| 400NitroExpress |
| (.400 member) |
| 26/10/09 06:07 PM |
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response
|
Your previous responses, especially your last, force to me ask this Rod: Is English your first language? If it is, be careful. Drinking that much is hard on the ol' liver.
Quote:
What you are speaking of is no revelation. The point isn't if the barrel expands {of course it does}, but whether the barrel expands beyond the elastic limit. The barrel expansion might damage ribs, etc, even if the elastic limit is not exceeded, but that is not the same as saying OSR "spiraling" has occured.
That is EXACTLY what I said!
Quote:
Originally posted by .400 Nitro Express:
With the steel jacketed solid, compression occurs (due to the soft lead core), but not enough to avoid elastic deformation, and the barrel steel returns to it's pre-stress dimensions. This is not the cause of OSR.
The bullet tested was a gilding metal covered steel jacketed solid. It's a bullet with a hard shell and a dead soft lead core that CAN and DOES compress during engraving. It still produced measurable elastic deformation of the barrel. One more time, how hard is it to figure out that a significantly harder bullet, like a mono solid (no lead core and thus not compressible at all) that the maker says is too hard to obturate within the standard pressure of the cartridge, will produce MORE deformation, perhaps enough to become plastic?
Quote:
To ignore pressure throughout the length of the barrel is to ignore the source of the energy necessary to alter the shape of the barrel {however small}. To ask "At what pressure does this event occur?" is completely logical.
It's totally illogical. The question posited for the test was: Can the passage of a too hard projectile of correct barrel dimensions ALONE cause deformation, elastic or plastic, in a barrel of .090" min wall. The purpose of the test was to ISOLATE that event BY EXCLUDING THE VARIABLE OF PRESSURE.
Quote:
Nobody said Woodleigh lied. Why did you ask that? In fact, if you are referring to the experiment with the hydraulic movement of the bullet thru the bore, it is accepted as fact. I've not heard any argument against it. I don't think the experiment conducted by Woodleigh is particularly earthshattering.
YOU said it.
Quote:
To the contrary, I have now been told attempts to reproduce this event have demonstrated that it is not reproducible. Just reporting some findings.
Quote:
I think you answered #1 and the answer was no, {correct? If not, maybe I misread that part}, and at least pointing to a possible answer of #2 is the fact that while it is to some degree informative and definitely interesting as an exercise, we don't normally squirt bullets out of gun barrels with hydraulic fluid.
Who said anything about hydraulic fluid? The test was conducted with a hydraulic RAM, not hydraulic pressure (hydraulic fluid in the barrel). To have conducted the test with hydraulic pressure rather than a ram would have failed to isolate the desired variable. I've met Geoff. I don't think he's that dumb.
Quote:
Also remember, at this point on this Forum, nobody has, in fact, "demonstrated" the event. No pix, no docs. Just discussion. Agreement by some that it occurs, and something akin to disbelief by others.
Do the effects of the ingestion of cyanide need to be "demonstrated" to you personally, or would you rather rely on established medical experts?
I've repeatedly directed you to experts and professionals in the DR community who have spent a lot of time on this issue, and can provide you with information.
Have you contacted Graeme Wright? No.
Have you even acquired his book to read chapter 13, as recommended? No.
Have you contacted the Technical Director of Gunmaking at Holland & Holland? No.
I've posted here that Graeme Wright states that NONE of the London gunmakers recommends hard bullets in their double rifles and, in some cases, single barrel rifles. Have you contacted ANY of these makers? No.
Have you maybe even thought about it a little yourself and come up with a few obvious options, like the only ammunition manufacturer in the world that specializes in double rifle ammunition, like David Little at Kynoch? I doubt it.
Who HAVE you contacted? Well, lets see. Barnes, a mono-bullet maker. A-Square, another mono-bullet maker with a very poor reputation. I'm sure they're both paragons of virtue and their opinions on this issue of unquestionable independence. We've already agreed that the mono-makers completely deny the possibility of barrel damage from their products and that this is entirely at odds with gunmakers. Since we already know the mono-maker's positions, seeking "information" from one more of them cannot possibly produce light on the subject.
Quote:
Also remember, at this point on this Forum, nobody has, in fact, "demonstrated" the event. No pix, no docs. Just discussion. Agreement by some that it occurs, and something akin to disbelief by others.
Like I said before, this attitude of yours that just because Graeme Wright, Ross Seyfried, Holland & Holland, Geoff MacDonald, et. al. had the temerity to not take you by your little hand and "prove" the phenomenon of OSR to you and, therefore, their claimed experience is a lie, and their conclusions based on it a fraud, is juvenile, laughable, and downright dishonest. Such garbage has no probative value whatsoever. Inasmuch as I have stated that I will have a rifle with OSR with me at SCI for anyone who wishes to see it, your statement is also yet another intentional insult.
You've sucessfully taken me full circle. I'm sure that makes you happy. I now realize, again and finally, that your purpose here is dishonest. You seek information only from those sources that can aid your agenda, which is clearly not what you've stated it to be, and have no desire to learn more about the subject, let alone understand it. I was right the first time.