editing.

 

[brucev]

Big difference between that 58 caliber mini ball out of that long Springfield rifle and that 9mm round.

Reb

True. Common .58 cal. rifle bullets at common velocity of the era were not in the hands of common infantry soldiers going to be effective for aimed fire at extended distances, unless those bullets hit a target. In that case, the bullet will likely to be very effective at punching a hole in a man. At very extreme range it would not be effective. One account I read of long range rifle/machine gun fire during WWI related the experience of a British Lieutenant who described feeling a sting on his hand as he stood exposed with other officers well behind the trenches. The sting came from a FMJ round that hit his hand. It was fired from such an extended range that the FMJ did not penetrate his skin. During WWI both sides used machine guns to fire at very extended ranges well beyond any practical direct aiming. I have a Springfield 1903 manual (reprint from Dixie Gun Works) that gives firing tables so that the rifle w/ standard the standard rifle round (.30 model of 1906) could fire at targets well beyond a mile.

Another thought. The Whitworth rifle was commonly used by Confederate forces when it could be obtained. It used a particular fitted bullet. Scopes were available and used, primitive by today's standards but certainly an advance over the common iron sights normally available. With such rifles good marksmen could be extremely effective on field targets even over great distances. Given that it was a smaller bore than the normal infantry rifle, it would have had a less looping trajectory, not flat like modern rifle calibers, but certainly more easy to use in field conditions.