As a couple of examples I had to explain to a number of people how a man and a dog would interact in a fight, and also what weapons could kill a bear

I have never shot a bear or beaten up a dog - but I am still able to apply facts in a logical way to draw conclusions which are sound.

Ah. So by "facts" you mean the nonsensical opinions that habitually you pull from your ass and by "corrected" you mean to say that you offered an opinion that you were completely unable (or unwilling) to support when asked to do so?

you can draw all the conclusions that you want, but when you are proven wrong by actual experts in the field then it's pretty much game over. But you insist that your non existant experience beats actual experts, and that's just silly.

... and just as hairbrained as every other opinion you've voiced.

I havent as far as I can recall ever reported any post on this board, but that is completely uncalled for. You have no right to make such insuations about me.

And as for the comment you are quoting - I think the people who answered it were well aware that I was not asking because I wished to do so, but because I was made uncomfortable about the behaviour of another member (who is now banned) and wanted to seek clarification on the rules.

---

-+-{Important TFP Staff Message}-+- This thread is dangerously close to being closed, and multiple people are contributing to that fact. If this discussion can't remain civil, it will be ended and more infractions may be handed out.

SF do I apologize for any false insinuations but I merely state the fact that many of your opinions in Tilted Weaponry have not been well received by people with real world experience (myself included). That is a fact.

But I stand by my earlier statement:

I'm sure you do appreciate the aesthetics of firearms from the standpoint of anyone who watches Hollywood films or videogames ... but, unlike most folks, you don't seem to acknowledge that the real world is much different.

As you have never so much as handled or even touched a firearm in your life - your opinion on the matter is about as relevant as sex advice from a virgin who only watches porn.

SF, the entire thread is right here in plain english, and anyone who can read can see you've changed your claims repeatedly. I've done nothing to distort the meaning of the words in those quotes. Your repeated moving of the goal posts is not going unnoticed by everyone reading this thread, and your claims that you aren't doing so, intentionally or not, are plain out bullshit--at this point there is no other word for it.

You are claiming something you admit is subjective as an objective fact, and then providing irrelevant evidence. It's a distinctive pistol, and is visually identifiable due to being so big and clunky...that's mostly why they're used in media. However, that has nothing to do with its quality or performance.

No, it isn't, even ignoring the 'single handed' quip. You are wrong--'power' isn't some arbitrary thing we can wax philosophical about, it's a force measured in foot-pounds. Reread the post by The_Dunaden--in it he points out:

Desert Eagle with 50AE: 1229 ft/lbs
Smith & Wesson X-Frame in .500: 3031 ft/lbs

In black and white, the X-Frame has almost 3 times as much power as the Desert Eagle. Done. End of story. No room for argument.

I thought you were claiming price was no object, and derided people who needed to take things like cost into account (purchases of lesser Austrian guns, I think you said) as not the target market for the DE.

In any case, you're wrong about this, too. Here's a link to two currently for sale for price comparison:

An X Frame .500 for $1125 "buy it now": Smith&Wesson Model 500 X-Frame : Revolvers at GunBroker.com

A Desert Eagle in 50AE for $1500 "buy it now": Magnum Research Desert Eagle Polished 50 AE .50 : Semi-auto at GunBroker.com

So no, you are wrong about this also.

So, in this post, you've narrowed your criteria for the DE being the "best" to something we can objectively discuss, that is:
1) Most attractive design (completely subjective)
2) Most powerful (completely false)

At least you've defined your terms concretely now, in phrasing which will make it hard to backpedal from.

It wasn't engineered by IWI. It was engineered by Magnum Research. And it is a design with some inherent flaws which have been pointed out.

It would appear I'm just trying to be contrary now, but long range pistol target practice is one of the few uses for it that I would consider it well suited and totally legitimate. So we disagree about this as well.

Finally, I have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say in your contorted vibrator analogy (clearly mine went over your head), so I won't even bother quoting it.

SF, this really seems like an utter troll thread.
If it wasn't, you might have stimulated a nice interesting discussion by saying something like "I was having a discussion with a friend recently and told him that i thought that the Desert Eagle in .50 AE was the best personal defense handgun and was totally badass, but he said he didn't think it was good for that. As i come from a country where there is significantly less 'gun culture' and people with experience with defensive handguns in general, I wondered, what do you guys think?"
It seems like you don't actually want to listen to reason, or provide any sources, so in my mind you call up your friends, get everyone together to watch a rousing game of "Let's bait the Yanks" by saying something ridiculous.

I'm not sure that this thread really accomplished anything but it was very entertaining and provided me with a lot of laughs. Thank you to all involved.

My God!!! This has to be THE most hilarious thread ever on TFP. I vote to move this to Titled Humor ASAP!!

I'll second the motion but only if he buys me one of those austrian guns, they're pretty cheap I hear.

The point the TK is I think missing is that I didnt talk of power in some abstract scientific sense, I spoke of it in terms in which it was materially comprehensible as defined by the usage of a hand gun.

Now, if a Desert E has 1500 lbs/foot power and the Swith and Weston X Framce has 3000 lbs/foot -we can all see that 3000 is a bigger number than 1500. I propose that I might bring into the equation a rifle that is designed for shooting elephants that perhaps has 4500 lbs/foot power

But in terms of the real situation that a handgun would be used in, 1500 lbs/foot is above the maximum power that a handgun can affectly harness in usage. The gun with 3000 lbs/foot simply wastes 1500 lbs of power because it will never perform any function which would not be done equally as well by 1500.

Just wanted to reiterate

Hey, let's see how the gun feels about all of this bullshit:

http://i919.photobucket.com/albums/a...tEagleTalk.jpg

Well, you heard it, folks. The truth from the source.

/thread

Thank you

Did you just type "some abstract scientific sense?" I have no idea what the hell the rest of this quote means, other than to say I weigh more than you--Not in some abstract scientific sense, but in terms which it is materially comprehensible as defined by the usage of weight. :orly:

There you go, pretending 1500 ft-lbs has some practical function again.

What is this 'real situation'?

What is this function?

You state that 1500 ft-lbs is "above the maximum power a handgun can affectly [sic] harness". What power DO you feel a handgun can effectively harness? I'd appreciate some links to data backing your opinion up, otherwise it's just an uninformed opinion.

You're actually unintentionally arguing AGAINST the 50AE Desert Eagle by admitting it's more power than can be 'harnessed' usefully.

Either more power is better, in which case you should go with the X-Frame, or more power than is needed to perform a useful task is overkill, in which case the Desert Eagle isn't justifiable over the 500 ft-lbs of the far more versatile and useful .45ACP, or the even more powerful (but still relatively mainstream) 640 ft-lbs of 10mm. Which is it?

Thats an interesting suggestion, although my own view is that I use more of my weight than you use of yours.

My view is that the ability to shoot and kill someone through a internal wall is the most anyone can expect of a handgun. We have heard that a Glock did this from another poster, I suspect it is possible if the wall is made of plasterboard or cardboard. I am talking about shooting and killing/maiming through a supporting wall in an average bricks and mortar house.

I hesitate to present two points, as it feels like I'm wasting my words, since so far you've got a track record of only replying to one point at a time and ignoring the rest.

1. Can you provide any documentation or videos showing the 50AE's ability to penetrate brick and mortar and still inflict lethal injury?

Here is a penetration test done on wood, where the 50AE has the same penetration as .357, and FAR less than the X-Frame Smith and Wesson caliber's we've already mentioned.



2. What possible purpose would shooting through a brick wall and killing someone on the other side have in the real world? If someone is on the other side of a brick wall from me, I have no need to shoot them, as they are not a threat. Furthermore, even with an interior wall, it is criminally negligent to shoot at something without positive target identification, which (unless you can see through a brick wall) you will not have. Finally, ignoring the above, I do not know how you intend to fire usefully through a wall, allowing for the path deviations, and still make a useful centermass hit.

My ideal handgun round, if I were able to craft one, would penetrate clothes and soft tissue, abruptly expand to the size of a jagged silver dollar, cause massive hydrostatic shock and permanent tissue deformation, and transfer all of its kinetic energy to the target--meaning no exit wound, the slug would remain in the target. It would also somehow dissolve into a fine harmless powder the instant it struck glass or drywall. It certainly would not penetrate brick.

1) Once again, you are speaking in absolutes. I dare you to cite a source. Any source.

2) Once again, (as TK pointed out), you are moving the goal posts.

3) I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that you have absolutely no idea as to the causes of penetrating power. (Double entendre unintentional, yet applicable). Ft/lbs has VERY little to do with it.

Good point. A long, pointy bullet will penetrate better than a short, fat bullet of the same weight and/or speed. Pounds/feed is a measure of the kinetic energy imparted into the round. That energy -helps- determine how well something will penetrate, but isn't nearly as important as the design of the projectile itself. This is why the 5.7x28FN will penetrate body-armor rated to stop a .44 Magnum (which has more than 3x the kinetic energy but is also more than 2x as wide). However, because heavier bullets -retain- their energy better, the .44 will blow through a human torso without difficulty, while the 5.7x28 will come to a dead stop in around 10-12" of soft tissue. But there again, the two rounds are designed to do two different things: the .44 is for blowing big holes in unarmored Bad Guys or dangerous animals, the 5.7x28 is for blowing several smaller holes very quickly in armored Bad Guys without excessive penetration.

You mean it's easier to stab someone with a knife than it is a sledge hammer? Holy schnikes!

...

Say, this thread reminds me of an applicable joke:

You know how to get a dog to stop humping your leg? Pick him up and suck his dick.

Don't pick up the dog, guys.

look, I have actually gotten trouble for flaming strange famous before, But frankly I cannot sit here and listen to this.... I am sorry, and I will try to be civil, but Strange famous, every single time you post about firearms, you make it VERY clear to anyone who has ever owned or shot a firearm that you do not even have a basic grounding in anything relating to any gun, much less IMI's products....just ....stop... please, unless you WANT to do nothing but troll and make people angry, please go and get some basic training...you are in england, but can still join a rifle club or something, and thus have the option to learn about the subject first hand... or hell, just READ about the subject from some objective source,,, please, you have a right to an opinion, but right is right, and you are , once again, wrong.......

First of, just have to say, this thread is perhaps one of the funniest things I've read in a long time. That said....

Everything I've heard about the DE outside of bad action movies says it's a piece of crap. The problems I've heard about are a tendency to jam, a total bitch to maintain, and with the top side ejector, if you hold it to low or close in, you end up with a red hot shell casing smacking you in the face. On top of that, a gun that size is just an unwieldy monster. Trying to put a round on target in a high stress situation with that thing just strikes me as being easier said then done. As for the raw power of it, who needs it, really? Why in the name of all that is holy would you want a gun of that size? I live in a condo, and if I am forced to use my gun, the last thing I want to worry about is killing the person that lives in the next unit. No, i can't say I would ever feel the need to own one of these things.

Same here, except I'm at 17 years, not 25 years. Strange...buddy...you couldn't possibly know what you are talking about. The general knowledge and understanding which comes from the keeping and bearing arms can not be replicated in books, videos, or video games. You are at a disadvantage, living in the UK, which you cannot possibly compensate for through extensive reading and videos. It's unfortunate, but undeniable.

Having fired a DE, I know that I would NEVER own one, much less depend on it in a life threatening situation. The only thing they are good for is watching Angelina Jolie's tits giggle during recoil.

I've said my piece, Strange, I recommend you make a trip across the pond and spend a week at the range. You can shoot anything you want for as long as you can afford it. I guarantee you will walk away from the experience agreeing the DE is "practically" useless.

One point you left out, look at the position of the spring in the magazine. It's toward the front with the bullets above the follower angled slightly to the sides and with the front tilted up. Even with the gas system functioning perfectly, the uneven pressure and staggering of the large cartridges necessary to cram such large rounds into a usable grip cause an awkward angle of the cartridge into the feed ramp, which frequently (I have seen several firsthand accounts of 1 in 5 shots jamming, and one report of every other shot jamming) causes failure to feed jams.

The gas system is quickly fouled by the faster-burning powders used in pistol cartridges, preventing the slide from recoiling fully and exacerbating the problem by narrowing the time and space constraints in which the next round must be loaded into the chamber.
From where do you draw your conclusion that a handgun can not harness any power over 1500 foot pounds?

I've stayed far away from this for a long time... however....

If someone swore up and down that Volga made the best cars in history it'd raise a serious eyebrow... and a whole lot of discussion.

If that person then turned around and admitted he had never actually driven before, that his sole experience is through how Gran Tourismo programmed the handling and acceleration, would you bother much with his opinion?

I don't mean to degrade... but your opinion is based solely on game balance programming.

I can't wait to start the next troll thread:

Does the General Electric M134 suck?

The Volga isn't what is made, but what is made of it Volga V12 BMW 850 hybrid photos, Pobeda GAZ M20 new russian retro cars pictures

Q: Does the Desert Eagle suck?
A: Yes it does.

thread closed.

This thread has plenty of life left in it

From a purely intellectual point of view*, I'm thoroughly convinced by this thread that the Desert Eagle does indeed suck. I'm sure there is a slew of far more sensible handguns out there to choose from. The Desert Eagle would be very low on my list.




*For the most part, the only actual guns I've seen were either in museums or the holsters of police officers and security guards. The only guns I've handled myself have been light guns, water guns, air rifles, and pricing guns.

The Desert Eagle, at roughly five pounds, excels at being a conversational piece on your coffee table or for securing lose papers on your desk.

...

I inherited the black 6" Desert Eagle XIX .357 featured in this thread in 2004 and refuse to sell it despite how bad it hurts my street cred. The piece is a hilarious example of how a total piece of junk can become so popular in the mainstream while more practical designs fall by the wayside. A little research on .357 caliber autoloading pistols will reveal how ironic it is that the Desert Eagle has become a pop culture icon. I'm still combing the desert looking for a Coonan Cadet, myself. And since I'm That Guy, the Desert Eagle sits in my safe next to a cherry Intratec TEC-9. So which owner category am I, TK?

...

Devil's Advocate'd:

As an aside, the Desert Eagle, at least in .357, is incredibly controllable (no shit, it weighs five pounds and is gas operated) and if meticulously maintained, can really rock .357s on paper. The polygonal rifling, large grip area, and sheer mass make it a decent target pistol... assuming it functions. The SAO trigger is wide and breaks pretty clean and I haven't had any magazine-related stoppages in 6 years despite word on the street. The gun is horribly picky about being dirty, however; and as mentioned above, the gas system is pretty much the mostest-stupidest design ever.

God bless Canada.

You're wasting your time; we're godless socialists, remember?

Jesus gave Real Americans the Desert Eagle.

I'm a bit amazed this thread was addressed specifically to me and yet I didn't see it until now. I'm not surprised by the content, though; the persistent arrogance of SF in yet another attempt to be an expert at something he's clearly not.

Skipping right past the fact that the quote he chose was actually in reference to the owners of Desert Eagles rather than the gun itself, I'd like to say that I think the actual experts in this thread have covered it far better than I could have. I honestly didn't know a lot of the information shared here. I appreciate you all taking the time to address his otherwise silly question, and it should be a learning experience for anyone who searches for Desert Eagle here or elsewhere.

That said, I think it's pretty clear almost 80 posts in that this is another trolling adventure of his so I'd ask that it's either locked or moved to Hall of Fame for the sheer volume and time you all have spent attempting to educate, even if it appears a lost cause.

EDIT: The talking gun was especially hilarious... thank you for that. :)

Pfft! The Desert Eagle is nothing compared to the .88 Magnum:

This thread wasn't addressed to you intentionally, Baraka Guru split it out of the other 'weapons you wish would go away' thread.

---------- Post added at 06:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:40 PM ----------

Sounds like you're owning it ironically. Speaking of irony, doing all the research for this thread totally makes me want to pick one of these up in 50AE to use as a range toy.

I can't tell you to -buy- one, but if you're going to be a douchebag, go for .357. It's a lot cheaper to feed.