OMG. What the hell do they teach kids these days?
When I was their age, I would have recognized an Edison wax cylinder or an early phone with no dial. It's so sad to me that kids are no longer exposed to historical technology. Don't they even watch Nick at Night (I'm just assuming that's still a thing)?
I bet they also have no idea what a Chesterfield is. ;-)

Definitely don't try this at home. He has a snorkel so his engine won't ingest water and hydrolock, cracking the cylinders and ruining the engine. A normal car would be done in that much water. Some sports cars with a low cold air intake pipe can't even drive through puddles.

Thanks for that, makes me feel better about getting them confused since the terminology is semi-fluid.

Seeing the disassembled Wankel engine in the video should have clued me in that that was NOT what was used in the P-47, which had lots of big cylinders for pistons radiating around a central point, hence the "radial" designation.

It (the video) was very helpful for figuring out how the chambers and path of the parts work in comparison to a piston engine, which is quite interesting even for someone like me who really only understands the rudiments of either design. Live and learn!

Actually, all of the actual bullets are in the 9mm width category. Even the .357 is actually .38 but they didn't want to call it a .38 magnum. The difference is in the size of the case. For instance, a 9mm is simply a longer cased .380 with more powder and slightly thicker case walls. This is why the cylinder has tapered chambers, so that the cases can all fit correctly, and the chamber mouths have the little spring projection.

Therefore it is quite accurate, at least as much as any other revolver.

There was an entertaining comment along those lines in a recent Jalopnik article, tell us about the worst car you ever owned, user bandi53 talking about a 1987 Volkswagen Fox that was a bit of a lemon:

[...]
Next was the ignition lock cylinder, which just entirely froze up one morning when I went to start the car. After that was the starter, which left me stranded at the gas station. The day after (Christmas Eve) I was heading back to visit my parents, the alternator light came on... So I figured I’d limp the car home. This would have been a great plan but unfortunately the car caught on fire.

I left it in a mall parking lot with the ownership on the seat, signed, and the keys in the ignition. I hoped I'd never see it again, but driving past two weeks later, it was still there. I came back that night with a trailer and scrapped it myself.

a real engine just an air pump. The combustion is what gives the air the force needed to move the cylinder.

This is the same thing, but because it's paper it only needs a bit of forced air, so if you were a mouse, you could put this in your tiny mouse car and work a little pump to drive around....

very impressive!

I think you still misunderstand. I don't mean it would hang from above, it would balance on it's contact point. In that way, it would 'hang', but the point of contact would be pointing down in contact with the top of the 2cm cylinder and the bulk of the mass in a ring hanging below that point. To exaggerate for clarity, think of a soda can with the top cut off, turned upside down, and balanced on a pin touching the exact center of the inner can 'bottom'...then spin it.
My idea is a top EXACTLY as they made it, except the weighted ring is much lower, so the CG is below the point. Then, when set on the pedestal, it would be stable when stationary (when set on a counter, the point would not touch). I can't see why that would change when spun as long as the CG stays below the point and balanced/centered.
It would balance when stationary, no question. My only question is what might happen when you spin it, would the rotation make the CG 'want' to be above the contact point for some reason, or would nothing happen. I don't have a lathe to make one myself to try, so I thought someone well versed in rotational physics might know.

Hmmm. I wonder why neither team decided to lower the center of gravity below the contact point, since they would be spinning on the tiny raised cylinders? It seems it would be easy to make the outer ring hang below the point, so it would stay upright at 0 rpm. Does that somehow make it unstable when you spin it?
*quality craftsmanship and design

I don't want to ban guns, but I would like to see the following:

1. License gun owners like Germany licenses drivers. Six months of classes, followed by multiple exams.

2. Mandatory psychological examination for any person wanting to purchase a gun.

3. Require that a minimum of $1,000,000 death or dismemberment insurance be carried at all times.

4. Automatic 25-year sentence for ANY crime involving a gun.

Limit guns to:

- Shotguns: Single-barrel breach-load.

- Pistols: 6-shot rotating cylinder; hammer-cocked firing mechanism. No semi-automatic pistols.

- Rifles: Single-shot, bolt-action.

Ex Machina -- have you seen that one?

If not, give it a shot. Best AI-themed movie I've seen in quite some time.

Messed with my head though, big time. It poses the sort of questions that lurk in the back of your head, only to emerge again at night, when you least want your brain to run on all cylinders, if you know what I mean.

2 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

Maybe he wanted to chop some wood?

Bring down a pole?

Shorten a pipe?

Trim a hose?

Butcher a salami?

Slice a pickle?

uh... Truncate a shaft?

Bisect a cylinder?

WORK WITH ME HERE!

Holy shit, I would totally pay for a backtalking cylinder thing.

I live in Finland, one of the top countries on guns per capita. Also one the lowest gun crimes per capita. Very strict gun control, in fact, i can't own a single casing, let alone live bullet. All have to be licensed, all counted, no guns licenses without a hunting or shooting club membership, no guns without proper training. No backyard sales, not even ammo. We have long hunting tradition. Also a long militia background, guns and the need for them are acknowledged in every part of our culture and history, armed uprisings (albeit all of them failed) against oppressive conquerors are our heroes.. And of course that one little squirmish against Soviet Union, we got thru with it with guns. But the tools they used are not worshiped, just appreciated as good tools.

Hand guns are not for hunting and as such, they are even more controlled. No ONE has ever raised an opinion that our freedoms are being oppressed by our gun laws. Overwhelming majority likes them the way they are, only wanting more control on mentally disturbed individuals. Some of course want no guns at all and very small portion wants guns for all. But majority and i mean majority as in +80% are very happy the way things are now. If i want to start hunting or shooting as a sport; i can. I can't, however, get a gun just because i want one.

Also, front doors in Finland are sturdy enough that you can't just kick it in... Something to think about, we got the best locks in the business (google abloy, 99,99% of our locks are ABLOY). In fact, and this is coming from experience, our burglars don't pick locks. They remove the whole doorframe with hydraulic jacks (or remove the whole lockbase and part of the door with tons of force.. or drill the lock)..Locksmiths here don't have lockpicks as the locks are protected very well against lockpicking, in fact abloy is one of the benchmarks on lockpickers and it still takes hours. Instead locksmiths carry a big ass cordless drill with the hardest drillbits you can find; they drill out and replace the whole cylinder and it's noisy as hell. That's what our doors are like, maybe there is some answer there; you don't feel afraid when your front door can take a bear.