"But is it enough of a difference to make a difference.........you be the judge."
@termitreter6545
3 жыл бұрын
Its like an idiot test.
@Gottaculat
3 жыл бұрын
Paul Harrell: "Hey, that's my line." XD
@L3THALXFOX
3 жыл бұрын
Ok Paul harrel
@williamjeffery9653
4 жыл бұрын
I feel like this is one of those myths that is inspired by videogame design decisions rather then realistic physics. In games that feature firearms, guns that fire slower or are limited to manual actions often have a high "damage per shot" to balance them out with fully automatic weapons. This is just another example of sacrificing realism for gameplay mechanics, and shouldn't be taken any more seriously then characters being able to heal themselves from grievous injuries instantly with a few bandages, or have a melee weapon like a knife somehow be more lethal then a bullet.
@leonpeters-malone3054
4 жыл бұрын
As an actual game dev with his own studio, yeap. I think you're onto something here. Reality and video games rarely cross over.
@kazoolordhd6591
4 жыл бұрын
@@leonpeters-malone3054 squad, verdun, rising storm and red orchestra both 1 and 2. In all those games you basically die from one shot for everything except pistols at anything but close up and center mads
@kazoolordhd6591
4 жыл бұрын
My favourite shooters are like that. Machineguns shooting 7.62 and your bolt action rifle does as well. Its fun
@leonpeters-malone3054
4 жыл бұрын
@@kazoolordhd6591 I've seen/read/heard enough stories to know that bullets and terminal ballistics is a funny thing. Don't get me wrong, I like my tactical shooters, the ones which are more overtly realistic, lethal. Doesn't mean it's right for every game and doesn't mean everyone wants it.
@mandowarrior123
4 жыл бұрын
You are severely underestimating melee weapons. Stopping power accuracy and lethality compared to most firearms is quite extreme. Bayonets obliterate organs, swords lop off limbs. I get your point though, ALL hits should be much more lethal. A lopped off limb having more stopping power than a vaporised muscle is rather an academic question.
@jmm6990
4 жыл бұрын
Coincidence, I also lived in the Netherlands, loved the country and it's people but hated the gun laws there, now I moved to Switzerland and love the country, it's people and it's gun laws!!! I do agree with your findings, shooting my semi AR10 6.5 creedmoor makes no noticeable difference with the gas system on or off.
@dragonstormdipro1013
4 жыл бұрын
Next, does beard work as good cheekrest and affects accuracy by a significant margin
@kindermord
4 жыл бұрын
Seconded.
@brendandor
4 жыл бұрын
Does beard make uncomfortable metal stocks more comfortable
@zedoktor979
4 жыл бұрын
It does when your stock pulls your beard hairs
@4d4m22
4 жыл бұрын
The worst is 5-day stubble on open grain wooden stock. Ouch!
@nathanielkidd2840
3 жыл бұрын
@@zedoktor979 also, it’s not as “sticky” as a smooth cheek, so the cheek weld is slippy, and you have to be aware of it. You get to where you don’t notice, though.
@jenkinsonian
4 жыл бұрын
Does operating a semi-auto take energy out of the system? Theoretically Yes. Does this make a difference in practice? Not really unless everything else is perfect.
@potus2582
3 жыл бұрын
The bullet exits the barrel before the system is operated if you film it in slow motion for Some Guns don't know about all
@Max-eg4mn
3 жыл бұрын
@@potus2582 Well, no, the energy consumed as work cycling the action is energy that won't contribute to the work of propelling the projectile, basic thermodynamics, simple as that. There will be a loss in any self loading system, no question about it, as it would be physically impossible for there not to be; the only real question is wheter the loss is significant enough to be noticeable, or even measureable, for that matter.
@Gajdzik
4 жыл бұрын
A remark from someone who is not a firearms expert, but knows a thing or two about interpretation of experimental data. The first result for Stgw 57 with blocked action looks like an outlier. It's 10% off the average while no other measurement deviates from average more than 3% (for AR15 all are even within 2% from the average). It may be ammo, it may be a measurement error, who knows. I would therefore consider it a gross error and exclude it from the results. After exclusion you get average of 2274 wich gives us a difference of only 15. Still a bit faster but clearly within standard deviation range. Also standard deviation drops form 92 to 27.
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
Yup, I probably should have discounted that outlier, but I wanted to present the data warts-and-all :)
@Gajdzik
4 жыл бұрын
@@BlokeontheRange Leaving it in the spreadsheet for everyone to see is a good decision. I was the result after all. But I wouldn't take it into average. Or present both averages with short explanation. But it doesn't change the conclusion anyway.
@Chiller01
4 жыл бұрын
It’s really not fair to throw out data points because they foul up your experiment. If the variation is to great then perhaps you need a larger “n” i.e.
@Chiller01
4 жыл бұрын
Sorry I.e. more data points
@Gajdzik
4 жыл бұрын
Eliminating data points that are considered gross errors is quite standard practice in any data analysis. There is nothing unfair about it. You can perform what is called a Q-Test to check which points should be discarded. In this case for the first data point yo get value of 0.75, while the second highest is 0.06. For ten point data set the threshold for discarding a data point is usually between 0.40 and 0.57 depending on confidence levels. In our case this point should be discarded regardless of confidence level. The problem with mentioned data point isn't that it is higher. The problem is that is significantly more distant to the average than any other point and that's exactly what Q-Test assesses (if it's higher or lower doesn't matter). And if so it can be expected that the measurement was for some reason faulty in this case. And it would always be nice to have more data points. That's obvious.
@88porpoise
4 жыл бұрын
Love to see you back to your old myth dispelling habits. That was what got me to watch your channel. And I always appreciate spreadsheets showing up. As to the topic, I always thought this was almost as silly as the Garand ping. Between the amount of energy already being used for bad things (namely recoil) and the relatively small amount of force used to cycle an action I just can’t see it being a big deal.
@ThePlebicide
4 жыл бұрын
as Paul Harrell would say, the difference was within the variation from one round to the next.
@contactacb
4 жыл бұрын
Nicely glossing over his extensive military firearms experience there.....I think he is more knowledgeable than most average people on the subject
@Thrawnmulus
4 жыл бұрын
@Win Mag because only engineers can use statistics? I guess this video had been debunked.
@derekp2674
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks to Bloke for an interesting video. I am a so-callled Engineer and I promise to do a more formal statistical analysis on Bloke spreadsheet's soon. But I am also a big Paul Harrell fan, and I really appreciate his real world view of things,
@derekp2674
4 жыл бұрын
@Win Mag These days I'm mostly retired. But having spent most of my early career working in wacky off beat areas like wave energy, electric guns, particle beam weapons and such like, I never got round to getting formally Chartered. Once you get to be a big fish in a small pond, it really does not matter whether or not you are Chartered.
@derekp2674
4 жыл бұрын
@Win Mag I started out with a general Engineering Degree from "fenland polytechnic" as some of us like to call it. In the UK, for safety critical systems, you pretty much have to be Chartered for some roles but not others. But Engineering is such a wide field that you might easily gain Chartered status in one area and then move into a completely different one, so lifetime learning can be really important.
@MA-hc6mb
4 жыл бұрын
Physics says yes, it absolutely has to be. The important question is is it significant, to which the answer is probably no.
@stanhilt1912
3 жыл бұрын
Ran a T-test on the values in the sheet. AR-15 P=0.0040 so statistically very significant. STG P=0.1669 so statistically insignificant.
@rriflemann308
4 жыл бұрын
The same experiment was done years ago with FN49s (SAFN) in 3 calibers, there was no statistical significance observed.
@genericpersonx333
4 жыл бұрын
This is one of those things that is fun to try and prove is true even though it is known to be true, but you still want to try and prove it for yourself though you know it doesn't really matter. You could go into the engineering reports from gun designers which will tell you exactly what energy is being tapped by the system to operate, but Bloke is kind enough to give us a practical demonstration rather than just throwing arcane physics maths at us and laughing arrogantly as we struggle to synthesize the data.
@siestatime4638
4 жыл бұрын
I had a similar experiment with a .22LR pistol (Walther PP Sport). Ten shots normal operation, 10 shots with my thumbs blocking the slide. The blocked slide group averaged 8 ft/sec faster, which was well within the standard deviation for that particular ammunition (I don't remember the brand). A locked bolt MAY conserve some energy, but not much.
@Gottaculat
3 жыл бұрын
That chair looks so cozy...
@mn_rifleman
4 жыл бұрын
This is one of those titles where you have to do a double take and silently whisper “what the f**k” to yourself 😂
@3ducs
4 жыл бұрын
I like the K31 operating handle on the Stwg 57, a nice touch.
@georgesakellaropoulos8162
4 жыл бұрын
This line of thought is why the Germans didn't field the stg 44 earlier. The high command was insistent that no holes be drilled in the barrel because they thought it would reduce velocities significantly. The designers had to disguise the project as development of a machine pistol in order to continue their work.
@commander31able60
4 жыл бұрын
don't need no fancy adjustable gas block - most ARs have a "sniper button", which you press before shooting to make it shoot harder.
@zedoktor979
4 жыл бұрын
Everyone knows holding the forward assist helps the bullets go faster
@blairbuskirk5460
4 жыл бұрын
Ha ha that is a weird ergonomic trick that the uneducated think has to do with the operation of the rifle. By pushing their thumb onto the forward assist button they're eliminating the torsion upon the grip which could cause deviation when shooting under pressure.
@emu4286
4 жыл бұрын
Reminds me of the accounts of African guerrilla fighters who would set the elevation sliders on the rear sights of their AKs all the way forward because they believed the rear sight was actually a "bullet power" control and that they were setting the power to maximum.
@derekp2674
4 жыл бұрын
@@emu4286 I heard that story also cited in an account of the battle at Rorke's Drift.
@5000rgb
4 жыл бұрын
most ARs have a "sniper button" Not in California.
@visje1996
4 жыл бұрын
You speaking a bit of Dutch really caught me off guard, it sounds quite good!
@genericpersonx333
4 жыл бұрын
Clearly Bloke is one of those cosmopolitan Brits who lives everywhere but England. I suspect he is on a secret mission for the Queen to spread a love of tea, crumpets, and firearms to the Continent. Chap is obviously his liaison for Francophone outreach. A right good bloke.
@visje1996
4 жыл бұрын
@@genericpersonx333 lol he sure is
@mrfurious93
4 жыл бұрын
I have been waiting for someone to explore this idea for a long time!
@truckerallikatuk
4 жыл бұрын
I presume it'd depend on where you extract the gas and how much is extracted. For most rifles the gas comes out most of the way down the barrel and only a small amount is removed, a combination that would make a near zero difference to the energy imparted to the round. Given your explanation of the excess gasses, it'd probably only really affect that unicorn round that wasn't so overgassed if you extracted it nearer the chamber and took more of the gas. I'm not sure any such round has really existed since the tiny pocket pistol cartridges of yore, and given the pressures involved, no-one designs a rifle like that anyway, it makes life FAR easier to deal with the lower pressures up near the muzzle when 99.9% of the useful energy has already been transferred to the round anyway.
@TemenosL
4 жыл бұрын
Bingo.
@thegunpenguin
4 жыл бұрын
This is a super interesting video! I love it! Thanks for gathering this data for us.
@aepilotjim
4 жыл бұрын
A few years ago I was involved in testing for personel bullet proof plates. The standard we had to use was a 30 caliber round with a muzzle velocity of 2400 fps, among other criteria. Shooting 147gr. Mil-Spec 7.62x51 out of a Winchester 70 and an M14, we would get about a 300 fps difference between the two. You might try the same ammo out of a bolt action vs. a gas operated system and see what you get. Bolt action rifles can afford to have a tighter seal vs. a gas operated system. Things like the extraction system being factors in how tight you can have the chamber to bolt seal.
@chris38663
4 жыл бұрын
Thinking about the unexpected increase in velocity, could it be due to chamber heating? Was that the second lot of test firing with a warm chamber warming the propellent and thus increasing the velocity slightly?
@TemenosL
4 жыл бұрын
^ Another important variable.
@danielball959
4 жыл бұрын
Hey Bloke, iirc the testing at Springfield back in the 1930's showed that the energy used to cycle the action is waste energy that would be lost anyway. (Hatcher's Notebook). The concern about semiautomatic actions 'losing' energy dates back to the early 20th century and the initial development of semi-and-fully-automatic firearms.
@nettobin
4 жыл бұрын
What order did you shoot in, as fouling or heat or something could possibly affect the second series shot and account for some of the variance.
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
5 warm-up shots, then semiauto, then blocked. To try to minimise this.
@derekp2674
4 жыл бұрын
I was interested in that thought, so fitted a linear regression line to the full sequence of 20 test shots. My result suggested there _might_ be something going on there, though it is hard to suggest what that might be. Firing a further 25 rounds, this time with 10 rounds gas off before 10 rounds gas on might be interesting further test. The trouble is doing more tests risks suggesting even more tests to do and so.
@matthewspencer5086
4 жыл бұрын
Most the acceleration happens in approximately the first third of the barrel. Gas pressure drops off before the bullet even reaches the gas port on most guns (except ones where the gas pressure holds the thing closed) and even before then, the efficiency of energy transfer from gas to bullet declines as the bullet gets faster. And it is energy transfer, so the amount of extra _velocity_ you get for a given transfer of energy from gas to bullet is subject to an inverse square law with the bullet's previous velocity. All of this means that in most guns there will indeed be no measurable effect on bullet velocity from blocking the operating mechanism. If you're going to do what is now fashionable and shorten the barrel of your rifle to a cool-looking length, which makes a bigger brighter flash and a muzzle blast your forebrain can really feel, you've already changed the muzzle velocity a lot more than any subtlety of the operating mechanism will.
@xjeffsmithx86
4 жыл бұрын
It looks like that one 2,554 fps reading on the blocked STGW 57 shots threw off your mean average. Throwing it out gives you a mean of 2,273, which is nearly identical to the semi auto mean.
@HAACKER45
4 жыл бұрын
Yeah that had to be a over loaded cartridge or a chrono error. Throwing that one out seems like a reasonable choice.
@TheFenrirulfr
4 жыл бұрын
Before watching the video: Yes. But not by any substancial amount. Also not ANYWHERE close enough to outweigh the benefits of having a autoloading rifle.
@Braun30
4 жыл бұрын
I remember the time we tried the white magazines in the army in 1980 convinced that the closed bolt would grant higher speeds and therefore flatter trajectories with our Fass57s. We also encountered a large spread of the rounds, the old guy at the range, an ancient adjudant, justified this by saying the oscillation induced to the barrel by the higher pressures could be the reason of the rounds going a bit all over the target.
@RodgerBirddog
4 жыл бұрын
Did you find the recoil was more significant when the Gas was turned off? Does the gas system reduce the recoil at all?
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
The recoil impulse is sharper on both. On a FAL it's quite marked.
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
*cough* momentum *cough*
@tiortedrootsky
4 жыл бұрын
@@BlokeontheRange do you think recoil was actually lower, but still felt harsher because of the sharpness?
@dbmail545
4 жыл бұрын
@@tiortedrootsky if you run the numbers the recoil of a repeater is actually greater than a bolt gun because of the reciprocating mass, but it is spread out over a longer interval for somewhat less perceived recoil.
@joejoelesh1197
4 жыл бұрын
@@dbmail545 oh ya?! You should try a Remington Model 11 when the friction rings are set up incorrectly. Let's see what you think about the sharpness of recoil then.
@jimsiress9687
4 жыл бұрын
Hoorah ! Copy that Bloke. Awesome leg work as usual. Carry On.
@somecoder3054
4 жыл бұрын
*mainland UK shooter observing the results* "Interesting experiment, wish there was a way we could test this out."
@jean-lucpicard1061
4 жыл бұрын
Could do a .22 based experiment if you were so inclined.
@Blackstone9x19
4 жыл бұрын
We need to crowdfund the ammunition for a much larger test! Going by the 10 shots each on the AR-15, there is a statistically significant difference between gas on and gas off, but in the opposite direction to what we'd expect...
@MrPolluxxxx
4 жыл бұрын
Can confirm, I did the math and we're significant at 95% certainty (if I didn't mess up)
@LUR1FAX
4 жыл бұрын
40 ft/sec is within the variation from one round to the next. Especially when you're talking velocities over 2,500 ft/sec.
@derekp2674
4 жыл бұрын
@@MrPolluxxxx I agree the different is significant i.e. the AR velocities are LOWER (not higher) with the gas turned off.
@zoiders
4 жыл бұрын
The Stoner DI system - does it not actually create forward thrust on the bolt face? meaning a tighter lock up than simply seating it in place with a cold bolt carrier group with no gas running through it?
@zoiders
4 жыл бұрын
@Win Mag I am fully aware of how it works. The gas key however directs gas inside the bolt carrier, that gas also expands into void in the bolt, it not only begins to move the bolt carrier rearward but it pushes the bolt forwards and seats it in battery more firmly at the same time until the carrier and cam stud over come that resistance and finally open the bolt. It does two things at once. Its why its so lightweight. Its also why I suspect its chronographing just a tiny bit higher with the gas system switched on. You can't put energy back into the system but you can control its release. Its why ARs are sensitive to barrel length and suppressors.
@wrxs1781
4 жыл бұрын
Very enjoyable video Bloke. For a future segment, it would be interesting about the history of the Husqvarna shotgun line, just purchased a 20B model and in the process of a restoration. In Canada they are a very reasonable purchase, if you have the time to restore and load for 65mm chambers. Now a Swedish ex-pat tells me you can only have six of either rifle or shotgun in your possession "is this true", Regards, Richard.
@TheWirksworthGunroom
4 жыл бұрын
I must do this with a semi-auto / lockable .22LR that I have. Nothing terribly surprising in your results but it's good to do this stuff - we find things we didn't expect even when proving the main points we anticipated. I do think I saw a little movement of the AR bolt with the gas system closed. Not enough to make a velocity difference I shouldn't think but interesting to wonder quite what was happening. Good stuff!
@jyan9917
4 жыл бұрын
It's possible that when the recoiling rifle is stopped by the shooter's shoulder, the bolt's momentum is enough to get it to bounce a little
@truckerallikatuk
4 жыл бұрын
If you have the cartridges available, doing so with the weediest ones that can just about cycle the thing may actually show the difference the myth suggests. Such an extreme example would, of course, be the one exception to prove the rule. If you have to go to such a length to provide one example of it happening when Bloke has shown it makes no measurable difference in more powerful cartridges, that'd be as much proof as anyone with a brain needs.
@ApurtureSci
4 жыл бұрын
The first thing I thought when watching this is whether a simple blowback gun would be any different, and being in the UK that essentially means .22LR. Sometimes when I've shot more powerful ammo in my rimfires (CCI Velocitor etc) I've had a lot of debris and gas from the ejection port as if it's opening too soon for all the powder to burn, would definitely be interesting to see how this might affect velocity.
@TheWirksworthGunroom
4 жыл бұрын
@@truckerallikatuk Sadly, the rifle I had in mind for this task chucked it's ejector out during a speed steels match a couple of weeks ago so there may well be some delay before this particular idea gets filmed. Most things you can just change an ejector ina few minutes, in this it is a spring steel pin that is swaged into the bolt. Will need some enthusiasm to tackle that job!
@truckerallikatuk
4 жыл бұрын
@@TheWirksworthGunroom That sounds like a rather poorly engineered little .22, but good luck with the project. Hope to see it on your channel sometime.
@johncashwell1024
4 жыл бұрын
For recoil operating systems it easy to visually verify that there is no loss by watching slow motion footage of the rifle in operation. That is, the bolt and carrier/barrel (depending on the system) don't even start to move until the projectile has left the barrel. Because of this, there can be no effect on velocity.
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
Well that's just not true at all, and infringes Newton's laws. Watch more carefully. You can see it very clearly from this TFM video: kzitem.info/news/bejne/qoONl2yVb3piZ44
@fallout1953
4 жыл бұрын
Bolt-Action fanboys when they see the title: "So you are telling me there's a chance?!"
@geezerp1982
4 жыл бұрын
look! if you live in a *communist state ./ country where semi auto is banned , is a quality bolt action such as the lee enfield good option as a fighting rifle ( insert your choice of bad guy) IF one is trained :- YES however if live in a free country / state then no, the bolt action is not a good choice ! *even in communist states / countries the spring assisted straight pull or pump action might be even better options then a turn bolt action
@fallout1953
4 жыл бұрын
@@geezerp1982 Yes, Bolt-Actions can absolutely do work, it's still an extention to your arms, but they are an obsolete class of Weapons.
@fallout1953
4 жыл бұрын
@@geezerp1982 Yeah, in a sniper role every major army's main rifle is a self-loading rifle.
@Paches92-
4 жыл бұрын
@@geezerp1982 if they’re good enough for the taliban, then i don’t see why not
@Face2theScr33n
4 жыл бұрын
Mary Swanson: 1 in a million Lloyd Christmas: so you're telling me there's a chance Probably one of the funniest lines in that movie!
@ivyssauro123
3 жыл бұрын
I think what a lot of people fail to realise is that in order for a rifle shot to be 100% energy effecient and not waste any gas/pressure it would need to have a barrel something like 2.5meters long or more, and even then the gains in bullet velocity would be minimal because way before that it would have hit a stopping point caused by the bullet weight, shape, drag and overall aerodynamics, as well as things like the friction between the bullet and the rifling, basically in the end the fact of the matter is A LOT of pressure is wasted in a shot, and that is the smoke and muzzle flash you see when shooting etc et al, diverting a bit of that pressure back to cycle the rifle only makes it for efficient because it uses up a bit of that spare energy, and rifles, at least well made and designed ones shooting good ammunition, are designed as such as to hit a sweetspot that allows for maximum terminal velocity while keeping the rifle at funcitonal, rational size and shape
@blairbuskirk5460
4 жыл бұрын
The perceived recoil on non self loading rifles is more vigorous but the foot pounds of energy delivered by the projectile is not significantly higher than out of a similar auto loading rifle. The main difference is that the excess energy that would just push the rifle into your shoulder with a bolt action is used to cycle the action in an auto loader. It isn't robbing energy from the projectile but the energy that acts upon the rifle itself.
@maximilianmustermann5763
4 жыл бұрын
Makes sense.
@baconx4
4 жыл бұрын
Interesting results.
@dbmail545
4 жыл бұрын
Most people don't realize how little power it takes to cycle repeating actions. I can't remember how often I have shot an AK left handed from a "sapling rest" and let my support hand foul the charging handle. Never hard enough to injure my hand, but would always cause a stoppage. If you know that overgassing causes increased wear to the gun then it is obvious that excess energy in the system is not desirable. And finally, any properly designed self-loading does not unlock, or in the cases of blowback weapons, unbreach before the bullet has left the barrel. But, hey! Any excuse to go to the range, right?
@Gottaculat
3 жыл бұрын
Makes me wonder, what about when using hotter loads? Wouldn't a bolt action typically be able to handle higher chamber pressures than a semi-auto? Or is it more like comparing apples to oranges, as that really boils down to barrel construction, and has little to nothing to do with having a gas system or not? After all, plenty of 105mm howitzers out there, and they have gas systems to manage recoil. It would seem that at a point, the argument becomes irrelevant, and what matters is the destructive ability and range of what's being sent down range.
@christiangullans7070
3 жыл бұрын
Correct me if i am wrong, but looking at the AR15, the moment gas pressure is taken away should be the point where the bullet passes the hole in the barrel for the gas operating system right? And if my first assumption is correct, the bullet will already be at the very end of the barrel when gas pressure is droping, which means the rest barrel length and therefore the remaining acceleration path should be very short. I doen t know how the stgw57 works, but it would be interesting to have a slowmotion clip of when the receiver moves in comparison to the bullet coming out of the barrel.
@OLLE3770
4 жыл бұрын
I have an idea. I'm not sure if it's safe or doable. Make a harness in which you can sort of safely hang a (self loading) rifle from a ceiling. Make a bladder you can fit between the trigger and trigger guard. Hang a gas operated and a recoil operated self loading gun in the harness - make it fire (by inflating the bladder) and then measure muzzle speed and WETHER it reloads. A Myth Buster experiment perhaps.
@joelcreel6081
3 жыл бұрын
Good analysis!
@enormhi
4 жыл бұрын
Had not heard of this myth before, but I can see why people might think it would work like that
@_foldr
4 жыл бұрын
Where can I find a match diopter like the one in your AR15? Im looking forward to buying one for precision and how to setup the diopter is a missing piece for my plans. Thanks!
@sandywilson8589
4 жыл бұрын
Don't know what markets are available to you, but you could start looking from here rpainternational.co.uk/accessories/rpa-sights/, albeit their site looks a bit dated.
@gregcampwriter
4 жыл бұрын
One possible cause of variation might be the time between shots if that was greater during the manual operation.
@casualobserver3145
4 жыл бұрын
What dispelled this myth to my satisfaction was an animated depiction of how the combustion gases are vented to cycle the action.
@zedoktor979
4 жыл бұрын
Yep. Gases are vented after the vast majority of acceleration has already occurred
@juanfootjohn2125
4 жыл бұрын
Hey bloke I love your content. I have recently purchased a no.4 mk1 star long branch. I need help. The sling swivel that attaches with the bedding screw. Just how was that used with the sling? My local club will allow us to shoot high power matches with any mil.surp rifle. I just haven't found how to use this sling swivel. As usual good video. Your advise has been great. Keep up the good work. Thank tou
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
The sling swivel that attaches with the bedding screw shouldn't be there on a normal rifle. In service, it was only fitted to sniper rifles. Out of service, it was used for Service Rifle (b) competition (the forerunner of Target Rifle). You can either use it for a normal "hasty" sling, or for a "crossover" sling. Difficult to explain "crossover" in words (sling goes around the upper arm the other way, so anticlockwise rather than clockwise, with the end attached to the mid swivel being underneath so it helps hold up the long part which goes behind your wrist and to the mid band), but there's a video in it that I'll get around to at some point.
@juanfootjohn2125
4 жыл бұрын
Thank you bloke my rifle didn't have one. I shoot high power and was thinking that swivel could help. I just haven't been able to find how it was used. Thank you for the speedy response. I'm looking forward to your video. Your enfeild content really helped me pick this ol no.4. Thank you sir.
@juanfootjohn2125
4 жыл бұрын
Sorry thank you sir.
@DerekIcelord
4 жыл бұрын
+/- 44fps sounds about right for variance in lower quality bulk ammunition. Love it when people get real data from the range to test these myths.
@r64g
4 жыл бұрын
The first round fired on stgw (blowback blocked) has so much higher energy than the rest. That datapoint should probably be discarded, because it's more likely a round with abnormal loading, or a measurement error caused by an equipment issue.
@Gottaculat
3 жыл бұрын
Seems to me the real difference is gonna be your barrel length. Pretty sure a properly gassed AR-15 with a 20" barrel is gonna have way better velocity than a bolt-action chambered for 5.56/.223 with a 16" barrel, and vice versa.
@AKlover
4 жыл бұрын
Within the margin of error from bullet to bullet within the same box of ammo typically.
@kenhelmers2603
4 жыл бұрын
Cool to see! Thanks :)
@kenibnanak5554
4 жыл бұрын
The reason why not is because in a well designed weapon the bullet has already left the barrel before the chamber gas pressure drops enough to allow extraction of the case to begin.
@rockingroli2057
4 жыл бұрын
I think the variation comes from the ammo. For precise reproducability you would probably have to fill the cartridges with the same amount of powder and weigh the bullets you put in.
@alan988
3 жыл бұрын
With a gas operated action particularly an m16 style using a gas tube , you would expect a loss of pressure behind the bullet once the bullet has passed the gas port. The pressure at this point is measured to be around 1000 bar , the pressure for the same round at the case mouth would be around 3700bar . Although there is a drop in pressure, it is not a complete venting of the pressure before the bullet leaves the barrel , there will be more in a long gas gas tube (M16) than a piston operated system (SA80) because there is an extra delay while the piston moves . There must be a loss in velocity, but the amount of loss could not be calculated by firing a small sample with a variation larger than the expected loss . Imagine the loss to be 50bar but the variation of the test ammunition is 150bar ,if you get 50 bar less is that the gas being vented or the ammunition giving 50bar less for that shot . There needs to be a much larger sample fired . In the case of the roller delayed blow-back, the bullet has long ago left the barrel before the breach vents the gas.
@tharqal2764
4 жыл бұрын
What does actually operate the gas piston? Is it the hot gases from the powder that's coming after the bullet? Or is it the compressed air in front of the bullet? Or a combination? Because if the compressed air in front of the bullet plays a role, it could explain why a rifle shoots slower with the gas mechanism disabled...
@alun7006
4 жыл бұрын
Combustion gasses.
@weegaz22
4 жыл бұрын
I'd like to see the same test done with matchgrade homeloads that don't have as wide a variance in FPS, I do think there would be a difference in gas on vs off, but I don't think that it'll be as big a difference as people thought, maybe in the region of 20 to 30 fps, also with the sturmgewehr test you may have introduced an ammunition temperature variance with having to swap out the mags each time leaving a longer time for the no gas gun's round in the chamber to heat up, this could be evened out by say shooting the round every 30 secs in both of the tests ... either way an interesting test Mike, keep up the good work.
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks. Budget for doing this with match grade and 100 rounds per gun is of the order of US$500, if you fancy chipping in via Patreon ;)
@weegaz22
4 жыл бұрын
@@BlokeontheRangejust had a look at the patreon page Mike, cant see a "donate" anywhere just the subscription levels? or is that what you meant? I'd even just chuck a few quid at you via paypal.
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks. What you can do is become a subscriber and then cancel the subscription after the first payment :)
@skylongskylong1982
4 жыл бұрын
I always found when I fired SLR it had less recoil, compared to firing a Bolt action rifle , both in 7.62.
@Chiller01
4 жыл бұрын
You could report the standard deviation or standard error set a p value and do some easy statistical analysis (student t-test?) to determine if the difference is statistically significant
@3of11
3 жыл бұрын
Do I cycle faster when I fart vigorously? Technically yes, measurably no.
@Surestick88
4 жыл бұрын
Interesting. I can see an argument for the gas operated firearm losing a slight amount of muzzle velocity to cycling the action but the blowback shouldn't (action=reaction as per Newton).
@herknorth8691
4 жыл бұрын
A friend of mine, who's actually a very bright guy and a very experienced shooter, opined a while back that he'd measured a significant velocity difference between gas on and gas off. The difference was great enough that I couldn't quite believe what he was saying and this vid seems to prove my instincts right. This friend of mine does like... mind-altering substances... so perhaps his memory is a bit fuzzy.
@timhofstetter5654
4 жыл бұрын
Carefully handload your ammunition to make it as identical as you can. Then at the range, record all ten shots for each. Sort by speed, so you have two columns of sorted speeds (slowest to fastest or fastest to slowest. Now create a double line chart of those two columns. That will give you, visually, a great deal more information than a simple mean will.
@karatos
4 жыл бұрын
There seem to be a few errors in your analysis and possible methodology but not big enough to change the conclusion. Without seeing the entire procedure it is difficult to say if or where other errors came in but they are likely negligible. First and most notable is in your data set, clearly one of the shots fired in the last string was an outlier, likely caused by ammunition or chrono failure and not relevant to the debate at hand but it is included and skews your data. Second, there is a mechanism to explain how it is possible that a semi-automatic would get higher velocity than a manually cycled firearm as the amount of heat that can be built up by firing rapidly is significantly higher than the heat retained and radiated from a slowly extracted casing. As the semi-automatic is radiating heat and you take a moment between shots to record the data the round inside the chamber heats as well, which excites the powder and gets a greater reaction when firing. While you are manually cycling you record the data with the next round not in the chamber heating up, then you cycle and fire, so with the AR that could explain at least some of the difference. With the Stgw 57 it has a substantially greater thermal mass (as indicated by the grunt in picking it up) and it is delayed blowback as opposed to a gas cycling firearm like the AR-15 which is blowing hot gasses into the action to further heat it, both of which reduce the difference in heating to the firearm between automatic cycling and manually cycling on the second firearm, and since you needed to change the loaded magazine out for one which would disable the action it gave the manually cycled round just a little more time for the round to cook than in semi-auto, so that should help explain some of why it is higher but by a lesser degree. This also lends to the spread of standard deviation as differences in even mere seconds can change the temperature of the round in waiting to a degree (forgive the unintentional pun, I can't think of another word) that it could throw the whole thing off. If one controls the temperature of the firearm and the temperature of the rounds and if one has enough data points to reduce the noise from largely unavoidable variances in velocity from ammunition, there should be a very slight and meaningless reduction in mean velocity in semi-automatics vs manually cycled firearms. Thank you for the tests. I am a firearm designer in the states so I have run essentially the same test several times to see differences in average velocity (and db rating and temperature buildup and fouling mass) between manually cycled, semi-automatic, and fully automatic firearms while unsuppressed and suppressed with a variety of silencers and in a variety of temperatures ("does shooting this silenced smg foul the can faster in the snow?" asked no one, "Yeah, kinda" I answered, etc). Basically the same result you got. There is a difference, usually, under all the noise and chaos, but it really does not matter in a practical sense. Like when our marketing team wanted to make an ad boasting that a new model in an independent test had a recorded average velocity *2 FPS* higher than another comparable firearm and they did not understand why I just kept laughing at them. Anyway, thanks again.
@ethanpillisdorpher3094
4 жыл бұрын
For the case of the AR-15, I wonder if it is the introduction of oxygen in the combustion process (when the bullet Passes the gas port in the barrel) that causes this increase in semi-automatic. Obviously it's miniscule to say the least but it is a very interesting Observation!
@jimmertrzcinski1144
4 жыл бұрын
Those are the most Manly Ironsights
@DNchap1417
4 жыл бұрын
Disappointing velocities on the 7.5 Swiss? Are those rounds under-loaded?
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
They're TopShot so they're whatever S&B are loading them to.
@JCU2803
4 жыл бұрын
S&B aka Schlecht und Billig 😄
@at1cvb417
4 жыл бұрын
Great video.
@Treblaine
4 жыл бұрын
Was the recoil much greater?
@zoiders
4 жыл бұрын
Just shoot in the dark and point them to the big flash going out the front. That way they can see where the energy is going. Its certainly not being lost through the gas system in a statistically significant way.
@USAACbrat
4 жыл бұрын
Does it make a difference as far as accuracy?
@Breakfast_and_Bullets
4 жыл бұрын
1:40 - Bloke can pronounce the letter R at the end of a word?! Seriously though, what are those sights on your AR? They look incredibly interesting.
@5000rgb
4 жыл бұрын
They are match iron sights. I also find them interesting. Now that optics are cheap the market has moved away from iron sights. While optics do have their advantages, iron sights are quite capable.
@cosmo9882
4 жыл бұрын
Thank you 👍
@astridvallati4762
4 жыл бұрын
Question have you tested a Semi- auto in blocked breech against a bolt action same barrel lenght,same calibre, to compare velocities/energies with both systems??? Doc AV
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
Doing that does not account for unknown variations in bore diameter, groove depth, throat profile, bore surface condition etc. which have a fairly substantial effect. The only way to do this without such confounding factors is to use the same rifle in 2 modes.
@danerickson1632
4 жыл бұрын
There is a mechanical variation with the AR-15 gas on or off. Gas on.vented pressure less impeading on projectile. Gas off, more air pressure in barrel ahead of projectile.
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
a) the gas system is not an open system, it's a leaky closed one with a certain volume. b) moving air ahead of the bullet will tend to try to suck air out of the gas system due to Bernouilli's principle, not blow it in. So you're working backwards there. c) the max chamber pressure is of the order of 3500 bar. Even pulling a full vacuum ahead of the bullet vs. normal air pressure at approx 1 bar makes a 0.03% difference. Which is nothing and can be ignored :)
@norullzz
4 жыл бұрын
The maths you are looking for is the student T test, support.google.com/docs/answer/6055837?hl=en-GB. It gives the likelihood that the two sets of observations are generated using different distributions. I think generally,
@manatoa1
4 жыл бұрын
Also the bullet will have achieved the great majority of its final velocity before the action begins siphoning any energy off. That means you're only losing a small percentage of a not very significant amount of energy. In something like an M1 Garand, the bullet will have achieved effectively all, or all of its velocity by the time the bullet crosses the gas port.
@shellymcmurrie
4 жыл бұрын
In terms of the deviations in velocity across the shots with the gas blocked off, I wonder does blocking the gas somehow cause the system to vibrate in ways that it doesn't when it's working as intended? Unintended and not-designed-for vibration along the length of the weapon, coupled with the rotation of the bullet and the difference in the harmonics between lands and grooves in the barrel as the projectile moves through it could account for greater spread of velocity? This vibration would be minuscule and perhaps imperceptible to something with the perspective, size and mass the shooter, but if you're the little bullet and your whole environment is humming just slightly off compared to the information they showed you in the brochure at bullet school, you might find that you under-perform in this less than optimal environment. I mean, it might have nothing at all to do with that but that was my thought?
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
When I shot that rifle in prone slowfire competition, I used to turn the gas block off and work it as a manually-operated single-shot since it reduced the group sizes such that my scores increased by 4-5% (from 92-94-ish to 96-98-ish on the Dutch 100m target).
@shellymcmurrie
4 жыл бұрын
@@BlokeontheRange Ah! So it's not unintended vibration then! :)
@derekp2674
4 жыл бұрын
@@BlokeontheRange Do you know if you would see the same small improvements from a machine rest? When I used to shoot centrefire pistols and revolvers, I always tended to be more accurate with the latter, which I put down to relative absence of jerk effects when firing. (To a gun designer, "jerk" is the rate of change of acceleration.)
@konstantinavilov1192
4 жыл бұрын
A bit of statisticianerding: a formal Welch's t-test (aka Student's heteroscedastic test) on the AR15 measurements produces a p-value of p=0.005 that is quite low, and thus signals that there is statistically significant difference in the mean values. There is still a room for mere coincidence, but it is quite small. So the repeated tests with better ammo are definitely needed to resolve this mystery!
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
The AR change is in the wrong direction, and seems to be dominated by one outlier in one dataset.
@konstantinavilov1192
4 жыл бұрын
@@BlokeontheRange Yeah, it is in the wrong direction - and that's why it is interesting. And which value is the outlier for you? The data points look pretty solid to me: "gas on" are mostly 32** values and "gas off" are mostly 31**. The formal tests do not detect any outliers there.
@konstantinavilov1192
4 жыл бұрын
@@BlokeontheRange I've just re-tested the AR15 data with removing one top and one bottom value in each group (thus, 8 measurements left in each group). The p-value has become even smaller: p=0.002. So it has nothing to do with outliers.
@derekp2674
4 жыл бұрын
@@BlokeontheRange After plotting the data I do not see any obvious outliers in the AR results. The 1st "blocked" Stgw 57 shot is the only obvious outlier in those results. Having now crunched my own independent 2 sample T-tests, I see no significant difference in the Stgw 57 results (I got p=~0.16, even with the outlier included) and a significant difference in the AR results (I got p=~0.004). As noted already, the "gas off" AR results do seem to be significantly lower, not higher.
@hawksnake3372
4 жыл бұрын
Semiautos hit harder, got it. I'm going to be using this video to derail plenty of forum threads.
@loquat44-40
4 жыл бұрын
Be interesting to do the same testing with an AK that is overgassed.
@EeekiE
4 жыл бұрын
I appreciate the testing and data, but it doesn’t hold a candle to a well written forum argument *telling* us why gas systems *must* impact bullet velocity.
@derekp2674
4 жыл бұрын
But do those forum arguments quantify the postulated impact on bullet velocity?
@djsalose
4 жыл бұрын
i mean.. technically it should take some energy.. but as you say, it will probably be hard to measure
@derekp2674
4 жыл бұрын
Yes indeed. I think this is a case where using American units may actually help us. For the sake of argument, if Bloke's AR15 has a muzzle of energy of 1300 ft-lbs normally and also needs 1ft-lb of work (i.e. energy) to cycle its action, then perhaps its muzzle energy might increase to 1301 ft-lbs with the gas turned off. Using those numbers we might expect a base muzzle velocity of 2900 ft/s to increase to 2901 ft/s, which far less than the statistical shot to shot variation.
@derekp2674
4 жыл бұрын
Then using the actually numbers in Bloke's spreadsheet, the average Stgw 57 muzzle energy increased from 1971 ft-lbs in semiauto to 2050 ft-lbs locked an increase of 79 ft-lbs, which is not statistically signifcant according to a 2-sample T-test. The average AR muzzle energy decreased from 1263 ft-lbs to 1229 ft-lbs, a statistically significant decrease of 34 ft-lbs.
@djsalose
3 жыл бұрын
@@derekp2674 How in the world is American units going to help? i actually didnt even read..
@derekp2674
3 жыл бұрын
@@djsalose Maybe it's just me, but I can envisage lifting a 1lb weight over a distance of 1ft much more easily than a 1N force acting over 1m. YMMV.
@davidbrennan660
4 жыл бұрын
A grenade launching Swiss weapon platform?....... who would have thought?
@horiag
4 жыл бұрын
Another explanation to those results could be that the RECOIL ENERGY is lower on a semi-auto than on a bolt action. That means the bullet takes always the same energy (i.e. speed) of the explosion whether the firearm is semi-auto or not, but the shooter's shoulder does not !... This could also explain why people think a bolt action is more powerfull ; just because it has more recoil.
@MPI1000
4 жыл бұрын
Energy has fuck all to do with any of this. It's all about momentum. The modern concept of energy is about 200 years younger than Newton, who would have figured all this out even back in his time. The concept of recoil is actually really very, very simple if you know the very basics of Newtonian mechanics. Like F=ma (Newtons 2nd law) and impulse (Force over time). The pressure in the chamber accelerates the bullet as well as the rifle with the same force in opposite directions. The acceleration of both the rifle and the bullet depends on the mass of the two objects, which is why a heavier rifle recoils 'less' (but not really). The peak acceleration of a heavier rifle is less and hence the peak force felt by the shooter in the shoulder is lower, but the recoil momentum is the same no matter what the mass is. The difference in 'felt' recoil is that in a semi-auto, some force is delayed over time by moving parts that have to be decelerated with springs and buffers that lowers overall peak force. The impulse (force over time) is still the same, though. You just trade peak force for a longer time.
@tiortedrootsky
4 жыл бұрын
??? how does this operation blocking mag work? Somehow stopes the rollers from going in? Crazy!
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
I said in the video: it stops the bolt carrier from moving, which keeps the rollers in their recesses.
@tiortedrootsky
4 жыл бұрын
@@BlokeontheRange didnt expect this small thing to be enough to hold it... Very cool feature
@dio3693
3 жыл бұрын
The idea that energy is "robbed" from potential bullet velocity doesn't make any sense, at least not in the case of an AR-15 gas system. The bolt carrier can't start to move backward until the bolt head has been forced to rotate and unlock, which will be after the bullet has left the barrel. So the only energy used to cycle the action is excess that wouldn't have been contributing to propelling the bullet anyway.
@BlokeontheRange
3 жыл бұрын
The bolt carrier moving backwards is what causes the bolt head to rotate and unlock...
@rastas3742
4 жыл бұрын
As you say it is within statistical standard deviation. If I were to make up an explanation for the AR15 results I would blame it on the build up of pressure in the barrel ahead of the bullet. The open gas system allows compressed air ahead of the bullet to bleed out, giving a greater pressure differential across the bullet and thus giving it greater acceleration down the barrel before it reaches the gas vent. Do I sound convincing?
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
No, sorry, not in the slightest...... ;)
@rastas3742
4 жыл бұрын
@@BlokeontheRange Excellent, that means it will be a generally accepted internet truth by this time next week ;-)
@The-Dom
3 жыл бұрын
The gas being blocked on the ar15 goes against the design impacting performance albeit minimally.
@BlokeontheRange
3 жыл бұрын
Wut? No, just no...
@PaulVerhoeven2
4 жыл бұрын
Didn't you see? One reading on that 7.5x55 with gas off, 2554, was extreme outlier, so you either presed the wrong button there (could be 2254 or 2354) , or it was a very overpressured round and you are lucky the blowback was blocked at this point. Of course sample size=10 is not any good for stats.
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
Look up the muzzle velocity of military 7.5x55 then you might reconsider the idea that it was a very overpressured round and I'm lucky the blowback was blocked...
@bitfunk24
4 жыл бұрын
But what about accuracy deviation between semi auto and manual action?
@alancox5777
4 жыл бұрын
Does the delay part that’s locked off cause a stronger recoil implulse
@BlokeontheRange
4 жыл бұрын
It's a sharper recoil impulse cos it's not spread out by the movement of the bolt.
@alancox5777
4 жыл бұрын
@@BlokeontheRange that’s what I meant lol
@jesusyeshuaelelyonelshadai6295
4 жыл бұрын
There is a difference just not enough to make a big difference
@pickeljarsforhillary102
4 жыл бұрын
Straight-pulls arent a thing anymore. AR-15 with gas port blocked: Excuse me.
@L3THALXFOX
3 жыл бұрын
The only way I could see this at all useful is if you were somehow so accurate and were just outside the effective range of the gun, you could squeeze out a tiny bit extra amount of performance to maybe?? Make a difference. If you count that 10% difference a difference
@mrfurious93
4 жыл бұрын
Bloke- just spitballing... Maybe the AR gas system gives the air in front of the bullet another exit besides just out the muzzle? Or the AR bolt pushes forward on the case before unlock, forcing better breach seating when gas system is working.
@314299
4 жыл бұрын
I've done this same test with a blow-back/bolt action .22 rifle and have a video of that - no significant difference between the two: kzitem.info/news/bejne/ooJ4yGhtsKtkf2U
Пікірлер: 331