imfdb.org  

Go Back   imfdb.org > The Forum > Just Guns

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-11-2008, 02:36 AM
Pointy Sextant Pointy Sextant is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15
Default Questions

I am writing a book at the moment, and the Ciener Silenced Ruger Mark II intrigues me as the side arm for one of my central characters. As this site is associated with several actual gunsmiths, I thought I'd ask my questions here.

1. Can the Ruger Mark II be fired with non standard .22 ammunition such as high velocity rounds?

2. Can the Mark 3 be fitted with the same kinds of silencers as the Mark 2?

3. Just how silent is the Ruger when suppressed? Do any of the guns moving parts still produce significant audible noise, or is really and effectively silenced?

4. Is the Ruger Mark 2 with the Ciener silencer in this sites photos nickel plated or chrome finished or some such or is that the standard color of the gun?

5. Would you describe hitting someone in the skull with a Ruger Mark 2 or 3 from six blocks away as inconceivable, or physically impossible?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-11-2008, 08:06 PM
Gunmaster45's Avatar
Gunmaster45 Gunmaster45 is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New York, USA
Posts: 1,779
Default

Planning to kill someone? 6 blocks is really pushing it for a .22, especially a handgun.

Most .22 handguns, including the Mk II handle high velocity rounds with ease. The bests IMO are Velocitors.

I believe the suppressor for the Mk II can be fitted to a Mk III, but some fitting may be required.

A suppressed .22 handgun automatic is ~ 50-60 Dec. This is including the air exiting the muzzle, the slide cycling and the empty casing ejecting. Using subsonic ammunition, such as high velocities, makes it even louder.

I'm pretty sure the gun on the site is all stainless.

Hope I helped. Don't consider me an accessory.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-11-2008, 08:59 PM
Yournamehere Yournamehere is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 912
Default

I think you mean supersonic rounds make the gun louder, as they break the sound barrier. Subsonic bullets don't and are inherently better for silenced weapons.

Also, a .22 is a poor choice for a distant kill, especially when something is attached to it that lowers it's velocity. Most of them are seen used at point blank range in movies. If I could suggest a different gun, give him a .45 of some sort. Not sure on the sound it makes, but it's subsonic, so it can't be too loud.

Last edited by Yournamehere; 12-11-2008 at 09:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-11-2008, 11:33 PM
MT2008's Avatar
MT2008 MT2008 is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,489
Default

I should also point out that the term "silencer" is one of those words that, like using "clip" to describe what is actually a "magazine", should be banished from the vocabulary of firearms jargon forever.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-11-2008, 11:59 PM
Yournamehere Yournamehere is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 912
Default

While it isn't what many consider the perfectly accurate term, I don't think it's in league with the word clip in it's inaccuracy. A clip is a completely different mechanism than a magazine, as well as a slang term for magazine, where the term silencer, although slang, means the same thing as "sound suppressor." If anything it's better to say silencer as there are other types of suppressors, and saying sound suppressor is a mouthful. Sometimes you can cut corners with good enough words, granted that they're not completely wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-12-2008, 12:22 AM
Gunmaster45's Avatar
Gunmaster45 Gunmaster45 is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New York, USA
Posts: 1,779
Default My Mistake

I meant supersonic, not subsonic. My head was elsewhere.

I missed the first sentence of the original post, so my mistake for questioning homicidal sounding questions. Oops.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-12-2008, 02:21 AM
MT2008's Avatar
MT2008 MT2008 is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,489
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yournamehere View Post
While it isn't what many consider the perfectly accurate term, I don't think it's in league with the word clip in it's inaccuracy. A clip is a completely different mechanism than a magazine, as well as a slang term for magazine, where the term silencer, although slang, means the same thing as "sound suppressor." If anything it's better to say silencer as there are other types of suppressors, and saying sound suppressor is a mouthful. Sometimes you can cut corners with good enough words, granted that they're not completely wrong.
True, but the fact is that "silencer" is a fairly inaccurate description of what a sound suppressor does.

Also, I usually just say "suppressor" myself, which isn't any more of a "mouthful" than saying "silencer".
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-12-2008, 01:42 PM
Nyles Nyles is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 917
Default

I have to chime in on that 6 block headshot - unless the blocks in your city are alot shorter than in mine, that is 100% impossible with a handgun, .22 or otherwise. An exceptional shot might manage a headshot at 100 yards on a stationary target - your average shooter has trouble hitting center mass at 300 yards with an open-sighted rifle.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-19-2008, 12:13 AM
Pointy Sextant Pointy Sextant is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyles View Post
I have to chime in on that 6 block headshot - unless the blocks in your city are alot shorter than in mine, that is 100% impossible with a handgun, .22 or otherwise. An exceptional shot might manage a headshot at 100 yards on a stationary target - your average shooter has trouble hitting center mass at 300 yards with an open-sighted rifle.
The point of the shot is that the character making it is possessed of inhuman abilities. Is the shot impossible because the bullet won't go the distance because of simple physics, super sonic or sub sonic no matter which, or because the skill required is impossible? The former requires a rewrite, the latter is a-ok.

And in response to the first question no, I'm not planning on killing anybody, but the clean lines and simplicity of the Ruger are attractive to me from a writing standpoint and the underpowered nature of the round seems to me to only accentuate the skill of a killer using it. However, if no .22 caliber round is capable of reasonable armor penetration, then I'll have to upgrade to a more reasonable handgun.

The idea here is that the shooter involved does things with the pistol that are seemingly impossible but still within the realm of physical possibility. If that is not true, than I need to find another weapon that will serve my purposes.

More specifically on why I like the Ruger as a silenced handgun because of the snub, close fitting almost integrated suppressor. The suppressor just replacing the barrel and not fitting onto the end of the barrel.

In the world of speculative gun alternatives, how does the Sig Sauer P220 and so on work on range fire, and what can be worked with silencers?

Also, I like the look of the integrated compensator on the Sig Sport. Now I understand that the idea of the silencer and the compensator clash pretty completely, but I'm willing to sacrifice the silenced aspect for the long range shot, which brings me to my next question. How would a full metal jacket, .45 ACP round smelted entirely out of Tungsten work for penetration on body armor, material, and soft targets?

Last edit. Could a silencer with an improvised Nielson device increase work on a smaller caliber handgun or just on browning style weapons and above?

Last edited by Pointy Sextant; 12-19-2008 at 10:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-20-2008, 09:30 PM
Nyles Nyles is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 917
Default

A .22 round will go that far (at least out of a rifle), but no handgun has the accuracy to do that. It's not a question of skill, even if it's completley immobilised in a mechanical rest and you've got a ballistic computer handy, it simply does not have the intrinsic accuracy to make that shot. Handguns are handguns and rifles are rifles.

Although even with a rifle that's a hell of a shot - all false modesty aside, in the military I'm considered an above average marksman. Using an open-sighted rifle (specifically a C7 or SA80A2) I can knock down a man sized target at 300 meters all day long, anything much further is pushing it. Combat-type scope (3.4X C79A1 or 4X SUSAT) helps, but not by that much.

As for the .45ACP round, assuming you're talking about a solid tungsten round (an FMJ bulley is, by definition, not a single piece of solid metal), it's not going to penetrate body armor with a trauma plate - that's a low velocity round with a low ballsitic coefficient. It's doesn't do range or penetration well. At normal handgun range it'll penetrate the bodywork on a car, most interior walls, but nothing really solid. A standard 230-grain .45ACP FMJ round will barely dent 3/4" aluminum (in fact, of all the varied handguns I've tried, only a 7.62mm Tokarev comes close to penetrating - very close, in fact), and I very much doubt that a steel or tungsten cored round would do much better. Small and fast rounds penetrate, big slow ones don't.

A Neilson device (just a muzzle booster, really) applies to recoil-operated locked breech firearms only, which these days are pretty much only (most) pistols of 9mm Luger calibre and above. A smaller pistol is usually straight blowback with a fixed barrel, which aren't effected by the additional weight of a supressor anyways.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.