Torque induced rotation will cause a strike on the previous cylinder, not the next cylinder.

I watched a very nice high-speed video on Youtube showing the hammer coming back under recoil which unlocked the cylinder.

As for double-taps, there's another nice video of a young lady doing just that.

"I did have a chain-fire once with a Walker reproduction. Early in my revolver days and some 20 years stupider ago, I thought I could lower the hammer on a percussion cap without setting it off. BIG MISTAKE. I had forgot to seal the other chamber mouths or put caps over the nipples. All six at once. Not fun. Didn't drop it though. That pretty well ended my BP days."
drewwhenrytnt could you please explain this? Did the cylinder rotate? If not, wouldn't two of the rounds have hit the frame and destroy the gun? What made the cylinder rotate?
I own a Ruger Old Army and have always put grease over the bullet but have often wondered what would happen if I didn't!
PS. Still confused over the cylinder rotating backwards bit. If it was backwards (for a S&W) wouldn't it hit the round that had just been fired? Presumably this would never happen on a Colt where the cylinder rotates in the opposite direction?

Peter.

quote:

Originally posted by 56hawk:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by bfrshooter:
Who shoots a .500 double action?

ME!

And Me

quote:

Originally posted by dla:
Torque induced rotation will cause a strike on the previous cylinder, not the next cylinder.

I watched a very nice high-speed video on Youtube showing the hammer coming back under recoil which unlocked the cylinder.

Could you share the link to that video? Just wondering since when it happened to me the cylinder rotated forward.

I have had two Smith & Wessons that unlocked and rotated backwards. It definitely happens.

Geez guys, I go away and you guys still have the same soap operas. What gives.

OK, just for information purposes and information only, I am a certified S&W Pistol Instructor for the state of Delaware. I was taught by S&W Master Instructor Bill Porter. I own a .500 S&W Magnum and I love the gun.

I was teaching a pistol class here two years ago and had exactly what is being described happen. I closed the range until I could secure the gun and I called Bill Porter immediately. I was sure it was a sympathetic fire. He couldn't stop laughing.

First of all, sympathetic fire is virtually impossible. The remaining 4 cylinder muzzles are blocked by the mechanism of the gun. Had that actually happened, the shooter would have lost is arm.

Secondly, the gun was loaded with 3 spent rounds and two live round. The #1 live round was in sequential order when I passed the gun to the shooter, expecting him to take two shots. He was completely unfamiliar with the recoil and was firing #1 in the single action mode.

Now let's talk common sense here. The S&W revolver cylinder rotates by a pawl at the rear and a locking cam at the bottom of the cylinder. It is virtually impossible to rotate the cylinder without holding the hammer at quarter cock. When you do this, the cylinder will only rotate counterclockwise to a fresh cylinder. The cylinder pawl will not allow the cylinder to rotate clockwise. To get the cylinder to go to a clockwise position, the cylinder release must be employed and the cylinder released and manually turned to the opposite side of the breech.

Bill explained that the phenomenon described most often happens to shooters unfamiliar with the recoil or smaller framed individuals who are "scared" to shoot the gun. The gun is squeezed tightly in the palm trying to prevent dropping the firearm. When this death grip manages to fire the first round, the gun recoils backward against the palm, thus releasing the tension on the trigger finger enough to let the lockout release on the cylinder, but the muscle memory of the shooter is still so tense that the second round fires almost instantaneously, usually pointing towards a hole in the sky at 10 o'clock. Bill also says they document this happening with some shooters with the .460 and .44 mag pistols. He said amazingly, the .357 has this happen seldom but it is the prime reason for many police agencies going to the 9mm as a "user friendly" round.

In my case, there's no doubt the above took place. The #2 round was fired. Had it gone to #5, then the #2 would have been left intact.

Now whether you guys want to believe that or simply pooh pooh it and make up more dynamic stories, it's up to you. I'll just go back to lurking and watching.

BTW, the most common mechanical malfunction of the 500 is "timing". Shooting heavier rounds wears the locking cam and the cylinder stop allowing the cylinder to be slightly offset at the forcing cone area. I found that out by bleeding all over my shooting table when shards of lead splattered back on my face. Luckily I was wearing quality shooting glasses. S&W will retime your pistol for free. Contact them and they'll send you a mailing sticker along with a return number. They will repair you gun and mail it back to you. Mine took about 2 weeks to get back.

Hey George! How in the hell have you been?!

Really just cooling my heels. Wife has some serious medical issues and I'm at or in the hospital as much as I seem to be home. I didn't get to do much hunting last year. I check on you guys occasionally. LOL

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
It happens way too fast to attribute to squeezing the trigger a second time.

I wish I had the video to prove you wrong, but I know for a fact, you are wrong.

When I was working for a company up north we had a very experienced shooter in the tubes that was getting double taps with the .480 and .454 versions of a popular DA revolver. Many theories were discussed and experimental lock work that would prevent the cylinder bolt from retracting was made and installed and the shooter still would get double taps.

Finally high speed video was taken of the shooter in action to observe the phenomenon.

The revolver would recoil straight back into the flesh of the hand, the mass of the trigger and trigger finger would not travel with the firearm thereby resetting the DA trigger, the shooter would then pull the trigger a second time in his attempt to reacquire a solid grip on the revolver resulting in a double tap. Once the shooter was shown this and he adjusted his shooting style to let the trigger finger "ride" rather than grip, the problem went away.

On a similar vein we bought a .500 for an engineering sample, one the engineers test firing the gun double tapped it into the concrete ceiling of the range tube. Exciting to say the least!

quote:

Originally posted by Rusty Marlin:

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
It happens way too fast to attribute to squeezing the trigger a second time.

I wish I had the video to prove you wrong, but I know for a fact, you are wrong.

When I was working for a company up north we had a very experienced shooter in the tubes that was getting double taps with the .480 and .454 versions of a popular DA revolver. Many theories were discussed and experimental lock work that would prevent the cylinder bolt from retracting was made and installed and the shooter still would get double taps.

Finally high speed video was taken of the shooter in action to observe the phenomenon.

The revolver would recoil straight back into the flesh of the hand, the mass of the trigger and trigger finger would not travel with the firearm thereby resetting the DA trigger, the shooter would then pull the trigger a second time in his attempt to reacquire a solid grip on the revolver resulting in a double tap. Once the shooter was shown this and he adjusted his shooting style to let the trigger finger "ride" rather than grip, the problem went away.

On a similar vein we bought a .500 for an engineering sample, one the engineers test firing the gun double tapped it into the concrete ceiling of the range tube. Exciting to say the least!

Conversely, Rusty, I believe you are wrong. I too wish you had the video to prove it. Why can't some folks wrap their head around the fact that it can and has happened. I am not trying to be argumentative, but it has happened to shooters who aren't recoil sensitive. Why can't there be a flaw in the design? Perhaps starting with a 62,000 psi .50 caliber cartridge?

Personally, I don't know what all the hoopla is about the recoil of the .500 X-frame. They weigh two-and-a-half tons and have a muzzle break. I have shot .454s that are much worse, and even with the absurd 700 grain loads we tested, I wasn't overwhelmed in the least. So why is it that so many are so quick to attribute this phenomenon to being unaccustomed to heavy recoil??

Same reason people insist muzzle energy has any significance.

Gentlemen.

There is a difference in when a S&W locking bolt us unlocked because of recoil and the culinder rotates backwards and no second round is fired, and when the gun shoots two shots. For the gun to shoot two shots the hammer has to come back and then go foward.

This is caused by the shooter pulling the trigger a second time due to his hand trying to control the recoil.

When the hammer comes back the cylinder will rotate in the proper direction.
Both shots go through the barrel.

If a round fires from a cylinder not inline with the barrel, the revolver will show some evidence to that fact.

Yes, I have seen 44 Mag S&W's have the cylinder rotate backwards, but they did not fire a second shot.

Any time I have seen a shot fired it was always with proper cylinder rotation, most always by an experienced with heavy recoil handgun. shooter.

I have trouble understanding why so many are quick to dismiss any possibility of a design flaw. Even if the trigger pulled twice theory explains the phenomenon, then there is a problem with the design as it has happened too many times. But seriously, if you think that the recoil is so heavy that it is causing this unfortunate reaction, I have some revolvers for you to shoot that will redefine your take on heavy recoil. Seriously.

I certainly wouldn't view MY opinions as being objective since what I know came from S&W, but I do know the stigma of a "big handgun" is traumatizing to many people. I'm from the Elmer Keith generation and love the big boom theories. Still, I know more people who convince themselves they're holding a bottle of nitroglycerin when they grab that big round. The western style grips are a bit more forgiving as they will slide up the hand when fired, while the grip on the Smith basically locks you down on the grip. Many people refuse to think a gun could be fired that quickly. Just watch Jerry Michelik or better, watch Bob Munden. Because we can't do it intentionally doesn't mean the gun is incapable of doing it. In my research MOST of these incidents were recorded on people firing their first shot from the single action position. And has been pointed out by others, the it's not the cylinder rotating either way at issue since the round won't fire unless that trigger is reset. In the scenario being argued, not only would the cylinder have to automatically rotate clockwise against the pawl, the trigger would have to reset without being relaxed and the hammer would have to skip over the trigger safety lockout and trip automatically. If the shooter keeps that trigger depressed throughout the sequence, there is no way that gun will reset and fire.

You guys know that American guns aren't "proofed" simply because of industry standards. Do you REALLY think Smith or any other company would hide a defect like this without being bankrupt by lawsuits in this crazy world we live in?

But again, my opinion is slanted.

Hitman, stop trying to agitate and stay on subject. LOL

What if the firing pin is still deployed (after striking the primer) when the cylinder unlocks and rotates the next round in line? Isn't it possible that this alone could ignite the primer of that round? Hasn't anyone considered this possibility? I just saying that where there is smoke, there is fire and this has happened to too many people to conveniently explain away as operator error.

Come on George, these things don't kick all that hard. My Super Redhawk (Double Action) in .500 Linebaugh weighs a pound-and-a-half less than the X-frame that I had in .500 Smith & Wesson. And like all big DA revolvers, it too slams back into your hand and frankly this thing kicks a hell-of-a-lot harder than anything I have shot through my .500 Smith. Hell, I have a .454 Redhawk that kicks harder. I'm just not buying that shooters are being overwhelmed by this "enormous" recoil. Surely some have, but to suggest that it is causing them to pull the trigger twice flies in the face of logic. At least to me it does.

LOL I like shooting the 700 grain hard cast with a peak load myself. At my age, that's about as close to an orgasm as I could hope for. What I love to do is to shoot the light loads and then have someone ask you if they could try it. Then give them a 700 grainer and stand back to watch seeing that sick feeling in their eyes when they touch it off. Guys like us won't notice it much as you say, but we both know guys who think the .357 Mag is as heavy as they'll ever need. I see them on the range throwing bullets all over the sheet. It's tough to be accurate when you're pulling the trigger with your eyes closed. NO BULL.

To answer your question about the firing pin, MY GUN is so close tolerant that the spent round WILL knock the pin backwards and since the rounds bases are exposed on the cylinder, the pin itself would prevent rotating the cylinder.

Well, I am still confused! Can someone explain how the hammer goes back if the trigger is not depressed involuntarily? I can see (perhaps) the cylinder rotating, but can't see how the hammer goes back and then forward to hit the primer at just the right time!
Peter.

the recoil of the gun with wrist tension pre-loaded can cause the gun to "snap". The hammer will sometimes "bounce" under recoil. This allows the gun to unlock (boltlatch) and tie the gun up (single actions) or let the cylinder reverse rotate. This is why some builders of the Maximums use a 28-30# xtra power hammer spring to minimize hammer bounce.

Peter, good luck getting the real answer here from some of the people that think they have all the answers... But if you ask me, the person shooting the gun pulled the trigger 2 times. It has happened to several people I know. When the trigger is pulled, under recoil the finger goes forward, and while under the recoil the person tightens their grip which in turn makes them pull the trigger for a second time. It all happen in a fraction of a second. S&W has confirmed this many times. S&W as someone else pointed out, would not risk being sued for a defective gun. Save some time and call S&W, they will tell you the real truth, not something they think.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:
Peter, good luck getting the real answer here from some of the people that think they have all the answers...

Am I to assume this was directed at me?

It's called a discussion, and no need to hit and run. I think that those who own and like X-frames, are a bit quick to accept Smith & Wesson's explanation. And perhaps to bolster their own egos, they explain it away as "people being unable to handle the recoil generated by the .500 Smith." At least, that is what it looks like from this chair. I know that I don't qualify as someone who is particularly sensitive to heavy recoil, but even with top-end loads, like those touted all over these internet sights, the X-frame still doesn't kick that hard to explain that the "massive recoil" caused a second trigger pull. It's absurd if you look at this objectively. I am not saying it hasn't/doesn't happen, but I don't think this is the whole story or entire explanation.

Now we can continue to discuss this like adults, or we can drag it into the dirt and no one will be better for it.

quote:

the recoil of the gun with wrist tension pre-loaded can cause the gun to "snap". The hammer will sometimes "bounce" under recoil. This allows the gun to unlock (boltlatch) and tie the gun up (single actions) or let the cylinder reverse rotate

Sorry I don't understand this. Under recoil, the gun and hammer are recoiling (moving backward) at the same speed. You are suggesting that something causes the hammer to "stay back" while the gun reverses direction and moves forward? And then, this cause ceases, and the hammer moves forward again?
Sorry I am slow here. Still trying to figure this out! Offhand, I tend to agree somewhat with Whitworth (gulp!!!). The 500 Smith is one of the heaviest guns out there and so I would think it would recoil less than a lighter gun (using the same load). However, perhaps the 500 encourages the use of really heavy loads. Still, I have an FA in 475 L and I have some very accurate max loads and it has never happened to me (yet). Can someone explain why this only happens to 500 Smiths?
Peter.

quote:

Originally posted by Peter: Offhand, I tend to agree somewhat with Whitworth (gulp!!!).

You would be well served.....

Whitworth, I know you are inspiring to be a writer, but instead of witting opinions, try facts. You are discussing an issue that was solved and discussed many years ago, and nothing has changed but the people discussing it, and coming up with more outrageous clams.

No it is not because I am a Smith & Wesson fan that I take their word for anything. I just know what happened.

Have a great day..

quote:

Bill explained that the phenomenon described most often happens to shooters unfamiliar with the recoil or smaller framed individuals who are "scared" to shoot the gun. The gun is squeezed tightly in the palm trying to prevent dropping the firearm. When this death grip manages to fire the first round, the gun recoils backward against the palm, thus releasing the tension on the trigger finger enough to let the lockout release on the cylinder, but the muscle memory of the shooter is still so tense that the second round fires almost instantaneously, usually pointing towards a hole in the sky at 10 o'clock.

So, George, are you saying that the first round was fired single action but the second was fired double action?
Peter.

It doesn't matter if the first round is fired SA or DA. The root cause is the trigger and trigger finger resetting under recoil and the trigger finger pulling the trigger again (DA) when the shooter's trigger finger reacquires a grip on the gun.

Peter, to confirm your earlier question, the mass of the hammer is above its pivot point and because it mass is high, it driven deeper into the frame under recoil, their is a slight bounce when the hammer strikes the firing pin in the frame and then the face of the hammer elastically rebounds off the frame, about the same distance as the firing pin protrudes toward the hammer before being struck. But it returns to the frame before the gun moves from recoil. Its a very short duration, and tiny movement (.03" or so).

High speed video at 20,000 frames/sec very clearly shows the second shot being fired by the shooter.

Peter, it's a dumb question as I honestly don't know. Who ELSE markets the 500 in double action? I know Smith came out with it initially and they followed up quickly with the 460. Had they reversed that, it's unlike the 500 would have become as popular as it did.

Now I've explained the mechanical operations as much as I know about and I know the scenario of an automatic fire sequence is MECHANICALLY implausible and I also know that the phenomenon is rare if not absent with experienced handgunners. PERSONALLY, it's never happened to me, yet it happened USING my gun which points me to believe even stronger that it's recoil sensitive people or people unfamiliar with the gun itself.

I'm not recoil sensitive, but I would never claim that the recoil on a 500 isn't substantial. I also know the X-frame requires a person with large hands to control it where if it were mounted on a single action frame, average sized hands could muscle up on it. So to answer part of your question, Peter, I think THAT is a large contributing factor to why the phenomnon occurs.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:
Whitworth, I know you are inspiring to be a writer, but instead of witting opinions, try facts. You are discussing an issue that was solved and discussed many years ago, and nothing has changed but the people discussing it, and coming up with more outrageous clams.

No it is not because I am a Smith & Wesson fan that I take their word for anything. I just know what happened.

Have a great day..

I am trying to be a writer? Alex, I have been a paid writer for more than a dozen years. And I am not "witting" opinions or "inspiring" to be a writer. There are more explanations for this phenomenon that the dreaded double squeeze of the trigger. I threw out what I believe could be an explanation, and you turned it into an opportunity to take a cheap shot. Instead of coming here once every six months to post a cheap shot, trying being less cantankerous and enter into the discussion without the aggression in your tone.

The moment someone goes against the approved explanation by Smith & Wesson, the S&W guys get up in arms about it. Why????

I had one of these revolvers too, and I don't feel the need to "defend its honor."

As far as facts go, you are merely presenting one side of the story. And, "I just know what happened," won't stand up in any court as a "fact."

All I am saying is that there is the outside possibility that something else is going on here. Can we discuss, or should we just dismiss every other possibility because you have chosen to accept one explanation? These forums are here for the sole purpose of exchanging ideas and information. So let's exchange ideas and information and not take cheap shots.

Whitworth, you need to read your own post and, take your own advice. It applies to you. Like I said, this has been discussed and proven many years ago, way before you ever decided to buy a 500 mag. It was discussed in depth on the S&W site for a few years, and has died off as the myth has been solved.

Thousands of rounds fired in my gun, and the only 2 people had it happen with my gun. So two times out of several thousand rounds, and never happened to me, I say it is all on the shooter.

Sorry you don't like the way I post, I stated facts, and you just don't want to hear the facts, if you did, you would have nothing to talk about.

Have a good one..

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:
Whitworth, you need to read your own post and, take your own advice. It applies to you. Like I said, this has been discussed and proven many years ago, way before you ever decided to buy a 500 mag. It was discussed in depth on the S&W site for a few years, and has died off as the myth has been solved.

Thousands of rounds fired in my gun, and the only 2 people had it happen with my gun. So two times out of several thousand rounds, and never happened to me, I say it is all on the shooter.

Sorry you don't like the way I post, I stated facts, and you just don't want to hear the facts, if you did, you would have nothing to talk about.

Have a good one..

I had to get one to test -- not because it was popular or because I wanted one. Period. If two people managed to get your revolver to double tap, there seems to be a problem. It's not like you heard about the problem, you witnessed it twice. Isn't that a cause for pause????

Now as far as taking my own advice, you are the one who performed your signature cheap shot and then you act surprised when you get it back. Perhaps, as has been noted before, you should work on your communication skills.

This thread went downhill with your comment. Own it, it's yours.

Whitworth, nothing was wrong with my gun, once again you are showing your ignorance. My gun went back to S&W and was check out, and was given a clean bill of health as well as my local gun smith. If you could comprehend that the shooters were the ones that pulled the trigger for the second shot, you would understand it is NOT THE GUN.. Damn are you that dense?

Also I am not worried about what you say to me, I don't value your opinion, so why would it bother me!

I think over the time I've known Redhawk,he's owned 4 or 5 S&W 500's. I know he's a member of several ranges and it's not uncommon for others to want to shoot the 500 - especially when it's touched off inside an indoor range. I'm honestly not surprised with the numbers of people he encounters that only two had a problem.

Away from the lovefest. I would ask that if it's NOT the shooter and a problem with the gun, where's the explanation for it never having been an issue with the 460 S&W? Same X-frame so I would assume that the mechanisms are the same. The cylinder is the same (obviously rebored to size). Only the barrel with it's progressive twists differs. Mine does not have a muzzlebrake as I bought the solid adapter to replace it. I don't think Redhawks has one either. So it's the reaction to the recoil and the unintentional tripping of the trigger IN MY OPINION. Now that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Whitworth, are you freelancing or a paid contributor. I've been "aspiring" now for about 25 years (I'm aspiring to actually get paid for writing what I do. LOL) I know it's a tough row to hoe for outdoors and firearms writers today. It's sort of tacky at times. I write a weekly column and contribute to a couple magazines occasionally, but it just irks me a bit that I'm required to "send them a bill" in order to get paid. They always pay, but it just seems tacky to me.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:
Whitworth, nothing was wrong with my gun, once again you are showing your ignorance. My gun went back to S&W and was check out, and was given a clean bill of health as well as my local gun smith. If you could comprehend that the shooters were the ones that pulled the trigger for the second shot, you would understand it is NOT THE GUN.. Damn are you that dense?

Also I am not worried about what you say to me, I don't value your opinion, so why would it bother me!

You're calling me dense? Have you read any of your posts here? Drag the conversation down to your level once again. If you don't see that the fact that two people managed to double your gun, there is a design flaw. Maybe nothing mechanically wrong with it, but the fact that it is susceptible to this even happening is a problem. I don't expect you to be able to wrap your unsophisticated head around that.

Evidently you are concerned with my opinion, because you never fail to come back and launch just one more attack. You are one uncultured individual who has never learned the skill of discussion and the value in not taking your signature cheap shots. Dang, were you an only child?

quote:

Originally posted by george roof:
I think over the time I've known Redhawk,he's owned 4 or 5 S&W 500's. I know he's a member of several ranges and it's not uncommon for others to want to shoot the 500 - especially when it's touched off inside an indoor range. I'm honestly not surprised with the numbers of people he encounters that only two had a problem.

Away from the lovefest. I would ask that if it's NOT the shooter and a problem with the gun, where's the explanation for it never having been an issue with the 460 S&W? Same X-frame so I would assume that the mechanisms are the same. The cylinder is the same (obviously rebored to size). Only the barrel with it's progressive twists differs. Mine does not have a muzzlebrake as I bought the solid adapter to replace it. I don't think Redhawks has one either. So it's the reaction to the recoil and the unintentional tripping of the trigger IN MY OPINION. Now that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Whitworth, are you freelancing or a paid contributor. I've been "aspiring" now for about 25 years (I'm aspiring to actually get paid for writing what I do. LOL) I know it's a tough row to hoe for outdoors and firearms writers today. It's sort of tacky at times. I write a weekly column and contribute to a couple magazines occasionally, but it just irks me a bit that I'm required to "send them a bill" in order to get paid. They always pay, but it just seems tacky to me.

PM heading your way, George.

The .500 is generating more momentum than the .460, therefore the recoil can be measured to exceed that of the .460. Same reason a N-frame in .44 Mag will "out recoil" a N frame in .357 Mag. Simple physics.

Let's not forget that S&W is the same company that caved on the side locks in order to try and gain favor with the Clintonistas. Pushing the party line that this is operator error is not above them.

quote:

Let's not forget that S&W is the same company that caved on the side locks in order to try and gain favor with the Clintonistas.

And they make some of the finest handguns anywhere! Just like Ruger! Hey let's just boycott them and buy Taurus, right? That'll teach them a lesson.
I have no idea what locks have to do with the above topic. BTW my Ruger LCR has a lock. I have not used it yet, but might well do so as I have a 2 year old grandson living with us. Maybe I don't need any stinking locks, just let an accident happen.
Peter.

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:

quote:

Let's not forget that S&W is the same company that caved on the side locks in order to try and gain favor with the Clintonistas.

And they make some of the finest handguns anywhere! Just like Ruger! Hey let's just boycott them and buy Taurus, right? That'll teach them a lesson.
I have no idea what locks have to do with the above topic. BTW my Ruger LCR has a lock. I have not used it yet, but might well do so as I have a 2 year old grandson living with us. Maybe I don't need any stinking locks, just let an accident happen.
Peter.

Peter, you are catching on, some guys here think that have all the answers, and if you don't believe them, other of there click will tell you they are right.

I have been shooting the S&W 500 mag a long time now, (YEARS) before Withworth ever thought about getting one. I have put well over 4000 round through all my 500 mags. I am no expert in the 500 mag, but I think I have a good grasp on what the gun is all about. Even when you show the know it all here facts, they dismiss it, because they think they know better. Hence the reason I don't post here much anymore. You have to wear rubber boots with all the bullshit that gets tossed around here. If you don't agree with the local know it all's you don't fit in.. I just don't fit in, as I am allergic to bullshit!

Whitworth, this is a case of mind over matter, I don't mind and you damn sure don't matter. The reason I post about what you are saying is, YOU ARE WRONG! It's that simple, but you can't handle the truth.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:I have been shooting the S&W 500 mag a long time now, (YEARS) before Withworth ever thought about getting one. I have put well over 4000 round through all my 500 mags. I am no expert in the 500 mag, but I think I have a good grasp on what the gun is all about. Even when you show the know it all here facts, they dismiss it, because they think they know better. Hence the reason I don't post here much anymore. You have to wear rubber boots with all the bullshit that gets tossed around here. If you don't agree with the local know it all's you don't fit in.. I just don't fit in, as I am allergic to bullshit!

Whitworth, this is a case of mind over matter, I don't mind and you damn sure don't matter. The reason I post about what you are saying is, YOU ARE WRONG! It's that simple, but you can't handle the truth.

I didn't "think of buying one" because I felt that it was an answer to a question that wasn't asked, and generally, the ones that ran out and bought them bought into the hype. I can proudly say that I never bought into it -- you did, what does that say about you?

So Smith & Wesson produces a video, and that constitutes "the facts?" Do you accept everything you are fed as facts? Hope and Change? LOL!

What am I wrong about? You are saying that there is absolutely no possibility, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that pulling the trigger twice is the ONLY explanation possible. Are you that limited?

Mind over matter -- wow, deep thought!

Keep stepping in it, Redhawk.

Okay, this has gotten out of hand.

Let us review. Someone else (contrary to the suggestion of Redhawk1) started this post about the phonomenom of the X-frame .500 Smith double tap. This is a topic that rears its ugly head seemingly every couple years. There are stories abound on the internet, there are videos of people experiencing the double tap, and Smith & Wesson even set out to "prove" that this event is operator error.

No doubt that in many instances, folks are pulling the trigger twice, but in some of these videos it happens at a rate that Bob Munden would be envious of. Think about it, Jerry Mikuleck, Ed McGivern, and Bob Munden had spent decades -- their lifetimes -- honing their trigger fingers to shoot rapidly. Now here you see a rank amateur shooting a .500 Smith, pulling the trigger the second time faster than world class trick shooters the likes of Munden. Doesn't that in the least strike you as odd?

All I am saying -- all I have always been saying -- is that there seems to be somemthing else going on here that may not be explainable as someone loosening their trigger finger and then suddenly reapplying pressure. That Redhawk1 has witnessed this happening on two separate occasions is mind boggling. That alone should raise a red flag.

I attempted to spur on dialogue and debate, but someone took the opportunity to misconstrue my words.

Now I've got too much else going on to get into one of our old pissing matches, but Hitman, I gotta call you out on that Smith "caving in" comment. That was a time when the old parent organization sold out to foreign investors and for about a year, Americans were stuck with that Euro gun control crap. Fortunately, Smith was reacquired by American investors as it is today. It's just the world we live in. You simply can't buy a Browning firearm that's made in America. That holds true with many of the guns we use. Do you realize that many of the firearms manufactured by Smith&Wesson in Massachusetts can't be SOLD THERE? Finding a Baretta made in Belgium now makes it a collectors item. That's the one-world-society PC bullshit of multinational corporations.

I did find your comment quite interesting on recoil. I couldn't agree more. In fact, I think it's what I've been saying all along as the reason for the double fire phenomenon. LOL