Impossible shot


The part where he shoots the bucket seems impossible to me since at the range he was shooting (thousand yards?)you can't see the target. How can you hit that which you cannot see? I remember shooting an M16 at basic and the furthest target we shot at was 300 meters. At that range it was very small and a challenge to hit, although I did manage to hit it. At twice that range, 600m, there is no way I could see the "man size" silhouette without a scope, much less hit it. It would be a very lucky shot. Either way, I loved the movie and would watch it again and again.

reply

He might have had exceptional vision. And could the sights have had a bit of a telescopic effect? I know ig you poke a pinhole in a piece of paper it can act as a slight magnifier.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Are you saying that at 1400 yards with open sights you could hit a bucket that is maybe twelve to fifteen inches tall? I would have to see it to believe it. You were a sniper in the Army? Cool. What kind of rifle did you use? When I was in the Guard in a Mechanized infantry unit, we had an M24 in our armory, brand new in the box. Man that thing was heavy.

reply

[deleted]

Nope, never shot a Dragunov, or an M24. On active duty I was in the artillery from 90 to 92, and then Mech infantry form 93 to 01. What makes the Dagunov so damn effective? I seem to recal reading a story a while back that when it first came out, the CIA was trying hard to get its hands on one. Is this true?

reply

[deleted]

Impossible shot? Dude, Billie Dixon. That is all.

"Never use money to measure wealth, son."

reply

[deleted]

Everyone has forgotten the details, it was 1874. But I wager to say no. But I think we can extend Selleck a bit of suspension of disbelief, this movie is good enough to earn it.

"Never use money to measure wealth, son."

reply

We of the goldfish army are probably much more advanced than human snippers. We use extra long rifles with calibrated teleoscopticals and when we want to hit things really far away we put extra firecrackers inside the extra long #707 9.938 McGoldensmokin Snippershot 309 and can hit a bucket sitting on the moon. If we want to.

What is essential is invisible.to the eye.

reply

pure talent.

There was this one time back in '99 I was sitting around on this hill enjoying the breeze and my autographed copy of Dermit's Indispensible Guide to Fluids when suddenly my field phone rang!

It was Major General Norton on the horn, old Snortin' Nortin himself!

And he said to me, "Staff Sargent Ludwig, my coffee is cold. What are you planning to do about it?"

So even though he was 14,000 yards away I knew what to do 'cause I had my trusty old 9.938 McGoldensmokin Snippershot 309 with a calibrated teleoscoptical peeper right there at my side. So I just moved up a few yards to account for the headwind from the south east-west and squeezed off a round.

Guess you know what happened next.

As that round traversed the distance between the smoking end of my mighty rifle barrel and the major general's insulated coffee cup it lost momentum until at the very end of it's trajectory path it simply dropped like a lead lump of sugar into the major general's cup, warming it up nicely without spilling a drop.

You know, it's been copied and imitated and though it's been tried you just can't duplicate a genuine McGoldensmokin Snippershot.


What is essential is invisible.to the eye.

reply

[deleted]

Ditto.

reply

You don't think that was a good shot?

'Cause I thought it was pretty good, not spilling the coffee or anything.





What is essential is invisible.to the eye.

reply

Man, that was funny.

reply

I wish this Goldfish guy had come over to this site. That's some funny posting!

reply

Agreed!

reply

There is an article in a back issue of "Guns of the Old West" about the Guns of Quigly... that may have the answer to whether or not the shot was possible. While I don't have a copy of that issue of GOW, I will say that previous articles about movie guns have often included whether or not the gun writer thought (or could duplicate) what occurs on screen.

reply

Well the Sharps rifle after all was nicknamed "buffalo rifle" for obvious reason's as we all know. I've had a chance to shoot it in 45-70 on several occasions. Very impressed of it's accuracy of course it was no bucket I was aiming at,just your standard silhoutte. Pretty good grouping too, probably better if I took the blindfold off!(ha-ha).But aside from this has anyone ever seen "Valdez is Coming"? with Burt Lancaster, good movie. I think 'Quigley' took lessons from 'Valdez' when it came down to "long distance reach out and touch someone" Don't get me wrong though I do think "Quigley Down Under" is a good movie

reply

I recall that about 1995/6 there was an article in the annual issue of the much maligned publication 'Guns and Ammo' where a number of expert shots with reproduction (and I believe some originals) Sharps rifles, experimented with the apparent ballistic occurences portrayed in 'Quigley' event. You will have to obtain a copy (you may find the article on their website) for the definitive answers but I am sure that the steel plate bucket silhouette that they used was several time oversized for the very practical reasons that it is dificult to see past the blind spot subtended by the foresight.

In an earlier article Elmer Kieth described how a marksman, on a National Park buffalo kull, claimed thet his Sharps would hit a buffalo if he could see it. At something over 800 yards the cross hairs on his telescopic sight all but covered the big animal. He made good his claim but only hit the animal in a back leg.

The 200 yard mid range tragectories of all the 45 sharps caalibers is around the 12" to 14" mark which means that at extreme range the bullet is dropping fairly sharply. If you enter .47/70 in your computor search engine you will find a welter of information both historic and regarding modern club results shooting historic breech loaders.

Major J.S. Hatchers 1935 on Firearms Investigation book gives the maximum range(distance only) of a .30 M1 cartridge 172 grain bullet and 2640 fps muzzle velocity, over water, as about 5600 yards, three miles (if you can see that far).


reply

Surely your eyesight is not that poor. When I shoot in Eatonville WA (at 550 yards) in the 50 caliber matches, I will somtimes bring my ar15 or M1A to shoot with after. We use 28" targets with the 8, 9, and 10 rings blackened in as usual, the black part being about 12" across. I wear glasses with corrected 20/20 vision and am able to see the target without a problem.

I have no problems hitting the target 100% of the time with my smaller rifles, and hitting in the black most of the time while shooting from the bench. I do not do nearly as well shooting while standing.

While Quigley claimed he was able to hit the advertisement poster at 1000 yards when he first showed up, I do not remember the bucket being 1000 yards away when he shot it.

Ranb

reply

dont marines have to hit targets at 1000 yards for basic?
Although I wouldn't know, I'm not a marine.

reply

Marines fire at 200, 300 and 500 yards in basic.

reply

[deleted]

the most you shot was 300m with an m16?....."600m, no way to see a man sized silhouette".... What are you?...airforce?...you suck..we shot 500m at a silhouette in boot camp, and i spot for rounds at distances much farther as a profession ....Not only that...but its a "movie"..enjoy it.. pussy

reply

No, I wasn't Air Force, 300m was the farthest target we shot during practice and qualification. For the Army, 300m was good enough because it was determined many years ago that most engagements occur within 200 yards/meters anyway, so shooting anyone over 300m would be a very rare event. Most of the combat in Iraq right now is at close quarters, if I'm not mistaken. Besides, at 500m, a heavier caliber would be better anyway. More knock down power.

reply