1911 firing underwater???

kayakersteve

New member
Moderators, pardon me if this is previously posted (I searched, but didn't find it).

I saw this in G&A and googled it: http://www.dlsports.com/underwater_handgun_shooting.html

Pretty interesting that the glock was not as reliable as the 1911 - I am sure the custom 1911 played a role in that, but I was surprised the glock didn't do better. Anyhow, not really a practical application of this for me, but interesting.
 

Saab1911

New member
I don't think ability to shoot underwater says anything meaningful. You may
as well compare how the pistols do in high earth orbit in the vacuum of space.
 

Night Watch

New member
How can anyone call that technogarbage a test? Sorry I wasted my time reading that nonsense! Guns & Ammo, you say, no wonder. :barf:
 

kayakersteve

New member
I actually agree that is was a biased test in that the 1911's were custom tuned guns, yet the glocks were stock - not comparing apples to apples - Obviously, is intent is to sell guns. It is still very interesting, yet I would not try it with my 1911.
 

Brian Pfleuger

Moderator Emeritus
I actually agree that is was a biased test in that the 1911's were custom tuned guns, yet the glocks were stock - not comparing apples to apples - Obviously, is intent is to sell guns. It is still very interesting, yet I would not try it with my 1911.

Anyone who buys a gun based on that sort of information falls in the "Fool and his money..." category.
 

RickB

New member
Glock sells a special striker, or something, specifically to allow underwater use; apparently, Glocks have something of a reputation as a shark gun for divers. G&A magazine did an underwater test of a 1911, 20-25 years ago.
 

fastforty

New member
What's most interesting is the "Dry Land" testing that they did before going submarine. I'd sooner use a pistol that performed like the Glocks did for a paperweight then for SD (3,789,000 Glock owners chiming in in 3...2....1....). And for those guys using them for shark protection, geeze, get a stun stick.
 

Tom2

New member
Probably some kind of dumb fantasy thing. Like what if the Phantom joins forces with the Mighty Submariner and has to go to Atlantis and have a gun battle with the frog men? :p
 

Night Watch

New member
Glock sells a special striker, or something, specifically to allow underwater use; apparently, Glocks have something of a reputation as a shark gun for divers. G&A magazine did an underwater test of a 1911, 20-25 years ago.

:rolleyes: Firing a gun underwater is one of the stupidest things you can do. If you're not wearing substantial hearing AND eye protection, you stand to permanently damage both abilities, (As a few people who've tried this have already done!) and come flying out of the water screaming in agony! The underwater shock waves can, even, permanently damage your internal organs, too!

Yes, Glock offers, 'marine spring cups' specifically for shooting a 9mm G-17 in or around an, 'aquatic environment' - NOT underwater! (One of the world's truly great stupid ideas!) In order to fire a pistol, any pistol, underwater you need: a free traveling firing pin, (In a Glock this means marine spring cups) reduced power round nose ammo, and you need to make sure that the barrel is full of water before firing.

What took place in that G&A, 'test' is pure insanity! Any of those pistols might have ruptured a barrel due to the increased firing pressure of: full power ammuntion, or JHP's increased resistance to water. Furthermore if you take the time to read the, 'test', the author admits that the Glocks were already defective in some respect; and, he decided to use them, anyway, during this, 'test'.

Use a pistol for shark protection? Why? The bullets aren't going to go more than 12 to 15 feet; and, they aren't going to be hitting all that hard, either. Firing a gun underwater is a great idea only if you're suicidal, tired of hearing and seeing or really like pain; and, you can forget about sharks! ;)
 

RsqVet

New member
Um folks some of you have got to read closer or something before getting your panties in a knot.

This was NOT a guns and ammo test.

The guy that did this test is Dave Lack --- one heck of a custom gunsmith and a guy that builds stuff that works even if his name is not a household word even amongst many die hard 1911 fans... kind of like Yam or to a lesser degree vickers.

He did the test to see what would happen because guess what.... someone who really, really uses their guns might want to know or god forbid need to knnow.... he also has tested various methods for making the 1911 run better when packed full of mud, some of which could have equal application to other platforms.

The guy put up one of his guns (which he could sell for what 3K? ) As well as one he had worked on and the glock in what is a very reasonable test short of a full ballisitcs lab compleate with high speed camera.

He is not some youtube yahoo so give it a rest and move on if you don't like it.
 

Night Watch

New member
:) I understand who did the test. Let's forget about getting anyone's panties in a knot. The point is that it was published in Guns & Ammo - Who, in spite of Lack's credentials, should have known better than to waste ink and paper on such nonsense.

(One other thing: The author's professional bias is also unmistakable; and, I hardly think that's fair.) ;)
 

Swampghost

New member
Just curious. What was the range underwater? 10ft or less?

I have filmed underwater penetration by pistols and rifles. Bullets don't go very far underwater. Never saw one fired there.
 

Brian Pfleuger

Moderator Emeritus
I can tell you a .22LR goes about 4 inches underwater.
Bigger than that, YOU try and tell me.:eek:

Mythbusters did an episode where they fired from outside the water in, they found that slower bullets do better as the faster ones tend to disintegrate on impact. Seems like FMJ M1 Garande was one of the deepest, maybe like 3 feet. All the really massive stuff did nothing, including a .50BMG, the bullet absolutely exploded.
 

Sarge

New member
He did the test to see what would happen because guess what.... someone who really, really uses their guns might want to know or god forbid need to know....

+1 on that. I have been up to my neck in water, in full uniform, on two different occasions.

These are not the first underwater firing tests I have seen. Glad to see the old warhorse did well- but it usually does. Frankly I would expect a GI spec gun to run better under water, than a close tolerance gun.
 

bojack2575

Moderator
Pointless

Reading that test for me was like going by a bad car wreck you know you shouldn't look, but you just cant help it.

I can sum it up in one word for me "pointless":eek:
 

Swampghost

New member
Our test (for gator guns) proved that most bullets do exactly what they are supposed to do, expend their energy within 12-24". FMJ's may go below 3' but their lethality is questionable as was the guy with the H&H double rifle with solid brass bullets. His penetration went about 6" further than the 30-06.

We counted penetration as to when the bullets quit leaving a bubble trail. They only travel a few more inches and then fall.

Many bullets do disentigrate shortly after contact with water. If you ever need to run and hide the lake is a good place.
 

B.N.Real

New member
Very scary.

The pressure on the bullet all the way down the barrel and just outside the barrel would be really high.

I would think it would be a great way to break a handgun.
 
Top