Silencers: Fact and Fiction.

[SFGOON]

Yeah, but not very well, and that too is a one-shotter.

[Mjelva]

Would jamming the muzzle into someone's fat rolls have the same effect?

[CannibalCrowley]

ive seen in some movies a guy put a pillow around the gun. How about that?

I always thought that was so you wouldn't get yourself all messy.

The movie version of silencers is BS; but there are some good ones out there. You still can't silence the action though.

The only silenced weapon I've personally used was a .22 rifle with a professionally made suppressor. It was pretty quiet and there wasn't any sound from the action because it was bolt action.

[SFGOON]

Would jamming the muzzle into someone's fat rolls have the same effect?

Yup! Body cavities make grea silencers for automatics and rifles. Not so for revolvers.

What a morbid question. Who sicker? You for asking or me for knowing?

[BackFistMonkey]

Yup! Body cavities make grea silencers for automatics and rifles. Not so for revolvers.

What a morbid question. Who sicker? You for asking or me for knowing?

wait wait wait ... so you say fat people muffle rifle rounds and guns with slides but not so with revolvers ? Why and why not ?

What if they are already dead and you're shooting at another person through the body with the gun in partialy , mostly , or all the way in the body ... like a gut wound ? Would it supress the sound well ? Would it slow the bullet too much ? Would that kind of gore affect the action of an automatic less than a revolver ?

[Tom Kagan]

What a morbid question. Who sicker? You for asking or me for knowing?

No contest: You for knowing. :smile:

[SFGOON]

wait wait wait ... so you say fat people muffle rifle rounds and guns with slides but not so with revolvers ? Why and why not ?

What if they are already dead and you're shooting at another person through the body with the gun in partialy , mostly , or all the way in the body ... like a gut wound ? Would it supress the sound well ? Would it slow the bullet too much ? Would that kind of gore affect the action of an automatic less than a revolver ?

Most of the gasses discharged from a revolver are expelled sideways, from the gap between the chamber and the barrell. With automatics, almost all the gasses are discharged from the barrell, and with bolt action rifles, all of it is.

Your second question is a tad assinine - for that answer go to www.necrophile.com and they can get you squared away.

[psychalogy]

wait wait wait ... so you say fat people muffle rifle rounds and guns with slides but not so with revolvers ? Why and why not ?

What if they are already dead and you're shooting at another person through the body with the gun in partialy , mostly , or all the way in the body ... like a gut wound ? Would it supress the sound well ? Would it slow the bullet too much ? Would that kind of gore affect the action of an automatic less than a revolver ?

Revolvers are for all intents and purposes impossible to effectively suppress. This is due to gas leakage between the forward edge of the cylinder and the rear of the barrel. As it's escaping expanding gas that gives you the 'bang' you're trying to suppress simply fitting a sound moderator the the end of the barrel doesn't solve your problem. You'll still get quite a bit of noise due to the gas escaping from between the cylinder and barrel. So unless you're wrist deep in whomever it is you're trying to use as a makeshift suppressor you're going to be out of luck on this one.

There is one exception to this that I can bring to mind though, a Russian Nagant revolver who's exact model escapes me at the moment. It had a cylinder that actually moved forward to engage with the rear of the barrel to form a propper gas seal and could thus be effectively suppressed.

Automatics, or anything with a continuous chamber and barrel, don't have this problem. For all intents and purposes the only way for the gas to escape is out the end of the barrel so sticking something there which slows the gas down will quieten the sound it makes.

All of the above is of course completely ignoring any sound produced by the bullet travelling faster than the sound barrier. This has little to do with revolvers vs automatics though. I would imagine however that the 'fat guy silencer' would be rather effective at ensuring most pistol rounds exit at less than ~1250 ft/s, even if it does do horrible things to your accuracy.



Ahh SFGOON beat me to it I see, that'll learn me for spending too much time editing
;-)

[Mjelva]

If gas escapes between the chamber and barrel on a revolver, wouldn't that mean a bullet from a revolver would have a lower velocity than a bullet from a pistol, at least presuming identical loads?

[psychalogy]

If gas escapes between the chamber and barrel on a revolver, wouldn't that mean a bullet from a revolver would have a lower velocity than a bullet from a pistol, at least presuming identical loads?

Yep, that's precisely what it means. Nice pick up.

The difference in muzzle velocity isn't huge, as the majority of the propellant gas does indeed exit via the barrel, but there is a difference. If you really want to get down to it and start splitting hairs then a bolt action (or any single shot weapon with a solidly locked breach, i.e. falling-block, etc) weapon will have a slightly higher muzzle velocity than most semi or fully automatic firearms too, as some of the energy produced by firing the round is bled off in order to cycle the action. Again the difference is getting close to bugger all but you can measure it.

Oh, and after a quick google search, the Russian revolver which can be suppressed that I mentioned in my last post is the Nagant M1895.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagant_M1895 if anyone's interested.