Van Owen

Probably a variety of reasons, such as Russia might have started doing it first, and the Germans were just giving tit for tat, the idea that the Slavs were subhuman, and "civilized" rules of warfare didn't apply to them, or it might be that Russia simply didn't abide by relevant treaties to begin with, so Germany didn't see the need to bother, or a combination of all of those.

I found those too, including a video of the 7.62x39, but it's nothing in effect like the explosive 7.62x54. Seems to really just create a brief puff of smoke and fire, without the actual explosive effect of the stuff in the vid.

Looking on the web, I haven't been able to find any evidence for the existence of this, alas.

I was watching a vid on YouTube of some guys shooting WWII German and Soviet explosive ammo, that was supposed to be used as spotting ammunition, but at some point, it got pressed into service by snipers of both sides against personnel. I was wondering if postwar, any of this stuff was made in 7.62 NATO for the same use, presumably spotting, and if it would be as destructive against a human target as the stuff the guys in this video are shooting? Of course, I know that using that kind of thing against actual human targets is banned, but the .50 Raufoss on occasion gets to have its way with the odd jihadist... Here is the original vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXaaybiRiYY

I found myself watching this on YouTube, and was wondering, if given the issues with revolvers, namely the need for comparatively complex machining of the cylinders and indexing mechanisms, this might be a better way of going for standard pistols? I could also picture carbine versions, which would likely be superior to revolver carbines in a number of ways.

I'd debated the Chassepot/Gras, but in terms of Rate of Fire, I sort of doubted it had any advantage over say the Martini-Henry, though for some military applications, they might have been superior. What's driving firearms development in the setting isn't warfare, rather personal defense. Excellent suggestions, and I'll add to the list. In truth, because of the city-state arrangement, there will likely be a wide variety of firearms floating around, so plenty of room for many different calibers and designs. Also, many older guns will be in use, simply because not everyone can afford the most current, and have to rely on inherited or secondhand pieces.

It's more of a balance and worldbuilding issue, really. If everyone had lever action repeaters, the bad things in the setting would be as extinct as the dinosaurs by this point. With the level of technology they have, strides are being made, and they'll likely eventually reclaim the world, but that's still going to be a ways down the line... That also factored highly into the my thinking and choice of calibers I'm thinking that there are also going to be some rather large shotguns in this setting, with 6 and 8 gauge ones not uncommon, particularly where they're likely to be needed, in single and double barreled variants, though I'm not sure if both barrels could be discharged at once, without significant damage to the gun, the user, or both. Of course, the effect on the target is bound to be pretty spectacular... I think some of my confusion about how powerful these BP era guns were, might have been based on me misreading the data, not realizing in the case of the .44-40, the statistics were for it being fired from a 20" barrel, where it outperformed a modern 10mm fired from a 6" but I don't think it necessarily would have done so from a pistol barrel. Wouldn't the unjacketed lead ammo of the time flattened out like a modern hollowpoint? I think that was what made the minie ball so deadly, wasn't it, after all?

I'm pretty much looking to make new weapons, though basing their operation and statistics off of existing historical designs. I want to avoid everyone and their brother sporting lever action, repeating firearms, so I'm reserving those for the extremely wealthy, or at least sponsored by them. They'd represent the cutting edge of firearms development. My idea is that the most common designs are equivalent to the Snyder or Springfield Trapdoor, with those who can afford better having Martini-Henry equivalents. for those who need repeating firearms, but can't afford the complicated and expensive lever action arms, revolver carbines, despite having their drawbacks, are probably the way to go. There are going to be lots of very bad, inhuman things in this setting, including a lot of creatures from folklore and such, that are going to be ferociously hard to kill, though most will still go down if you put enough bullets in them. The basic idea I'm looking at is a setting like Europe, with city-states, which are linked by rail. In between these, are large areas of hinterlands, where the bad things dwell. Conditions in the city-states themselves vary. The most developed areas are industrialized, and probably not terribly far off from the cities of our own Victorian era, but the further away one gets, the the more primitive and dangerous the setting becomes, with conditions on the border, being almost medieval, with having to defend from constant raids. I chose the .44-40 as it was a common round in the wild west, and seems like it would be adequate here. Looking up data on it, and comparing the numbers, however, I was struck in that it didn't seem very far off from modern loads, which really made me wonder. I'm also thinking having the pepperbox still around, too.

Wow; been awhile since I posted here! One of my my hobbies is roleplaying online, and in preparation for one that will be set in a post-post apocalyptic setting, I've been researching Victorian era firearms, which of course include a lot of classic, old west guns and calibers such as the .44-40 and reading up on the ballistics of it, it would seem that it has statistics at least as good as most modern pistol rounds, despite being a black powder weapon, which was surprising to me, as I thought BP was distinctively inferior to smokeless powder, let alone the evolved varieties of it we have today. With this in mind, what real advantages are 140+ years of handgun and propellant research really giving me? I'm looking this only from an ammunition perspective, not a platform one. In terms of terminal effects on the target, is there really any advantage of say a 10mm Super Redhawk firing Speer Gold Dot rounds over an 1870s Smith and Wesson Model 3 chambered in .44-40?

While I'd expect some experienced golfers to possibly just pretend the person's head is a giant golf ball, I would anticipate that most of us would default to using that back part of the club, near where the head joins the handle, so therefore the club with the head that weights the most? (Not sure what this is)

I gather you'd want steel or titanium vs one of those carbon fiber jobs, as the shaft is the most likely part to fail, and have bad consequences for you, vs the intended recipient. I'm guessing you should ahead and bring your bag, or at least extras, in case spares are required, however. Probably want to remove any head covers first as well, come to think of it... Make sure you don't leave any of them behind, though.

"Well, Google "Beaten to death with a golf club" and you'll find it does periodically happen, but they never seem to explain which particular clubs are used. I'm mainly curious, given the sheer variety of them, and different swing characteristics, which is probably the best suited for the task. For example does a #2 Wood (seldom used these days, I hear) beat out a sand wedge? I'm guessing, however, upon deeper contemplation of the matter, the part of the club you want to use on a person, might not be the same as you use for the ball. Still, let's keep this within the realm of blunt trauma, as opposed to stabbing or more exotic means. (Such as having the person carry the thing during a storm.)

I feel like I've been a part of this forum, on and off, long enough to indulge in a question which is has long held a not inconsiderable bit of my natural curiosity. Namely, which golf club would you suggest for killing someone, and why? Wood, iron or wedge? Personally, I've always fancied the idea of using a wood, though I understand modern ones are made of something else, and probably lighter weight than really optimal for the task at hand, but I think you have to factor a certain style factor in, at the very least. Of course, the iron is probably the default answer for most of you, but which one in particular? Also, what about wedges? Seems they might be the middle ground, but not being a player myself, I haven't much practice in using them. I'm guessing that putters might well be the least useful of the lot, but I dunno something about the shape might come in to play somewhere? I'd imagine, ideally, you'd want to use one with a titanium handle (or the whole club, come to think of it) and a good pair of grips, because you don't want the thing to break doing something it strictly speaking, wasn't designed for, and injure yourself in the process. As I am given to understand, people have been killed by clubs breaking and the pieces becoming lodged in vital areas.

As a side note, I tried to send the Moderator a message, but apparently, that can't be done. Is there anyone else connected to the site who I might be able to contact?

You'd just sign on to the channel, whenever you happen to feel like it, and see who else is signed on at the time. With Shipbucket, we have members from around the world, and it works fine. As I said, I'd prefer our moderator or someone officially connected to the site to create this channel, however. This is the Shipbucket Discord if anyone wants to see how it works. https://discordapp.com/channels/288016775533166592/288016775533166592 You don't have to download anything to use Discord, just register a username.