Hatrack River Writers Workshop: Gun question

This is topic Gun question in forum Open Discussions About Writing at Hatrack River Writers Workshop.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/writers/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=001976

Posted by NewsBys (Member # 1950) on :

When you fire a pistol, the barrel gets hot right?

If a character fires a pistol once, then 5-10 minutes later presses the same gun to another character's neck, would it still be hot, just warm, or cold?

FYI - The action takes place in a tropical climate.

Thanks for any help you can give.

Posted by HSO (Member # 2056) on :

No, the barrel would not be hot, unless the tropical climate made it specifically hot (sunlight). But it wouldn't be hot after five minutes from being fired once.

Posted by NewsBys (Member # 1950) on :

Thanks HSO!

Posted by RavenStarr (Member # 2327) on :

Yea, for a pistol to still be hot after 5-10 minutes after firing only one shot, fair to say, something's wrong with the pistol, and you should be grateful you still have a hand. As HSO mentioned, about the only way it could be hot by then is if it's environmental, and not the actual after affect of the shot itself. In the right sun light gunmetal can conduct enough heat to easily burn someone, especially if it has a solid coat of blueing (the black-layer on a gun that prevents rust)… but that’d also lead to suggesting the type of gun it is (and I’m going to stop here before I start babbling)…

Posted by NewsBys (Member # 1950) on :

No, the sun if not a factor. Thanks Raven.

Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :

It depends on your definition of "hot/warm/cold". It also depends on what the gun was doing the last minute or so before being pressed to the person's neck.

But when someone presses a handgun to your neck, what you feel has almost nothing to do with the actual temperature of the barrel

Posted by NewsBys (Member # 1950) on :

Ha! That's a good point Survivor, maybe my heroine can imagine the heat from the barrel.

Posted by Winin (Member # 2508) on :

On the other hand, metal conducts heat very well, so it would likely feel colder than the ambient temperature. Since ambient temperature is probably below body temp, I would expect a gun to be described as cool or cold unless there is some outside factor (like the sun mentioned above).

Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :

Yeah. And as I understand it, most people will feel a "chill" with attendant goosebumps when any lethal weapon is applied to their necks. The burning blush of humiliation is somewhat more rare.

Posted by NewsBys (Member # 1950) on :

Hot or Cold, Hot or Cold.
Maybe a knife would be a better choice.

Just kid'N.
I like the goosebumps idea.

Posted by matthew (Member # 2473) on :

It definitely would not be hot after only one shot, maybe slightly warm but I wouldn’t bet on it, if you shot off one clip it MAY be hot for a few minutes. You would be better off having the gun be shot several times right before it gets pressed against the person’s neck. But I have accidentally touched a rifle barrel after it had shot off about 90 rounds in a few minutes. It was hot but did not burn, although I don’t think I would find it pleasant to have it held against my skin for any extended period of time.

Posted by Inkwell (Member # 1944) on :

It also depends on the construction of the barrel and if the weapon features a suppressor. Suppressors are known to get very hot, as they increase the volume in which the muzzle blast is allowed to expand (while containing it), and by delaying gas exit by trapping it between metal 'buffers.' Suppressors, therefore, retain and absorb heat, dissipating it over a longer period of time than a standard barrel. It also depends on the caliber of the firearm (and subsequently, the size of the controlled explosion in the breech). I've heard of some suppressors getting hot after as little as five shots. If you really wanted to bother suppressing, say, a .50 cal. pistol (which would still be very loud, even with a can on the end), I'd guess that it could get significantly hot after only one round. My logic relies on the fact that those gases percolating through a series of metal baffles inside of a metal shell probably transfer more heat energy than one round usually does to a standard barrel (since most of the heat escapes directly from the muzzle). Just a thought.

Inkwell
------------------
"The difference between a writer and someone who says they want to write is merely the width of a postage stamp."
-Anonymous

[This message has been edited by Inkwell (edited May 06, 2005).]

Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :

A .50 cal. pistol? That's just silly, both the barrel and the ammunition would need to be custom manufactured. And why would you bother to put a suppressor on something that is mostly good for making noise?

It is very true that a suppressor will heat up faster than the barrel, since it has greater surface area in contact with the gun gasses. That doesn't change the fact that most metals have a pretty low specific heat. If you don't push the gun past its limits of safe operation, almost all of the heat will disperse in a couple of minutes. This is especially true of something like a suppressor, which also has a large surface area exposed to the local environment.

The safe operating temperature of a suppressor will be quite a bit higher than the safe operating temperature of a barrel. There are two reasons for this. As already mentioned, a suppressor will tend to absorb a lot more heat than a barrel. Also, a suppressor will not be in mechanical contact with anything other than the barrel and the gun gasses, so there is not very much an overheated suppressor can do to impair the weapon's proper function (unless it melts, but that's not going to happen from normal operation of a handgun).

Still, you can take something made of steel, heat it red hot, and in five or ten minutes it will only be slightly warm (five or ten seconds if you dunk it in water). And like I said, when someone pushes a gun to your neck, you don't care what temperature the barrel is at unless it's burning you.

Posted by FreyasFriend (Member # 2426) on :

This is an interesting discussion. I tried to remember what it felt like to have a pistol barrel nuzzled into my neck - and you know something - I don't remember chills or heat, or goosebumps. What I remember is that oh sh**t feeling and the relaxing of certain parts of my lower anatomy. But, each person's reaction is probably different. SO let your character tell how she would react, or reacted.

Posted by Inkwell (Member # 1944) on :

quote:
Posted by Survivor:
A .50 cal. pistol? That's just silly...

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. I was merely providing an example of one type of weapon that might expel enough heat to fit this discussion. I also implied that I considered such a weapon impractical, due to its greater aural output.

quote:
...both the barrel and the ammunition would need to be custom manufactured.

Here I disagree a bit. The 'Desert Eagle' pistol, manufactured by Magnum Research, Inc., is available in .50 AE (action express). Smith & Wesson also makes a 5-shot .50 cal. magnum revolver (the Model 500)...currently the world's most powerful mass-produced double-action revolver. What must be made clear is the difference between a .50 caliber pistol round and, say, the ammunition fired by the .50 cal. Browning M2 machine gun (the type commonly mounted on our military transport vehicles). In other words, a big difference. The .50 BMG is, for all intents and purposes, a rifle cartridge (at 5.45 inches long), where the .50 AE is cased in pistol brass (which is, needless to say, much shorter and of a different physical configuration).

Ammunition is available in many licensed gun stores for both the 500 and the Eagle. While it's true that the barrel would have to be modified, most pistols that feature a suppressor do not retain their original barrel, anyway. For one thing, many non-tactical pistols do not come from the factory with a threaded barrel. For another thing, some threaded barrels require special adapters to allow the weapon to cycle properly when the suppressor is attached (and some factory threaded barrels are inappropriate for attachment of a suppressor). Either way, to get the best performance you would need to obtain a match grade threaded barrel.

quote:
And why would you bother to put a suppressor on something that is mostly good for making noise?

Any gun is mostly good for making noise. A large suppressor would take the bark off of even a .50 cal. round, thereby giving the user an advantage in firepower for the same aural signature as a smaller caliber pistol. I've watched a video of a suppressed .50 cal. rifle being fired...it was a little less loud than a standard .45 cal. handgun, though the crack of the round breaking the sound barrier could still be heard downrange. Also, one would not be suppressing any weapon without a specific purpose in mind. If that purpose required more firepower with the same amount of noise as a standard pistol, a .50 cal. pistol might fit the bill. Here's another thought...some suppressors do more to alter the sound of the weapon being fired than to actually suppress it. This makes the firearm a little harder to identify as a firearm (if that makes any sense). In any case, it all depends on the situation at hand. Now, if you wanted to use subsonic .50 cal ammunition...that would be a different matter altogether. You’d have to hand-load those. Such ammunition would be more impractical than using a standard .50 cal. round with a suppressor in the first place. I'm not even sure how effective it would be, as a lesser powder load would have a harder time pushing that big 400-grain jacketed softpoint toward the target.

In conclusion, I do agree that a suppressed .50 cal. pistol would be a bit of a silly choice...if one were trying to be stealthy. NewsBys never specified if stealth was even an issue. Immediately following five shots, I’d guess that a .50 caliber pistol suppressor would be a bit hot on the skin. But, as many have already said, metal cools rather quickly. After a couple of minutes, the gun would return to 'normal' temperature. I’m not disputing that.

Inkwell
-----------------
"The difference between a writer and someone who says they want to write is merely the width of a postage stamp."
-Anonymous

[This message has been edited by Inkwell (edited May 08, 2005).]

Posted by Josh Leone (Member # 2365) on :

Just for info sake, the old Peacemakers were .50 cal. At one time .50 was the most common kind of ammo. Also, unless you're able to get your hands on some controlled ammo, .50's are good for more than just making noise. However, I wouldn't recommend a .50 for a character doing close up, such as putting it against someones' neck. The shot would take the head off, and keep right on going. It would also be very messy. If you want your guy to do something that close, stick to a .22.

Josh

Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :

Huh. Yeah, I was mostly familiar with .50 cal. pistol ammo in the older black powder sense. I certainly wasn't imagining anyone suggesting something insane like trying to fire .50 cal. rifle ammo out of a handgun.

Really, I don't think much of the idea of .50 cal. pistols, even if they are making them again. Sure, the extra 25% impulse you get from the larger cross section plus the large increase in grain gives you an enormous amount of stopping power...but you know what? It won't actually stop anything you couldn't stop just as fast with a 9mm pistol.

I will grant you, if you're going to wave a gun in someone's face, a .50 cal. has a marked advantage. But a suppressed .50 would just look silly, "You're threatening me with a muffler?"

On the other hand, I don't trust .22 pistols. They're loud, they're inaccurate, they look like toys, and because they fire a rifle ammo most of the energy is wasted. Use a knife instead.

Okay, so I'm being opinionated What else is new?

Posted by NewsBys (Member # 1950) on :

Wow, this is a pretty lively discussion. But then al l of our gun discussions are. Are we strange?

Anyway, no, stealth is not an issue, and I was picturing the gun as a .38 revolver.

Basically, the heroine shoots someone with the gun. 5 minutes later the bad guy picks up the gun and holds her hostage with it, by pressing it against her neck.
I just didn't want to write it and then someone say - Hey, why didn't the barrel burn her?

Posted by RavenStarr (Member # 2327) on :

"But then al l of our gun discussions are. Are we strange?"

I blame the military; I worship my weapons...

"I just didn't want to write it and then someone say - Hey, why didn't the barrel burn her?"

I don't know if readers would ever think that in-depth... thinking they would almost sounds paranoid... but hey... at least it forces you to cram your brain full of a whole bunch of trivial information, and that's what makes my life so joyful.
If you wanted to describe the feeling of having the barrel put up to the back of your neck, I'd go with the chill it causes... but then you'd have to wonder, is the chill from the cold of the gun-metal, or the feeling of a bullet staring down your spine (paraphrase that so it works better or something... I think in comic book alot).

[This message has been edited by RavenStarr (edited May 09, 2005).]

Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :

quote:
THIS IS MY RIFLE. There are many like it, but this one is mine. My rifle is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life.
My rifle, without me is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless. I must fire my rifle true. I must shoot straighter than my enemy who is trying to kill me. I must shoot him before he shoots me. I will....

Well, who knows?

Anyway, the question is a valid one. If you don't know whether or not something is plausible, it is better to be in the habit of noticing your ignorance and finding out. I assure you, most readers might not notice, but the more informed and intelligent ones will. People that are not themselves in the know tend to rely on those that they believe are in the know, and while most of those they believe to be in the know may be just as ignorant as everyone else, some of them will probably actually know.

So don't go thinking you can get away with stupid mistakes just because people don't know better, unless you have a huge conspiracy (like Hollywood and the major media) ready to cover your ignorance.

Posted by NewsBys (Member # 1950) on :

Alas, my brain is already full of a whole bunch of trivial information.
What to do with it all?
And look, I just received more of it.
"Stop learning!"
That's what I tell myself, but I don't listen most of the time.