I agree absolutly with 9.3

Nothing is safe from the "primer doesent look that flat to ME" sindrome.

One of the problems with firearms and ammunition is that they are complicated interactive bits of kit, sold for the most part to complete idiots. (and I except all members, former members, perspective members of this forum and their friends, families, girlfriends and cousins from that statment.)Think that covers anybody who thinks that that was aimed at them, it wasent.

I take a very jaundiced view of the machanical abilities of most of the population.
I will not ride on a carnival ride. Why trust my life to people that when they arn't putting these things togeter or taking them apart, sell tickets, drink beer and try to get their hands down the knickers of impressionable teenage girls. If they were good machanics they would work for Farrari or NASA. Let my next door neighbour fix the brakes on my car? I'd rather let him shag my cat.

If the book says MAX load then it means MAX. Like the Farrari says 180 on the clock, that is MAX, It doesent mean safe in all circumstances (in fact safe in very few)
IMHO if the cartridge will not get the job done at 10% below max, get a rifle chambered for a different cartridge.

Simeraly with building guns. If you engineer in a 100% safety margin like bridge builders do, then failing the gods of hunting really having it in for you you will be safe. Reduce this margin at your own risk.
Choose the action and cartridge carefully. A double in .378 WbyM is not a good idea.
Many famous gunmakers in this country have used standard length mauser actions for long cartridges and releived the rear of the bottom lug to do so. Have they held up, yes. How many rounds have they fired, who knows. Are they using the safety margin engineered in by Mauser to make this work, you bet.
It could just be a gamble. Build a 404 jeffery on a standard action and the repeated strain will not cause it to fail for 10,000 rounds. Nobody will ever fire 10,000 rounds through this rifle in its lifetime, ergo it is safe.
Engineers do this in the car industry all the time. Build a million cars and sooner or later a critical part will fail and somebody will die. Boats, bridges, airplanes all the same. That is why we examine all of these things at prescribed intervals.
Guns are the exception. They can go their whole lives in the hands of rank amatures and never be critically examined.
For the most part it is never an issue because of number of rounds fired, but compitition shooters do have their guns fall apart from metal fatigue fairly regularly.
On the other hand I have seen 22rf martini target rifles in clubs with millions of rounds through them. There is such a margin built in that, the chances of catastrophic failure are aproaching 0%

How many posts have you seen with "Is it safe to shoot my damascus barrelled hammer actioned whatever" Of course it isent "safe" it is a calculated risk. If it were safe then nobody would have invented 4140 CM forged steel barrels, to replace iron horseshoe nails hot hammer forged over a mandral.
If you want it safe then send it to a proof house or competent gunsmith in the States (see I can bend 9.3 :-) )and let them destroy it for you in controlled conditions with a proof load.

9.3 and I are in fact far closer to agreement than appears. When he says "FOR SOMEONE WHO IS COGNIZANT OF THE ISSUES" He has hit the nail on the head. A good gunmaker/engineer can prove his own work because he knows what is and is not acceptable. I met a gunmaker from the States on my recent trip. I would not hesitate to fire a rifle he handed me.
Proof houses either here or in Europe are the safety net because of just that level of experience. They hopefully catch the inexperienced or incompetant.

Regards