Adam acknowledges that at around 32:30. He says they don't have the right scope for the era. He just says that it seems highly unlikely for it to happen with a modern scope like the ones they had.
One of my friends was driving nails with a hammer, clipped the tip of the hammer, this took a 5mm x 1cm shard off the end and straight into his arm. He had to go the the hospital and it was a serious surgery, the sharp narrowly missed some arteries so the doctors said he was super lucky as he could have bled out really fast.
For the fusing bullet, why wouldn't they just aim the guns just slightly off-center to each other so that a miss wouldn't actually mean hitting the other gun? They're going for lucky timing anyway.
The 2 hammer myth is totally true I still have fragments in my figure, but it is more related to the angle of impact, a glancing blow is the most dangerous. It the same with cast iron
Anybody else seen the video where some engineers did set up a bullet hitting bullet rig and got the slow mo footage of the bullets fusing? Mind blowing stuff that somebody actually pulled it off.
@@avirajsinghmehta1857 No, it weren't the @TheSlomoGuys. They too tried this myth, true, but they did not quite got it like it should have been. It was actually Destin from @SmarterEveryDay and his friend who actually perfectly replicated the two bullet fusion by 'accident' and got it on slomo camera.... They never thought it was possible as they had failure after failure. But with their last shot of the day they 'accidentally' made the perfect 2 bullet fusion on slomo video: search for _"Bullets HITTING Bullets in Slow Motion - THE IMPOSSIBLE SHOT - Smarter Every Day 287"_
Guys, guys! Even a Brit who has never shot anything other than an airgun (aspect British law), I identified immediately what must have been a major spurious factor in the results the team experienced experienced in the test: instead of textbook technique which requires a progressive squeezing of the gun's trigger until firing occurs. Jamie always yanked the cord that activated the trigger. This alone could explain why he almost always missed his target.
A VC sniper would probably have had a Soviet PU or PSO-1 scope, not a modern US scope. The PU is a much more primitive scope and should be able to take far less punishment.
The scope Carlos Hathcock put a bullit through was either a Soviet PE or PU scope as it's well cocumented that "Cobra", the sniper he cileld during this incident was armed with a Mosin-Nagant Model 1891/30, the standard issue Soviet sniper rifle during the Second World War. Hathcock and his observer Burke captured it after the kill was made and brought it back to the firebase they were operation from. There they handed in the captured rifle to the base armory. Both the PE and the PU scopes were vastly inferior to the scope that Jamie and Adam fired at in this test. Both scopes are shorter, especially the PU scope, and had far less magnification, meaning fewer and lower quality lenses inside them. This information would not have been to difficult for the Mythbuster team to research. And hence they could have chosen a far more suitable target scope to shoot at that would have been far more similar to the scope Hathcock put a bullit through in 1967. But instead they choose a scope that was far to "robust" for this test given they based it on the Hatchcock vs "Cobra" duel specifically.
Yet it is historical fact that Carlos Hathcock put a bullit through the PE or PU scope on the Mosin-Nagant Model 1891/30 used by the Vietnamese sniper designated by the US forces as "Cobra" in 1967 during the Vietnam War. Hathcock and his observer Burke captured the rifle in question and handed it in at the armoury at the firebase they were operating from. So it's not a myth. In the case of the Hathcock vs "Cobra" duell it is historical fact! Other Hollywood variants of snipers putting bullits through sniper scopes however are clearly mythical in proportion. It all depends on with what rifle you shoot and what kind of scope you are aiming to shoot through. In this case the Mythbuster team choose a scope far more advanced and with more lenses inside it than the PE or PU scope mounted on the Mosin-Nagant Model 1891/30 rifle that "Cobra" used.
they state that the 9mm round(0.355) is bigger than the chamber of the 38 but actually the 9mm round is just a tiny bit smaller than a 38 round(0.357) and since the 38 round has to fit in the chamber that simply isn't true.
Yes, hammers do split if old enough and work hardened. A chip, no explosion. Chips penetrate 2 cm of forearm. Carlos Hathcock did the through telesight shot in Vietnam.
Exactly. Work hardening is key here. It's not just how hard you hit but how many times you've done it. If they had shown more of the blacksmiths shop we probably would have seen an old drift or similar punching tool where the head has mushroomed out. It's generally these tools that have been the source of flying shrapnel. The other thing is modern hammers are usually made out of alloy steel which have additional alloys which improve toughness as well as more advanced tempering techniques. Old hammers forged by blacksmiths were typically made of high/medium carbon steel and the heat treatment might be less than ideal resulting in a more glass like hammer. Alec Steele did a colab with real engineering where he demonstrated how heat treatment affects steel properties
As someone who has been on a jobsite where my coworker had to go to the hospital to get a chunk of hammer removed from his arm, I can assure you that pieces of exploding hammer are very real, and will ruin your day.
Mythbusters taught me what gun culture is like in the United States. It is incredible the fascination they have for guns and how they use them in normal society settings, as if they were using a phone or a pair of shoes.
@@daza3620 What you mean _"no ammo"_ ???? Of course there were bullets in the cylinder. You can clearly see at least two cylinders with a bullet loaded, and one cylinder with a reverse bullet (shrapnel) in it. The photo doesn't show the other cylinders on the other side by the way; so you can't say anything about them. And even if there was no other bullets loaded in the gun, except for the reverse bullet, that still doesn't mean the cop pointed an empty gun at the suspect. It might mean the not used bullets were removed before taking the photograph. And even if there was no ammo at all in the gun from the very beginning (although that would be extremely rare; police should always have their guns loaded). You could still point an empty gun to a suspect to show force/threat. But all this said, it is completely mute anyways since, as pointed out at the beginning, you can clearly see 2 loaded cylinders and a reverse bullet in the cylinder in between.
@@CookieTube The mythbusters gun had no brass or bullets in it, the narrator kept saying the cylinders where empty. Why would they be empty? Would the cylinders not have eithe live ammo or spent brass in?
When it comes to the Carlos Hathcock scope shot I feel the Mythbusters dropped the ball to be honest. The scope they shot at was far to advanced for anything that the VC or NVA used during the Vietnam War. Especially in the example of Carlos Hathcock. Even if they didn't know exactly what kind of scope Hathcock actually put a bullit through it wouldn't be that hard for them to do a bit of historical reserach into the type of sniper rifles and scopes that was commonly used by the VC and NVA. It would most likely have been a less powerfull scope that what was standard issue with the US Marine Corps at the time. VC and NVA snipers tended to have to rely on Soviet or Chinese hand-me-down sniper rifles and scopes, usually Second World War vintage. In the case of "Cobra", the sniper that Hatchcock shot through the scope, the rifle in question was a Second World War Soviet Mosin-Nagant Model 1891/30 with either a PE or a PU scope. The same type of sniper rifle that was used by the famous Soviet sniper Vasily Zaitsev. Both the PE and PU scopes were far smaller, cruder and had less magnification than the scopes Hathcock had avalible for his Winchester Model 70 30.06 rifle, aswell as the target scope the Mythbusters chose for their test. The PE only had a x 3,87 magnification while the PU scope had a magnification of x 3,5. Meaning fewer lenses in a far shorter scope for Hatchcocks 30.06 bullit to pass through than in the test done by the Mythbusters. So less chance for the bullit to deviate and exit the side of the scope. We know for sure that "Cobra" used a Mosin-Nagant Model 1891/30 as Hathcock and his observer Burke captured it and handed it in at the armory at the firebase near Hill 55, southwest of Da Nang, from which they operated. So whether or not it's plausible or not to put a rifle bullit through a snipers scope and into a snipers head behind it depends on the scope that gets shot at. The longer the scope and the more lenses there is in it the lower the chances are that a bullit will manage to go through it without deviating. Off course the calibre of the rifle that fires also matters aswell. In this case the Mythbusters chose a scope very far from suitable for a test like this as they used the Carlos Hathcock vs "Cobra" duel as their basis for their test. And even if theis episode is old, there was plenty written on the subject of Carlos Hathcock vs "Cobra", snipers during the Vietnam War aswell as on Soviet Second World War rifles and scopes. They could have found out roughly what kind of scope Hathcock put his bullit through and chosen a modern equivalent of such a scope or even a repro PE or PU scope if they had wanted to. Still a great watch though!
In some World War in Galipoli in Turkey another pair of bullets hit each other. I also know from a Smarter Every Day video that the bullets of the Civil War are in some museum and Destin also tried to do that experiment.
@Idiomatick yes, hit any two hard items together and they can break. There's is always a possibility. But it just doesn't happen with every light tap like some people panic about.
@@Goalsplus I thought it was interesting that they couldn't replicate at all so they called it busted. It should be confirmed or at least plausible. You totally can be killed by your hammer shattering... I mean, it won't go off like a grenade.
Small but important thing: they proved that two cars hitting each other don't magnify the speed but only impact at the highest speed. But, at 47:00, they half the charge of powder to "compensate" for only one being fired.
They've revisited it, possibly twice. But I don't believe it was ever confirmed, because it isn't possible to actually do in the real world. The problem ultimately becomes one of geometry. The flight path of a bullet is not a straight line, its an arc. Long distance shots have to take into account elevation differences between you and the target, the direction of the wind, drop due to gravity. Even the effect of the bullet 'rolling' sideways through the air due to the riffling. So if I aim directly at you from say 500 or 1000 yards, and you aim directly at me, we probably wouldn't hit each other. We'd have to aim up and to the side a bit, but each of us would have to do that by different amounts. And now the line through my scope to my eye won't be lined up with the path of your bullet. Even if it could get through all the glass and whatnot inside my scope. So you're never going to get the Hollywood 'sniper vs sniper down the scope kill shot'.
14:28 Now there is your Problem, its empty because the bullet its not there but obviously the cases are in position the brass case its the golden thing in the center
As a chippy i have never had a hammer head chip off in a dangerous manner but i was bashing the shit out of a hardened ramset gun nail because i shot the material down in the slightly wrong spot and had to remove it and reposition it and while bashing away at the thing after grinding it nearly all the way off a bit flew off with so much force it embedded itself pretty deeply into my knuckle, blood pissed out everywhere and i was pretty surprised but i had heard about it happening before its just one of them things, sometimes you just wanna get shit moving and do things that in the back of your head you know you perhaps shouldn't.
Jamie: we determined that the difference between the power of the sniper rifle from a distance and up close is negligible. The marksman shoots and the scope of the other rifle blows out from its stand. Jamie is such a m0r0n.
I think the main issue with the sniper myth is that they were using most likely the wrong ammo type and also the wrong scope on the receiving end
definitely scope issue. the ones used by the VA were nowhere near as complex, same in WW2. much thicker and tubular.
Adam acknowledges that at around 32:30. He says they don't have the right scope for the era. He just says that it seems highly unlikely for it to happen with a modern scope like the ones they had.
They revisit this myth in a later episode and confirm it by using period accurate scope and different ammunition.
Smarter Everyday did a bullet fusion test recently. They nailed it and are able to reproduce the same results everytime.
One of my friends was driving nails with a hammer, clipped the tip of the hammer, this took a 5mm x 1cm shard off the end and straight into his arm. He had to go the the hospital and it was a serious surgery, the sharp narrowly missed some arteries so the doctors said he was super lucky as he could have bled out really fast.
For the fusing bullet, why wouldn't they just aim the guns just slightly off-center to each other so that a miss wouldn't actually mean hitting the other gun? They're going for lucky timing anyway.
This is so hilariously US of A - you buy a hammer and it has a sticker saying not to hit hard objects with it. ;-)
The 2 hammer myth is totally true I still have fragments in my figure, but it is more related to the angle of impact, a glancing blow is the most dangerous. It the same with cast iron
It it true that they don't just tell the myths? Can someone confirm this?
I'm sorry, you've gotten bad information. They tell the myths, and nothing more.
@@blankfrankie3747 I'm sorry, but I have substantial evidence to argue that they don't just tell the myths but also, in fact, put them to the test.
I call it Confirmed . 👍 At least Plausible
@@blankfrankie3747 Myth busted!
Ive also heard they have more than 30 years of special effect experience between them, anybody able to confirm?
Anybody else seen the video where some engineers did set up a bullet hitting bullet rig and got the slow mo footage of the bullets fusing? Mind blowing stuff that somebody actually pulled it off.
Slowmo Guys
@@avirajsinghmehta1857 No, it weren't the @TheSlomoGuys. They too tried this myth, true, but they did not quite got it like it should have been.
It was actually Destin from @SmarterEveryDay and his friend who actually perfectly replicated the two bullet fusion by 'accident' and got it on slomo camera.... They never thought it was possible as they had failure after failure. But with their last shot of the day they 'accidentally' made the perfect 2 bullet fusion on slomo video:
search for _"Bullets HITTING Bullets in Slow Motion - THE IMPOSSIBLE SHOT - Smarter Every Day 287"_
You mean the smarter everyday vid?
I wish the narrator would finally answer this age old question: Who are the Mythbusters?
Lmfao so true
Guys, guys! Even a Brit who has never shot anything other than an airgun (aspect British law), I identified immediately what must have been a major spurious factor in the results the team experienced experienced in the test: instead of textbook technique which requires a progressive squeezing of the gun's trigger until firing occurs. Jamie always yanked the cord that activated the trigger. This alone could explain why he almost always missed his target.
I was waiting for this one
Idk anything about scopes, but could it be vintage scope is just not as robust as modern one?
A VC sniper would probably have had a Soviet PU or PSO-1 scope, not a modern US scope. The PU is a much more primitive scope and should be able to take far less punishment.
They revisited this one. This is an older episode.
The scope Carlos Hathcock put a bullit through was either a Soviet PE or PU scope as it's well cocumented that "Cobra", the sniper he cileld during this incident was armed with a Mosin-Nagant Model 1891/30, the standard issue Soviet sniper rifle during the Second World War. Hathcock and his observer Burke captured it after the kill was made and brought it back to the firebase they were operation from. There they handed in the captured rifle to the base armory. Both the PE and the PU scopes were vastly inferior to the scope that Jamie and Adam fired at in this test. Both scopes are shorter, especially the PU scope, and had far less magnification, meaning fewer and lower quality lenses inside them. This information would not have been to difficult for the Mythbuster team to research. And hence they could have chosen a far more suitable target scope to shoot at that would have been far more similar to the scope Hathcock put a bullit through in 1967. But instead they choose a scope that was far to "robust" for this test given they based it on the Hatchcock vs "Cobra" duel specifically.
They tested that in episode 75. The bullet went through the scope, and they deemed it "plausible".
R.I.P. Grant
hes battleboting up that sky ;__;
Yeah
Sniperscope is a pretty impressive myth
Yet it is historical fact that Carlos Hathcock put a bullit through the PE or PU scope on the Mosin-Nagant Model 1891/30 used by the Vietnamese sniper designated by the US forces as "Cobra" in 1967 during the Vietnam War. Hathcock and his observer Burke captured the rifle in question and handed it in at the armoury at the firebase they were operating from. So it's not a myth. In the case of the Hathcock vs "Cobra" duell it is historical fact! Other Hollywood variants of snipers putting bullits through sniper scopes however are clearly mythical in proportion. It all depends on with what rifle you shoot and what kind of scope you are aiming to shoot through. In this case the Mythbuster team choose a scope far more advanced and with more lenses inside it than the PE or PU scope mounted on the Mosin-Nagant Model 1891/30 rifle that "Cobra" used.
@@Verdunveteran yes it is Not a myth, it was a incredible lucky shot, the 1 in 1 million.
they state that the 9mm round(0.355) is bigger than the chamber of the 38 but actually the 9mm round is just a tiny bit smaller than a 38 round(0.357) and since the 38 round has to fit in the chamber that simply isn't true.
Yes, hammers do split if old enough and work hardened. A chip, no explosion. Chips penetrate 2 cm of forearm. Carlos Hathcock did the through telesight shot in Vietnam.
Exactly. Work hardening is key here. It's not just how hard you hit but how many times you've done it.
If they had shown more of the blacksmiths shop we probably would have seen an old drift or similar punching tool where the head has mushroomed out. It's generally these tools that have been the source of flying shrapnel.
The other thing is modern hammers are usually made out of alloy steel which have additional alloys which improve toughness as well as more advanced tempering techniques.
Old hammers forged by blacksmiths were typically made of high/medium carbon steel and the heat treatment might be less than ideal resulting in a more glass like hammer.
Alec Steele did a colab with real engineering where he demonstrated how heat treatment affects steel properties
All revisited here: th-cam.com/video/p-AWDXa_zxQ/w-d-xo.htmlsi=lzkbJwcj6CxXPrQF
As someone who has been on a jobsite where my coworker had to go to the hospital to get a chunk of hammer removed from his arm, I can assure you that pieces of exploding hammer are very real, and will ruin your day.
The worst hammers for chipping in my 50 years in the workshop are lump hammers and short sledgehammers.
*tory* builds the robot not grant? is that legal??
LMAO
Had a 5inch axe at one time and Brooke part of the cutting edge off when I hit a Holly tree and the reason it brook was because it was made too hard
Would they have used solid bullets years ago now we have lead centre cooper jackets which break up solid more chance of staying whole?
Mythbusters taught me what gun culture is like in the United States. It is incredible the fascination they have for guns and how they use them in normal society settings, as if they were using a phone or a pair of shoes.
The simpsons also made an episode about this 😂
what ammo did the perpetrator use?
The first myth, it looked like the revolver in the news clip did not have an empty chamber.
....because there was a reversed bullet in it
@@CookieTube It looked like there was at least empty brass in the cylinder, Why would a cop be pointing a gun with no ammo in at someone?
@@daza3620 What you mean _"no ammo"_ ???? Of course there were bullets in the cylinder. You can clearly see at least two cylinders with a bullet loaded, and one cylinder with a reverse bullet (shrapnel) in it. The photo doesn't show the other cylinders on the other side by the way; so you can't say anything about them.
And even if there was no other bullets loaded in the gun, except for the reverse bullet, that still doesn't mean the cop pointed an empty gun at the suspect. It might mean the not used bullets were removed before taking the photograph.
And even if there was no ammo at all in the gun from the very beginning (although that would be extremely rare; police should always have their guns loaded). You could still point an empty gun to a suspect to show force/threat.
But all this said, it is completely mute anyways since, as pointed out at the beginning, you can clearly see 2 loaded cylinders and a reverse bullet in the cylinder in between.
@@CookieTube The mythbusters gun had no brass or bullets in it, the narrator kept saying the cylinders where empty. Why would they be empty? Would the cylinders not have eithe live ammo or spent brass in?
When it comes to the Carlos Hathcock scope shot I feel the Mythbusters dropped the ball to be honest. The scope they shot at was far to advanced for anything that the VC or NVA used during the Vietnam War. Especially in the example of Carlos Hathcock. Even if they didn't know exactly what kind of scope Hathcock actually put a bullit through it wouldn't be that hard for them to do a bit of historical reserach into the type of sniper rifles and scopes that was commonly used by the VC and NVA. It would most likely have been a less powerfull scope that what was standard issue with the US Marine Corps at the time. VC and NVA snipers tended to have to rely on Soviet or Chinese hand-me-down sniper rifles and scopes, usually Second World War vintage. In the case of "Cobra", the sniper that Hatchcock shot through the scope, the rifle in question was a Second World War Soviet Mosin-Nagant Model 1891/30 with either a PE or a PU scope. The same type of sniper rifle that was used by the famous Soviet sniper Vasily Zaitsev. Both the PE and PU scopes were far smaller, cruder and had less magnification than the scopes Hathcock had avalible for his Winchester Model 70 30.06 rifle, aswell as the target scope the Mythbusters chose for their test. The PE only had a x 3,87 magnification while the PU scope had a magnification of x 3,5. Meaning fewer lenses in a far shorter scope for Hatchcocks 30.06 bullit to pass through than in the test done by the Mythbusters. So less chance for the bullit to deviate and exit the side of the scope. We know for sure that "Cobra" used a Mosin-Nagant Model 1891/30 as Hathcock and his observer Burke captured it and handed it in at the armory at the firebase near Hill 55, southwest of Da Nang, from which they operated. So whether or not it's plausible or not to put a rifle bullit through a snipers scope and into a snipers head behind it depends on the scope that gets shot at. The longer the scope and the more lenses there is in it the lower the chances are that a bullit will manage to go through it without deviating. Off course the calibre of the rifle that fires also matters aswell. In this case the Mythbusters chose a scope very far from suitable for a test like this as they used the Carlos Hathcock vs "Cobra" duel as their basis for their test. And even if theis episode is old, there was plenty written on the subject of Carlos Hathcock vs "Cobra", snipers during the Vietnam War aswell as on Soviet Second World War rifles and scopes. They could have found out roughly what kind of scope Hathcock put his bullit through and chosen a modern equivalent of such a scope or even a repro PE or PU scope if they had wanted to. Still a great watch though!
In some World War in Galipoli in Turkey another pair of bullets hit each other. I also know from a Smarter Every Day video that the bullets of the Civil War are in some museum and Destin also tried to do that experiment.
YT Video: _"Bullets HITTING Bullets in Slow Motion - THE IMPOSSIBLE SHOT - Smarter Every Day 287"_
"BANG IN A BANG!!"
Thank you from Russia. When we were kids we all watched you)
The hammer myth sort of falls apart when you find out anvil tops are hardened steel.
So, you believe in your own experience you hit the anvil instead of the malleable heated steel? What a tool LOL.
@manusb6441 start with an insult and tell us how you don't know.
I have not only seen a hammer blow off a shard causing a life threatening injury, I have a photo of the xray
@Idiomatick yes, hit any two hard items together and they can break. There's is always a possibility. But it just doesn't happen with every light tap like some people panic about.
@@Goalsplus I thought it was interesting that they couldn't replicate at all so they called it busted. It should be confirmed or at least plausible. You totally can be killed by your hammer shattering... I mean, it won't go off like a grenade.
The sniper was from Vietnam...
They used Grant as a model for the shooter, who's Asian... oml lol, they went the extra step to replicate the myth.
ive already watched it
Small but important thing: they proved that two cars hitting each other don't magnify the speed but only impact at the highest speed. But, at 47:00, they half the charge of powder to "compensate" for only one being fired.
pretty sure this episode was well before the one you would referencing, same with the hammers myth, they confirmed it later in the series
"If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer."
-- Alan Lewis
17:11 >>> 17:42
Wait I thought I watch other versions of snipe scope when they made it?
They've revisited it, possibly twice. But I don't believe it was ever confirmed, because it isn't possible to actually do in the real world.
The problem ultimately becomes one of geometry. The flight path of a bullet is not a straight line, its an arc. Long distance shots have to take into account elevation differences between you and the target, the direction of the wind, drop due to gravity. Even the effect of the bullet 'rolling' sideways through the air due to the riffling. So if I aim directly at you from say 500 or 1000 yards, and you aim directly at me, we probably wouldn't hit each other. We'd have to aim up and to the side a bit, but each of us would have to do that by different amounts. And now the line through my scope to my eye won't be lined up with the path of your bullet. Even if it could get through all the glass and whatnot inside my scope. So you're never going to get the Hollywood 'sniper vs sniper down the scope kill shot'.
14:28 Now there is your Problem, its empty because the bullet its not there
but obviously the cases are in position the brass case its the golden thing in the center
the target scope was NOT period accurate
burning oil on a wooden table........love the show but they can be so stupid sometimes...." professionals " mmmhmmmmmmm lol
Shoot the scope from the other side
The audio is out of sinc
Wow😮
Problem with the hammer tests was that you dont really hit something with a hammer just the one time
mong nó có lồng tiếng việt vì tôi là người việt nghe tiếng anh không quen nên là mong có tiếng việt nếu có tôi sẽ coi quài❤❤
mong nó có lồng tiếng việt vì tôi là người việt nghe tiếng anh không quen nên là mong có tiếng việt nếu có tôi sẽ coi quài
Blimey... Adam's put on some weight! 😬
As a chippy i have never had a hammer head chip off in a dangerous manner but i was bashing the shit out of a hardened ramset gun nail because i shot the material down in the slightly wrong spot and had to remove it and reposition it and while bashing away at the thing after grinding it nearly all the way off a bit flew off with so much force it embedded itself pretty deeply into my knuckle, blood pissed out everywhere and i was pretty surprised but i had heard about it happening before its just one of them things, sometimes you just wanna get shit moving and do things that in the back of your head you know you perhaps shouldn't.
Jamie: we determined that the difference between the power of the sniper rifle from a distance and up close is negligible.
The marksman shoots and the scope of the other rifle blows out from its stand.
Jamie is such a m0r0n.