9.3x57
(.450 member)
22/10/09 01:59 PM
OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Here is the response from Barnes regarding the use of their mono's in doubles.

Also, here is the contact info for Ty Herring at Barnes. Please direct any questions regarding the use of Barnes bullets in doubles to him @ tyh@barnesbullets.com

Here goes:

Barnes says, '...our position is that we "own" the African market. Every year at the SCI Reno show we have countless guides and PH's visit our booth and buy our products. These same folks recommend our products to thousands of their clients and we've not had a single complaint in regard to the so called OSR issue.

I believe the competition uses these forums in a desperate attempt to gain popularity by spreading these rumors without any facts to back up their claims. There is no doubt in my mind that folks are smart enough to see through the smoke and mirrors tricks these folks portray.

We did the testing required to prove our products don't harm the doubles rifles in question and posted it at the following link. I might also add that these pressures were determined with strain gauges mounted on the exterior of the barrels - confirming that the exterior stress on a given barrel is less using our Mono Metal Banded Solids compared to the Woodleigh FMJ and RNSP.

http://www.barnesbullets.com/resources/newsletters/september-2008-barnes-bullet-n/

Since the post in September of 2008 we have not had a single complaint in this regard. We consider this a non issue and again we encourage anyone to contact us should they feel they have a problem.

At this time we don't feel that further testing is required.'


Here is the link again if it doesn't work above:

http://www.barnesbullets.com/resources/newsletters/september-2008-barnes-bullet-n/

Scroll down to the appropriate article on the site.

By the way, I have no relationship of any kind with Barnes. In fact, I've never shot a game animal with a Barnes bullet, and have never worked for Barnes in any capacity and do not now. I am, merely, a curious gun enthusiast and have found this topic particularly interesting because of the committed, diehard and, most conspicuously, diametrically-opposed positions.

I would love to see documentation of the actual CAUSE of OSR by those who believe it is caused by Barnes bullets. I haven't seen any such thing yet in spite of the long and horse-carcass-kicking discussions. I have read statements that it has occured and Barnes bullets caused it, but I have never seen any documentation or proof that Barnes bullets caused it.

In fact, in spite of implications that pictures of OSR may be posted, I've actually never seen such a thing posted on this forum. Since this is arguably the world's finest "double forum", I am a bit frustrated by that. I am all thumbs with technology, but I find it pretty easy to post pix...

I am not denying that damage to doubles has occured by firing them, maybe with this bullet or with that, and I cannot assert that a Barnes bullet has never caused damage to a gun. I can, however, state that on this forum, I've never seen a shred of proof that any Barnes bullet ever damaged a double. That is not because a Barnes bullet never did cause damage {I have no idea if one did or didn't}, but rather, that no proof has been provided.

That's not an indictment of anyone's integrity, or insinuation that anyone has lied and it certainly is not meant to hurt anyone's feelings, it is merely a fact.


DUGABOY1
(.400 member)
22/10/09 11:34 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/760101804/m/5671051911

Here is something you might read if you really want to know what happens when you use these ill designed mono-metal bullets in a double rifle!


JabaliHunter
(.400 member)
23/10/09 12:08 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I think that neatly bypasses the fact that prior to 2007(?) Barnes solids were not of 'driving band' design

JabaliHunter
(.400 member)
23/10/09 12:21 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Barnes says, '...our position is that we "own" the African market.



Neither does this statement inspire any confidence either - seems incredibly arrogant and dismissive to me. I also very much doubt whether it is true in the context of double rifle users.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
23/10/09 12:50 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Jabali, the bit about the owning of the market generated a chuckle from me, too, and others, but it is a statement of confidence in their sales, obviously, and whether it is strictly true I do not know. Maybe they are the largest American maker of premium bullets for hunters in Africa? I know other makers make pretty forceful statements about their products, too.

Your point about the pre-07 is a really good one. Not sure if they've done any testing with both pre-driving band and post-driving band bullets side-by-side. The pressure and barrel strain tests appear to have been run 2008. It seems tho, that those who say Barnes bullets damage guns do not limit that statement to pre-driving band bullets. Is that correct? Don't they say that ALL Barnes bullets damage doubles?

Dugaboy: I clicked on the link but only got a repost of the link shown here. The remark about Barnes bullets that came from the one poster doesn't give any particulars, but seems to imply that all was well with his "custom loaded" ammo till he got to Africa? I assume he shot the gun before he left? Our own Peter here posted a problem he had with a double {barrels separating or reg wedge loosening IIRC} when he went to Africa, but that had nothing to do with mono bullets. I do not believe he blamed the bullets for the problem. I do not remember if a cause was actually found for the problem.

Anyway, the AR thread provided no details of any kind, no pic's nothing. No criticism here, just observing the obvious. A fellow could say the same about pretty much anything. I had a gun that blew primers on Remington ammo consistently. While I thought it was Remington ammo, I finally found out it was the gun, and once rectified, the gun doesn't blow primers with any factory ammo.

If you can see here, I am actually trying to help you state your cause, as I want to know the truth. But repeating the same accusations without providing proof or any technical data only makes such statements sound like the "smoke and mirrors tricks" cited by Barnes above.

Now here's one, from the link I'm surprised nobody pounced on,

Barnes says: "Based on our tests and experience, I’m comfortable stating that Barnes Banded Solids are better for antique barrels than the competition."

Wow. That is a pretty strong statement!!


Ripp
(.577 member)
23/10/09 12:51 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

9.3
As I stated in my email, and state above--that they "own the African market" is a crock, IMHO..Not what I see and hear in the lst 4 hunts over there..are they around?,,you bet..but hardly rule the market..I used their solids in my .416's when hunting ele or buff...but for softs, still stick with the A-Frame..and NO, I do not get $$ from Swift for promoting them..just merely feel their A-Frame soft is second to none for game..

I also use the Triple shocks in some of my higher velocity cartridges while hunting here in the U.S. ..257 Weatherby is one example..

As to whether there is validity to the claim that barnes solids should not be used in doubles, especially older doubles..I do find it ironic that NO ONE has been able to put forth proof. One would think, with all the shooting that is claimed to be done, someone, somewhere, would have photos to share. Having said that, and own a older WR, I am still not going to risk it when another viable product is available..Just see no reason to ..

Ripp


Huvius
(.416 member)
23/10/09 01:26 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Having said that, and owned a older WR, I am still not going to risk it when another viable product is available..Just see no reason to ..




Precisely!
Surely the monometal bullet fad is a result of political pressure to decrease the use of lead projectiles. Which has no basis in scientific fact BTW.
Traditional bullets have been doing a splendid job for well over 100 years - why take the chance?
It's like saying to yourself, "my gut tells me this may not be good for my rifle, and there are excellent options, but what the heck - I'll try them"


9.3x57
(.450 member)
23/10/09 02:08 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Huvius brings up a good point about traditionals.

They HAVE been around, and I suppose, preferred.

OSR has been stated on previous posts to be "everywhere", not uncommon at all.

Assuming we are right and most people do not shoot Barnes bullets in doubles, doesn't it logically follow that OSR is, if caused by bullets at all, caused by traditional bullets also?? Or has every gun exhibiting OSR been shot only with Barnes bullets?

I seems a stretch to say that Barnes aren't popular bullets for use in doubles but they are the only ones that cause the common OSR failure. Or is that not what is being said?


DarylS
(.700 member)
23/10/09 02:32 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I don't know who 400 Nitro Express is, but his post: What a joke. Damage to DR barrels has nothing to do with pressure, and everybody knows that. I've discussed their "tests" with Ty on the phone. I tried, but I couldn't keep myself from laughing."

When I read this from the link above, I laughed. Obviously 400 NitroEx. knows nothing about pressure relating to strain gauges, but sure likes to spout off. Perhaps he's being funded by 'other' bullet companies?
Strain gauges show exactly what the barrel is feeling. To have this OSR phenominum, to actually press the rifling out to the outside of the barrel takes pressure - a strain gauge is on the outside of the barrel and shows the strain, pressure THERE.

Interesting.hahahahahahaha!


Ripp
(.577 member)
23/10/09 04:40 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:


Interesting.hahahahahahaha!






Ripp


500Nitro
(.450 member)
23/10/09 05:46 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I don't know who 400 Nitro Express is, but his post: What a joke. Damage to DR barrels has nothing to do with pressure, and everybody knows that. I've discussed their "tests" with Ty on the phone. I tried, but I couldn't keep myself from laughing."

When I read this from the link above, I laughed. Obviously 400 NitroEx. knows nothing about pressure relating to strain gauges, but sure likes to spout off. Perhaps he's being funded by 'other' bullet companies?
Strain gauges show exactly what the barrel is feeling. To have this OSR phenominum, to actually press the rifling out to the outside of the barrel takes pressure - a strain gauge is on the outside of the barrel and shows the strain, pressure THERE.

Interesting.hahahahahahaha!





Darryl

I understand what you are saying, but you can get pressure with other bullets as well that don't cause OSR.

It is the fact that the bullets don't obturate as they go down the barrel that causes the rifling to be pushed to the outside.


And re 400NitroExpress, I think he knows a shitload more than 99.9% of the rest of us and be thankful IMHO that he is quite willing to impart that knowledge.

And I don't think he works for anyone else, he just likes calling a spade a spade.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
23/10/09 07:34 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I don't know who 400 Nitro Express is, but his post: What a joke. Damage to DR barrels has nothing to do with pressure, and everybody knows that. I've discussed their "tests" with Ty on the phone. I tried, but I couldn't keep myself from laughing."

When I read this from the link above, I laughed. Obviously 400 NitroEx. knows nothing about pressure relating to strain gauges, but sure likes to spout off. Perhaps he's being funded by 'other' bullet companies?
Strain gauges show exactly what the barrel is feeling. To have this OSR phenominum, to actually press the rifling out to the outside of the barrel takes pressure - a strain gauge is on the outside of the barrel and shows the strain, pressure THERE.

Interesting.hahahahahahaha!




Pretty ignorant post. You obviously are completely ignorant of the cause of OSR, as well as of the test conducted, but you sure like to spout off as if you're not.

I've been exclusively a double rifle shooter for over 20 years, have had damage to DRs from monos, and have been discussing this issue with gunmakers, other serious double rifle shooters, and recognized experts in the DR field the entire time. Contrary to what 9.3 thinks, there are a lot of very well informed professional people with first hand experience with this problem. I've never found a single one of them that believes that excessive operating pressure has anything to do with the OSR, loose ribs and, sometimes, bent barrels characteristic of this damage.

OSR is the result of the expansion of the necessarily thin walls of double rifle barrels, caused by the passage of a bullet too hard to obturate, to the extent of exceeding recoverable deformation - the steel doesn't return to it's original shape. Also, the passage of this bulge down the barrel can flex the solder joints, causing them to fail. There are documented cases of barrels that actually bent.

Chamber pressure is no part of the puzzle, excessive or otherwise. One bullet maker (Woodleigh, I think) tested this by driving bullets down a barrel by hand, and measuring the expansion over the bullet as it was driven down the barrel. Soft, lead core bullets made a very small bulge, or none at all, as they passed down through the thinner sections up forward because the lead core is compressible, permitting the bullet to obturate. Bullets that are too hard to obturate made a large bulge. Mono-metals don't have a lead core that permits them to compress, so they can't obturate.

I spent some time on the phone with Ty about what Barnes had done to determine the suitability of their bullets for double rifles. I was careful to make sure that I understood what he said. Look at the link. The "take" was over the chamber ONLY. The expansion over the chamber gives you chamber pressure only, that's how a strain gauge works. No attempt was made to measure expansion downtube caused by the passage of the bullet itself - and there is no controversy that it is that expansion that causes the damage. I had this conversation with them maybe a couple years ago, many years after my complaint to them about damage to a double rifle from Barnes X, plus another from their mono solids.

Quote:

Originally posted by 9.3X57:

In fact, in spite of implications that pictures of OSR may be posted, I've actually never seen such a thing posted on this forum. Since this is arguably the world's finest "double forum", I am a bit frustrated by that. I am all thumbs with technology, but I find it pretty easy to post pix...




...and not so easy to take them. If you had basic knowledge of quality double guns, you'd know why.

If you had a good quality gun with well-struck barrels next to a cheap machine made gun with very poorly finished barrels, would the difference be obvious? Of course, a blind baby could see it. Could you photograph it and capture the difference? Good luck. You look for OSR in exactly the same way that you examine a Purdey best for perfectly struck barrels.

Tell you what. I have ready access to five double rifles with OSR. I'm sure you're right and I'm wrong. I'm sure it's simple to capture on film. I haven't figured out how yet, and I'm sure you'll know exactly what to do. Come show us how it's done.

Quote:

Originally posted by 9.3X57:

If you can see here, I am actually trying to help you state your cause, as I want to know the truth.




Well, let's see. You don't own, and never have owned, a double rifle. If you have I think you would have mentioned it. As such you haven't had the experience, or the worry, that we long-time DR shooters have had. We've had the need to research this issue and make our own choices, and some of us have actually observed direct cause and effect first hand. So, you don't have any experience with the subject matter, or knowledge of it, nor do you have any reason to. You're also the only one trying to make this discussion exclusive to one brand, which it is not. And, you seem to have a need to make a statement about a long-settled issue. You obviously have an agenda, but your manner proves that it isn't to help anyone, or to gain knowledge, let alone the truth.

Quote:

Originally posted by 9.3X57:

That's not an indictment of anyone's integrity, or insinuation that anyone has lied




Yeah. Right.


The direction this discussion has taken is a waste of time, as OSR and it's cause is a long since settled matter. Once again, for anyone with a genuine desire to better understand OSR, no one has liaised with the trade on this issue as much as Graeme Wright has. The third edition of his book, "Shooting the British Double Rifle" has just been released, and his discussion of the issue is the best I've seen. The list of names of the principals of the double rifle making trade that he has consulted in researching this work is exhaustive.

Here are a few excerpted comments from it that I posted on another string:

Quote:

"The first and more frequent problem is what I will refer to as over-stressed rifling....It can be seen when looking down the outside of the barrels at an acute angle, using the same technique as examining a shotgun barrel for dents and bulges. The damage appears as raised metal areas following the lands of the rifling. Maybe a better description is "shadows outlining the rifling." (Sounds real easy to photograph, don't it?)

"This problem can affect double rifles of any age. Virtually all double rifle makers have encountered this at some time and it is obviously a major concern."

"Firstly, Russell (Wilkin of Holland & Holland) points out the fact that double rifles operated without problems for 75 to 100 years. However, late in the twentieth century these problems started to manifest themselves. The only change was the use of a different projectile material"

"In severe cases, even more damage can result. In some cases the barrels have come apart at the muzzles, breaking the solder of the ribs and bending the barrels. One British gun maker has reported a case where the right barrel was bent one inch up and to the right and the solder of the ribs cracked half way down the barrels."

"On a practical level it is interesting to note that none of the current London Gunmakers recommends hard projectiles in their double rifles and in some cases single barreled rifles."




500Nitro
(.450 member)
23/10/09 07:39 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


Woodleigh definately tested this in a 45 cal barrel.

I can't remember whether he pushed it down the barrel but I know they fired bullets down the barrel.


450_366
(.400 member)
23/10/09 08:10 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

This is realy getting out of hand, why the heck is it so hard to try to argue reasonably.
Do people realy think that being agressive is the way to go, if you know something is true and you have the facts to prove it, then for gods sake use your facts. If not be prepared to be questioned, i could post for being the king of sweden if i liked (ok nowone would beleave it but anyway to make a point) as this is the internet and we should not trust anyone here without facts.

If you only have heard others say it, do not raise your voice before you can show some facts.

I have tryed to ask these question before.

Are there any 9,3mm or smaller rifles with osr out there.
Are there any combos such as drillings or O/U with osr.

And please only first hand information, or at least second, so if questioned a rifle can be presented.

400NE, to bad about your rifles, how do they shoot with the osr, compared to before? Where they vintage or new.



Mike_Bailey
(.400 member)
23/10/09 08:15 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Guys, we can put this to bed once and for all, if one of you chaps knows someone at Barnes and give me their tel. no, I will BUY 200 rounds of their TX or mono solids in flanged .375 IF they place US$75k in an escrow account of my choice. I will then shoot said 200 rounds through my .375. Any damage after said rounds (regulation,ribs,off face, OSR,) they pay for the damage, is that fair ? best, Mike (regulated with Woodleighs and finished last week after 2 years 10 months), best, Mike p.s. pound to a pinch of shit they don't take me up

500Nitro
(.450 member)
23/10/09 08:15 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


450_366

Who was the first part of your post aimed at ?????



In regards to
"Are there any 9,3mm or smaller rifles with osr out there."

Yes, but I am sure 400NE can elaborate.


450_366
(.400 member)
23/10/09 08:28 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:


450_366

Who was the first part of your post aimed at ?????








No one in particular, it was only an observation of the posts on this subject, not only from this tread.

When posting i try not to hurt peoples feelings, sorry if some got hurt by it.


500Nitro
(.450 member)
23/10/09 08:41 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:



No one in particular, it was only an observation of the posts on this subject, not only from this tread.

When posting i try not to hurt peoples feelings, sorry if some got hurt by it.





I was just asking for general interest sake, that's all.

You definatley didn't hurt my feelings LOL


I find that some people don;t even listen to reason from experienced people and fact, that is probably what gets
me more than anything.

It's all well and good not listening and believing in some newbie but someone as credible as 400NE who would have to be up in the top 5% of experience along the lines of Graeme Wright et all, why wouldn't you listen to him ?


peter
(removed)
23/10/09 08:45 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Guys, we can put this to bed once and for all, if one of you chaps knows someone at Barnes and give me their tel. no, I will BUY 200 rounds of their TX or mono solids in flanged .375 IF they place US$75k in an escrow account of my choice. I will then shoot said 200 rounds through my .375. Any damage after said rounds (regulation,ribs,off face, OSR,) they pay for the damage, is that fair ? best, Mike (regulated with Woodleighs and finished last week after 2 years 10 months), best, Mike p.s. pound to a pinch of shit they don't take me up




so mike

where is the pictures

best

peter


450_366
(.400 member)
23/10/09 09:17 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:



I was just asking for general interest sake, that's all.

You definatley didn't hurt my feelings LOL


I find that some people don;t even listen to reason from experienced people and fact, that is probably what gets
me more than anything.

It's all well and good not listening and believing in some newbie but someone as credible as 400NE who would have to be up in the top 5% of experience along the lines of Graeme Wright et all, why wouldn't you listen to him ?




Good to hear.
As you write, im not listening to him i read it, together with all the rest i read all day, it doesent mean that i beleve it.

Now, im not saying i do not beleve 400NE or any other on this forum, but i do say that its the right to anyone to question someone, even 400NE as has already been done. I would regard anyone that question myself in anything i would say/write as a sound person, most thing we take for facts has been rewritten many times and will be again. And i would not get down to nametelling agains anyone that does so, not implying that he did, but some have done.

As to listen and beleve, listen to everyone, beleve no one.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
23/10/09 09:37 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

This is realy getting out of hand, why the heck is it so hard to try to argue reasonably.




Beats me. This one is so pointless to begin with. I feel like we're having a discussion about whether or not 9/11 was a Bush White House hoax. Nothing wrong with that I suppose, but I don't get the need for the tone of a couple posters here at all.


Quote:

I have tryed to ask these question before.

Are there any 9,3mm or smaller rifles with osr out there.




By far the worst damaged of the two was a 9.3 from the '30s.

Quote:

Are there any combos such as drillings or O/U with osr.




I've never paid much attention to them. Some rifle barrels in combination guns a very, very thin. I wouldn't use monos in them.

Quote:

400NE, to bad about your rifles, how do they shoot with the osr, compared to before? Where they vintage or new.




The 9.3 suffered. It was sold shortly thereafter, and I've not heard tell of it since. The other was only fired with a very few mono-solids, and OSR became very slightly visible, after which monos were discontinued. I've used lead core bullets since and it's never gotten worse, and remains very accurate. That rifle is also pre-war. However, as Wright observes, it happens with new guns as well.


Huvius
(.416 member)
23/10/09 10:37 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Just a quick question.
I have a box of Barnes .416 mono solids which I ended up with somwhere along the line.
They are a light yellow brass color and seem to be quite hard and are the older style with no driving bands - I have never used any.
Is there any information regarding the composition of Barnes or any other makers' mono solids?
Can they be annealed to "soften" them up? How about my earlier suggestion of boring them out to allow for some comression?


Omnivorous_Bob
(.333 member)
23/10/09 12:37 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Jabali, are barnes bullets really a driving band design even now? I've only used them in 30-06 on caribou and loaded but not used their solid in 375, but my understanding is that even the grooves between the bands is larger than the bore diameter. Can anyone confirm this? I don't have one here to measure.

I'm just curious, I have no intention of using one in a double. Woodleigh's do just fine, and I see no need to take even a remote chance for a dubious gain.

Bob


bonanza
(.400 member)
23/10/09 12:45 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I think it is good for these subjects to bubble up. There are some new double rifle owners who, unless it arises, would not know better. I think I shot about 100 barnes X bullets in my Merkel before being advised otherwise.

I've only shot lead core bullets in my vintage doubles.


Ripp
(.577 member)
23/10/09 01:58 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I've only used them in 30-06 on caribou and loaded but not used their solid in 375, but my understanding is that even the grooves between the bands is larger than the bore diameter. Can anyone confirm this? I don't have one here to measure.
Bob




Just went down and grabbed a box --measured several-my reading was .412 on the bottom half of the bullet after the band..

Ripp


Ripp
(.577 member)
23/10/09 02:04 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:


450_366

Who was the first part of your post aimed at ?????








No one in particular, it was only an observation of the posts on this subject, not only from this tread.

When posting i try not to hurt peoples feelings, sorry if some got hurt by it.







Maybe words of wisdom we could apply to everyday life as well as this forum...


Do agree with the comment though, think it is healthy for a discussion on this to take place, as stated, how else would people learn??

Thank you

Ripp


9.3x57
(.450 member)
23/10/09 03:10 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Just a quick question.
I have a box of Barnes .416 mono solids which I ended up with somwhere along the line.
They are a light yellow brass color and seem to be quite hard and are the older style with no driving bands - I have never used any.
Is there any information regarding the composition of Barnes or any other makers' mono solids?
Can they be annealed to "soften" them up? How about my earlier suggestion of boring them out to allow for some comression?




I called Barnes today.

I didn't read this before I did or I would have asked about the hardness. I can do so.

First; According to Barnes, the driving band type was developed for a couple reasons. One was that they found accuracy was improved with the driving band type to the tune of better than 50% reduction in group size {2-inch groups became sub-1-inch groups}. You guys that shoot them can verify that or not. They incorporated a flat meplat also, as they found thru testing and customer etc, recommendations that it penetrated deeper/straighter than the older RN type. I think this is well-established fact now.

As for pressure, the driving band type was said to produce somewhat LESS pressures, about 2,000 psi on average, which is something on the order of the range in variation in other bullets tested, so peaks were similar to some other bullets, tho average was greater for the non-banded.

Huvius: from my knifemaking experience I can tell you how to anneal a gilding metal bullet {I do not know if they are sold "dead soft"}. Heat it up to glowing red and drop it in a bucket of water. Opposite of steel hardening. But I can also suggest that the probability is you will get warping and deformation of the bullet if you do. Maybe it wouldn't matter at close range. The surface will oxidize, so you'll have to tumble them if you want pretty bullets.

Copper alloys are normally measured on the Rockwell B scale, and harder materials like steel on the C scale.

Rifle barrels normally register about 24-to-low '30's on the C scale. Brass alloys are normally measured on the B scale for softer metals. It is possible to harden brass or bronze to exceed pure iron in hardness tho I've never done it, that is, had it tested, as pure iron is hard to come by. What passes for "iron" is usually mild steel. Brass runs about 93RB and that correlates to about 16RC, very "soft" for steel. Knives run in the high 20's for some bayonets {soft spring}, mid-high 40's for machetes to low 60's for "short" knives. A knife that goes RC62 is a very hard knife. I heat treat my own to 50RC for hard use bolos to 57RC for hunting knives. Those I donate to servicemen I heat treat to about 52-54 for good hardness with excellent toughness, and I apply a differential hardening as well to prevent breakage. In simple carbon steels, in a general sense, the harder the knife blade, the less "tough" it is, i.e. the more brittle it is.

Theoretically, a VERY hard, oversize bullet could "egg-in-the snake" its way thru a thin, soft steel gun barrel. What that would do to the rifling is unknown to me and certainly no one here has provided any proof of damage though we can all imagine some sort of damage, mostly at the breech end and at solder joints along the barrels. Hard steel jacket, tungsten- or hard steel-core military ammo can produce excessive rifling wear as cited in various military ordnance sources and by experience. Pressing the rifling to the outside of the barrel? I don't know, but I do know it would take pressure, and lots of it. And for it to push the rifling out similarly at the breech as at the muzzle is, well, almost impossible for me to imagine if that is what it is said to do. Nay, impossible, in the absense of any proof, which, of course, as always, has not been provided. Daryl is right. It takes pressure. LOTS of pressure at the thick breech, and, indeed, quite a bit at the bayonet end.

Just how an engraved, undersized bullet {Barnes are sold undersize & I'm sure all double owners slug their guns, right...?} could push rifling out to show on the outside of a barrel near the muzzle is unknown to me and not demonstrated here by anyone. Indeed, it defies credulity.

For an undersize bullet to engrave, NOT obturate and then press the rifling out anyway seems, well, you all decide. In fact, the suggestion that an undersize Barnes {or other} bullet does not obturate is a recommendation for it, not a condemnation in this instance.

As for boring them out, I submit that MIGHT cause obturation depending on the wall thickness of the remaining bullet and, correspondingly, greater pressures...

Maybe we should fill the void with something. Like lead?


bwananelson
(.400 member)
23/10/09 03:33 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

if you doubt dont do it but i posed that question to EVERY maker and none stated a problem with modern guns or steel.iits your double if you think after spending tens of thousands of dollars that will be hurt by copper dont shoot them but on the hardness test coper is softer than steel will some one post rockwells hardness for steel.copper ,bronze ect

500grains
(.416 member)
23/10/09 04:29 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

9.3 x 57, I don't know what you are up to with this, but Barnes has fed you a line of bullcrap.

So if you are unsure, may I suggest that you take a vintage double rifle and fire 200 Barnes solids through it, and observe the result?

Also, someone commented above that until 2007 Barnes solids were not of driving band design. AND they are still NOT. They are grooved, because Barnes does not wish to invest the machine time necessary to produce a genuine driving band bullet which would not damage double rifles.


Mike_Bailey
(.400 member)
23/10/09 06:28 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Peter, I'll post the pics when the rifle is in Spain, I'm off to test it at Hollands shooting school on 5th Nov, maybe see you in London that week ? best, Mike

peter
(removed)
23/10/09 06:34 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Peter, I'll post the pics when the rifle is in Spain, I'm off to test it at Hollands shooting school on 5th Nov, maybe see you in London that week ? best, Mike




i am planning on just that, when we get a bit closer, i will call you to firm dates up

best

peter


Mike_Bailey
(.400 member)
23/10/09 06:36 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Sorry to hear the news Ripp, good luck. 9.3, I hear what you are saying and for the life of me I can't understand how a copper bullet can damage a steel barrel BUT there are a lot of people out there with a lot of knowledge who say they can so just stick with Woodleighs ? best, Mike

9.3x57
(.450 member)
23/10/09 07:51 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

500g:

I guess it is just plain interesting.

Mike Bailey sums it up well; both sides have presented their case. Barnes with their technical material, and the other side with assertions.

Everyone can believe what they want to believe.


peter
(removed)
23/10/09 11:09 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

500g:

I guess it is just plain interesting.

Mike Bailey sums it up well; both sides have presented their case. Barnes with their technical material, and the other side with assertions.

Everyone can believe what they want to believe.




rod

barnes have not presented any technical material, that is worth a damn, regarding double rifles IMO.

It is actually quite funny in that, they approch the truth of the matter a few times and then misunderstands the entire subject in the end.

Quote:

barnes web page:
It is a fact that some double rifle barrels are out of spec on bore and groove diameters. In a perfect world we would build bullets to fit each individual throat and barrel, but this is simply not feasible. So we try to build bullets that will work safely for the majority. SAAMI requires that diameters on all sporting rifles not exceed +.002”, but double rifles were being built long before SAAMI came into existence




THIS IS THE KEY PROBLEM, REGARDING MONOMETAL BULLETS !!!
plus most of the new dbl. rifles are buildt to CIP spec. as they come from europe.

Quote:

Barnes web page:
To further reduce bearing surface and pressure, Barnes has cut a series of grooves in the shank of the mono-metal solid that provides any material displaced by the lands someplace to go. Full metal jackets do not have this feature. Steel on steel is not the desired scenario for a rifle barrel, especially if what people are saying is true about the older barrels being made from softer material. Is the steel in the jacket material softer or harder than the barrel steel? In general, we don’t know the answer to this as the metal used for double rifle barrels has varied to such a great extent over the years. However, we know for a fact that the brass in Barnes Banded Solids IS softer than barrel steel. We also know that the grooves cut in the shank provide an area for the softer material to displace.




i dont condone the mudslinging of their competition, especially since this is where they prove that they dont understand the subject at hand, it is not about material strenght, but weather or not the bullet material will give to the barrel instead of the barrel material giving to the bullet.
The barrel shank is the problem they should be looking at, maybe the shank dia. of a barnes banded is small enough for you to use them, maybe it is NOT. that can vary both in new guns and especially in the older gems.

Quote:

barnes web site:
I believe the “high pressure with all mono-metal solids” propaganda was spread via the old “someone heard something from someone” and so on, and so on. If someone out there is aware of an actual case involving pressure issues with BARNES mono-metal solids, I would ask that these people contact Barnes personally. We would like the opportunity to investigate any such claim. Based on our tests and experience, I’m comfortable stating that Barnes Banded Solids are better for antique barrels than the competition




THIS is where they are making a major mistake, lets do an fun example:

My alex henry from 1883, im using the barrelset in the small caliber 450/400 3 1/4", so im buying the 450/400 caliber bullets in .410", now had it been a normal barrel size with a 408 bore and a 410 grove, it could actually work fine.
Now my barrels made by daniel frazer in edinburgh for the alex henry action, are actually .405" bore with a .408" grove, which mean that it could destroy my barrels completly......

but barnes wrote that their bullets are better than woodleighs, and had the technial proofs posted as well. YES they did, so who should have the pleasure of me wrapping my destroyed rifle barrels around their neck real tight...... hmmm maybe barnes

rod im not picking on your post, but as i wrote in my PM to you, these guy's still dont know double rifles well enough to be putting out statments like that, and they apparently dont have a problem with using our prized gems as test guns.

another issue is different rifling profiles, i can not even imagine the damage a oversized shank bullet would do to a henry rifling or a lancaster oval bore.

Quote:

I’m comfortable stating that Barnes Banded Solids are better for antique barrels than the competition




this is the dumbest statment ever, and they should remove it at once.

best regards

peter

this rant here is my own rant, and not a official statment from John Rigby & Co. Ltd London


9.3x57
(.450 member)
23/10/09 11:33 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Thanks Peter.

I think you have presented here more technical data from the OSR Camp than I've ever read before on this Forum! But still you haven't given proof of a double being damaged by a Barnes bullet.

And that damage is, among other things, a spiral pattern of rifling pressed out and visible on the outside of the barrel from stern to stem.

You are right on with rifling types, too, as they present varying amounts of resistance to a bullet.

YES, I wholeheartedly agree that the shank size of the bullet must or at least could be a factor and thank you for saying so. It seems to be so in my own sizing "experiments".

And the Barnes statement you highlight in red, well, I also agree...pretty broad-sweeping it is. To me, it is meaningful only if correct diameter bullets are shot thru a gun, but even then, it is a very inclusive and confident statement. I do not think I'd make that statement myself if I were them.

As for bullet diameters though, I slug all my older guns. Why, because as you state, they vary. In my 9.3 rifles I custom size bullets to fit. I simply cannot imagine a fellow buying any double and then NOT slugging it, and knowing all relevant measurements, especially if they are handloading for it. And as for bullets, I'd be checking every bullet type for size and frankly, I'd check every lot change also. I thought that went without saying, but maybe not. Maybe some double gun owners have shot oversize bullets thru their rifles and damaged them. Or maybe, as I believe you and I touched on in the PM's, some old guns {and poorly made new ones...} are merely damaged by being fired at all.

I'm not telling anyone to use Barnes or A-Square or a new Remington or Hornady or any other bullet in their guns. As Bwananelson says, use what you like, "it's your gun". I'm simply saying this; if the damage is extensive and everywhere, then let them show evidence of it. I cannot imagine that no one has done private testing on this issue when it involves guns of tens of thousands of dollars value. People do stuff that costs hundreds of dollars as a hobby all the time. Yet no one has shoved a few experiments down Barnes' corporate throat in spite of all the guns that have been so-called ruined by their bullets?

I can tell you this; if I owned a $60,000 {or some such value} double that was ruined by a Barnes bullet, I would make sure Barnes never forgot my name and the correct spelling of it. You all would know it, too. At any rate, they would see it often enough in black and white in front of them. The judge would read it in court. I have any number of ideas about ways to prove the point for hundreds, not thousands of dollars and certainly not tens of thousands of dollars. And with the values of guns we are dealing with, such experiments would be worth the cost and effort.

Most people stiffen a little when they are told "trust me, you don't need any evidence". And when they read, "I have lots of evidence but I don't know how to operate a digital camera", they are about finished with the topic, and frankly, I am, too.

Some people on this forum like to smear Barnes. Some even admit they have no direct experience of damage, only hearsay. If Barnes did something worth condemning and they can prove it, I'm all ears to hear it and I'll be first to join their chorus.

And yes, no matter how you cut it, it takes pressure to displace metal. Those bullets, any bullets, aren't driven up the bore with a feather.

Frankly, Peter, and this just came to me, you would possibly be a trustworthy, disinterested party to conduct some tests. I offered to kick in some dough to get that going, and the offer still stands. How about a skinny-barrel test? Such a barrel could be miked in various internal and external positions before firing and then after.

My point is this; If OSR cannot be reproduced in a lab, it doesn't exist. I happen to have a theory about how it occurs {if it does} and think I know a good way to find out if it can be reproduced, but nobody has yet directly shown that it does with Barnes bullets, at least nobody has shown it to us here. And no, you do not need a "$60,000 Double" to perform a meaningful test. PM me again and we can discuss it if you like.

BTW: I'm told the owner of Barnes owns several doubles. Guess what he shoots in them?

No...I can't prove it...


peter
(removed)
24/10/09 12:14 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Frankly, Peter, and this just came to me, you would possibly be a trustworthy disinterested party to conduct some tests. I offered to kick in some dough to get that going, and the offer still stands. How about a skinny-barrel test? Such a barrel could be miked in various internal and external positions before firing and then after.




rod

thank you for the vote of confidence, as i told you, i am working on a design for a monometal bullet, in whatever little time i have left at the moment

the reason why tests proberly wont be conducted is that to determine the actual damage you need a set of double rifle barrels to prove it and although i can make them at cost i will much rather sell them than blowing them up.

slugging the barrels is not done as much as it should be done, and that is one of the major excuses the bullet makers can use to counter any claims in court, and since courtcases demand money most people stay away from them alltogether.

i once did a small test, that at least can give you an idea about the damage that can happen with these guns, i fired a slightly oversize copper ball through a shotgun, the ribs came lose from a third down the barrels, and the shotgun were a total loss alltogether, the size difference to the bore and and the ball were only 0.02mm, using barnes logic that shouldent have happened because the steel is harder than the copper and there were plenty of room to displace the metal, with it being a round ball.

i have my own ideas about OSR, and i play around with them whenever i have the time, problem is that time is rare at the moment.

one thing i wonder about is a lot of older barrels were slightly constricted in the musselend back in the day, a bit like a shotgun constriction, and it worked well, but i think that fact might be helping osr along, now i dont know but, if barnes test barrel were a low cost test tube then it surly wont be sporting this constriction feature, thereby making their test absolutly useless.

we can all set up test's to be proven right, but a test to actually investigate what happens would be a sight to behold, maybe when i have more time and a set of old barrels that i dont have any use for.

my bullet design is meant for use both in new barrels and in such rifling as henry and other oddball stuff, when it will be ready, only the gods knows

best regards

peter


nitro450exp
(.333 member)
24/10/09 12:42 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Hello All,

400NE
Have you observed a barrel wall thickness threshold where OSR is more or less likely to occur ?
I have a CZ550 (.375 H&H), Ruger RSM (.416 Rigby) and Douglas barrelled Mark X (9.3x62).
I have both X and Mono solids from Barnes, The X's are the old type (no bands) and the Mono's are the round nose type (I believe they have bands, I will have to check).
I have done some limited load development, and have not observed any issues.
But now I am curious since OSR has been observed in bolt guns.
All of the above guns have pretty healty, meaty barrels.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.

This is not a hijack, just a redirect, since OSR is still the subject, just not in doubles.

Thanks
Nitro450exp


DarylS
(.700 member)
24/10/09 01:35 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Guys - I am sorry for any and all offence generated by my post. It is frustrating trying to get to the bottom of the 'problem', especially when we have seen no proof. We're told there are/were a number of guns thus damaged, with the lands of the rifling pressed out to the outside, even protruding or at lest visible, but none are brought foreward. Any movement of the lands must increase the bore diameter to a measurable degree - any measurements before and after?

BTW - Jacketed bullets or monometal bullets of groove diameter or slightly under as in the shank length of Barnes TSX's, do not "obturate" into the rifling. No modern bullet obturates as it engages the rifling. To obturate, bullets must be of ductile nature or material and they are undersize to the groove diameter in the first place, then expand to fill the rifling, as the minnie-bullets did which were shot in Civil War rifles and rifles around Europe at that time. That is obturation. "Obturation" is expansion in diameter which causes a reduction in length. Obturation is caused when the rearward pressure against the bullet exceeds it's elastic strength and causes it to foreshorten and expand into the rifling. This happens prior to the bullet's initial movement inside the bore. Simply put, the rear of the bullet moves before the front, causing it to expand in diameter but become slightly shorter.

Perhaps the word "Obturate" is being used because it 'sounds' knowledgeable. Unfortunately, it's use in this context of solid metal bullets is ridiculous.

I suspect you are trying to say the bullet is too hard and dense to allow the lands to engrave/impress into it, therefore causing the lands to press outwards. You are saying the bullet forces the lands outwards. If this was actually happening, there would be incredible pressure outwards from the bore of the barrel which would SHOW on a strain gauge as well as any other type of pressure measuring device. If there is no recording of excessive pressure, then physics says damage isn't being created.

Do you really have any idea how much breech PRESSURE, in PSI it would take to actually press the lands out through the metal of the barrel by a bullet. The bullet would have to be very hard indeed. Theree probably aren't any doubles rifles made, then or now, which could contain such pressures, let alone have this happen at normal pressures.
I don't believe you realise just exactly what you are claiming is happening.

Obturation is not only fine but necessary if you want to shoot undersized (under groove diameter) lead bullets, grooved lubricated or paper patched undersize bullets from your double rifle. The breech pressure must be high enough to cause obturation of the bullet metal being used, so the lead bullet will expand to engage the rifling. Obturation is necessary for shooting some bullets in some barrels, but generally doesn't happen in modern guns shooting modern bullets. It certainly won't happen in double rifles shooting jacketed bullets of sufficient integrity to withstand heavy animal structure, especially at the low pressures involved and necessary in these weaker actions.


450_366
(.400 member)
24/10/09 01:37 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:


The 9.3 suffered. It was sold shortly thereafter, and I've not heard tell of it since. The other was only fired with a very few mono-solids, and OSR became very slightly visible, after which monos were discontinued. I've used lead core bullets since and it's never gotten worse, and remains very accurate. That rifle is also pre-war. However, as Wright observes, it happens with new guns as well.




The one you cept, does it have a tapered bore?


Mike_Bailey
(.400 member)
24/10/09 02:13 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

OK Peter, I will stump up US$500 for this "test pair" of barrels, who else is interested ? Can we raise the dough to do a proper test ? best, Mike

400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
24/10/09 02:32 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:


The 9.3 suffered. It was sold shortly thereafter, and I've not heard tell of it since. The other was only fired with a very few mono-solids, and OSR became very slightly visible, after which monos were discontinued. I've used lead core bullets since and it's never gotten worse, and remains very accurate. That rifle is also pre-war. However, as Wright observes, it happens with new guns as well.




The one you cept, does it have a tapered bore?




No.


500grains
(.416 member)
24/10/09 02:51 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


Quote:

I’m comfortable stating that Barnes Banded Solids are better for antique barrels than the competition




this is the dumbest statement ever,




I agree!


mickey
(.416 member)
24/10/09 02:57 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I have a 9.3x74R that I feel was damaged by Barnes X bullets. I shot 36 of the 286 Grain bullets through it and the rifle was taken off face. You can also see a 'shadow' of the rifling on the right barrel if the you hold it to a bright light in just the right way.

I can't say as a 'fact' that the damage was caused by the X bullets and I can't say for a 'fact' that the damage wasn't there from before. But I think it is true.

The interesting part was how fast it came off face. I was showing it to my friend before we went out shooting (Zebra culling) and he commented on how tight it was for a 70 year rifle. Three days later you could slide a business card between the standing breech and the barrels. It was while looking at it that he noticed the rifling impressions on the barrel.

Maybe a coincidence?

I spoke to Randy Brooks about it at SCI that January and was blown off with 'it must be a cumulative result, my bullets are the best thing in the world' comment. He was not interested in talking about it, I think he was afraid others might overhear.

Much the same as his conversation with 500 grains at SCI a couple of years ago about his bullets failing.

If you put your hands over your ears and jump up and down while singing it is hard to hear others talking.


SharpsNitro
(.375 member)
24/10/09 03:01 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Hello All,

400NE
Have you observed a barrel wall thickness threshold where OSR is more or less likely to occur ?
I have a CZ550 (.375 H&H), Ruger RSM (.416 Rigby) and Douglas barrelled Mark X (9.3x62).
I have both X and Mono solids from Barnes, The X's are the old type (no bands) and the Mono's are the round nose type (I believe they have bands, I will have to check).
I have done some limited load development, and have not observed any issues.
But now I am curious since OSR has been observed in bolt guns.
All of the above guns have pretty healty, meaty barrels.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.

This is not a hijack, just a redirect, since OSR is still the subject, just not in doubles.

Thanks
Nitro450exp




Nitro450exp

I have a friend who has built several "super light" bolt guns in .308 based cases (i.e. .243, 7-08 etc). He uses an incredibly thin barrel that is fluted, length is 19"; these barrels are about as thin as he can go and keep them safe. To make up for the short barrel he uploads a bit to recover the lost velocity. He also uses Barnes TSXs. So far, I have heard of no issues with his barrels. It's one data point so take it for what its worth.


nitro450exp
(.333 member)
24/10/09 04:04 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

SharpsNitro

Thanks for the input.
As I mentioned the projectiles I have, are the erlier X and Mono solids before, the TSX.
So they lack the "driving bands" or "grooves" that allow the "flow" of the copper.
They copper foul like a SOB.
I guess I should just shell out the cash and get the new TSX's
Maybe I can sell them on GB.

Nitro450exp

PS: 400NE hoping you will chime in with some input.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
24/10/09 04:17 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Peter:

A question for you. You're a gunmaker and, of course, you know what "well-struck" means, which 9.3 obviously doesn't. Do you think that obvious imperfections in barrel striking would be easy to photograph? If so, how would you go about it?

Quote:

Originally posted by 9.3X57:

Daryl is right. It takes pressure. LOTS of pressure at the thick breech, and, indeed, quite a bit at the bayonet end.




Unsubstantiated speculation proven false by Barnes. This canard floated by Barnes is pure BS, and Barnes' own tests proved that it was, although their tests proved nothing else. One more time, NOBODY believes that excessive chamber pressure has ANYTHING to do with it. ONLY Barnes says that it does, and they maintain that OSR doesn't even exist.

Mono-metal bullets don't create excessive pressure in bolt rifles, and they don't in double rifles either. Anyone that says otherwise has no data to support it, because it isn't true. Bolt rifles have much thicker min wall than quality double rifles do, and that's the difference. You don't understand that because you have no experience with the type.

Quote:

Just how an engraved, undersized bullet {Barnes are sold undersize & I'm sure all double owners slug their guns, right...?} could push rifling out to show on the outside of a barrel near the muzzle is unknown to me and not demonstrated here by anyone. Indeed, it defies credulity.




Even though you have no experience with double rifles and have no knowledge of them, you continue to refer to this as theory. It's isn't. Many professionals in the DR trade have observed it first hand. David Winks (shop foreman for Holland & Holland, now retired) is on record that a NEW .465 Royal suffered OSR in regulating it with mono solids, before the rifle was even finished, and new barrels had to be made. You continue to ignore the quote from Russell Wilkin (Holland & Holland) from Graeme Wright's book that I posted. You continue to ignore Mike Bailey's post about the NEW Holland & Holland double rifle that he commissioned (you have any idea how expensive that is?)

Quote:

I have no ties to anyone, but the heads of gunrooms at Holland and the ex regulator at Westleys have
both told me I will be nuts if I put any mono's down my gun (a new one) and I don't intend to try, best, Mike




You continue to ignore one of the foremost authorities on double rifles and their ammunition. This "if it's news to 9.3, IT'S NEWS" stuff is tiresome. This attitude of yours that because Graeme Wright, Ross Seyfried, Holland & Holland, Geoff MacDonald, et. al. haven't taken you by your little hand and "proven" the phenomenon of OSR to you that it's a fraud is as intellectually bankrupt as it is dishonest. These people have enormous experience in the DR field in general, and the problems of barrel damage from mono bullets in them in particular. You have zero, yet you suggest that theirs "defies credulity", and that's hysterical.

Quote:

Originally posted by 9.3X57:

And for it to push the rifling out similarly at the breech as at the muzzle is, well, almost impossible for me to imagine if that is what it is said to do. Nay, impossible, in the absense of any proof, which, of course, as always, has not been provided.




Like I said, come click away. Further, I'll arrange to have a DR with OSR at the booth at SCI in Reno in January. If you're so interested in gathering information about OSR, you have to make an effort. I have, over a lot of years. I'm sure you'll make excuses, as your "interest" here is clearly feigned and dishonest.

Like I said, it's clear that you have an agenda here. I don't know what it is, don't care, but it obviously doesn't have anything to do with learning something about the issue. Your unveiled insults make that clear.


peter
(removed)
24/10/09 04:54 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Peter:

A question for you. You're a gunmaker and, of course, you know what "well-struck" means, which 9.3 obviously doesn't. Do you think that obvious imperfections in barrel striking would be easy to photograph? If so, how would you go about it?




mark

i have actually experimented with the camera since this tread started, and the closest i have come so far is with the lens very close to the barrel and the mussel end against a dimed light(glass plate with white paper in front the light) but the results are not good enough yet, my better half is a lot better than me with the camera, and she is working on it now.

best regards

peter


nitro450exp
(.333 member)
24/10/09 04:55 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Hey 400NitroExpress

I know you are distracted, But I would like to know if you feel that OSR
is a risk in bolt guns, and at what barrel wall thickness you have experienced it.
I will be at DSC again this coming year, will that DR be at DSC, I would love to see it.

Thanks
Nitro450exp


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
24/10/09 05:31 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Look Guys:

I'm with Andreas. These two strings got out of hand quite rapidly. On this subject, it seems they always do, and there's no good reason for that.

I'll say again, the problems with mono-metal projectiles in double rifles are not specific to Barnes. There are many out there.

I DO find statements like this:

Quote:

I’m comfortable stating that Barnes Banded Solids are better for antique barrels than the competition




...disturbing in the extreme, because I have painful personal experience to the contrary. It never fails that when this subject periodically arises here or on AR, when I post my first hand experience and observations about it, I get called a liar or worse. That's a particularly nasty insult, when I'm holding a treasured DR of my own in my own hands and know what I can see with my own eyes. It's a real pisser. In that epiphany, how would YOU guys feel about it? I don't have it "in" for anybody. I suppose my view of this issue in double rifles is coloured by the fact that I'm not a wealthy man, and one doesn't just screw off the old tubes and slap new ones on. It's an expensive mistake. My interest is in helping others avoid making the same mistakes that I, and many others have. Being accused of having some other sinister motive doesn't sit well.

I don't know how to display it on the internet, but I do know how to show it to someone in person. I make the commitment to have a DR with visible OSR with me at SCI in January. Anyone who doubts the existence of OSR in double rifles is welcome to come by and look at it.

In reality, this issue isn't much different from that of many other products. Any given product is appropriate for a given use, but it's just common sense that it may be potentially inappropriate for others. Like steel shot is a potential problem in some shotguns, it's been known for a long time that mono-metal bullets can be a real problem is double rifles.

Via PM, I hear that some wonder if I have a professional connection to some bullet-maker. The answer is no. I have no economic or professional connection to any business in the firearms trade. I'm purely an enthusiast. For the purposes of full disclosure, I DO work the Heym AG booth at SCI. Heym picks up my air ticket, but does not otherwise compensate me. All of us at the booth are long time personal friends and double rifle junkies. I've hunted with all of them, and still do. I enjoy SCI, I believe in Heym's product, and much enjoy hanging out with my good friends at the booth. You'll find me there in January. This will be my third year there.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
24/10/09 05:38 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Hey 400NitroExpress

I know you are distracted, But I would like to know if you feel that OSR
is a risk in bolt guns, and at what barrel wall thickness you have experienced it.
I will be at DSC again this coming year, will that DR be at DSC, I would love to see it.

Thanks
Nitro450exp




I don't know if I'll be at DSC this year or not. If I make it, I'll be at the Heym booth, and I'll bring one. I'm one of the founders of a group that's conducting a hunt that starts the last day of the DSC show, so DSC is kind of tight for me. If you'll please PM me a week or so before the show, I'll be able to give you a better answer.

Generally no, magazine rifles don't have anything like the problems with monos that doubles do, as min wall is much thicker. I HAVE heard of bolt rifles showing OSR, but have not seen one myself. I think it must be quite rare in single barrel rifles, but it would certainly depend on barrel profile.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
24/10/09 05:40 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Peter:

That's almost exactly what I had in mind, but haven't tried it. When I can get some time to, I will.


peter
(removed)
24/10/09 05:49 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

please do, i actually try to make it to SCI this year, and if i do first brew will be on me, and i would also love to see the gun in question.

best

peter


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
24/10/09 05:49 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I have a 9.3x74R that I feel was damaged by Barnes X bullets. I shot 36 of the 286 Grain bullets through it and the rifle was taken off face. You can also see a 'shadow' of the rifling on the right barrel if the you hold it to a bright light in just the right way.

I can't say as a 'fact' that the damage was caused by the X bullets and I can't say for a 'fact' that the damage wasn't there from before. But I think it is true.

The interesting part was how fast it came off face. I was showing it to my friend before we went out shooting (Zebra culling) and he commented on how tight it was for a 70 year rifle. Three days later you could slide a business card between the standing breech and the barrels. It was while looking at it that he noticed the rifling impressions on the barrel.

Maybe a coincidence?

I spoke to Randy Brooks about it at SCI that January and was blown off with 'it must be a cumulative result, my bullets are the best thing in the world' comment. He was not interested in talking about it, I think he was afraid others might overhear.

Much the same as his conversation with 500 grains at SCI a couple of years ago about his bullets failing.

If you put your hands over your ears and jump up and down while singing it is hard to hear others talking.




Except for the rifle coming off face, your experience mirrors mine exactly. Thanks for posting Mickey.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
24/10/09 05:51 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

please do, i actually try to make it to SCI this year, and if i do first brew will be on me, and i would also love to see the gun in question.

best

peter




It will be an honor. I've wanted to get together with you for a long time.


peter
(removed)
24/10/09 05:52 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

we have to make it a priority then

best

peter


450_366
(.400 member)
24/10/09 06:18 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I’m comfortable stating that Barnes Banded Solids are better for antique barrels than the competition




He could be right, but as most statements like this, it depends on the competition refered to.

Quote:


...I don't know how to display it on the internet, but I do know how to show it to someone in person. I make the commitment to have a DR with visible OSR with me at SCI in January. Anyone who doubts the existence of OSR in double rifles is welcome to come by and look at it.






I would love to travel over see to see it, but cant, or rather would not be allowed.
Not becourse i dont think its there, but to see with my own eyes how it looks, and know what too look after on other rifles.

At last this tread is getting a bit constructive, with first hand experience, what bullet besides barnes a nono to doubles?

There must be some relation to hardess or alloy to look for, from the pressures barnes has shown, the soft seems to give a bit higher pressures. Are they worse then the solids?

This is of some substancial interest to anyone that would like to continue hunting with their doubles as the greens will finaly bann lead, thats something im sure of. And they wont give a crap about the guns that in their eyes killed every elephant in the wourld.


new_guy
(Sponsor)
24/10/09 06:35 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

How about we conduct our own tests?

I can provide the tube (turned to appropriate contour), and then we need someone with the proper equipment to measure any expansion as the bullets are driven down the barrel.

I would think that person would also need a lathe to continue turning down the outside of the barrel to thinner and thinner wall thickness to make the test as comprehensive as possible.

How about it: do we have any retired engineer types out there with some good measuring tools and extra time on their hands?


450_366
(.400 member)
24/10/09 06:55 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

How about we conduct our own tests?

I can provide the tube (turned to appropriate contour), and then we need someone with the proper equipment to measure any expansion as the bullets are driven down the barrel.

I would think that person would also need a lathe to continue turning down the outside of the barrel to thinner and thinner wall thickness to make the test as comprehensive as possible.

How about it: do we have any retired engineer types out there with some good measuring tools and extra time on their hands?




A comon strain gouge would be just fine as daryl stated, but mounted half way down the barrel.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
24/10/09 07:05 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Not becourse i dont think its there, but to see with my own eyes how it looks, and know what too look after on other rifles.




Andreas:

Precisely. A lot of folks that scoff have no idea what it looks like.

Quote:

There must be some relation to hardess or alloy to look for, from the pressures barnes has shown, the soft seems to give a bit higher pressures. Are they worse then the solids?




In my experience, I don't think there is a difference.


Mike_Bailey
(.400 member)
24/10/09 09:11 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Hoping to make the SCI too if SWMBO allows me, if I'm going, I want to have a few jars with you guys there, best
Mike


Sarg
(.400 member)
24/10/09 09:42 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I know nothing about this , but does any one think it may be the grooves that are showing as this is the thinness part of the barrel and pressure is blowing the thin steel out ?

I read the book & thought shit thats weird , rifling appearing on the outside !

Just a thought , and I'm not in the fight , discussion ! !


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
24/10/09 10:07 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Look forward to it Mike. Would love to see photos of your new jewel.

DarylS
(.700 member)
24/10/09 12:27 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Sarg - can't be the grooves as the bullets don't even go to the bottom of the grooves, except at the very last band, normally.

400Nitro says he has the gun with this 'damage' - GREAT! If he lacks the knowedge to post a picture or two, he can merely send them to someone who will - I am dead certain there are a HOST of people who'd love to help, myself included.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
24/10/09 01:08 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Thanks for the info 400. I take it at face value.

I'll help with photos. I photo my knives for publication, and I know how tough it is to photo steel under lights. It IS difficult. I can give you some pointers, truthfully.

You misjudge me entirely. No more need be said, but I think that'll come out in the end.

As Daryl says, lots of fellows will help with pix. I can, too.

Look, ALL {?} of us have taken it on the chin financially in some way or another. Who hasn't gotten butched by some thing or another? Your gun broke. Maybe Barnes bullets caused it, or maybe it was ready to let go anyway?

YOU are not a wart.

But all guns have warts. At least all the guns I buy... ALL guns. Maybe I'm unlucky. The difference between me and you is, I think, you are more trusting. I don't trust any maker of any product, gun, bullet or diaper {as I remember, they all leak}.

My trust goes down as the price goes up.

I have many years of experience shooting hard bullets. Mostly in junk milsurps. But they do weird things there, too, at times... Your doubles may be more like a $79 Mosin Nagant than you think...

Can you give us some pre- and post- mono measurements of your gun? What did the monos do internally? The dimensional differences would be very instructive to us all. No BS.

I never shoot any "oddball" gun without slugging, first, and I assume others are the same. I cannot imagine shooting a gun worth the price of a nice car without slugging it and the bullets intended for it. Yes, I check bearing surfaces, too, an work up slow. Steel-core solids teach that the hard way.

I called Merkel today.

I spoke to Kent Barnard at 205-655-8299. I asked if there were any problems with using properly sized mono bullets in Merkel doubles. He said; "none whatsoever". He said no guns have been sent back to him due to damage caused by monos. He was very familiar with OSR, but said he has not seen any evidence of it with their guns. This is interesting, as I have heard different elsewhere.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
24/10/09 02:04 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Originally posted by Daryl S:

400Nitro says he has the gun with this 'damage' - GREAT! If he lacks the knowedge to post a picture or two, he can merely send them to someone who will - I am dead certain there are a HOST of people who'd love to help, myself included.




Another insult with nothing constructive to add to the discussion. Same to you.


Omnivorous_Bob
(.333 member)
24/10/09 02:18 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I'll throw $200 into the pot for a test. In a few months I might be able to get around to doing something similar myself(with a bolt action I plan to rebarrel, not a double!). If I do I'll share the results here.

I think two points can't be emphasized enough.

The first is that chamber or peak pressure has nothing to do with the issue. It is a matter of barrel thickness/strength vs bullet hardness. This should be obvious when you consider that peak pressure usually occurs when the bullet is only 8-9 inches from the chamber and drops rapidly thereafter, yet OSR occurs at the low pressure/thin muzzle end, not the high pressure/thick end. I've never heard of it just in front of the chambers.

Secondly, the human eye is incredibly good at seeing flaws that are difficult to measure or photograph. Take a seemingly perfect polished metal cylinder and sight along it at a low angle and look at the reflection of a light on its surface as it is rotated. Any flaws will be obvious, but I'd have an extremely difficult time photographing it or measuring it with a runout gauge. As Wright mentioned a simlar technique is used when you inspect shotgun bores. For a flat metal surface, any distortions in a reflection of a grid pattern indicate unevenness that I can see but can't measure. I think OSR is very much a similar situation. My 2 cents.

Bob


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
24/10/09 03:21 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Thanks for the info 400. I take it at face value.

I'll help with photos. I photo my knives for publication, and I know how tough it is to photo steel under lights. It IS difficult. I can give you some pointers, truthfully.




9.3:

As I think now you understand, the problem isn't with posting photos, it's taking them. In my late youth, I had several years of formal instruction in photography, so I'm not a novice. This isn't something that's a quick snap with a pocket digital.

It isn't raised to the extent that you can feel it, or see it from any side angle. In order to judge good barrel striking - and see OSR - the barrel must be viewed from the muzzle or breech with the eye no more than, say, 5 degrees from the axis of the bore. It's necessary to be looking into a light source, plus have a background to provide contrast, and a straight-edge. Further, focus must be precise, and depth of field will have to be deep for the camera to capture it. In the end, I'll probably need studio lights and backdrops. Based on my efforts so far, I can tell you it will be a trick.

Quote:

Look, ALL {?} of us have taken it on the chin financially in some way or another. Who hasn't gotten butched by some thing or another? Your gun broke. Maybe Barnes bullets caused it, or maybe it was ready to let go anyway?




Honestly, no, I don't think so. Double rifles are expensive, and I'm not rich, so I have always been careful. While this was a long time ago, I was no novice when this took place. I had the advantage of knowing what "well-struck" meant, and knew what OSR looked like. I carefully inspected both before they were purchased (one of them was not mine), plus both were professionally inspected. Both were perfect. The one that belonged to my hunting partner was sold for a song after it was damaged. I still have the other. The OSR is present only on one barrel, and is very slight. It wasn't present before, and came up when roughly 20 rounds total of super solids were fired. No other projectiles of any description were fired during that interval. In the 18 years, and some thousands of rounds (including steel jacketed solids) since, no change has occurred.

Quote:

My trust goes down as the price goes up.




Way ahead of you. In part because of the issues we're discussing, I think it's absolutely nuts to buy a used DR without professional inspection. I can truthfully say that I'm helping friends look for nice British doubles constantly. Once we find a candidate, I insist that they have the gun inspected by a true DR expert gunmaker (not a magazine rifle parts changer), usually J. J. Understand that many of these are from online, and I don't always get to see them before he does. SEVERAL times J. J. has nixed 'em for OSR.

Quote:

Can you give us some pre- and post- mono measurements of your gun? What did the monos do internally? The dimensional differences would be very instructive to us all. No BS.




I always slug double rifles before shooting them. Both of these were spot on spec. I didn't have the occasion to slug my partner's gun afterwards, before it was sold. Mine did not measurably change, but like I said, visible OSR is very slight. I see OSR a lot, but unfortunately, almost always only after it's already there. A couple of times, J. J. has mentioned that a rifle that had OSR had bores out of spec on the large side.

Quote:

I called Merkel today.

I spoke to Kent Barnard at 205-655-8299. I asked if there were any problems with using properly sized mono bullets in Merkel doubles. He said; "none whatsoever". He said no guns have been sent back to him due to damage caused by monos. He was very familiar with OSR, but said he has not seen any evidence of it with their guns. This is interesting, as I have heard different elsewhere.




I believe the man, and don't find that particularly surprising. As we discussed earlier, this problem is directly related to min wall. Let's just say that issue opens a whole new can of radioactive worms. Merkel's barrels are very thick for a double, as are Krieghoff's.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
24/10/09 03:23 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Secondly, the human eye is incredibly good at seeing flaws that are difficult to measure or photograph. Take a seemingly perfect polished metal cylinder and sight along it at a low angle and look at the reflection of a light on its surface as it is rotated. Any flaws will be obvious, but I'd have an extremely difficult time photographing it or measuring it with a runout gauge. As Wright mentioned a simlar technique is used when you inspect shotgun bores. For a flat metal surface, any distortions in a reflection of a grid pattern indicate unevenness that I can see but can't measure. I think OSR is very much a similar situation. My 2 cents.




That's it exactly. Thanks.


500Nitro
(.450 member)
24/10/09 03:35 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I have actually seen OSR on a 404 Bolt Action and
totally agree, it is hard to see and near impossble
to photograph but it was there.


As to why it occurred in that gun, not sure.


DarylS
(.700 member)
24/10/09 10:17 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

Originally posted by Daryl S:

400Nitro says he has the gun with this 'damage' - GREAT! If he lacks the knowedge to post a picture or two, he can merely send them to someone who will - I am dead certain there are a HOST of people who'd love to help, myself included.




Another insult with nothing constructive to add to the discussion. Same to you.





There is no insult in that post - "GREAT" was used in the context that this means there is some proof that is easily accessible - so lets have it.

1/. You have insulted several posters here including myself, but I see in your eyes you are allowed to do this as you believe you are "all knowing", yet you seem to lack normal ballistics nomenclature knowledge?

2/. - No one is allowed to question your OPINIONS and opinions they are until there is proof - yet you maintain that if anyhone questions your opinions it is a personal insult against you. Your and your opinions may fact or based on fact at this time - but only to you.

3/. If OSR doesn't happen at the breech, why would it happen at the muzzle as by that time the bullet is already engraved and fitting the bore?

4/. If this expansion isn't happening at the breech, but the bullet still isn't engraving, the pressures would be over the top. This is common sense in the world of ballistics.

5/. Does this "pushing rifling lands out through the steel of the barrel" happen with TSX and other bnaded bullets or is it restricted to solid full diameter bullets without bands.

1/ & 2/. are observations 3/. is a question, not an insult 4/. is a question, not an insult 5/. is a question, not an insult


Omnivorous_Bob
(.333 member)
25/10/09 12:32 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Daryl, here's my take of how this occurs:

Woodleigh's test, which involved driving bullets through barrels, showed that with some bullets and some barrels, the barrel bulged as the bullet passed, then returned to it's original size. The 'egg is a snake' example that 9.3 gave. If the steel's elastic limits are exceeded, it will not quite spring back, and this fatigue can be cumlative.

If I take a high pressure round, say a 300win( chamber pressure well above the bullet's yield), with a typical bolt action countour (very thich at the breech), I believe the bullet will be swagged down to bore size shortly after leaving the chambers, and OSR probably won't be encountered regardless of how thin the subsequent bore tappers to.

If I fire the same bullet in a lower pressure round (well below the bullet's yield) and through a barrel with a much thinner countour at the chamber end, it may not swag down as much, as the barrel may 'stretch' to allow passage even at the breech end. When this less-reduced bullet reaches the thin end, stretching exceeds the steel's elastic limits.

This is just my theory on what is happening, nothing more. I think we read material property data on various metals and then misapply them in some cases. Yes, steel is indeed harder than copper, but I can also easily split a thin steel tube by inserting a tapered copper rod and gently rapping on it if the proportions are right. Pressure from my mallet is low, the steel is harder, but the taper acts as a lever and the hoop stress skyrockets. Someone with a better mechanical engineering background than I could explain this.

Lastly, I still do not understand how the grooves in barnes bullets "give the displaced copper somewhere to go" if the shank between the grooves is still larger than the bore diameter and being engraved itself! I understand the grooves mean less materials must be displaced, but thier idea in the previous sentance would only work if the shank between the grooves was LESS than bore diameter.


My idea for a test was originally to turn down the last few inches of a bolt action barrel to .010" or .09" and polish it to a mirror finish, but I think it would be better to contour the entire barrel appropriately and fire a cartridge in the 30,000 psi range.

Ideally, you could take an unturned blank, cut it in two (so each half has exactly the same bore dimensions), and chamber one piece for, say 300W and the other for 30-30 with typical bolt and double contours respectively, then fire the same monolithic bullets. I believe the bullets from the first barrel would be VERY slightly smaller than the later, but wouldn't know how to measure such minute dimensions accurately.

One last piece of complete speculation, but I presume all of the barrels with OSR 400 mentioned, being on doubles, had cut rifled barrels. I wonder from a materials standpoint if the act of button rifling a barrel pre-stresses the steel in a manner similar to firing a monolithic and are subsequently more resistant to such damage? Similar techniques are used in some manufacuting processes.

This is all just my 2 cents, take it or leave it. I use cast lead in my bore rifles and woodleighs in my nitros and am happy.

Bob


Anonymous
(Unregistered)
25/10/09 02:20 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

The statement from Barnes gave me a nice bout of uncontrollable hysterics, thanks for posting.

9.3x57
(.450 member)
25/10/09 03:45 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Omnivorous Bob:

I agree with your theory exactly. I've kept my hand close to my chest maybe for too long, in the hope that somebody out there had run a number of experimental tests that could be uncovered and reviewed. I guess there aren't any? I apologize for trying to drag it out, and if I've been annoying, well, sorry for that, too.

First; I want to emphasize tho the SHANK diameter as you mention. It should be no trick to design a mono bullet to be totally safe in thin-tubed guns AS LONG AS the dimensions of those guns' bores are known and their measurements worked around. Take about ten minutes including the time it takes to find the pencil.

Meaning, a "safe" mono bullet is a bullet that has an undersized shank and bands that allow the displacement of the metal impacted by the lands. BUT.......that bullet must fit the GUN.

As you say, I'll add. I can dent a piece of sheel steel with a brass hammer. I can SHATTER a hardened {but not tempered} knife blade with a piece of wood. Soft/hard only are relevant under the parameters you outline.

I do not think it is fair to categorically blame Barnes for their bullets in this sense. If the dimensions of their bullets are compatible with the internal dimension of the barrel shooting them, they'd be safe.

Now, I am going to tread lightly but say this as gently as I can. Whose responsibility is it to determine whether those dimensions are compatible?

Answer; The shooter.

Various causes can, I'm certain, be found for double damage. SOME THEM THE SHOOTER CANNOT REASONABLY BE EXPECTED TO PREVENT AND SOME OF THEM HE CAN.

I can wreck my gun with a normal powder charge and a soft cast lead bullet. How? By casting it so neck relief is inadequate to allow bullet release. An improperly fitting bullet will wreck any gun.

A bullet company makes bullets. The dimensions are known when a person lifts one from the box. They can easily be measured and so can the internal dimensions of the barrels. EVERYONE who owns a double should know every dimension of that double. Groove depth and land depth, neck relief and headspace, and acceptable OAL and max case length. Especially old ones. Just like most of us casters check our guns rigorously before shooting new bullets in them. IMO, every double before being shot should, in concert with its ammo, be rigourously miked, measured and checked, especially as and since as Peter noted earlier, Euro and American standards vary, and some guns might be out of spec in some way anyway. Screwing around with old clunkers has taught me to never trust the caliber stamp on the side of the barrel...NEVER. I mike, measure and doublecheck before I shoot.

This is why I find the statement by Barnes saying their bullets are better than the competition for the oldies to be, well, both possibly true and...amazingly crazy! They just might be fine IF the dimensions are compatible. If not...

I believe certain old guns are wrecked by merely firing them. Soldered barrels under stress from slightly improper fitting in the first place may not be noticeable, but may, afer years of sitting still or being used and EXACTLY LIKE AN OLD SOLDERED WATERPIPE, fail "for no reason" when a load is applied to them. Pardon me for saying, but fine doubles bear some similarity to your toilet supply line. {c'mon, guys, I'm trying to lighten the atmosphere here... }

The point is, solder fittings if done right are amazingly strong, but can give way under also-amazingly light stresses. Gunmakers I've discussed this with agree. The fitting is a tremendously skill-demanding process. I'm thinking that most of the non-double-owners out there have had an old, soldered sight base or two fall off, again, "for no reason". Similar condition.

It is possible that barrel harmonics and different bullet types could aggravate a conditon that lurks within the gun as well. This is the part of the mono equation that might be the hardest to duplicate in a lab, in my opinion. This one is kind of like a root ball somewhere in the dike. It's there by getting rid of it means finding it first, and we don't want to rip the whole dike down to find it...

I think we are going to see some experiments that will demonstrate the truth or falsehood of some of these theories. And they are, in my case, as in Bob's, theories. At any rate, they might give the shooting world a crutch to lean on when the greenies finally put the kibosh on lead bullets. {That copper may be far more toxic in the ground than lead is, well, a saga for another fireside...}


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
25/10/09 03:54 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

There is no insult in that post -




Sad. You can't even come up with a credible denial.

You begin with dripping sarcasm, clearly insinuating that a statement of mine isn't truthful:

Quote:

400Nitro says he has the gun with this 'damage'




And then you further insult my character by stating that because I can't give you instant gratification by posting a photograph of it, then I'm obviously making it up:

Quote:

GREAT! If he lacks the knowedge to post a picture or two, he can merely send them to someone who will - I am dead certain there are a HOST of people who'd love to help, myself included.




....which intentionally ignores a number of posts above about the difficulty of photographing OSR.

When I then observe the obvious, you respond with a lie:

Quote:

There is no insult in that post -




Quote:

1/. You have insulted several posters here including myself, but I see in your eyes you are allowed to do this as you are all knowing, yet seem to lack normal nomenclature knowledge?




Remember this?:

Quote:

Originally posted by Daryl S:
When I read this from the link above, I laughed. Obviously 400 NitroEx. knows nothing about pressure relating to strain gauges, but sure likes to spout off. Perhaps he's being funded by 'other' bullet companies?
Strain gauges show exactly what the barrel is feeling. To have this OSR phenominum, to actually press the rifling out to the outside of the barrel takes pressure - a strain gauge is on the outside of the barrel and shows the strain, pressure THERE.

Interesting.hahahahahahaha!




You had no idea what tests had been conducted, but that didn't stop you from being free with your insults. You get what you give. As for your comment about nomenclature, I'm ROFLMAO. Your comments about obturation don't even make it to sophomoric.

The constructive value of any knowledge you have to contribute seems always to be negated by your general nastiness, as it has here. I won't bother with your blather in the future.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
25/10/09 04:31 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I do not think it is fair to categorically blame Barnes for their bullets in this sense. If the dimensions of their bullets are compatible with the internal dimension of the barrel shooting them, they'd be safe.






I can't agree with the above portion of your premise. As I told you, both of the rifles I referred to were slugged. The Barnes bullets used in both actually measured very slightly under groove diameter of the bores in both. OSR occurred quickly in both.

According to Barnes:

Quote:

"The material used to manufacture Barnes Banded Solids will not obturate at less than 45,000 psi."




No over .40 Flanged Nitro Express has a CIP MAP that high (save the .500/.416, which operates at 45,000 PSI with normal loads). So, we know that the bullet can't obturate, for two reasons. The material used is too hard, and there's no compressible core. Barnes says the bullets are slightly undersize, which I don't contest. That helps, but it can't be an answer. A hard .407" mono that has to pass down a .400" bore/.408" groove barrel still has a lot of metal to displace - metal that Barnes specifically states is difficult to displace - in order to conform to the bore. In the thin tubes of a double rifle, that's almost a guarantee of problems.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
25/10/09 04:55 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

I do not think it is fair to categorically blame Barnes for their bullets in this sense. If the dimensions of their bullets are compatible with the internal dimension of the barrel shooting them, they'd be safe.






I can't agree with the above portion of your premise. As I told you, both of the rifles I referred to were slugged. The Barnes bullets used in both actually measured very slightly under groove diameter of the bores in both. OSR occurred quickly in both.





Did you check neck relief {OD of loaded rounds} and chamber length, OAL and land origin? Is it posible the bullets were pressed into the rifling before firing?

Also, are you certain chambers were concentric and not cocked or seated bullets misaligned in some way that the bullets were presented to the leade in misalignement with it?


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
25/10/09 05:11 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:




Did you check neck relief {OD of loaded rounds} and chamber length, OAL and land origin? Is it posible the bullets were pressed into the rifling before firing?




Yes. All that was done before the rifle was ever fired with anything. Min chamber/max cartridge neck dimensions are especially important in doubles, because most all of them made before the late '70s were cut for the original Cordite ammunition, which usually had very thin brass in the necks. With today's heavier brass, a tight fit is not uncommon, so it's crucial to check it. The bullets were seated off the rifling, as I've found doubles typically regulate better that way.

Quote:

Also, are you certain chambers were concentric and not cocked or seated bullets misaligned in some way that the bullets were presented to the leade in misalignement with it?




Quite certain.


Raff
(.300 member)
25/10/09 05:44 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Can someone tell me when the OSR problem first came to
notice? It seems to me to be fairly recent but I'm just
not sure.
Thanks in Advance.

Raff


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
25/10/09 06:17 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

As the guys at Hollands's have pointed out - about the time mono-metal bullets in double rifle calibers appeared.

Quote:

"Firstly, Russell (Wilkin of Holland & Holland) points out the fact that double rifles operated without problems for 75 to 100 years. However, late in the twentieth century these problems started to manifest themselves. The only change was the use of a different projectile material"




500Nitro
(.450 member)
25/10/09 08:07 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:



I agree with your theory exactly. I've kept my hand close to my chest maybe for too long, in the hope that somebody out there had run a number of experimental tests that could be uncovered and reviewed.






The only people who would have an interest in doing tests would be Barnes sine they seem to cop all the blame and really, is it that important to them ?

I would say NO and Barnes seems to indicate that they aren't interested by saying the bullets are fine because
no one can blame them.

Their are plenty of other excellent bullets on the market.


Mike_Bailey
(.400 member)
25/10/09 08:48 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

No over .40 Flanged Nitro Express has a CIP MAP that high (save the .500/.416, which operates at 45,000 PSI with normal loads). So, we know that the bullet can't obturate, for two reasons. The material used is too hard, and there's no compressible core. Barnes says the bullets are slightly undersize, which I don't contest. That helps, but it can't be an answer. A hard .407" mono that has to pass down a .400" bore/.408" groove barrel still has a lot of metal to displace - metal that Barnes specifically states is difficult to displace - in order to conform to the bore. In the thin tubes of a double rifle, that's almost a guarantee of problems.





Now THAT makes a lot of sense, best, Mike


9.3x57
(.450 member)
25/10/09 09:50 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

No over .40 Flanged Nitro Express has a CIP MAP that high (save the .500/.416, which operates at 45,000 PSI with normal loads). So, we know that the bullet can't obturate, for two reasons. The material used is too hard, and there's no compressible core. Barnes says the bullets are slightly undersize, which I don't contest. That helps, but it can't be an answer. A hard .407" mono that has to pass down a .400" bore/.408" groove barrel still has a lot of metal to displace - metal that Barnes specifically states is difficult to displace - in order to conform to the bore. In the thin tubes of a double rifle, that's almost a guarantee of problems.





Now THAT makes a lot of sense, best, Mike




It does and it's pretty basic stuff.

If the driving bands of this bullet described here were the only part of the bullet that met the .407 diameter {.001 under groove depth}, and they were designed correctly, and the rest of the bullet was merely bore riding, there should be no problem at all, even in a thin tube rifle, assuming the charge is worked up to carefully, SOP of course.

I can certainly see how the full groove depth of the bullet, the shank diameter, or the driving band surface area, any of them whether by themselves or in concert together could cause problems. Since {I think} doubles in the older NE calibers vary quite a bit in chamber, leade and bore dimensions, the onus would certainly be on the shooter to make sure modern bullets fit the gun and don't cause any damage. I say modern bullets, and not just Barnes, because it seems we have ever greater numbers of "hard" bullets on the market, some expanding, some "solid". This predicament will probably only get worse as higher and higher performance bullets are demanded by shooters and/or laws require non-lead bullets.

It is interesting, because though in this case it is easy to look back to the "golden years" when just about any bullet was safe for use in a double, it can't be forgotten that many of the old bullets were criticized for poor terminal performance...

Certainly a company like Woodleigh can be commended for sticking to tried and true, but one here has warned against the overuse {?} of their solids, and from what I have seen of them sectioned, I can certainly understand that. Again, personally, I'd check dimensions with a fine tooth comb before shooting any of the hard ones, or really, any bullets at all! I guess being ignorant about doubles might have its advantage, because I have read so much about the wide variations and non-standard chamber/leade/bore dimensions that I'd be checking any bullet at all for every dimension...from cast to jacketed...just like we do with cast bullets.

Is this not always done by old double shooters? Seems like the old guns should be treated like an old wall-hanger front stuffer to me. I mean, just who says Federal .470 {or any other modern maker} is going to fit every .470; old Belgian, Brit, German, whatever, not to mention the reborn moderns. No, I'm not throwing a rock at Federal, but I really wonder. Maybe I'm wrong and the old NE guns are all the same, but I don't think so.


500grains
(.416 member)
25/10/09 03:33 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:


Meaning, a "safe" mono bullet is a bullet that has an undersized shank and bands that allow the displacement of the metal impacted by the lands. BUT.......that bullet must fit the GUN.





I will agree with that.

I worry that the bullet first shown below has such thick bands that the barrel must bulge to let the bullet pass, and the grooves simply reduce contact area rather than serving as a location to receive the material displaced by the rifling lands.



This bullet appears better able to engrave as the driving bands are thin and the materials is easily displaced into the grooves behind the thin bands.



peter
(removed)
25/10/09 06:08 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:



This bullet appears better able to engrave as the driving bands are thin and the materials is easily displaced into the grooves behind the thin bands.






yes dan

But i have seen pictures of the north forks with rather deep engravings in the shank as well,the answer is really not that hard to figure out, less bands and deeper groves to make sure that no harm will come to anybodys gun, but since nobody makes them yet, apparently it is hard to figure out

best

peter


500Nitro
(.450 member)
25/10/09 06:14 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


Peter,

The thing is, the DR market is so small compared to the rest of the shooting market, is any company going to put a whole heap of time and money into it for not a large return ?

Especially when you have very good bullets out there already ?

And on top of that, people like me who have spent the time and effort developing loads with Woodleighs (and other bullets) who are unlikely to go through the process again
just to try a new bullet ?

Which MAY damage a very expensive gun ?


peter
(removed)
25/10/09 06:31 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

nigel

i agree and i only shoot the good stuff (woodleighs) as well, but it is true that a time may come when we are only allowed to shoot those pesky mono's, if that time comes i would like to be sure that a bullet is there, that is safe to shoot without damaging the barrels of my guns.

best

peter


500Nitro
(.450 member)
25/10/09 07:13 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


Peter

Good point.


450_366
(.400 member)
25/10/09 10:26 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

nigel

i agree and i only shoot the good stuff (woodleighs) as well, but it is true that a time may come when we are only allowed to shoot those pesky mono's, if that time comes i would like to be sure that a bullet is there, that is safe to shoot without damaging the barrels of my guns.

best

peter




And it will come, sadly im sure of that.

So what about your design is it a secret or are there any info.


JabaliHunter
(.400 member)
26/10/09 02:17 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

North Fork will make whatever diameter you want. I spoke to them once and they can make softs with a minimum order of 5000 plus die cost (>$1K) but can make solids with no tooling cost. If there is sufficient demand they add them to their line. That would be the way to go IMHO

9.3x57
(.450 member)
26/10/09 02:42 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

As long as the shaft does not contact the die, the North Forks I've resized slip thru a drawing die as easy or easier than a lead core soft.

I know there might be disagreement here, but I am still about 99.9% sure the trouble that may be caused by copper-alloy monos involves dimensional incompatability of some part of the bullet with the gun, not the mere fact that the bullet is a copper-alloy solid. Personally, I think the shaft diameter is the problem, not even really the driving bands {within reason}. Check out the truncated cone of that NF pic'd above and you can see the almost immediate relief in front of the driving bands, and essentially no portion of the bullet afore the DB's is "bore riding". Meaning, nothing to jam into the rifling of a gun whose interior dimensions are "out of spec" to the bullet, so-to-speak. In effect, this type of bullet, due to the hardness {advantage} of copper alloy, can be designed almost the opposite of modern cast bullets with their long bore riding portions. The thing looks almost like a Pope bullet from the old days.

A long bore riding portion shouldn't be a problem in a gun that fit it/that it fit, but some guns might have rifling/bore/groove dimensions that would not be compatible with a production mono sporting a long bore-riding portion {or a shaft diameter that got into the lands}. In such a case, "one size does not fit all".

I have a big hunch this whole "OSR" topic {probably under a different name} has been fully documented and experimented by Ordnance engineers, particularly during autofrettage experiments and process development {in pursuit of thinner/lighter artillery barrels} and/or AP round development, probably the former, but I can't locate such documents. Maybe others can? It is a hunch, anyhow...

As the saying goes, there is nothing new under the sun, especially true in my opinion about anything involving The Gun. Unfortunately we do not have anybody with past or present artillery ordnance education here?

This whole topic has panned out in the opposite of the way I figured it would. Most of these things seem to be eventually handled cleanly when somebody with technical expertise wades in and clears the air, oftimes it seems from a military engineering background. Maybe that person has merely not yet surfaced.


500Nitro
(.450 member)
26/10/09 03:26 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


9.3

I think a lot of arty rounds have a band around the base of the projectile which is what engages the rifling.

I'll have to check.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
26/10/09 04:16 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

But i have seen pictures of the north forks with rather deep engravings in the shank as well,the answer is really not that hard to figure out, less bands and deeper groves to make sure that no harm will come to anybodys gun, but since nobody makes them yet, apparently it is hard to figure out




Exactly. Peter, I've seen the same thing with every brand of this type made. A .450 bullet - .450" bore/.458" groove - should have an internal shank smaller than .450", and a fewer number of THIN, full caliber bands deeper than .004". The metal is hard as a pair of good quality woodpecker lips, they don't need to be anything like as wide as they are on the Barnes "banded" bullet.


Huvius
(.416 member)
26/10/09 05:28 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I would think that evidence OSR would be most apparent in a vintage drilling IMO due to the usually thin barrel wall thickness and the abundance of soldered surfaces on the rifle barrel - especially if of the double shot barrel over the rifle barrel configuration.
California, being at the forefront of the lead ban, and where there is still a fair amount of boar and deer hunting being done will probably be the most likely place for these problems to originate (if we assume OSR is from monos and hunters will be required to use such bullets).
Taking into consideration that many combos are in a 9.3mm chambering, I bet there are more than a few shooting Barnes' (or another maker) monos right now.

Also, I am confused as to how a "egg in the snake" bulge can occur any further down the barrel than at the point at which the bullet is "swaged" to the land and groove dameters.
IMO, unless the bore is tapered, the bullet is sized to the rifling immediately after leaving the chamber. If not, then monos fired from a 24" barrel would be expected to be of a smaller diameter than if fired from a four inch barrel - which I suggest is not the case.


450_366
(.400 member)
26/10/09 05:44 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

The only possibility would be that the bullet "springs" back to shape with an force stonger then the barrel when leaving the thick part at the breech, or somethink in that area.

peter
(removed)
26/10/09 07:03 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

So what about your design is it a secret or are there any info.




no secret at all:
Sub caliber shank, thin ribs and not that many of them. wide nose with a bit of a curve on them as i find the square nosed ones ugly, this is just a project i have to do for myself, when there might be some time for it.

my biggest job is to gather enough data to determin how small the shank should be, as everybody and their uncle apparently is going for saami or cip spec. which we know wont cut it with the gems we have at home in the cabinet, and also i feel quite strongly that it shouldent cost as much as everybody else is charging for them.

so the two time consumers would be more data collecting and the testing on big nasty critters
last part is the good part though.

best

peter


gryphon
(.450 member)
26/10/09 07:16 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Well over at the other place someone is not too happy with "our NE Darryl" and needs a good kick in the ring for his comments he has posted..Serve it up to him Darryl!

500Nitro
(.450 member)
26/10/09 07:45 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Well over at the other place someone is not too happy with "our NE Darryl" and needs a good kick in the ring for his comments he has posted..Serve it up to him Darryl!





The thing is, most discussions, even heated one's on NE still stay civil.

On AR, they end up in a bitch fight of the worst proportions
and normally get way off topic.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
26/10/09 08:26 AM
Re: OSR, Coming Soon; Col Arthur Alphin Responds

I believe we have left out a major player in this discussion.

In light of that, I contacted Col. Arthur Alphin in regards to the OSR issue and had a very interesting conversation with him.

I believe most of you are familiar with Col. Alphin and his company, A-Square. For those who are not familiar with Col. Alphin, here is A-Square's website:

http://a-squareco.com/

Col. Alphin has many years of experience dealing with the issue and has agreed to weigh in on the subject. Fellows, please, let's get the data, facts and observations to the front of the stove, and emotions to the back burner.

Thanks.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
26/10/09 09:18 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

No over .40 Flanged Nitro Express has a CIP MAP that high (save the .500/.416, which operates at 45,000 PSI with normal loads). So, we know that the bullet can't obturate, for two reasons. The material used is too hard, and there's no compressible core. Barnes says the bullets are slightly undersize, which I don't contest. That helps, but it can't be an answer. A hard .407" mono that has to pass down a .400" bore/.408" groove barrel still has a lot of metal to displace - metal that Barnes specifically states is difficult to displace - in order to conform to the bore. In the thin tubes of a double rifle, that's almost a guarantee of problems.





Now THAT makes a lot of sense, best, Mike




Yes, it does make a lot of sense. Let's take that full circle.

From Graeme Wright's "Shooting the British Double Rifle":

Quote:

Geoff MacDonald who makes the Woodleigh brand of projectiles did an experiment which illustrates the difference in barrel stress with different projectiles. After checking for correct bore and groove diameters, Geoff turned down a section of a .375 barrel until it had .090" wall thickness. He then forced various projectiles through the barrel USING A HYDRAULIC RAM. On the outside of the barrel he had a micrometer set up to measure any expansions of the barrel. When forcing a soft point through, the barrel has no measurable expansion at all. However, a steel solid gave .0005" expansion to the barrel, although the barrel did spring back after the bullet had passed."




In other words, the jacketed soft point compressed, engraved, and conformed to the bore, with no elastic deformation of the barrel at all. 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.

Steel will always return to it's pre-stress dimensions after elastic deformation. That's the DEFINITION of elastic deformation. If it's elastic limit is exceeded, it's original dimensions are permanently altered - which is the definition of PLASTIC deformation. By definition, OSR is plastic deformation. The dimensions of steel can't be altered by stress any other way.

Woodleigh's tests confirm what has long been known - the thin barrel walls common to quality double rifles DO expand SOLELY due to the passage of a bullet too hard to entirely conform to the bore. One of the bullets used in the test was a dead soft LEAD bullet with a thick gilding metal covered steel jacket. The soft core makes it compressible, although less so than a copper or gilding metal jacketed soft point expanding bullet, and elastic, not plastic, deformation occurs. A conventional mono metal bullet (one with no thin full-caliber bands to obviate the problem) has no soft metal core, making it perfectly NON-compressible, and plastic deformation occurs.

On that note let's consider this statement again:

Quote:

"The material used to manufacture Barnes Banded Solids will not obturate at less than 45,000 psi."




Again, no .40+ caliber double rifle cartridge operates at pressures that high. To complete the circle, consider this again:

Quote:

So, we know that the bullet can't obturate, for two reasons. The material used is too hard, and there's no compressible core. Barnes says the bullets are slightly undersize, which I don't contest. That helps, but it can't be an answer. A hard .407" mono that has to pass down a .400" bore/.408" groove barrel still has a lot of metal to displace - metal that Barnes specifically states is difficult to displace - in order to conform to the bore. In the thin tubes of a double rifle, that's almost a guarantee of problems.




The fact that something this basic seems so hard to understand utterly escapes me.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
26/10/09 09:23 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

Well over at the other place someone is not too happy with "our NE Darryl" and needs a good kick in the ring for his comments he has posted..Serve it up to him Darryl!





The thing is, most discussions, even heated one's on NE still stay civil.

On AR, they end up in a bitch fight of the worst proportions
and normally get way off topic.




True, and Daryl is doing his best to make this place the same.

Mac said nothing that isn't true.

Quote:

In the thread on NE is that one guy is simply a know-it-all ass, and can't be civil, and has no experience where double rifles are concerned. 9.3X57, however is trying to work things out in his mind, but is simply sceptical, but at least willing to discuss the matter, without the other guy's scarcasm. His's take on the subject is a Know-It-All OPINION that is no different from a person who has never ridden in an airplane, telling a pilot how to fly one!




Not a big thing, but I would differ with him on one point. Making forceful, intentionally insulting comments on a subject that the poster has zero experience with, has done no research on, and that belittle the opinions of professionals who really are expert on the subject, fails to rise to the level of "opinion". It's merely arrogance taken to the level of oral diarrhea.


tinker
(.416 member)
26/10/09 11:45 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

This is one of those conversations that would sound a lot different and likely go much more smoothly and constructively if it took place over the benches in our collective machineshop and loading den.

I don't think that there would be nearly the tension or missing-in-communication if everyone interested in the topic could carry on in person - I have a sense all parties in this discussion are a nostril-hair from seeing eye-to-eye on the topic and that there are slim and narrow margins of distinction in the way of the "A-Ha Moment" for all concerned.

I like all of y'all, across the board.
I see potential for walking-around sense to support many different sides of the story, and with the right group in the right space and a couple real-for-real examples of OSR damage on the table all could come to a common ground in language regarding the issue where everyone saw things in the same light.

The witch-hair-nest that comes to surround conversations on this topic resembles the "45-70 for dangerous game", "458Win VS Lott", "Wheelgun VS Autoloader" etc discussion snares.
I think that at some time (hopefully soon) someone's going to get a simple idea across in simple language, backed with photographic and anecdotal evidence, clearly putting the lights on the OSR issue - highlighting the distinction and the details and problems around and about it.
Ideally somewhere in-step with that moment there will be clear and distinct language around 'driving-band' monolithic bullet design and load design that will point one-and-all in the direction of truth and light.



I'll cross a finger.





Cheers
Tinker


Huvius
(.416 member)
26/10/09 12:57 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I just noticed a Hornady add for their new GMX mono bullet made entirely of gilding metal - "the same alloy used to make Hornady bullet jackets for decades". And their banding is even wider and fewer than those on the Barnes bullets.
The grroves are way up from the base of the bullet with a long ungrooved portion at the tail of the bullet - I would say more than half of the bearing surface of the bullet is at the rear - nonbanded portion. Does this make any sense at all? I see the need to have the base of the bullet full diameter for a decent extent to prevent pushing the last band forward on the bullet when fired, but this looks excessive.

BTW, I do have a CNC lathe if anybody here has a mono design which they would like to try, send me a PM. Heck, with the green meanies breathing down our necks, maybe there will be a future making monos custom sized in a design specifically for double shooters.


500grains
(.416 member)
26/10/09 01:31 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Unfortunately we do not have anybody with past or present artillery ordnance education here?





You may wish to contact the person posting under the handle "Andy" at AR and invite him to join in. Andy was an ordnance evaluator for Jane's Defence.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
26/10/09 01:40 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

When forcing a soft point through, the barrel has no measurable expansion at all. However, a steel solid gave .0005" expansion to the barrel, although the barrel did spring back after the bullet had passed."




There is a difference between the use of a hydraulic ram and the combustion of powder to drive a bullet thru the bore. I was given something of an engineering lesson from an ordnance engineer about this specific test today. Suffice it to say I think we all might get that lesson shortly. I hope so, as I am no engineer, and the lesson was interesting indeed.

A hard .407" mono that has to pass down a .400" bore/.408" groove barrel still has a lot of metal to displace - metal that Barnes specifically states is difficult to displace - in order to conform to the bore. In the thin tubes of a double rifle, that's almost a guarantee of problems.

This IS it!

The simple question is; Will the passage of a .407 bullet down a .400 bore/.408 groove barrel cause the barrel to exceed its elastic limit and if so, at what pressures?

This seems relatively easy to prove or disprove, so what seems so hard for me to understand is why we have never seen a lab reproduction of that event documented here.

To the contrary, I have now been told attempts to reproduce this event have demonstrated that it is not reproducible. Just reporting some findings. I'm pretty sure we'll get more.









9.3x57
(.450 member)
26/10/09 01:44 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

Unfortunately we do not have anybody with past or present artillery ordnance education here?





You may wish to contact the person posting under the handle "Andy" at AR and invite him to join in. Andy was an ordnance evaluator for Jane's Defence.




500g, I have never been able to register on that forum. I'd love to but I can't. I've emailed Yemen or wherever that is many times, with not response and no fix. I have no idea why. As it is, I hope to have someone with several degrees in ordnance engineering on board soon. If you'd like to contact the "Andy" fellow please do. AR won't let me in.


Omnivorous_Bob
(.333 member)
26/10/09 01:49 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

9.3, autofrettage is exactly the process I was thinking of when I mentioned buttoning full diameter blanks. I think this might make them possibly be less susceptable to OSR? I know some modern production doubles use buttoned barrels in addition to having fairly heavy contours. I wonder if this contributes to some production makers saying monos are ok in their guns. Given a choice I still prefer cut rifling, preferably of the chopper lump variety!

Also, I speculate that the condition of the lands at the throat could make the situation potentialy worse. Nice new square lands perpendicular to a bullet band should shear through it. A worn throat could present a taper, in effect squeezing the land into the band/shank. Not a big problem with a compressable lead core bullet, but squeezing would present far more radial pressure than shearing.
As an analogy, the lead face of the thread on the ice screws I use is tapered because the goal is to NOT shear the ice, but rather displace it gradually under pressure.

I think this would be interesting to experiment with out of curiosity, but as others have mentioned wouldn't ever take a chance with a double when legal alternatives are available.

If you talk to Col. A2, I'm really curious about that "Weapons Systems Engineering" degree he mentions on his book jacket.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
26/10/09 02:04 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

9.3, autofrettage is exactly the process I was thinking of when I mentioned buttoning full diameter blanks.




Yes.

For those not familiar, the driving force {no pun intended...} of the process is to increase the strength of a barrel by an explosive loading {other methods are used as well}. In the practical world of artillery and tank guns, one goal is to maximise the strength of the lightest possible barrel. This was why I was wondering if OSR had been researched by ordnance engineers, since it seems logical that very thin tubes have been experimented with.

In a rifle barrel, I am not sure what stress is required {pressure} to cause the autofrettage {"self hooping"} event. Skennerton cites the increase of .303 military chambers by .001 {IIRC} as a result of proofing and since a slight and predictable increase in inside diameter is a result of autofrettage, possibly this process occurs during the proofing of such barrels? The weird thing is I cannot recall mention of increased dimensions of other calibers as a predictable result of proofing which means nothing since I am no ordnance engineer. I watched a few guns get proofed once at the Musgrave Mauser plant in Bloemfontein, RSA but that's my sum total experience {not counting the "proofing" of my waterpipe/firecrackers & BB's "gun" I made when I was 12...}

Getting back to 400NitroExpresses .400/.408 barrel, another experiment comes to mind;

Fire a mild steel, machined solid bullet of .407 diameter thru said test barrel. Obviously this would demand extreme safety measures but it might shed some light on the possibility of reproducing OSR in a controlled environment...

As for the degree, I hope you can ask him yourself.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
26/10/09 02:46 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

There is a difference between the use of a hydraulic ram and the combustion of powder to drive a bullet thru the bore.




You completely missed the point of the test. The purpose of driving the bullet through manually was to determine whether or not barrel expansion could be induced SOLELY due to the passage of a hard bullet, thus eliminating the influence of chamber pressure. It was. This has long been known to be true and was confirmed by Woodleigh's tests.

Quote:

The simple question is; Will the passage of a .407 bullet down a .400 bore/.408 groove barrel cause the barrel to exceed its elastic limit and if so, at what pressures?




One more time, no one has EVER demonstrated that chamber pressure has ANYTHING to do with this issue. I've spoken with a lot of people in the trade familiar with this issue, and have never found a single one that believes it, except Barnes. Pressure testing has conclusively proven that mono-metal bullets can be loaded to standard external performance without exceeding established pressure limits. Even Barnes' tests prove this. Excessive pressure is a canard.

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. I'm pretty sure we'll get more.




Ah. Standard response for this string. Woodleigh lied. How impressively credible and constructive. Probably from a certain mono-maker that's done no testing at all.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
26/10/09 03:36 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

There is a difference between the use of a hydraulic ram and the combustion of powder to drive a bullet thru the bore.




You completely missed the point of the test. The purpose of driving the bullet through manually was to determine whether or not barrel expansion could be induced SOLELY due to the passage of a hard bullet, thus eliminating the influence of chamber pressure. It was. This has long been known to be true and was confirmed by Woodleigh's tests.

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.

Quote:

The simple question is; Will the passage of a .407 bullet down a .400 bore/.408 groove barrel cause the barrel to exceed its elastic limit and if so, at what pressures?




One more time, no one has EVER demonstrated that chamber pressure has ANYTHING to do with this issue.

It is completely relevant to ask; "At what pressure does this occur?"

Remember, nobody is limiting their discussion of pressure to the chamber anyway or for that matter saying that excessive pressure has occured, tho it is admittedly hard to believe that such a circumstance would not occur.

Also remember, there must be sufficient energy imparted to the bullet to cause the displacement of rifling, regardless how hard the bullet is. In a gun, that energy is imparted by the expanding gases of the burning powder, and those expanding gases create pressure. 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. For the sake of argument, pretend that this event occurs at completely "normal" pressures. It is still relevant to investigate the pressures. I'm not sure why you have a problem with this.

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.


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. I'm pretty sure we'll get more.




Ah. Standard response for this string. Woodleigh lied. How impressively credible and constructive. Probably from a certain mono-maker that's done no testing at all.

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. The liquid is not compressible, so anyone familiar with hydraulics on a farm tractor knows extremely high forces can be applied using hydraulics. Again, I'm not sure why you brought up Woodleigh. The point isn't that Woodleigh lied. The point is twofold;

1} Was the elastic limit of the barrel material exceeded by the hydraulic test??

2} Does a hydraulic test replicate the forces of expanding powder in the barrel and the application of force against the rifling, i.e. is a steady application of force the same thing as a pressure curve as existing in a gun barrel??

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.





450_366
(.400 member)
26/10/09 06:02 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:



1} Was the elastic limit of the barrel material exceeded by the hydraulic test??

2} Does a hydraulic test replicate the forces of expanding powder in the barrel and the application of force against the rifling, i.e. is a steady application of force the same thing as a pressure curve as existing in a gun barrel??





3. Was the barrel turned down all the way or did they leave a "chamber" with thicker material at the "breech"?

2,3mm vall thats not much, taken down further they would see it with softs also. The only thing it proves is that a bullet vill need some force to adapt to the bore.

Now why didnt he make the test with his competition, in relation to other brand it would hawe been usefull info.


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.


Empire375
(.300 member)
26/10/09 06:36 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Hi Guys

One thing I take from this discussion is that I've been searching to buy a Vintage DR and now I'm too scared to bloody buy one !!!


500Nitro
(.450 member)
26/10/09 06:41 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Hi Guys

One thing I take from this discussion is that I've been searching to buy a Vintage DR and now I'm too scared to bloody buy one !!!





Don't be scared.

I've only had one with a problem OUT OF 3 dozen or so (loose quarter rib) (not counting those that needed a tighten) and I knew about that before I bought it.

And at least with OSR, you can see it !!!

Anytime you need some help, give me a holler via PM.


Empire375
(.300 member)
26/10/09 07:07 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

HI 500Nitro
Thanks for the offer. I may take you up on it. I have a Mauser on order from Empire Rifles and once I get over the shock of that I will start searching again in earnest. I bought a Greener shotgun once (when Young) only to realise it had been well and truly shot out. It still smarts
If anybody is going to buy a beautiful rifle with OSR it will be me !!

Bob


NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
26/10/09 07:14 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

How do the driving bands on GS Custom bullets compare to the Barnes, North Fork bullets mentioned? GS also claims they can be safely used through double rifles.

Interestingly Geoff MacDonald had some monometal bullets with driving bands at the last Aussie SHOT Show which another gentleman is making, so there might be some developments in the future especially if lead bans start to occur in more places. Not stating fact, merely speculating.


Mike_Bailey
(.400 member)
26/10/09 08:25 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

400Nitro, you are not wrong about the A Square reputation, mention that name to any UK double makers and it's like bunging a whole bunch of garlic at Dracula, best Mike

9.3x57
(.450 member)
27/10/09 12:52 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Originally posted by .400 Nitro Express:

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?

It's the little word "perhaps" in the last sentence here that is the trouble for many intelligent people reading this thread...


The purpose of the test was to ISOLATE that event BY EXCLUDING THE VARIABLE OF PRESSURE.

The addition of a new energy source for the movement of the bullet is just that, an addition. That is not an isolation of the event, it is the addition of a new variable, a completely different application of force {steady} versus what happens in a gun {pressure peak and valley of the pressure curve}. As for Woodleigh "lying", well, I never said it as you accuse me, in fact, I stated the opposite. I believe Woodleigh's test, and I believe it was a sincere attempt to duplicate OSR in a lab. The experiment however, did not do that. The bullet did not apply a force to the rifling that exceeded the elastic limit of the steel barrel.

I wish they had used ever larger bullets and as was suggested, monos. I still want to see a lab controlled firing of a mild steel bullet of the dimensions you stated per the .400/.408 barrel. That would be very interesting.


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.

Now don't start calling Geoff dumb. I don't think he's dumb, either. But whether the bullet is moved by direct application of hydraulic fluid or whether the hydraulic fluid moves a ram which moves the bullet is irrelevant; both rely on hydraulic fluid for the force application to the bullet. And that force is applied in a completely different manner than is the force of expanding gases. Does this matter? Well, I don't know. I'm not willing to say categorically {others are}, but it IS different and the effect on the bullet and barrel may be, too. One cannot add a new variable and call it a control. Let me rephrase my previous statement; "I don't think many of us shove our bullets outta the barrel with a hydraulic ram". Good, cleared that up.

You ask a good question; Have I contacted Graeme Wright, David Little, Ross Seyfried, Holland & Holland, Geoff MacDonald?

The answer is; No.

This is correct. My original contact was made to find out if Barnes had done any testing, because it was stated here that they hadn't. That was false, they had done testing, but nobody seems to accept it or better put, most who post here seem to reject it. Same reason I contacted A-Square. I've contacted Merkel, and started the process with several other gunmakers. I applaud the invitation to any and all of these folks you mention to join in here. I think that would be great and if you can help me with the contact info on the list above I'd be happy to invite them myself. Send me a PM or invite them yourself. Or anyone else that could add information of value to the discussion; engineers, etc. Actually, I kind of thought you had contact with some of these folks and could get them in on the back-and-forth here. Your list may not be all-inclusive, so if you can think of any others in the future, get on the phone and call them as I've done with several. I absolutely agree with you about inviting experts. Get all you can. And by the way, everyone will have to accept or not accept the word of someone else, at least to a degree. Many on both sides of the "OSR Issue" have been accused by the other side of having side interests {business, etc} that flavor their opinions. Accusations flow both ways. That makes it doubly hard for a reasoned decision to be made by those of us who have never seen the phenomenon.

400; You have a really bad attitude, as we all know. We love you, and ignore it for the most part because in the area of double rifles you are better informed than almost anyone, even on this arguably World's Best double-centric forum {which is not meant as an insult to others!!! }.

Regardless, most here are straining to drive through what is very thick, hard wall; That rifling can be forced to the outside of a barrel by firing a mono bullet. Many very intelligent people recoil at the thought if it, seek proof, and want answers because, for one thing, we are all probably going to be stuck with monos of one ilk or another in the future. Some are just interested, others are concerned that the purchase of an expensive double rifle might be a expensive mistake or worry that if they did buy one and lead-core bullets disappear due to regulations, laws, etc, they would be stuck with nothing but a tomato stake that cost them the price of a nice sedan. Whether you like it or not, many here would like to see OSR proven in a controlled environment so all the dangers can be isolated and then, avoided. I, and many others, believe EVERY bullet maker will be making monos some day, and we want to make darn sure they don't wreck our guns.





Paul
(.400 member)
27/10/09 01:09 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Whatever the merits of each side of the argument, the way the law is going in various parts of Europe and America, it will be handy if someone makes a mono that's definitely and finally safe to shoot in DB rifles, asap.

- Paul


CptCurlAdministrator
(.450 member)
27/10/09 01:18 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

In reading this thread two things are immediately apparent. First, 9.3x57 is not a double rifle owner, but he should be. Second, 9.3x57 is from Missouri. To believe in the existence of OSR he must be shown.

I suggest this test. It will be 9.3’s task to get Barnes to agree to participate. We can hammer out all the details once they are on board.

First both Barnes and 9.3 deposit with me the full cost of a new Chapuis double rifle in 9.3x74R. I will place the funds in escrow in my professional trust account.

Next, procure a brand new Chapuis double rifle in 9.3x74R from Champlin Arms, an authorized distributor. The rifle will be paid for using funds from the escrow deposit.

Third, load 200 rounds of ammunition using brand new brass, an appropriate powder charge known not to produce excess pressure, and topped with the old style "X" bullets.

Lastly, fire the rounds in the Chapuis with both 9.3 and Barnes' representative present. Carefully avoid over-heating the barrels, and clean them every 20 rounds. This should be a fun day of shooting.

The entire test is to be conducted under the supervision of J. J. Perodeau, and I suppose it all shall occur in or near Enid, OK. 400NitroExpress will be invited to attend, and I will be invited also. We may help you shoot up the ammo if asked.

J. J. will carefully inspect the barrels when new, before the test, and then again following the test. He will determine whether any OSR or other damage has occurred. I don't think his qualifications for the task can be questioned.

If in the end the barrels visibly show OSR or other damage then Barnes pays for the rifle and all the ammo and posts an appropriate confession on its website. Barnes gets to keep the rifle. 9.3 gets his money back from my escrow deposit.

If no OSR or other damage is visible, then 9.3 pays for the rifle and all ammo, and he keeps the rifle. Barnes gets its money back from the escrow deposit. In that event 9.3 becomes the newest member of DRSS. It will be a truly great step for him.

In either event, the occasion will be reported in minute detail here on NE.com.

Before this goes any further, let me say I am a strong believer in OSR. I think the chance that 9.3 will have to buy the rifle is practically nil.

Rod, you have been in contact with Barnes. You get them to agree to these terms, and we're on. What say ye?

Curl


CptCurlAdministrator
(.450 member)
27/10/09 01:22 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Another idea just came to me. Maybe there's enough interest on NE.com and on AR that people would pay a modest amount, say $100, to witness this event. Any money collected could offset the cost of the rifle and ammo.

400NitroExpress and CptCurl exempted!

Curl


Huvius
(.416 member)
27/10/09 02:13 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

procure a brand new Chapuis double rifle in 9.3x74R




Nice idea, but Graeme Wright's discussion of OSR suggests that modern barrel steels are not as susceptabe to OSR as vintage barrels.

"for the most part, new rifles and new barrels fitted to old rifles are not showing the overstressed rifling problems with hard projectiles"

Are Chapuis, Merkel, Krieghoff, Blaser, and Searcy among the makers recommending AGAINST using monos in their guns?
If not, does their warranty cover OSR or loose ribbing when using factory ammo?
If they recommend against it, what do they base that recommendation on?

I think we can all agree that a vintage double brings many variables into play here that a new gun simply does not.
Barrel thickness, steel composition, type of rifling, and wear of the rifling all contribute to the possibility of OSR occurring - not to mention land and groove variations when they were new.

IMO, this argument is totally moot!
Also, IMO, OSR exists and seems to be easily avoided (at least for now) by simply choosing the correct size and type of bullet for your rifle. (ie, no monos!)
I learned very quickly with my first vintage double that if you aren't willing to do the homework and experimenting required to shoot these guns properly, then you shouldn't bother...


SharpsNitro
(.375 member)
27/10/09 02:27 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Anyone care to opine on whether the method of forming the rifling in the first place is a contributing factor (i.e. cut vs. button) to OSR?

9.3x57
(.450 member)
27/10/09 02:35 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Anyone care to opine on whether the method of forming the rifling in the first place is a contributing factor (i.e. cut vs. button) to OSR?




Indeed, I have opined. Several others, too, at least in PM's and outside discussions. I almost am embarassed to say, though, there doesn't seem to be any, well...proof...


9.3x57
(.450 member)
27/10/09 02:53 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

BTW:

Back to autofrettage for a moment;

I forgot to add. I submit, that an investigation of the process of autofrettage MIGHT reveal that in a thinwalled double, OSR is the observable after-effect of autofrettage, and that, in the event, the OSR barrel may be actually STRONGER than it was before OSR was observable. That was the line of thought I was headed for, but forgot to add. The gun could I suppose still be, in effect, "wrecked", due to altered dimensions of the barrel, fitting, etc, but I wonder about this as a side issue.

This might be a rabbit trail, but possibly Omnivourous Bob can comment his own opinion.


CptCurlAdministrator
(.450 member)
27/10/09 02:59 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Huvius,

Sure the Chapuis uses modern steel. But those rifles are reported victims of OSR, modern steel notwithstanding.

If you are saying that successful undamaged completion of the "test" by the Chapuis would not dis-prove OSR, I agree. I just don't think there's much likelihood the Chapuis will survive undamaged. And if I am correct, Barnes will have a big crow pie to wolf down. Maybe that would prompt them to do proper R&D to avoid OSR from their product.

The test really wouldn't cost them much (in dollars). As confident as they seem to be, I would think they would jump to the occasion.

Curl


NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
27/10/09 03:14 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I believe there is an enthusiastic double rifle hunter whom uses monometal bullets eg Barnes X, in his Chapuis 9.3x74R double and yes other persons whom have handled his rifle have said there is evidence of OSR. I have not seen the rifle but trust the guys whom have seen the rifle.

400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
27/10/09 03:33 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I believe there is an enthusiastic double rifle hunter on the net whom uses monometal bullets eg Barnes X, in his Chapuis 9.3x74R double and yes other persons whom have handled his rifle have said there is evidence of OSR. I have not seen the rifle but trust the guys whom have seen the rifle.




Actually, the Chapuis 9.3 would be a decent choice for such a test. I know of three that suffered loose ribs with Barnes X and TSX, one that was very recent. I'll see that one again in January and will inspect it for OSR.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
27/10/09 03:48 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

400:

What would be the best caliber for a single-barrel test?

A medium like the 9.3 or a big bore like the .458? I thought .458 along with thin .078" walls.

Would that be OK?


AkMike
(.416 member)
27/10/09 04:14 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

It'd be hard to crack the ribs loose on a single tubed rifle. Make it a double!

470evans
(.333 member)
27/10/09 05:13 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Ok Curl,

I'll volunteer. I have a Chapuis 9.3 that has fired less than 50 rounds of Woodleigh and Hornady softs and is less than a year old. If Barnes agrees to reimburse me for the rifle if it's damaged I'll agree to volunteer it. The rifle can be shipped to JJ for a pre test inspection to insure no damage prior to the shooting.

I would make myself and the rifle available at the Dallas Gun Club to fire 200 rounds with Barnes X bullets.

Let me know if Barnes would agree to the test.


Mike_Bailey
(.400 member)
27/10/09 05:20 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

470Evans, that's called putting it on the line now lets wait and see ! best and thanks, Mike

400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
27/10/09 06:08 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I'll come up and spell you on the shooting.

Mike_Bailey
(.400 member)
27/10/09 06:42 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Help fill in a thicky, whats the difference between the X and the TSX ? thx, Mike

DUGABOY1
(.400 member)
27/10/09 08:56 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I believe there is an enthusiastic double rifle hunter on the net whom uses monometal bullets eg Barnes X, in his Chapuis 9.3x74R double and yes other persons whom have handled his rifle have said there is evidence of OSR. I have not seen the rifle but trust the guys whom have seen the rifle.




Gentlemen, one last thing here, and IMO this thread should die!
The whole thing that is debated here is one side declares the existence of OSR, and separating of ribs, and wedges caused by improperly made mono-metal bullets in DOUBLE RIFLES! In this 6 or 7 pages of tossing this back and forth, several examples of this phenomenon have been offered, and not one clear iota of proof that it doesn't exist has been offered, except apples to oranges comparisons, and biased opinion.

People who own doubles that have this damage have posted here, and most of us have posted about examples we have seen with our own eyes, yet we are commissioned in charge of showing proof, to the two people here who have not seen it, but they offer only single barrel rifles and chamber pressures in those rifles they have shot as proof that it doesn't exist.

It seems odd to me that dozens of long time collectors and shooters of double rifles all seem to know of this effect on double rifles, and the two who staunchly deny the existence of damage to double rifle by the use of improperly made Mono-metal bullets, are two people who have never even owned a double rifle, and I doubt either has ever even held one in their hands, or fired one in any caliber. Amazing! Yet they know all about what works in them, and what will, and will not damage them, and to what extent. Are these two to be believed while there are many right here on NE, and a hundred or so on AR who are aware of this effect on double rifles who seem to be mistaken in what they have seen. Perhaps they all had a joint nightmare! Nitro's post above is just one more example offered by our host here! Is he to be included in the disillusioned among us?

Gentlemen, this is not a unicorn, it is a well known real ANIMAL among the long time double rifle owners, collectors, and makers, and is always a thing a knowledgeable buyer looks for when buying a used double rifle, just like off face condition, or cordite burn, and loose ribs, which by the way, is also caused by the same thing, in most cases, as causes OSR. This phenomenon only bared it's ugly head about the time Mono-metal bullets arrived on the shooting seen, with a full 100 yrs of double rifle use before, with no OSR. That alone should tell a intelligent person there may be a connection, but not to everyone it seems.

................. I don't think we need sarcasm, but it seems at least one poster here seems to live for it. That is not needed in a debate, and those who use it are, most times, operating from a base built on quicksand!


450_366
(.400 member)
27/10/09 09:16 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

It'd be hard to crack the ribs loose on a single tubed rifle. Make it a double!




Or a combo, still no word of a combo wrecked out there?


9.3x57
(.450 member)
27/10/09 10:05 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Bravo and splendid!

Call placed, and PM sent!


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
27/10/09 10:26 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

People who own doubles that have this damage have posted here, and most of us have posted about examples we have seen with our own eyes, yet we are commissioned in charge of showing proof, to the two people here who have not seen it, but they offer only single barrel rifles and chamber pressures in those rifles they have shot as proof that it doesn't exist.




This string went off the rails from the first page for two reasons, and the above is one of them. From the first post, it wasn't framed as a discussion. Neither "It's a myth, prove it to me" nor "nobody's proven anything yet" represent a genuine, good faith, or appropriate effort to gather information about any topic. Indeed, neither mindset has ANYTHING TO DO with obtaining information, or even conducting a discussion for that matter. That approach is only used when only heat is desired to the exclusion of light, and this topic was intentionally framed that way from the beginning.

Tinker summed up the second reason here:

Quote:

This is one of those conversations that would sound a lot different and likely go much more smoothly and constructively if it took place over the benches in our collective machineshop and loading den.




When the insults begin to fly in the original post and continue apace, it doesn't matter what the string is about, it's doomed to begin rotation around the bowl. That kind of attitude in the approach just guarantees it.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
27/10/09 02:30 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Help fill in a thicky, whats the difference between the X and the TSX ? thx, Mike




Mike, the X is the original Barnes "expanding" mono-metal. It's the same shape as a conventional jacketed spitzer, and has no grooves or bands. The TSX is the follow-on with wide bands, so the bearing surface is reduced.


Huvius
(.416 member)
28/10/09 01:25 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Gents,
Not to drag this thread out again...but here goes!

I was just reading some old Kynoch adverts last night.
In their ad for the then new nickel based bullets (which I believe was the first use of a "gas check") they mention the high pressures encountered when using the "solid nickel bullet".

Now, this leads me to believe that perhaps this mono idea was attempted over a century ago with largely the same concerns arising then as there are now.

Just food for thought...


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
28/10/09 02:37 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Gents,
Not to drag this thread out again...but here goes!

I was just reading some old Kynoch adverts last night.
In their ad for the then new nickel based bullets (which I believe was the first use of a "gas check") they mention the high pressures encountered when using the "solid nickel bullet".

Now, this leads me to believe that perhaps this mono idea was attempted over a century ago with largely the same concerns arising then as there are now.

Just food for thought...




No. The terminology is confusing to some. "Solid" bullet has always meant "non-expanding", and still does. It has nothing to do with "homogenous". There are jacketed solids and homogenous solids, as well as jacketed and homogenous expanding bullets.

The "nickel based bullet" referred to was their terminology for the metal-based lead bullet used mostly in the Nitro for Black loadings. The "solid nickel bullet" was the ubiquitous full nickel jacket, round nose - a purely conventional lead core FMJ with a nickel jacket - that was loaded in double rifle ammunition from the the appearance of the Nitros in the 1890s until the early 1950s, at which time the jacket was changed to gilding metal. The British sporting FMJ of that day was always referred to as "solid nickel bullet", and the jacketed soft point as "soft nose nickel bullet". You'll find reference to both engraved on the barrels of a great many British sporting rifles.

In the large double rifle Nitro Expresses, the ordinary nickel jacket RN "solid" worked well, and there was little demand to improve it. However, some of the new high velocity magazine rifles produced enough failures with them that Kynoch introduced nickel covered steel jacket solids - and softs - for a few of them shortly after WWI, but these weren't offered in the large DR rounds, as they weren't needed in those. After WWII, due to cost and, probably, supply (war rationing was still in force), it was found impractical to continue to use nickel for the jacket material, and plain gilding metal was used instead. These solids failed miserably, and Kynoch began offering gilding metal covered steel jacketed RN solids in double rifle ammunition in 1950-51.

The British never made an homogenous sporting bullet.


Huvius
(.416 member)
28/10/09 02:53 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

400NE,
Thanks for the clarification!


500grains
(.416 member)
28/10/09 05:15 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

That forum sent me off to a FEMA camp, so I am not able to post there or to PM the members. Sorry I was not of help.


Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Unfortunately we do not have anybody with past or present artillery ordnance education here?





You may wish to contact the person posting under the handle "Andy" at AR and invite him to join in. Andy was an ordnance evaluator for Jane's Defence.




500g, I have never been able to register on that forum. I'd love to but I can't. I've emailed Yemen or wherever that is many times, with not response and no fix. I have no idea why. As it is, I hope to have someone with several degrees in ordnance engineering on board soon. If you'd like to contact the "Andy" fellow please do. AR won't let me in.




ozhunter
(.400 member)
28/10/09 06:08 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

This is realy getting out of hand, why the heck is it so hard to try to argue reasonably.




Beats me. This one is so pointless to begin with.




I'm not sure if it's pointless as you'd be surprised how many people with doubles there are that have no idea of the possible problems in using some Mono bullets from their rifles.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
28/10/09 08:01 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

This is realy getting out of hand, why the heck is it so hard to try to argue reasonably.




Beats me. This one is so pointless to begin with.




I'm not sure if it's pointless as you'd be surprised how many people with doubles there are that have no idea of the possible problems in using some Mono bullets from their rifles.




Oz:

I'm acutely aware of that problem and you're absolutely right. I agree that, at this late date, that's disturbing and that discussion wouldn't be pointless at all, especially for a unique forum like this one, dedicated to double rifles! Indeed, that's what this string should have been about. Unfortunately, the OP, a non-double rifle shooter, began it with "It's a myth, prove it to me". So instead, we've dusted off the '80s debate and are now poised to conduct "tests" about an issue that was settled 20 years ago, and that IS utterly pointless. Worse, it obfuscates the more important aspect of dealing with the issue.


4seventy
(Sponsor)
28/10/09 08:13 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

400,
The double that you own which shows slight OSR on only one barrel, just wondering if both barrels were fired with monos, or only the one with visible OSR?

Also, can we please have some more details about this rifle, like the caliber and makers name?
Thanks.


450_366
(.400 member)
28/10/09 09:51 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

400,
The double that you own which shows slight OSR on only one barrel, just wondering if both barrels were fired with monos, or only the one with visible OSR?

Also, can we please have some more details about this rifle, like the caliber and makers name?
Thanks.




And when slugging the barrel before were there any differences as to wear or whatever?


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
28/10/09 10:34 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Both barrels were fired R/L. It's a .450/.400 3". As for bore wear, there was practically none. It was a high condition original gun when I got it.

NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
29/10/09 12:17 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Gentlemen,

Please act like it. No need for any insults or insulting behaviour from anyone.


450_366
(.400 member)
29/10/09 01:06 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Gentlemen,

Please act like it. No need for any insults or insulting behaviour from anyone.




Now you step in, where have you been, out hunting?


DarylS
(.700 member)
29/10/09 03:30 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Andreas -
And when slugging the barrel before were there any differences as to wear or whatever?




Question on 'changes' to measurements was asked pages ago - still waiting for an answer.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
29/10/09 04:22 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

Andreas -
And when slugging the barrel before were there any differences as to wear or whatever?




Question on 'changes' to measurements was asked pages ago - still waiting for an answer.




That isn't the question he asked. You asked about the changes. Your insults got you an answer, too, didn't they?


DarylS
(.700 member)
29/10/09 07:03 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Askings questions is an insult, eh - well, I'll be damned.

I appologised but wasn't accepted - oh well.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
29/10/09 08:12 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I appologised but wasn't accepted - oh well.




Because you went right back to insults in your very next post.


JDD
(.224 member)
30/10/09 12:14 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

When they pull a button through a barrel to form rifling, is any metal removed? My understanding is that the metal is displaced not removed. OSR is the displacement of metal. As a barrel ages and is fired many times does the steel work harden. I think ribs coming loose and loss of regulation is a bigger problem with the older mono bullets than osr. What does JJ have to say about this ,He's done more repair work on new and old doubles than any one else.


At least there is a public statement by Barnes now, if you were to have a problem, It would be much easier to recover any losses in court or via a insurance claim. They are missing the boat by not resolving this, they would expand their customer base and take a large share of the market that wooleigh has had wrapped up for years.

JD


DarylS
(.700 member)
30/10/09 01:22 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Buttoning impresses the rifling with a tungsten button pulled through the barrel whereas hammer forging forces the barrel's metal onto an outside-rifled mandrel with rolling hammers - in a nutshell.

450_366
(.400 member)
30/10/09 05:32 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Older ones would likely to be cut rifled or am i wrong.

calpappas
(.275 member)
30/10/09 12:16 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Gents:
For what it is worth...At the SCI show in January I took home two boxes of Barnes banded solids and later bought two more. I wanted to see for myself how they would do in my vintage Wilkes .600 nitro express. I also used the data for two pages in my book on the .600. Bottom line--no problems at all. Accuracy was the same, the rifle opened with ease. Folks have related to me stories of the rifling being visible on the outside of the barrels, the barrels splitting, and (my favorite) the rifling lands being pushed several inches out of the muzzle. Stories like this remind me of the tales of the dangers of shooting twist or Damascus barrels--how they will blow up.

If any of you gent would like to see my story that is in my book, I will reproduce it and place it here if I can figure out how to do it.

Cal Pappas


gryphon
(.450 member)
30/10/09 02:38 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Yep I would like to read it Cal

9.3x57
(.450 member)
30/10/09 04:03 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I'd be very interested also.

About how many rounds of monos have you shot through your rifle now?

Have you slugged the bore; land and groove measurements? What do Barnes .600's actually mike? I'm curious because Wright's summary points to incompatible dimensions as primary source of barrel damage with what he calls "hard" bullets {not necessarily restricted to monos}.

Very interesting and thanks very much for posting.


bwananelson
(.400 member)
30/10/09 04:21 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

expert after expert pro's have stated no problems but their id still those that will nevert be swayed,rifle makers.bullet makers ,money on the table for proff and still they wont be swayed really dont you think this forum is done minds wont be changed and we know this will rise again in less than a year like and abcess.you all have your learned points but its done dont shoot the bullet you dont like but dont say it will do things it wont,please as a favor to all of us lets find a new subject to squable over.im saying this without malice or with the intention of hurting no ones feelings but this has gone over a year with no proof just speculation and hear say my weatherby has a thin barrel and it has over 3000 barnes through it and no rifling in the out side yet.i know my post wont mean squat but it had to be said

CptCurlAdministrator
(.450 member)
31/10/09 12:46 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Gents:
For what it is worth...At the SCI show in January I took home two boxes of Barnes banded solids and later bought two more. I wanted to see for myself how they would do in my vintage Wilkes .600 nitro express. I also used the data for two pages in my book on the .600. Bottom line--no problems at all. Accuracy was the same, the rifle opened with ease. Folks have related to me stories of the rifling being visible on the outside of the barrels, the barrels splitting, and (my favorite) the rifling lands being pushed several inches out of the muzzle. Stories like this remind me of the tales of the dangers of shooting twist or Damascus barrels--how they will blow up.

If any of you gent would like to see my story that is in my book, I will reproduce it and place it here if I can figure out how to do it.

Cal Pappas




Mr. Pappas,

Do you advocate the position that overstressed rifling is a myth that doesn't occur? It sure sounds that way.

In my opinion that's a reckless position to stake out.

Curl


DarylS
(.700 member)
31/10/09 02:38 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Although I am happy Cal didn't have any problems in his .600, my friend has no problems in his Drilling, with an exceptionally thin tube virtually right from the chamber, I remain unconvinced either way.

I know or perhaps feel is a better word, that OSR could very well happen or has happened to a few rifles under the right/wrong circumstances with perhaps older rifles which have or had questionable barrel strength, dimensions or weight of barrels. I still question 'which' or 'how many' different bullets are responsible & if the current variations of grooved bullets can be susupect at all.

The little 'tit' of lead protruding from the base of some 'solids' is caused by the flow or extrusion of the interior lead from being compressed by the lands pressing in the sides of the jacket, in simple terms. It cannot protrude out the nose as that is encased in jacket material. It cannot be contained inside as the bullet is being held by the lands and grooves to the size of the bullet being passed through, which in itself, eliminates the possibility of oburation (expansion). The lead does not obturate out the rear of the jacket, it is extruded out the rear of the jacket, just as when swaging bullets, a tit or string of lead is extruded out the bleed hole of the die when the core is queezed to a smaller size.

The grooved bullets such as Barnes banded bullets won't obturate, which is a good thing and noted on the Barnes web site. They are slightly undersized over most of their legnth and due to their construction, cannot expand, ie: obturate. The grooves of the banded bullets give the displaced metal of the bullet a place to go - which is the reason for their design according to the bullet makers themselves. Do the grooves do other things, yes - but in this particular case, this is an important trait of these bullets.

"A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."

Don't know who said this, but it's true - across the board.


calpappas
(.275 member)
31/10/09 02:51 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Good day gents:

My .600 Wilkes has a groove diameter of .622. The Barnes bullets are .618 (This is from memory). The recovered bullets showed rifling engraved through the outside diameter of the bullet but NOT in the bands. I believe this keeps pressures low.

As to over stressed rifling--sure it is possible. My statement has been for 20 years that if any rifle (double or not) is shot to the original velocity, original bullet diameter and weight, and the powder is of the proper burning rate, all should be fine. However, and deviation will or may result in problems as well barrels that are excessively pitted, worn, too thin from reaming or sanding (shotguns here) etc.

My life with fine double rifles and my writing is based on practical everyday experience. I'm not a technical writer nor a user of fancy phrases such as Capstick was, but focus on shooting these fine firearms every day (except in the cold winter months here in Alaska). 20 yeas ago I began shooting my Damascus barreled shotguns and rifles loading smokeless to the same pressure and velocity as the original black powder load and never had a problem. Over the years I have listened to and read countless stories of the dangers of doing so and the new fears of banded solids seem to echo the same fears. However, I have never spoken to anyone who has actually seen a Damascus barrel blow up nor have I talked to anyone with actual experience of monometal bullets damaging a rifle--all know it to be true because someone else told them.

I'm not the last word on this stuff, but I can tell you what I have been shooting through my English doubles for two decades. You can see some of my rifles and ballistics on the 4-bore on my website.

When I can figure out how to reproduce the two pages of my .600 book about the Barnes bullets, I will post them here. I have also sent a scan of the pages to Barnes with permission to use them and/or reproduce them any way they wish. I have not been paid for anything I wrote on the banded solids.
Cal

PS. Let me try to put the scans on my website. That may be easier for someone of my limited computer knowledge.


Altamaha
(.333 member)
31/10/09 03:05 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Ahh, Bwanna, bolt guns are not a true test. Mechanics are very different due to the small bore size vs. the wall thickness. A large bore double with thin barrel walls near the muzzle will react much differently. And throw in the softer steel of old double rifles vs. 4140 and you have a big difference.

I have shot solid steel bullets down a 50 BMG barrel at 2700 ft/sec with no visible damage, but we are dealing with a very heavy barrel with around 1/2" wall thickness at the muzzle, i.e., 1-1/2" outside barrel diameter at the muzzle, 2" at the chamber.

Yep, this subject has been shot, hung, drawn and quartered, but the meat was left to rot and nothing edible remains. Time to close this thread and patiently wait for scientific test results!!!


mickey
(.416 member)
31/10/09 04:13 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Before OSR is talked into non existence let's remember 400Nitroexpress has offered to show anyone who shows up at SCI a rifle that has it.

I would also point out that most of the claims revolve around non banded mono metal solids, not the new banded ones that have been made in reaction to the claims.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
31/10/09 01:12 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Before OSR is talked into non existence let's remember 400Nitroexpress has offered to show anyone who shows up at SCI a rifle that has it.

I would also point out that most of the claims revolve around non banded mono metal solids, not the new banded ones that have been made in reaction to the claims.




Please take note, and sincerely I hope someone can get some pix to start a file here, something I've been hoping to get going for a loing time. I'm still hoping this forum can be the repository of documentation for this issue and for causes of damage in general. What better place?

As for investigations into the cause of OSR and ways to prevent it, several efforts are now being made. I'll post the results as they are made known to me. Others will as well, no doubt.

These promise to be interesting projects.


500grains
(.416 member)
31/10/09 05:27 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Perhaps this analogy is overly simplisitic, but I will post it anyway.

I have been driving every day for 30 years and I have still not been killed by a drink driver. Nor have I personally witnessed anyone killed by a drunk driver.

Therefore no one has ever been killed by a drunk driver.



calpappas
(.275 member)
31/10/09 06:09 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

For those wanting to see what is in my book on banded solids go to my website and click on "double rifles" on the navigation bar and it is there. calpappas.com Again, this is what I did with my rifle and nearly 100 rounds fired.
Cheers,
Cal


DarylS
(.700 member)
01/11/09 02:31 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Mickey and 500grains - you both make excellent points.

470evans
(.333 member)
01/11/09 03:07 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Cal,

I'm glad you haven't seen any damage to your Wilkes, have you ever seen a gun with OSR? That's a rare gun to experiment with.

Can you bring the 600 to SCI?

Most people who have never had OSR pointed out to them don't know what it looks like and many have handled doubles with OSR that weren't aware it was there , I know I didn't know how to see it until JJ pointed it out to me.

The analogy that the same way you determine the quality of striking on a double barrel shotgun is the same way to pick up OSR is a good one.

There will be some surprised people at SCI when they see the gun 400 brings. The argument will stop being does OSR exist? which is silly, and focus on the cause, which is a good thing.

I've handled 5 guns with OSR so far. 2 1906-1908 era British doubles, 2 1920's British doubles and 1 1920's Belgium double.

My only confirmation that monos cause OSR is the owners of 2 of these doubles that I've handled with OSR shot quite a few Barnes bullets through them. My doubles, 6 of them, that didn't have OSR when I got them and have been shot exclusively with Woodleighs, Hornady lead core and Hawk bullets still exhibit no OSR.

Is that "proof" the monos caused it? No, but it's good enough for this DR owner not to fool around with monos.




Anonymous
(Unregistered)
01/11/09 03:56 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


400 already examined specimens destroyed by said solids, I think its rude to scoff at his results and await testing from another source.

If it takes the ruination of another double to prove it for some of you, I suggest you buy a nice DR and go shoot Barnes nono's yourself, since there's 'no' proof or pictures of said OSR damage that will satisfy you seemingly now or ever.


CptCurlAdministrator
(.450 member)
01/11/09 05:35 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Ditto that!

Curl


calpappas
(.275 member)
01/11/09 05:43 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

470 Evans:
Good day, mate. I will be at both Dallas and Reno Safari Club shows at the African Hunter booth selling my book on the .600s. I will have both my .600 and the 4-bore with me to show to interested folks and (maybe) put the 4 bore Hughes up for sale as there is another for sale and I want to upgrade a bit.
I've never seen a rifle with OSR but have listened to countless stories of it but no one has actually showed me one. Kind of like Nessie, UFOs, and Bigfoot--lots of stories but no clear photos or examples. However, I can't imagine the banded solids hurting my .600 as they are undersize and the bands reduce pressure. I've shot nearly 4 boxes with no problems. I also shoot Woodleigh softs and solids when I hunt and, of course, cast when I plink (if one actually "plinks" with a .600).
Cheers,
Cal


500Nitro
(.450 member)
01/11/09 08:30 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


The other thing that seems to happen is that not every double shot with the said problem bullets suffers from OSR.

After all, think how many doubles are out there, think how many MAY have shot some of the bullets through them and then how many OSR Doubles can we pin down - not that many.

So firing the problem bullets though a double isn't always going to cause OSR but as 470Evans said well

"Is that "proof" the monos caused it ? No, but it's good enough for this DR owner not to fool around with monos."


9.3x57
(.450 member)
01/11/09 09:49 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:


400 already examined specimens destroyed by said solids, I think its rude to scoff at his results and await testing from another source.




Nobody is scoffing at any "results".

The new testing is to isolate exact causes of OSR as opposed to the generalized "mono's".

Might be a good place to remind the readership that Wright uses the term "hard bullets" in his discussion of OSR. Such bullets he says are not limited to "mono's".


Altamaha
(.333 member)
01/11/09 11:08 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Good point 9.3X57.

From my days of fooling around with a stout 50 caliber bolt gun, I have left over 50 BMG bullets that I cut down, Harold Johnson style, turned around and essentially shot the bullets "boattail" first. Some of the bullets were steel core and gliding metal jacket, some steel core with a washed copper steel jacket, some were lead core with gliding metal jacket, some were solid bronze. My thinking is the steel core would be especially bad on a thin bore, yet is it not a mono metal. So the term "Hard Bullet" should stand


500Nitro
(.450 member)
01/11/09 11:35 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


Yes, I agree, but then you should also take into account
the dimensions of the bullets, the fact some are tapered so only a small part of the bullet is engaging the rifling plus a whole lot of other factors.


As an example, I have fired "hard" Woodleigh Steel jacketed solids through a heap of double rifles and none have OSR.

Would I risk anything else like Mono's - no, no need.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
01/11/09 12:57 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:


Yes, I agree, but then you should also take into account
the dimensions of the bullets, the fact some are tapered so only a small part of the bullet is engaging the rifling plus a whole lot of other factors.

Exactly, something planned.


As an example, I have fired "hard" Woodleigh Steel jacketed solids through a heap of double rifles and none have OSR.

I'm not certain Woodleighs would be the only steel-jacketed solids falling under the "hard" tag. For example, what would be the effect of a lifetime of shooting, say, Hornady's, in a gun with thin, soft UNDER-sized tubes? I'm not sure, but it wouldn't seem like a good idea.

Just how "hard" is "hard"? I don't know, but if anyone wants to attack THAT problem, have at it. I believe a slick little device could be made to measure the resistance of a bullet to rifling. I'm going to guess that a similar device exists for some reason in the world somewhere, but I don't know where or what it is. The machinists here might be able the weigh in on that one. Might be nice to have some means by which "resistance to rifling" could actually be compared.

Use Woodleigh's hydraulic test as an example. Could a small device be made to measure such resistance? I think so. Would it be relevant to the discussion? I don't know. Maybe, maybe not. It would not necessarily correlate to exactly what is going on in the barrel under the pressure of the expanding powder gases, but might be a useful measure of bullet "hardness" for comparative purposes.

PS: I make knives so I'm well acquainted with the various methods of measuring material hardness. Let's not confuse material hardness here with "hardness" as it might apply to resistance to rifling. For example, a Woodleigh steel jacket solid might scale a higher hardness to a Rockwell instrument yet might slide through rifling easier than some other bullet, or maybe not. Just some further brainstorming...





500Nitro
(.450 member)
01/11/09 01:25 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


9.3

Just how "hard" is "hard"? I don't know, but if anyone wants to attack THAT problem, have at it. I believe a slick little device could be made to measure the resistance of a bullet to rifling.


Well why bother, Woodleigh know that steel jacketed solids are hard, hence why they are a fraction undersize and a bit tapered.

So that partly overcomes the hardness issue.


All I know is I have a DR, I work up a load for it, get it shooting, take it hunting and move onto the next DR or gun.
I'm just not into all this trying different powders, bullets etc etc. Prefer spending my money on other things once the gun is shooting.


Sometimes I wonder why more time isn't spent
shooting and hunting - or in some people's cases here,
going into business and making bullets !!!!! LOL


9.3x57
(.450 member)
01/11/09 01:56 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

500:

Ahh, the answer is that some of us find all aspects of "GUNS" fascinating. I'm learning that maybe this just isn't the place for that.

And we hunt literally almost every day of the year as we did today {one grouse, deer sighted, no bucks...}. Whatever's in season. And shooting is done all the time as it's done just out the kitchen door for us.
.
Alas, we don't have the monsters to shoot that you guys do.

Why couldn't the gub'ment have dumped banteng on us instead of wolves.....!!!!!!

{You guys have it good...don't let'em take it away... }


kamilaroi
(.400 member)
01/11/09 07:38 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

^^ Cough,

Actually it's "gubbahmint", deriving from "gubbah", either a phonetic interpretation of "governor" or "government"; or in the greater Dharug lingo a malevolent spirit, usually ephemeral and obviously white/translucent. (inferred from the original pre colonial moral philosophy and colonial historical experience).

More recent times have set a twist to this inasmuch that the "gubbahs" dispense money to those willing to accept the imposition of greater control. (a linguistic in joke, id est the "gubbah mint")

Larfin' me moom orf!


500grains
(.416 member)
25/11/09 04:45 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

from Andy, former writer for Jane's Defence:

Quote:


1. Chamber pressure is not necessarily related to pressure in the barrel. The pressure curve of monometals may be different than a conventional lead core bullet. In my experience, Barnes bullets are more accurate when they are seated rather deep, giving them more jump to the obturation of the rifiling. Maybe the pressure curve is occuring farther down the barrel than a FMJ?

As an example I am familiar with, when the USMC switched from 5.56mm M193 ammo to heavier SS109/M855 two problems occured. The diameter of the gas port had to be substantially reduced as the pressure curve was much higher at the gas port w SS109 than M193.

the other problem was w SS109 ammo itself. The hard (Rockwell C70) 10 grain steel insert in the ogive made contact with the rifling, just barely, but enough to wear out barrels in just 5,000 rounds. (No lead sheath protected the bore like conventional AP or API ammo). FN originally thought this was due to the high cyclic rate of the Minimi (later M249), but same problem occurred in XM16. Since XM16 had 3 shot burst it wasn't a problem of cyclic rate. A bit more lead in core and pushing the penetrator farther forward did the trick. Yet chamber pressure was normal NATO specs. And it wore out barrels. OSR was not a problem even in relatively thin M16 barrel.

2. Tank barrels are smooth bore so no relation to OSR there from ordnance world.

3. Light weight artillery barrels have been adopted for both 105 and 155mm howitzers. Since artillery shells use soft copper driving bands OSR was not an issue. Most weight was saved from carriges rather than barrels, which went from 39 caliber length to 42, 45 and even 52 calibers in length.

20mm Gatling gun barrels are really skinny and OSR is not an issue I am aware of and I have tested many GE products. i have also tested three light weight 0.50 and 12.7mm HMG's and it has not been an issue w AP and API ammo.

4. It is interesting that Barnes chose to use a teflon based product on their original blue 470 bullets. And they dont need to do that anymore with the banded bullets. That thick coating was surely for a reason and was basically a synthetic copper jacket.

5. the original Thunderbird Cartridge Company (TCCI) patent for brass monometals used the 0.50 BMG ctg as proof that the turned bullet had less pressure than a copper coated steel jacket with lead core 0.50. (See #1 above). the Barnes and TCC bullets I used in my 450 Dakota required less powder to reach similar velocity than FMJ's. However the original Barnes slimed my barrel so badly I would never recommend them to anyone. The banded bullets are much better.

6. Mike Brady the founder of North Fork may have something illuminating to say about this issue if he has the time or interest to do so.

In conclusion, I suspect that OSR in double rifles may be related to the difference in pressure curve of a monometal vs a FMJ.




Andy
(.224 member)
27/11/09 06:59 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I am registered now. Thanks Mike for posting my notes above. I might add that the only OSR like issues I am aware of came from over heating of a very lightweight medium machinegun barrel, the 19 pound M60E3 which actually had barrel droop after about 500 rounds. I know DR barrels get very hot, my 12 ga Birmingham SS shotgun certainly does. Maybe that is also involved???

Andy


500Nitro
(.450 member)
27/11/09 07:01 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I am registered now. Thanks Mike for posting my notes above. I might add that the only OSR like issues I am aware of came from over heating of a very lightweight medium machinegun barrel, the 19 pound M60E3 which actually had barrel droop after about 500 rounds. I know DR barrels get very hot, my 12 ga Birmingham SS shotgun certainly does. Maybe that is also involved???

Andy





Andy

Interesting you mention barrel droop and OSR in an M60. I hav seen barrel droop from a normal M60 after we decided to expand all ammo left via a burnt out barrel. And when it started to glow hot, I can vaguely remember that the glow was not even on the barrel.

I wish I had inspected the barrel afterwards - when cold.


tinker
(.416 member)
27/11/09 10:25 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Getting into the neighborhood of 500 degrees Fahrenheit you risk permanent shift of temper ahd relative hardness.



Cheers
Tinker


9.3x57
(.450 member)
27/11/09 10:43 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Glowing is a bit hotter than 500, that is, more like 1500 and well into the non-magnetic phase.

Yikes.

Complete annealing would be produced at glowing red, and unless the steel was an air hardening type would be left dead soft as a result. Thus, the use of scrapped out barrels for this fun! I imagine what's left of the stellite liner would be gone after such activity.


tinker
(.416 member)
27/11/09 02:49 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

That's right - no color or light phase at five hundred degrees Fahrenheit.
It is pretty damn hot though.




Cheers
Tinker


9.3x57
(.450 member)
27/11/09 02:55 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

That's right - no color or light phase at five hundred degrees Fahrenheit.





Actually, with the simple carbon steel alloys I use, and polished bright {or even "well struck" }, 500 gives oxidation colors of purple/blue.


tinker
(.416 member)
27/11/09 04:57 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

9.3-


I meant to say from a blacked barrel you won't see a color change and it won't glow.





Cheers
Tinker


500Nitro
(.450 member)
28/11/09 12:59 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


Well it was glowing very Red.

Which isn't surprising considering we put about 5000 rounds through it in as short a time as physically possible.


450_366
(.400 member)
28/11/09 03:36 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

9.3-


I meant to say from a blacked barrel you won't see a color change and it won't glow.





Cheers
Tinker




If heated to 1000c, wont the oxide on the surface burn of?


tinker
(.416 member)
28/11/09 07:56 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Andreas-


You know that 1000C = 1832F don't you?




Cheers
Tinker


450_366
(.400 member)
28/11/09 09:03 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I was only taking a temp that produces glow. even if its sherry.

But you are right, that fahrenheit scale is not my strongest.


Huvius
(.416 member)
29/11/09 03:05 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

IMO, I doubt that soft steel or overheating/annealing have anything at all to do with OSR.
If lack of barrel hardness is a contributor, degradation of the rifling inside the barrel would become apparent long before OSR. I would think that for OSR to occur, the lands would have to actually be harder than the rest of the barrel steel.
I will have to re-read this entire thread, but is it right that OSR is visable but not measurable?


500Nitro
(.450 member)
29/11/09 06:02 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

IMO, I doubt that soft steel or overheating/annealing have anything at all to do with OSR.
If lack of barrel hardness is a contributor, degradation of the rifling inside the barrel would become apparent long before OSR. I would think that for OSR to occur, the lands would have to actually be harder than the rest of the barrel steel.
I will have to re-read this entire thread, but is it right that OSR is visable but not measurable?





"but is it right that OSR is visable but not measurable?"


That is my understanding of it.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
29/11/09 08:09 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I discussed this very question with Graeme Wright. His explanation to me was that the shadow effect is of course caused by a change in dimensions, tho they may be less than .001" which is the limit of common micrometers available to hobbyists, shooters, handloaders etc. This makes sense since it would seem at least inuitively that anything that can be seen with the naked eye can also me measured, albeit with proper instruments.

As for interior dimensions, trying to mike slugged bullets to less than .001 is admittedly somewhat difficult depending on rifling type so I can imagine miking interior dimensions might produce mixed results. But it should be able to be accomplished, especially with the gross damage results commonly described. At the very least, it seems reasonable to suggest that some dimensional change would be noticeable in the inside if there is any visible change at all on the outside.

Regardless, with all the discussion of the topic on this site, no one has as of yet posted on this site slugged bore dimensions before/after OSR has occured to a gun.


500Nitro
(.450 member)
29/11/09 08:36 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


By not measureable, I meant by us amateurs.

I am sure if you had scientific instruments or lasers,
then yes, you could measure both the internal and external
dimensions.


450_366
(.400 member)
29/11/09 08:41 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I discussed this very question with Graeme Wright. His explanation to me was that the shadow effect is of course caused by a change in dimensions, tho they may be less than .001" which is the limit of common micrometers available to hobbyists, shooters, handloaders etc. This makes sense since it would seem at least inuitively that anything that can be seen with the naked eye can also me measured, albeit with proper instruments.

As for interior dimensions, trying to mike slugged bullets to less than .001 is admittedly somewhat difficult depending on rifling type so I can imagine miking interior dimensions might produce mixed results. But it should be able to be accomplished, especially with the gross damage results commonly described. At the very least, it seems reasonable to suggest that some dimensional change would be noticeable in the inside if there is any visible change at all on the outside.

Regardless, with all the discussion of the topic on this site, no one has as of yet posted on this site slugged bore dimensions before/after OSR has occured to a gun.




Funny, surely someone must have messured them, at least after to see if they were not to tight, to establish that the bullets were to blaim.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
29/11/09 08:55 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:


By not measureable, I meant by us amateurs.

I am sure if you had scientific instruments or lasers,
then yes, you could measure both the internal and external
dimensions.




You might be right as to requiring very fine instruments.

I really have no idea what instruments might be needed. As we all know, damage caused by hard bullets is described as ranging from faint shadows of pressed out rifling all the way to spitting of rifling out the muzzle, ribs falling off, etc.

Some of the latter would, I think...be measurable with a ruler and weighed by the pound...

But no pictures of the latter types of damage have been posted here, either.


500Nitro
(.450 member)
29/11/09 09:16 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


I have only seen OSR once, and you could barely see it unless you got the light at the right angle - ie the reflection off the barrel.

So yes, I would say a laser or some micro instrument would be needed.


As for "spitting of rifling out the muzzle, ribs falling off",
I have heard of ribs coming away or apart but never "spitting of rifling out the muzzle".

Where has that been written ?


9.3x57
(.450 member)
29/11/09 09:22 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

As for "spitting of rifling out the muzzle, ribs falling off",
I have heard of ribs coming away or apart but never "spitting of rifling out the muzzle".

Where has that been written ?




Various places.

The bullet companies have told me of gibberish tossed at them on forums involving this sort of nonsense. Cal Pappas can elaborate, too, as he was told this by a supposed expert on the subject who promised to show pictures of it, pictures which never materialized.

I'm agreeing with you about the possible need for the very fine instruments to measure the shadow effect.


500Nitro
(.450 member)
29/11/09 09:43 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Re the ""spitting of rifling out the muzzle""

How would rifling, which in itself is very shallow, separate
from the rest of the barrel ????

The whole thing doesn't make sense.

Sounds to be like someone spouting BS
and the fact "photos" never show up
probably prove it !!!


9.3x57
(.450 member)
29/11/09 12:08 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Sounds to be like someone spouting BS and the fact "photos" never show up probably prove it !!!




You said it.

I agree, but..."no photos = BS" could be said about the whole OSR topic. I was flamed big-time for suggesting same early on in this discussion.

No photos or any other "proof" has as of yet been posted here pertaining to any aspect of OSR or double damage caused by monos for that matter. I accept the premise on the word of others but my and others' repeated pleas for some sort of documentation of damage {for the educational benefit of the Forum community} has of yet produced no responses.

This total lack of "proof" as some call it is what has motivated me to engage several companies and individuals in the hope that at some point the phenomenon will be reproduced in a lab so-to-speak so the exact causes can be isolated.


doubleriflenut
(.300 member)
29/11/09 01:27 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I have used Woodleigh bullets in my double rifles for years and they have performed perfectly! I have no reason to experiment with bullets that may cause a problem in my rifles.

Huvius
(.416 member)
29/11/09 01:31 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Is OSR visible when the barrels are wiped clean of any oil or residual film?

So, just how much of an issue is this if you can barely see it, may not be able to measure it, and it has no effect on accuracy or regulation?
Sounds like a big to do about nothing.

Also, before sounding off about loose ribs and such, remember that loose ribs happen fairly frequently on SXS shotguns too and I hasten to think that the causes in shotguns are largely the same in rifles. Ribs have been loosening since ribs have existed.

Personally, if I had a set of barrels with OSR, I would see it as an opportunity to have the gun reregulated to a modern powder/bullet combination.


500Nitro
(.450 member)
29/11/09 01:55 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I have used Woodleigh bullets in my double rifles for years and they have performed perfectly! I have no reason to experiment with bullets that may cause a problem in my rifles.





Ditto, once I get my guns shooting, I can't see any reason to change.

Playing around with every new bullet on the market
is just burning more powder for no reason IMHO.


Andy
(.224 member)
29/11/09 04:41 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Based on the considerable experience of shooters on this thread, once you develop a well regulated load for your DR I would stick with it. Period.

If problems with regular use of monometals pop up Im sure we will hear about it!

It is hard enough comming up w a load that regulates w premium and practice ammo in a bolt gun that I cant imagine regulating twice w a DR!!!!!

Shoot what you like. Life is short.

Let us know how it feels when the elephant is 10 paces away!!!!

Andy


mikeh416Rigby
(.450 member)
29/11/09 06:02 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Andy,

Welcome. I'm glad we were finally able to sort things out.


BlainSmipy
(.375 member)
02/12/09 02:03 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Well if Obama and his commi minions have their way the lead bullet will go the way of the Doo-Doo. Already happened in CA, I had to re-regulate one of my guns to Barnes because of this.

bwananelson
(.400 member)
03/12/09 12:38 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

have you seen the test target with the 470 NE rigby IN THE ria auction nice group and old rifle and federal solids sweet

bwananelson
(.400 member)
03/12/09 12:40 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

http://www.rockislandauction.com/photos/48/p_standard/WEF301-Q-CU90-L.jpg

nice target

Trophy Bonded® Sledgehammer® Solid



Use it on the largest, most dangerous game in the world. This Jack Carter design maximizes stopping power and your confidence. It's a bonded bronze solid with a flat nose that minimizes deflection off bone and muscle for a deep, straight wound channel.

or

Woodleigh® Solid



Woodleigh Solid is a top choice for safari hunters and provides the energy and penetration needed for large game.
Full Metal Jacket
The most heavily constructed steel
jacketed solids available. Made from
extra deep drawing grade steel, clad
with 90/10 gilding metal alloy. The
jacket is heavy at the nose (0.084”)
to create extra impact resistance. The
base of the bullet is rolled back 90
degrees to provide a double strength
heel to prevent core loss on impact


500Nitro
(.450 member)
03/12/09 12:47 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

http://www.rockislandauction.com/photos/48/p_standard/WEF301-Q-CU90-L.jpg

nice target





Well I'd expect a Rigby made around 1905 to shoot.

Good to see it regulates with modern ammo.


bwananelson
(.400 member)
03/12/09 12:53 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

one of the sweetest groups i have seen by the by this gun is up for auction

ChrisPer
(.300 member)
03/12/09 01:52 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Its worth noting that a barrel that shows 'shadow rifling' on the outside may have had the shadows before firing the solids. What was the rifling method - do those who have seen the problem know?

4seventy
(Sponsor)
03/12/09 03:19 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

So, just how much of an issue is this if you can barely see it, may not be able to measure it, and it has no effect on accuracy or regulation?
Sounds like a big to do about nothing.





You could be correct, who knows.

On page 234 of Graeme Wright's latest book however, there is a photo of a blown .577 DR barrel. There is a large chunk of metal missing from the right barrel, and it is stated that the shooter was injured.
OSR was apparently visible on the left barrel, and GW says that with this particular rifle, he believes the OSR and the blow up were related.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
04/12/09 12:56 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

ChrisPer:

As 4seventy says, you could be right. No one who claims significant experience with OSR has ever demonstrated or documented any investigation into this possibility here. I don't think anyone truly knows, but some engineers I've discussed the issue with have suggested that there could indeed be a relationship between rifling type and stresses induced by it and OSR and indeed, possibly even a release of stresses over time that might not have anything to do with shooting, might be caused by shooting large numbers of bullets or might be caused by shooting of hard bullets.

Again, as 4seventy says, who knows.

To answer your question further, IMO, your suggestion deserves deeper investigation. It has been brought up in the past on these threads. Since no one here has shed any light on the possibility, you might be better off investigating this possibility elsewhere.

No one to my knowledge has done extensive testing to determine actual, specific causes of OSR. That lack of concrete data has prompted the independent and commercial testing being pursued now.


bwanakim
(.275 member)
30/12/09 02:50 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I've been reading this thread with great interest. I'm no engineer, but the logic that damage would be done by firing monolithic solids through a DR's barrels is compelling enough for me without pictures! Suffice to say I would NEVER shoot them through any of mine--all vintage British rifles.

Question, though: on page 136 of the second edition (I'm waiting for delivery of the 3rd) Wright says in speaking of OSR: "I would like to say...that in most cases the damage can be repaired."

Does anyone here know how it is repaired? If a bullet has gone through a barrel and enlarged the bore, or flattened the lands, how can the barrels ever be restored? Just for my own information, I'd like to know about this.

Thanks!


tinker
(.416 member)
30/12/09 03:01 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

B'Kim-



Quote:


Question, though: on page 136 of the second edition (I'm waiting for delivery of the 3rd) Wright says in speaking of OSR: "I would like to say...that in most cases the damage can be repaired."

Does anyone here know how it is repaired?








The short answer is 'The Hammer'
Barrel bulges (and such) can be hand hammer-forged back into place.
Not good-as-new, but it's a repair that's been on the menu for as long as there have been gun barrels.




Cheers
Tinker


kamilaroi
(.400 member)
30/12/09 05:42 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

After talking to at least 2 respondents here maybe OSR is related to exceeding the modulus of elasticity of a given steel alloy. Mind you there were a few varieties around 1900, incl Krupps Flusstahl that was apparently very highly rated, then pom stuff, Poldi etc etc.

tinker
(.416 member)
30/12/09 06:46 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

kamilaroi-


Quote:

After talking to at least 2 respondents here maybe OSR is related to exceeding the modulus of elasticity of a given steel alloy. Mind you there were a few varieties around 1900, incl Krupps Flusstahl that was apparently very highly rated, then pom stuff, Poldi etc etc.






I definitely agree that the OSR issue appears to be indication of excursions outside the elastic limits of barrel steels.

Have you seen this thread?


I don't necessarily agree that hammering a bulged barrel back to shape is a great idea, but it's done anyway.
From what I've heard that happens to guns and rifles that have then gone on to pass proof.

I prefer to take a more prophylactic approach - by way of careful diet and care of what I have!




Cheers
Tinker


4seventy
(Sponsor)
30/12/09 08:01 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I've been reading this thread with great interest. I'm no engineer, but the logic that damage would be done by firing monolithic solids through a DR's barrels is compelling enough for me without pictures! Suffice to say I would NEVER shoot them through any of mine--all vintage British rifles.

Question, though: on page 136 of the second edition (I'm waiting for delivery of the 3rd) Wright says in speaking of OSR: "I would like to say...that in most cases the damage can be repaired."

Does anyone here know how it is repaired? If a bullet has gone through a barrel and enlarged the bore, or flattened the lands, how can the barrels ever be restored? Just for my own information, I'd like to know about this.

Thanks!




I don't think that OSR can actually be repaired.
Evidence of OSR could be removed if the barrels are re-struck, but this is not a repair, just a disguise.

Rib solder joints can be repaired.


kamilaroi
(.400 member)
30/12/09 08:48 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

kamilaroi-


Quote:

After talking to at least 2 respondents here maybe OSR is related to exceeding the modulus of elasticity of a given steel alloy. Mind you there were a few varieties around 1900, incl Krupps Flusstahl that was apparently very highly rated, then pom stuff, Poldi etc etc.






I definitely agree that the OSR issue appears to be indication of excursions outside the elastic limits of barrel steels.

Have you seen this thread?


I don't necessarily agree that hammering a bulged barrel back to shape is a great idea, but it's done anyway.
From what I've heard that happens to guns and rifles that have then gone on to pass proof.

I prefer to take a more prophylactic approach - by way of careful diet and care of what I have!

Cheers
Tinker




Yep,

Following same for some time and noting sundry "positions" taken, many without a grasp of what minimal metallurgy even I know.

I think Dunlap and Ackley got it abt right until the 1950's. AFAIK the use of lead inclusive "free machining" steels has done a world of harm and this may be why the euro makers prefer their own brews.


DarylS
(.700 member)
31/12/09 02:50 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I don't necessarily agree that hammering a bulged barrel back to shape is a great idea, but it's done anyway.
From what I've heard that happens to guns and rifles that have then gone on to pass proof.

I prefer to take a more prophylactic approach - by way of careful diet and care of what I have!

Cheers
Tinker

Of course, a barrel bulged in proofing, is hammered down, then re-proofed, hammered, etc, until it passes - if it doesnt blow, of course.

"Struck or Striking" - refers to filing, not hammering - if WW Greener can be believed. I cannot see fling away evidence of trouble or hammering a problem as being a solution, either. Hammering down a bulge us different I suppose, as the hammering work-hardens - whether this relates to Damascus barrels only, or only when BP is used for proofing, I don't know.


tinker
(.416 member)
31/12/09 03:27 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Daryl-


Quote:

...Of course, a barrel bulged in proofing, is hammered down, then re-proofed, hammered, etc, until it passes - if it doesnt blow, of course.

"Struck or Striking" - refers to filing, not hammering...





I know the difference.
And I've seen rifles with bulged barrels crated and shipped off for a vacation tour to the hammer then the proof house.

It happens, and if given the full skinny on a rifle that had 'been there' I'd pass on it as a matter of course.


Sound wacky? (pun intended)
I thought so too the first time I heard of hammering barrel bulges (etc) back into place as a 'repair'
Not so much my cup of tea, but they do it...




Cheers
Tinker


DarylS
(.700 member)
31/12/09 04:03 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Tinker - no offence intended. I should have rear higher up in the thread.

I was quite surprised when I read about hammering buldges repeatedly until they passed proof in "The Gun etc".


tinker
(.416 member)
31/12/09 07:19 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

No worries at all Daryl!

Good to get the distinction out there that 'striking' does not equal 'hammering'!!




Cheers
Tinker


4seventy
(Sponsor)
31/12/09 09:01 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

"Struck or Striking" - refers to filing, not hammering




This is true, and a "restrike" could remove or conceal the evidence of OSR.
OSR is different to "bulging" of the barrels.
Bulging is more likely to be localised in one area, where OSR can apparently sometimes be visible over almost the entire length of the barrel/s.


450_366
(.400 member)
31/12/09 09:53 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Bulgin been hammered back on a rifled barrel? Its been done a lot on smooth bores but on rifled barrels in modern times on modern steel? that must be quite rare.

DarylS
(.700 member)
31/12/09 11:19 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I don't know about rifled barels either, Andreas. That seems to be a very poor fix. I would think a rifled barrel would have to be replaced. We've raised dents n smoothbores quite easily using mandrels and hammers, but never had to hammer a bulge back.

9.3x57
(.450 member)
31/12/09 01:41 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I don't think it would be any trick at all to remove OSR-damage from a double if such lines are barely visible.

As far as restriking barrels is concerned, more to the point tho is what has been brought to my attention in the past; many British doubles are or have been refinished over and over again. Restriking barrels can certainly over time reduce barrel wall thickness and might in fact be the "cause" of OSR in many guns!!

Possibly some think in terms of rebluing a rifle and what might be a minimal surface cleanup on the wheel but those of us that use the file know what it can do. Heck, I make knives with them...I reckon repeated use on thin-tubed gun barrels ain't gonna do them one bit of good for holding pressures...!

The use of the file to eliminate pits and whatnot might very well over time set a barrel up for failure.


470evans
(.333 member)
26/01/10 07:27 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I thought you guys may appreciate a recent development as outlined by Cal on his website.

http://www.calpappas.com/


9.3x57
(.450 member)
26/01/10 01:46 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Great stuff!

Recently I have had a long conversation about this topic with Dave Scovill of Wolfe Publishing. Interestingly, he has suggestions for mono bullet design that I think are worth repeating.

He suggests that mono's should have a diameter across the bands that goes .001 under groove depth and shaft diameters that are at least .004-TO-.006" UNDER LAND DIAMETER OF THE GUN IN WHICH THEY WILL BE FIRED.

His theory goes back to an issue discussed in this thread some pages back; namely, that monos do not obturate. I believe it was 400Nitroexpress who stated that at 38000 CUP or something like that a mono doesn't obturate. This is on the face of it, true, and accepted by all of us, except Dave says that the rearmost BULLET groove will, under the pressure of a shot fired with nitro powder, compress a bit. This may only occur in the one or two BULLET grooves closest to the base of the bullet, but such a collapse/compression is real, and it effects both pressure and barrel stress.

He points to engine pistons as examples. He says "seizure" of perfectly-fitting piston/cylinders can occur; under compression of firing, the piston may seize for a moment and apply immense stress to the cylinder.

I'm just passing this information on, as it seems the best explanation of how a "perfectly fitting" bullet could damage a barrel. I have no idea of the validity of the issue regarding protection from OSR. Scovill says ACCURACY will improve dramatically if his principles are applied to monos.

Seems about time I call Barnes and see how the experiments are going, too....


DarylS
(.700 member)
27/01/10 02:35 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Note the new Hornady and Nosler monos - not many bands for eitehr it appears - but I haven't measured any, either. Nosler is quite proud of theirs at double the cost of any others around here.

JabaliHunter
(.400 member)
27/01/10 05:07 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

He points to engine pistons as examples. He says "seizure" of perfectly-fitting piston/cylinders can occur; under compression of firing, the piston may seize for a moment and apply immense stress to the cylinder.



A race mechanic once told me that a Formula 1 race engine has to be pre-heated to near operating temperature before it can be started as when cold the pistons are seized solid. Can't comment on that, but perhaps temperature can also play a part in creating OSR with tight bullets?


500Nitro
(.450 member)
27/01/10 05:12 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Well I have now fired some of the new Woodleigh Hydrstatic bullets through one of my doubles (a very old WR 500/465) and no problems. They also kill damn well !!!

I would have no problems using them Woodleigh Hydrostatic in any of my doubles.

Had a close look at the shanks of the bullets after recovery
and Woodleigh have got it right in terms of bands engage the rifling but the main part of the bullet doesn't.


450_366
(.400 member)
27/01/10 06:58 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

He points to engine pistons as examples. He says "seizure" of perfectly-fitting piston/cylinders can occur; under compression of firing, the piston may seize for a moment and apply immense stress to the cylinder.



A race mechanic once told me that a Formula 1 race engine has to be pre-heated to near operating temperature before it can be started as when cold the pistons are seized solid. Can't comment on that, but perhaps temperature can also play a part in creating OSR with tight bullets?




You are absloutely right thuy are docked to a heater before startup, but i think its the main bearing on those engine that are stuck, or at least also.

So firing a buch of proper bullet before to warm her up and then a couple of hard ones perhaps helps, anyone up for it.

btw, i wonder who the upset one with the 450/400 was? I would have gotten up to the barnes booth and gone bärsärk.


404bearslayer
(.300 member)
27/01/10 07:24 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Reading the claims and counter-claims on the issue of OSR, I think it is important to take a step back from the various attempts of explanation.

Gun writers, first of all, have often only very cursory knowledge of internal ballistics. What they state on issues of this kind is usually what they have heard elsewhere, not necessarily something they either understand or have thought through.

Bullet makers have of course knowledge in their particular field, but arrive at conclusions about their products quite often by trial and error rather then by applying scientific theories. Consequently, they have a hard time explaining a particular process relating to their bullets. Usually, they will tell you they have done 'this and that' and therefore, in there opinion, there is no problem. 'This and that' is of course a test with regular barrels in this case, and I will get back to that, as it is important in regards to claimed observations of OSR.

In very simple terms, launching a bullet through a barrel means that a harder material (the barrel) forces its shape on a softer material (the bullet). As long as the material of the bullet is significantly softer then the barrel, and that is the case for traditional bullets as well as solids, then the barrel will displace bullet matter, and not the other way around. Irregardless of how hard that may be, this process is done with after the bullet has traveled the distance of its own length - it is engraved from this point on and does not offer further relevant resistance on its way along the barrel. That gets us to why bullet makers tend to undersize their solids, or why they apply drive-bands. A tougher bullet material is initially harder to displace, making loads that employ such bullets prone to early pressure spikes if not properly adjusted. Damage to a rifle from such a bullet may therefore occur as a result of excessive pressure that exceeds the tensile strength of the barrel. This effect, if it does not blow up the barrel outright, is of course felt along the entire length of the barrel while the bullet still travels inside. The prerequisite of a bursting barrel (provided it is the weakest link) is that it bulges and bulges until the barrel cannot take it anymore and bursts. A barrel that was just before bursting point because of excessive pressure should therefore look very much like the claimed manifestation of OSR. A barrel exposed to that kind of pressure would not spring back fully to what it was before, and in a double it might well have loosened the soldered rib. However, this displacement in the barrel was caused by excessive pressure as a result of the INITAL engraving resistance of a bullet that was launched with a load that was too strong for that type of bullet.

That brings us to why bullet makers claim these bullets are safe, while traditional rifle makers tend to advise against them. I might note here, that my modern H&H double was regulated with TTBC bullets, which are also mono-metal (in the shank area - and in .470 caliber only their shank is actually subject to engraving). The simple reason for this is that a modern gun, with the properly adjusted load, can shoot mono-metal solids without any problem. With the right load they do not even have to be undersized, and they could actually be a tad harder as well. The problem is that a lot of people don't think when they're reloading and just transfer load data without regard to bullets' differing friction and engraving properties.

Older guns, with generally thinner barrels and softer steel, are a therfore a different matter. They simply do not have the safety margin that modern guns have when a load is not adjusted to a particular bullet's properties. I might add here, that it is not always old manufacturing processes or the thin barrels that make them more prone to damage: There are gunsmiths that 'fix' off-face doubles by heating and bending the worn-out locking lugs. You can imagine what improperly applied heat can do to a rifle. According to my gunsmith this practice is more widespread then one might wish for, and quite dangerous for the shooter, as the metallurgical properties of the entire barrel-bundle are altered by this.


400NitroExpress
(.400 member)
27/01/10 07:47 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

btw, i wonder who the upset one with the 450/400 was?




That would be me. Earlier in this thread, I promised to be at SCI at the Heym booth with a double rifle with OSR to show anyone interested. I was. I flew in Tuesday and promptly got sick as a horse. I was in bed through Friday, and was only in the booth for a full day on Saturday. However, the rifle was in the booth for anyone to look at the entire time.

I was showing the rifle to Graeme Saturday morning, and Cal's name came up in conversation. I mentioned that I was disappointed to have missed him, as he had been one that had posted on this thread that had been skeptical. Graeme said "I'll go get him right now" and was back with Cal in tow in minutes. He had trouble seeing the OSR initially, but with Graeme's help was finally able to. His description of this rifle in the link is accurate. The OSR is mild and visible only on the left barrel. This is why this wasn't the rifle I originally intended to bring. The other four rifles I previously mentioned in this string have OSR that is much more severe and more readily visible. Unfortunately, last minute changes in plans messed up the logistics, and I had to bring this one instead.

There were a lot of skeptics on this string. Anyone that still is should read what Cal has to say in the link. In addition to Graeme Wright and Cal Pappas, Russell Wilkin (Technial Director, Gunmaking, Holland & Holland) examined it and will remember the gun, as did Butch Searcy.

Russell Wilkin said - if I understood him correctly - that in his experience the "banded" designs had not solved the problem. I wish I'd had time to dig into that deeper with him then, but I didn't. I'll do so soon.

Quote:

I would have gotten up to the barnes booth and gone bärsärk.




Been there, done that. They say "that's impossible", and there you are.


450_366
(.400 member)
27/01/10 08:12 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

There are gunsmiths that 'fix' off-face doubles by heating and bending the worn-out locking lugs. You can imagine what improperly applied heat can do to a rifle. According to my gunsmith this practice is more widespread then one might wish for, and quite dangerous for the shooter, as the metallurgical properties of the entire barrel-bundle are altered by this.





Sound like dodgy gunworks to me, but cant understan how it would affect the barrels anymore then the brazing of the lump? A proper smith would see the temprature and would also see to that it gets the proper cooling for it to regain if lost its strenght, or am i missing something, as usuall.


500Nitro
(.450 member)
27/01/10 08:22 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

There are gunsmiths that 'fix' off-face doubles by heating and bending the worn-out locking lugs. You can imagine what improperly applied heat can do to a rifle. According to my gunsmith this practice is more widespread then one might wish for, and quite dangerous for the shooter, as the metallurgical properties of the entire barrel-bundle are altered by this.





Sound like dodgy gunworks to me, but cant understan how it would affect the barrels anymore then the brazing of the lump? A proper smith would see the temprature and would also see to that it gets the proper cooling for it to regain if lost its strenght, or am i missing something, as usuall.





Sounds like an extension of the "squeeze the lugs in the vice trick" to tighten a loose gun.


404bearslayer
(.300 member)
27/01/10 09:29 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

450_366:

First of all, a double that has seriously come off face is damaged goods to begin with. Any metal that is exposed to stresses beyond its intended design is from that point on weaker then before. A rifle that has survived serious excessive pressure close to breaking point will not do so the next time.

So now you have a system that is already considerably weaker then before. A gun smith cannot 'know or see' the proper temperature for a particular gun if he does not know the exact properties of the metal in question. Depending on prior stresses he might not even be aware of, the carbon content and the percentage and quality of impurities of the steel in question, he might change the structure of the steel to something downright life-threatening. It might not blow up with the next regular load, but you are in danger territory a lot earlier. Just a regular propane handtorch can reach temperatures well beyond what is needed to either over-soften the metal or to turn it into brittle scrap metal. Guess what these guys use to heat up the massive locking lugs. And heat travels, especially quickly in thin barrels. This practice is not limited to doubles, by the way. It's a dirty secret among European gun smiths that they often use a blow-torch to heat up jammed barrel / receiver junctions in old Mauser 98 rifles when they want to use the parts of the old 98 for something else. Guns based on these once overheated parts tend to blow up after one or two decades normal use, when the culprit of the cause is long forgotten.


4seventy
(Sponsor)
27/01/10 10:31 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Just a regular propane handtorch can reach temperatures well beyond what is needed to either over-soften the metal or to turn it into brittle scrap metal. Guess what these guys use to heat up the massive locking lugs. And heat travels, especially quickly in thin barrels. This practice is not limited to doubles, by the way.




I find it a bit hard to believe that this would happen much if at all.
That sort of heat on double rifle barrels would result in a pile of solder on the workshop floor, and would require a full relaying of all the ribs, as well as the fore-end loop.

Dodgy gun repairers know of far more simple ways of (temporarily) tightening loose doubles, and they do it without the use of any heat.


404bearslayer
(.300 member)
27/01/10 10:58 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

4seventy,

would agree with your assessment if I had not been shown and explained examples of that by my gunsmith.

In one example you could still see where the flame of the torch was applied on the lug, even a layman could see that the lugs were ruined by heat - the surface looked almost like brimstone. Don't know how they handle the solder issue. They might have the barrels submerged in water while they do that or simply re- solder afterwards. Certainly cheaper then building a double from scratch, easy money is the issue here anyhow.

In another case, someone had not worked on the barrel bundle, but on the receiver, which was heated up and then hammed on sideways so that an extrusion of metal would form left and right of the barrel breech that was utilized to keep the gun closed like in a vice (!). To obscure this, the smith in question then had the entire breech area nickel-plated. Hard to believe until you actually see it.

The point in regard to the above discussion is that a gun that was built in, say, 1905, can have been exposed to improper treatment at some point during its long life, which might not necessarily be visible. Therefore it is a good idea to be a bit more careful with these guns.


4seventy
(Sponsor)
27/01/10 11:05 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


Quote:

In one example you could still see where the flame of the torch was applied on the lug, even a layman could see that the lugs were ruined by heat - the surface looked almost like brimstone.



404,

What do you mean by the "lugs"?
Are you referring to the lumps, or the bites, and what are they actually bending with the applied heat to tighten an off face double?


gryphon
(.450 member)
27/01/10 11:18 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


Well I have now fired some of the new Woodleigh Hydrstatic bullets through one of my doubles (a very old WR 500/465) and no problems. They also kill damn well !!!

So Nigel wtf did you kill man?


500Nitro
(.450 member)
27/01/10 11:29 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:


Well I have now fired some of the new Woodleigh Hydrstatic bullets through one of my doubles (a very old WR 500/465) and no problems. They also kill damn well !!!

So Nigel wtf did you kill man?





2 Water Buffalo - one really big bodied one as well.

If I knew how to post photos, I would.

I didn't know I was going to be using them, but on my annual trip up to the NT (where my 500/465 lives on a permanent basis), it was decided (not by me) that some test results / recoveries from a DR would be good to have and because my gun was up there, they made some bullets for it.

I was very impressed to say the least with how they went,
not that I had much doubt. I also spoke at length to Geoff from Woodleigh and would have no problems using them in any of my doubles.


404bearslayer
(.300 member)
27/01/10 11:35 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


4seventy,

What I meant is called 'Laufhaken' in German. The literal translation of that is 'barrel hook'. The example that I was shown was a 'Doppelte Laufhaken Verriegelung', which literaly means 'double hook lock', which is simply a double locking lug system (without anything else, so no a Greener cross-bolt, for example). These lugs / hooks were apparently worked on.


4seventy
(Sponsor)
27/01/10 11:58 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

What I meant is called 'Laufhaken' in German. The literal translation of that is 'barrel hook'.




404, Thanks for that, but there is still some confusion regarding the translation there.
The "hook" on a double is referring to location of the semi circular cutaway, usually on the forward face of the front lump.
This hook is what allows the barrels to pivot on the action's hinge pin when the gun is opened and closed.

Quote:

The example that I was shown was a 'Doppelte Laufhaken Verriegelung', which literaly means 'double hook lock', which is simply a double locking lug system (without anything else, so no a Greener cross-bolt, for example). These lugs / hooks were apparently worked on.




This "double hook lock" you refer to sounds like you are talking about the bolting system which locks the barrels to the action frame. This is where a sliding bolt located under the barrels, engages into bites located in the barrel lumps, when the gun is closed.

So I'm guessing that you are saying that the apparent heat damage is located at the barrel bites?


404bearslayer
(.300 member)
27/01/10 12:38 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


4seventy,

I guess you are trying to pinpoint where the heat was applied on the lumps, as for example at the semi-circular section. It looked like the entire lumps were exposed, but I did not examine them closely enough to identify focal points. I am also not familiar with what exactly that guy wanted to accomplish there, so did not look further. What I kept in mind was that older guns might have been tinkered with. With 'Laufhaken' (barrel hook), we refer to the entire lump in German, by the way. 'Doppellaufhaken' would the be a 'double lump', I guess.


tinker
(.416 member)
27/01/10 02:26 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

There are metal deposition (spray) processes which can leave the appearance of brimstone, local to the area of affect.

Depending on the parent materials, the end result can give a very very tough and hard surface that can be machined/ground/finished.





Cheers
Tinker


DarylS
(.700 member)
27/01/10 02:52 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Excellent post, 404Bearslayer.

4seventy
(Sponsor)
27/01/10 03:10 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

There are metal deposition (spray) processes which can leave the appearance of brimstone, local to the area of affect.





Good point.


404bearslayer
(.300 member)
27/01/10 07:35 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

4seventy & tinker,

thanks for the advice on the 'brimstone' appearance' . Maybe I used a misleading term here. What I wanted to describe is the look of 'burnt' metal. When you overheat metal long enough, it 1) becomes first softer then brittle in the end 2) the surface assumes a typical look because iron oxide builds up - the surface is no longer shiny, but rather dull, 'dry' - maybe 'brimstone' was too strong an image here, initially I wanted to call it a 'shale-like' appearance .

Daryl,

thanks. You made one of the most important points in this tread regarding obturation, which I'd like to take the chance to expand on a little:

Obturation:

A bullet, by being pushed fast enough, get slightly compressed (inertia effect) while it travels through the barrel, which temporarily expands its diameter. This is a however a known and beneficial process that aids the sealing of the bullet in the barrel. Without that, we would have gas leakage as the barrel, being elastic, expands temporarily as well while under pressure (this is why strain gauges can measure pressure). THIS is what obturation means, it is a word with a latin root that means to seal. Obviously, a SOFTER bullet obturates (seals) better then a hard bullet, as softer material is more easily compressed (again: LENGTHWISE compression, because the inertia of the bullet works against its acceleration, which means the diameter of the bullet increases). So harder bullets are by definition LESS prone to that effect. Herein lies the real problem of these bullets: As manufacturers undersize 'hard' bullets to minimize pressure spikes at ignition, they open the window for potentially damaging gas leakage. These leakages, which amplify the gas flow in areas where they occur (in the sense of a jet stream), could over time be damaging to the inside of a barrel. Think of miniature blow-torches passing through those leaks - I think you get the idea.


450_366
(.400 member)
27/01/10 08:41 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

There are metal deposition (spray) processes which can leave the appearance of brimstone, local to the area of affect.

Depending on the parent materials, the end result can give a very very tough and hard surface that can be machined/ground/finished.





Cheers
Tinker




Are you refering to the powder spraygun that uses a oxy/acetylene flame.
In the industry its often applied on moving parts that needs a bit of buildup after wear, it could explain the surface. I would be damn more easy to just use a hammer to bend the bites and lug up a bit then using a torch.

But there are some really stupid beople out there so who knows


akjeff
(.300 member)
28/01/10 01:09 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

This OSR phenomenon that's referred to. Is it visible down the length of the barrel? If so, I have a hard time accepting that it's caused by the bullet. Even a "hard" bullet like a mono solid. You take a solid copper bullet, banded or otherwise. When that sucker hits the rifling in a considerably harder steel barrel, it will swage down to bore dimensions in pretty short order. Metal has to move period, or it would be a bore obstruction. Once the initial swaging is done, I fail to see how it could act on the barrel any differently than any other bullet, for the remainder of it's trip down the bore. Fire a conventional solid, and a monometal solid down the same bore, and measure them. See if there's a difference in the land/groove dimensions?

Jeff


450_366
(.400 member)
28/01/10 09:16 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

This OSR phenomenon that's referred to. Is it visible down the length of the barrel? If so, I have a hard time accepting that it's caused by the bullet. Even a "hard" bullet like a mono solid. You take a solid copper bullet, banded or otherwise. When that sucker hits the rifling in a considerably harder steel barrel, it will swage down to bore dimensions in pretty short order. Metal has to move period, or it would be a bore obstruction. Once the initial swaging is done, I fail to see how it could act on the barrel any differently than any other bullet, for the remainder of it's trip down the bore. Fire a conventional solid, and a monometal solid down the same bore, and measure them. See if there's a difference in the land/groove dimensions?

Jeff




I think 404bearslayer made a good point that its most likely not the bullet that is the couse of osr, than the pressure within the barrel behind the bullet. But then it needs to be really high all the way down and exact so it affects the steel in an uniform way so the rifling appears to be equal affected over the lenght of the barrel.


470evans
(.333 member)
28/01/10 11:19 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

This OSR phenomenon that's referred to. Is it visible down the length of the barrel? If so, I have a hard time accepting that it's caused by the bullet. Even a "hard" bullet like a mono solid. You take a solid copper bullet, banded or otherwise. When that sucker hits the rifling in a considerably harder steel barrel, it will swage down to bore dimensions in pretty short order. Metal has to move period, or it would be a bore obstruction. Once the initial swaging is done, I fail to see how it could act on the barrel any differently than any other bullet, for the remainder of it's trip down the bore. Fire a conventional solid, and a monometal solid down the same bore, and measure them. See if there's a difference in the land/groove dimensions?

Jeff




The doubles I have seen with OSR (4-5), including one of my own, begin to exhibit the OSR about 8-10 inches down the barrels and the OSR continues to the muzzle. It appears where the barrels are beginning to taper down. There is too much steel in the chamber end for it to show. The more severe the OSR the further up the barrels it will begin.


404bearslayer
(.300 member)
29/01/10 01:05 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

470evans,

that what you see is only apparent towards the muzzle has something to do with the fact that your gun is tapered - the closer you come to the muzzle, the weaker the barrel becomes.

Now, whatever I have read here about what some people call OSR are classical signs of a barrel that has been exposed to a level of pressure that has expanded it to a point where it cannot spring back fully to what it was before. Even what some people call a test for OSR (looking inside that barrel at a angle) is a classical test for that with gunsmiths in my country. Now, as I pointed out before, hard bullets can create far steeper pressure curves then other bullets, add to that a round where the bullet's ogive accidentally touches the rifling (had that with factory ammo in my .404 quite often) and you can have such a rapid rise in pressure that older softer steels, especially in thin barrels, cannot spring back fully anymore. And don't forget that some barrels are duds, they might not have been hardened correctly in manufacturing to begin with. With benign loads (and by that I mean a shallow rise in pressure, rather then a weak load per se) this might never be an issue. With a steep pressure curve, however, it will bring out faults.

As for the claimed 'shadows' of lands showing outside the barrel and the like: That is an easily understood phenomenon, and has nothing to do with a bullet pressing out the lands. Imagine a barrel that is cut open lengthwise and rolled out before you. What do you see? Something like the profile of a car tire, the lands stand out, the deeper the grooves are cut the more the barrel has a 'profile'. Now imagine you could tear like the Hulk at the sides of this rolled-out barrel (this represents excessive pressure). The grooves, being cut into the barrel, are the weakest link (the barrel is thicker where the lands remain) - therefore the weakest link (the grooves) will stretch first (but certainly differently, -this for people who now start thinking about cut-rifling versus hammer-forged). Do this with enough force and you will see the claimed OSR shadows on the outside of the barrel. They are simply stretch-marks alternating with stronger sections of the barrel. Hence the visible lands / grooves pattern.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
29/01/10 01:21 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

As for the claimed 'shadows' of lands showing outside the barrel and the like: Do this with enough force and you will see the claimed OSR shadows on the outside of the barrel. They are simply stretch-marks alternating with stronger sections of the barrel. Hence the visible lands / grooves pattern.




I've wondered about this for a long time, namely; Is it truly the lands pressed out, or, rather the weak part of the barrel in the grooves that is "giving way". I suspect it is the latter. Not sure.


DarylS
(.700 member)
29/01/10 04:22 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

470evans,
The grooves, being cut into the barrel, are the weakest link (the barrel is thicker where the lands remain) - therefore the weakest link (the grooves) will stretch first (but certainly differently, -this for people who now start thinking about cut-rifling versus hammer-forged). Do this with enough force and you will see the claimed OSR shadows on the outside of the barrel. They are simply stretch-marks alternating with stronger sections of the barrel. Hence the visible lands / grooves pattern.




Spot-on, 470 and 9.3 - I now see the 'light'. I was definitiely having trouble with the lands being pushed to the outside hypothesis.


4seventy
(Sponsor)
29/01/10 08:44 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

As for the claimed 'shadows' of lands showing outside the barrel and the like: Do this with enough force and you will see the claimed OSR shadows on the outside of the barrel. They are simply stretch-marks alternating with stronger sections of the barrel. Hence the visible lands / grooves pattern.




I've wondered about this for a long time, namely; Is it truly the lands pressed out, or, rather the weak part of the barrel in the grooves that is "giving way". I suspect it is the latter. Not sure.




Yes, the stretch mark theory has been around for quite some time, and is indeed a plausable one.
However, it doesn't answer the really important questions concerning OSR.
The true cause is still a mystery.

There are other factors involved here though which have not yet been discussed in any of the threads concerning OSR.


AkMike
(.416 member)
29/01/10 07:00 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

One factor that hasn't been brought up is that the DR tubes have a much thinner sidewall than a bolt gun. I am not an expert, but I can easily see that being a serious factor.


What say ye?


DarylS
(.700 member)
30/01/10 01:10 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Unfortunately, the true cause is most likely a combination of many contributing factors which most likely change, gun to gun.

akjeff
(.300 member)
30/01/10 02:16 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

One factor that hasn't been brought up is that the DR tubes have a much thinner sidewall than a bolt gun. I am not an expert, but I can easily see that being a serious factor.


What say ye?




The reason I have doubts about the thin barrel wall theory is that I think the bullet would have to be swaged down upon entering the bore, which occurs in the heavier walled shank of the chamber area. By the time it gets to the thin walled part of the barrel, I should think the bullet is already at bore dimension, and thus, have no impact on causing the tubes to "bulge". If the bullet were truly causing a "bulge" that travels down the exterior of the barrel, the chamber pressure would be sky high, and would have to remain higher than normal, for the entire time that it's in the barrel. But, that's just my opinion.

I should think the whole thing should be easily(but not cheaply!) proved/disproved by attaching strain gages inch by inch down a test barrel contoured like a double rifle. Fire some control rounds of conventional lead cored bullets, and then fire the mono's, and see what really happens.

Jeff


tinker
(.416 member)
30/01/10 03:20 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I grew up (active in the shops from 8+years old) in top-shelf auto restoration shops, doing full-kit jobs on best-placing Concours show cars.

I've seen a lot of fine metal beaten in every conceivable direction -- with every imaginable kind of hammer...


...which brings the hammer to the conversation.
The hammer I'm speaking of here/now is the bullet.

Anyone here ever own a vintage Ferrari?
Do y'all know what the tool kit looks like for a top shelf street roadster?
One thing you'll see in there is a big lead hammer.
That big lead hammer is your lug-wrench for wheel removal/replacement.
That big lead hammer is what the factory prescribes as the ideal tool for knocking the knockoff (single central) wheel nuts loose.

Try the same operation with a hard copper or cupric alloy wrench, and you'll likely end up screwing up the finish on the spinner nuts.


Could it be possible that this dead VS springy nature of the bullet material could have something to do with the phenomenon?



Just thinking...





Cheers
Tinker


450_366
(.400 member)
30/01/10 06:19 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

I grew up (active in the shops from 8+years old) in top-shelf auto restoration shops, doing full-kit jobs on best-placing Concours show cars.

I've seen a lot of fine metal beaten in every conceivable direction -- with every imaginable kind of hammer...


...which brings the hammer to the conversation.
The hammer I'm speaking of here/now is the bullet.

Anyone here ever own a vintage Ferrari?
Do y'all know what the tool kit looks like for a top shelf street roadster?
One thing you'll see in there is a big lead hammer.
That big lead hammer is your lug-wrench for wheel removal/replacement.
That big lead hammer is what the factory prescribes as the ideal tool for knocking the knockoff (single central) wheel nuts loose.

Try the same operation with a hard copper or cupric alloy wrench, and you'll likely end up screwing up the finish on the spinner nuts.


Could it be possible that this dead VS springy nature of the bullet material could have something to do with the phenomenon?



Just thinking...





Cheers
Tinker




And the steel jacket fms? That supposely not contribute to the osr fenomen?
And a large peace of oak works to, but takes up to much space in the trunk.


404bearslayer
(.300 member)
30/01/10 06:33 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


Tinker,

your ideas about a hammer are useful. Let's first remember the main claim about OSR: 'A hard bullet presses the rifling from the inside to the outside, while a soft bullet does not do so'. Let's play 'Mythbusters' and set up the following experiment: Take a potato, cut it in half, and then carve a heart into it. The potato is the barrel, the heart represents the rifling. Now take a hammer (which represents the hard bullet) and violate the potato with some strikes. Now turn the potato around and look for the heart being visible on the other side. You won't find any pattern, irregardless of whether you strike the potato with a hammer or a bag of feathers. The reason is simple and shows the main fallacy of the OSR claim: No force or material on earth can drive a profile through a material that is of the same hardness and consistency as the profile itself. Take another cut potato and put a little wooden heart on it, hammer the wooden heart into the potato. Now turn the potato around and you will see the heart shape imprinted on the other side. Hence, OSR could only occur if grooves and lands were made of different materials with significanty different levels of hardness.


srose
(.300 member)
30/01/10 07:02 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Isn't the bullet your wooden heart?

470evans
(.333 member)
30/01/10 08:04 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:


Tinker,

your ideas about a hammer are useful. Let's first remember the main claim about OSR: 'A hard bullet presses the rifling from the inside to the outside, while a soft bullet does not do so'. Let's play 'Mythbusters' and set up the following experiment: Take a potato, cut it in half, and then carve a heart into it. The potato is the barrel, the heart represents the rifling. Now take a hammer (which represents the hard bullet) and violate the potato with some strikes. Now turn the potato around and look for the heart being visible on the other side. You won't find any pattern, irregardless of whether you strike the potato with a hammer or a bag of feathers. The reason is simple and shows the main fallacy of the OSR claim: No force or material on earth can drive a profile through a material that is of the same hardness and consistency as the profile itself. Take another cut potato and put a little wooden heart on it, hammer the wooden heart into the potato. Now turn the potato around and you will see the heart shape imprinted on the other side. Hence, OSR could only occur if grooves and lands were made of different materials with significanty different levels of hardness.




404, I must be losing something in translation here. I would guess you have never seen OSR either?

Unless you've seen it it's very difficult to explain and get some people to believe it even exists. At least one non-believer(Cal)has changed his tune about it existing.

Cal, I hope you don't find any issues with that beautiful Wilkes. I'd like to hear what you find out after you inspect the rifle and I look forward to hearing there aren't any issues.


4seventy
(Sponsor)
30/01/10 11:04 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

One factor that hasn't been brought up is that the DR tubes have a much thinner sidewall than a bolt gun. I am not an expert, but I can easily see that being a serious factor.


What say ye?




Mike,
You are correct that the thin barrel walls are a very relevant issue concerning OSR.
This is nothing new though, and has been mentioned before in this thread and others relating to OSR.

400NE had this to say back on page one of this thread.
Quote:

OSR is the result of the expansion of the necessarily thin walls of double rifle barrels




AkMike
(.416 member)
30/01/10 11:32 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Whoopps I didn't see that post!
I think that the mono is engraved through out the length of the barrel. From what I gather (not having seen one) it's more pronounced further out towards the business end.


404bearslayer
(.300 member)
30/01/10 11:03 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

470EVANS,

there is nothing lost in translation here - and if, it would be the fault of your fellow Texans, as I went to college in the Lone Star State (and later to grad school in Florida) and had that kind of English imprinted on me . If anything, I might have picked up an accent .

I simply addressed one of the wilder claims about HOW OSR comes about. I know perfectly well what people talk about, and do not have reason to believe that they lie about their observations. The problem is that few have an understanding of internal ballistics and arrive at fairly wild conclusions about the processes that lead to those manifestations. I have explained most of the processes and misconceptions within this thread. For people who prefer the opinion of a specialist: In Australia, I would talk to an engineer at Thales/ADI, in Europe, you want to talk to the folks at BOFORS, Sweden (Thales/ADI makes the powder for Hodgdon, Bofor makes the powder for Alliant, Norma, Rottweil). These people know ballistics at the professional level, it is part of their job description. Don't expect this level of expertise within even the larger bullet companies - they simply don't need to know - and for the most part they don't.


Paul
(.400 member)
31/01/10 12:22 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

404, I can't see that potato 'flesh' and steel comparison really works. Raw potato can't be bent into different shapes that will retain any strength but steel often can. Without cooking and mashing a spud there is no way it can be forged into different shapes the way steel can.

Risking another false analogy, the pattern left on the outside of hammer-forge-rifled barrels shows that patterns emanating from inside the tube can be seen outside.

Akjeff, I've thought about your point, too. I seem to remember reading somewhere that firearm barrels can bulge as projectiles go through them and contract again, anyway, like a a snake digesting a mouse. This sounds hard to believe, especially because it might affect the solder in double guns and rifles, but maybe some of these mono bullets don't just shear off the offending bits of driving band as they hit the rifling but cause more than the allowable stress all the way up the barrel.

- Paul


450_366
(.400 member)
31/01/10 01:16 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Risking another false analogy, the pattern left on the outside of hammer-forge-rifled barrels shows that patterns emanating from inside the tube can be seen outside.



- Paul




I always tought that came from the twisting of the tube as it is pushed thru the rotohammer.


DarylS
(.700 member)
31/01/10 04:10 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

You are correct, Andreas. The barrel turns in the hammer mill, or the barrel is stationary and the hammer mill rotates up the barrel. I believe there have been both types. Either way, this is how the rotational grooves are impressed on the outside of the hammerforged barrel. They do not come form the inside. Styre chose not to remove all of the marks at the breech end as they are rather sexy to some people. They merely smoothed, reduced and polished them.

Paul - extra stress on the barrel as the bullet goes up the barrel will increase pressure that is readable on strain gauges placed along the tube.

The transducer method of presssure recording actually shows the rise from zero pressure to peak over time and distance, as well as the pressure curve from chamber to muzzle. This is displayed on a graph. A single transducer should show comparative pressures for different bullets launched at the same velocity. This system has been used since the 70's by some outfits.


Paul
(.400 member)
31/01/10 06:15 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Thanks guys,
I guess the placement of the hammers is obvious now you mention it. The recipricol of that may be the true analogy then: the hammering on the outside in that pattern causes the metal to mould around the spiral on the mandrel within. Not so easy if you make barrels out of potatoes.

The transducer stuff is one of the closest things to a scientific look we've had on this thread. Could the issue be resolved using that?

- Paul


450_366
(.400 member)
31/01/10 11:10 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Thanks guys,
I guess the placement of the hammers is obvious now you mention it. The recipricol of that may be the true analogy then: the hammering on the outside in that pattern causes the metal to mould around the spiral on the mandrel within. Not so easy if you make barrels out of potatoes.

The transducer stuff is one of the closest things to a scientific look we've had on this thread. Could the issue be resolved using that?

- Paul




Naturally, it has come up in the past also, but if not the bullet producers want to do it, then its up to someone private and then it wouldnt make anny difference.


404bearslayer
(.300 member)
31/01/10 11:30 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Paul,

all materials have a certain elasticity. If you don't like the potato example, think of chewing gum. The point is that if you try to press an elevated profile into material of the same consistency, that you cannot drive it through that material without loosing its original shape. It gets displaced in all directions and ends up being crushed outright (for relatively inelastic materials) or 'swallowed' by the material it is pressed into. That makes it impossible to press rifling from the inside of a barrel to the outside, creating a 'rifling shadow' there, as some people tend to believe. These are stretch marks in a barrel that has been exposed to too much pressure.

Your idea about a mouse in a tube is correct, by the way. Barrels are elastic and always bulge / stretch somewhat when a bullet is launched through them. It is of course a dynamic process, but for the sake of illustration, imagine it like this: Take a bullet of relatively hard consistency, that is also, because of sloppy quality control, oversize. That increases its initial resistance to engraving and also its friction coefficient. Normally, if all is well, the bullets expands a bit in diameter by being pushed against it own inertia and still seals the barrel even though the barrel itself is expanding. That is what obturation really means (latin: Obturare = to seal).

By the way, if you have ever wondered why certain bullets shoot well with some rifles, and not with others - it is because there is a mismatch in the bullet's material relative to the rifle's material, disturbing this beneficial process. Happens most often with copper bullets, as rifle manufacturers (especially in older days) have made barrel steel that is meant to harmonize with soft bullets.

But back to the hard, oversized bullet. Imagine it getting stuck briefly - what happens then: As the bullet cannot move, the burning powder experiences a severe pressure spike. If the spike is steep (fast) enough, the barrel bursts before the bullet can be moved sufficiently to relive pressure. If however, the pressure spike is below a certain threshold, the expanding gas causes a bulge behind the bullet, which, because of the shape of a barrel, extends towards the sides of the stuck bullet, 'freeing' it and launching it forward. This may have saved your life as the barrel did not rupture outright, but could have exceeded the elasticity of the barrel, leading to exactly the symptoms that people call OSR. The misconception about OSR is not that a hard bullet is problematic (it is, mono-metal bullets as well as steel-jacketed bullets are more prone to pressure spikes). The misconception is that the bullet causes the damage DIRECTLY, while it is in reality excessive pressure that bulges the barrel beyond its point of elasticity. Even if a bullet were so much harder then the barrel that it could theoretically 'smear' out the rifling, this would never happen as the resistance by the rifling would be so strong that the pressure would go through the roof and blow up the gun.


450_366
(.400 member)
01/02/10 12:08 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

This would then be a couse of an oversized bullet?
Taking one of the osr rifles and slugging it to compare with the bullets that is blamed would reveil it then, woulnt it?
Or in worst case a standard load on a harder bullet that becomes an severe overload do to the bullet construction, it would also be easy to test.
Either none has tested or there must be more to it, either way its interesting.

In the good old days severe overpressure from cordite would have been quite normal in hotter condition, why isnt there plenty of records from burst/osr barrels.

btw, beeing in germany have you ever seen a barrel on a combo ruined by "hard" bullets?


Paul
(.400 member)
01/02/10 12:18 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

404, your argument is more technical than I can comment on. I don't know what the answer is but, if the rest of the world goes the way of Sweden and California, we'll need to find monos that are definitely safe in doubles or else mothball the rifles.

- Paul


450_366
(.400 member)
01/02/10 12:23 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

404, your argument is more technical than I can comment on. I don't know what the answer is but, if the rest of the world goes the way of Sweden and California, we'll need to find monos that are definitely safe in doubles or else mothball the rifles.

- Paul




Actually our lead ban is set on a hold for now, but for how long.


404bearslayer
(.300 member)
02/02/10 12:38 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Paul, 450-366,

if it has been too technical so far, maybe it is helpful to concentrate just on one well-known fact: Modern propellant is extremely sensitive to heat and pressure. Cordite, which didn't have today's additives to tamper that effect somewhat, was a prime example of this - African heat was enough to create dangerous pressure spikes, that's why Nitro Express loads were given such low pressure limits, (which aren't necessary anymore with today's powders). That also answers whether problems existed in the past - if rifle makers had reason to lower pressure that drastically, then there must have been a lot of problems in the early days.

Now, nitro-cellulose powder creates the expected level of pressure and energy with an ever-expanding 'boiler room' - during the burning of the powder, the barrel is really the extension of the cartridge case, so while the bullet moves, the volume of the confined compartment (case plus barrel) up to the position of the bullet constantly expands, which lowers pressure dynamically, allowing the powder to burn in a controlled and expected fashion. However, once you increase resistance to the movement of the bullet, be it by an obstruction or a bullet with excessive resistance to engraving, you are making the 'boiler room' smaller then it should be at that point in time (thereby raising pressure beyond the design criteria of the powder).

Here we have the main misunderstanding by people who think that by now the bullet and the inside of the barrel can do something to each other. They erroneously assume pressure at this point to be either static or to to be in a linear relationship with the force of resistance that bullet/rifling can pose. This would be the precondition of bullet and rifling staying in contact with each other, and without contact they cannot damage each other. The relation between the volume of the 'boiler room' and resultant pressure is however not linear but exponential. That means that before an oversize stainless steel bullet could damage the inside of a barrel, its temporary slowing of the 'boiler room' expansion raises pressure. However, if exposed to confinement, modern powder burns even faster, creating further pressure, which in turn makes the powder burn faster yet again. What you have is a cascading, self-feeding process that approaches detonation. This process happens a lot faster then the time a bullet needs to damage a rifle. The barrel either bursts outright before that happens, or the barrel over-stretches, releases the bullet, thereby lowering pressure again by expanding the volume in which the powder works, and then afterwards showing symptoms that people call OSR.

OSR, as most people seem to understand it, namely the bullet itself doing damage, can however only happen when two conditions are met:

a) The bullet is harder or at least approaching the hardness of the barrel.

b) You drive that bullet through the barrel with a dowel, thereby eliminating the stretching of the barrel that the dynamic combustion process causes. Now, bullet and rifling can stay in contact and potentially damage each other (if condition a is also met). But who launches their bullets with a dowel?

Now to the important point: What are the practical implications for the shooter?

If you have a modern rifle with correct barrel dimensions and know how to reload, there is no issue with 'hard' or mono-metal bullets, you have a lot of safety margin even if bullet size or hardness is a bit out of whack. In general, things go only wrong when there are several factors at work. If that was not the case, nobody could shoot Barnes bullets without screwing up.

On the other hand, if you are a novice to reloading, have an old gun with thin barrels and have not even slugged that barrel to see whether it has the correct internal dimensions (old .404 barrels can be significantly tighter then newer one, for example), then don't add another risk factor - harder bullets DO make the pressure curve steeper (unless undersize, but then, your barrel might be undersize as well). The same goes for people who do not properly clean their barrels, leave oil in the chamber, never remove carbon deposits around the chamber shoulder or the carbon ring in the barrel, and so on. Something relevant as well: If you shoot bronze slugs, steel jackets and normal bullets on top of each other you can weld yourself a new alloy inside your barrel which can significantly increase friction and thereby pressure.

So the conclusion is quite simple: You have a valuable vintage double? No need to understand OSR, stick to Woodleighs and traditional loads and never look back. I myself, on the other hand, own a modern Holland & Holland .470 double, and shoot mono-metal bullets and loads that approach that of a .500 NE. - and I have zero problems. I do however know how to control and adjust a pressure curve, use mathematical modeling for it and cross-check with a pressure gauge that, amongst other things, displays my pressure curve graphically at any point in time during the launch of my bullet. That way I catch even secondary or tertiary spikes as a result of inefficient and potentially dangerous powder/case/bullet mismatches and can readjust. In other words, I do my homework, and can therefore enter somewhat more 'risky' territory.

As a final word: What damages rifles is in many cases not peak pressure as such, but how fast you get there (the steepness of the curve). Therefore, even a load with a 'normal' peak pressure can be damaging under certain circumstances. Mono-metal / hard bullets simply contribute to a steep rise in pressure more then traditional bullets. If other things go wrong, they can be the tipping point, that is all you need to know.


... Forgot one thing: The reason why the described damages tend to show up in the forward section of double rifle barrels - it is the result of an intended design 'flaw'. The principle behind a chopper lump barrel is to be without seams, and to be strong at the breech, and progressively weaker towards the muzzle. Recall the early days of cordite with its pressure spikes. Manufacturers could not control WHETHER a gun would blow up, but HOW. They chose to make the barrel comparably weak towards the muzzle, so the barrel would stretch / burst as far away from the shooter as possible. The drawback i, that you get damage in these barrels (towards the tip) much easier then with other types. But better the gun gets damaged then your face. Besides, I would never shoot an old gun period as I don't know what the previous owners did to them. - I have been asked whether I have seen damages in guns that look like what people call OSR. Yes, as I spend much time with my gunsmith. All damaged rifles that he gets, bolt, doubles, drilling, have one thing in common. They are usually over 30 years old.


calpappas
(.275 member)
16/02/10 01:43 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Gents:
If someone can l email me and let me know how to post photos on this site, I will be pleased to show you detailed photos of my Barnes Banded Solids I shot through my .600 Wilkes. The rifling cut the bands but did not contact the body of the bullet. I think this is the answer to OSR--bands and a bullet .002 undersize. I saw a mild case of OSR at SCI Reno and seeing made a believer out of me.
Cheers, all.
Cal


500grains
(.416 member)
17/02/10 01:51 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Gents:
The rifling cut the bands but did not contact the body of the bullet. I think this is the answer to OSR--bands and a bullet .002 undersize.




Yes, IF IF IF the bands are thin enough. Otherwise the banded part causes the same problem as a non-banded bullet. Barnes was about 10 years late on this bandwagon, and still has the bands too thick.

THIN BANDS:



THICK BANDS:



DarylS
(.700 member)
17/02/10 03:42 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Or do they? Have any guns, previously with no OSR developed OSR from shooting Barnes TSX or their banded solids?

Is this opinion on band thickness based on fact, or suposition due to 'sounding' logical? Just because someone happens to make a bullet with very thin bands, does not mean thicker bands are bad or that they cause OSR.

As to band width, I suspect total area of the bands 'could' be important in the equation, as well as the material's composition itself, along of course, with size of the bnads and grooves between. Taking from one area of importance and adding to another 'could' have the same outcome.

Seems to me I saw a picture of those thin banded bullets, showed heavy engraving all the way around, lands and grooves digging deeply into the solid shank. That only means the barrel it was fired in, was perhaps on the tight side, only, and was only one barrel - could have been too tight for that bullet. Maybe! Considering barrels that have shot nothing buy Woodleighs show OSR - 5 out of 5 discussed. 2 of them had also fired monos? Whose mono's? Did the monos contribute or was the OSR caused by the Woodleighs as in the other 3 - coincidence that all 5 barrels shot with the Woodleigh solids had OSR or that both (2) barerls shot with monos had OSR.
This does not sound as if the woodleighs are particularly 'safe' to me - every barrel shot with them had OSR.

Yes I know you have several DR's and all you've shot is woodleighs and they don't have OSR - but those 5 did. What does this mean- maybe nothing - maybe those 5 guns were 'faulty' or undersized in the bores? We'll never know.

We do know that fingers cannot be pointed at the mono bullets in this example.


Omnivorous_Bob
(.333 member)
17/02/10 05:45 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I'll throw in my 2 cents.....

I agree with Daryl and 500gn both. I think thin bands are probably better than thick ones.

I think the shank between the bands needs to be sufficently smaller than bore diameter in order to give the displaced metal somewhere to go. How much smaller is determined by the spacing between the bands, but there should be a positive space to deposit the displaced metal.

I think the face of the lands in the throat should be perpendicular to the bore so as to cut the band via shearing, rather than a sloping/tapered throat that presses the land into the bullet, radically increasing radial stress and doing a poor job of moving band material into the grooves between them. Fortunately most barrels are this way when NEW, but I wonder if throat errosion over the decades give the lands a more tapered profile in this area, thereby increasing radial stress. Even when new with a non-grooved bullet the bearin surface may be too long to move the sheared material all of the way to the bullet base. It has to go somewhere, and squeezing lands into all sides of a solid bullet takes a huge amount of force.

Chamber pressure is important only to the extent that if it is below the level required for the monolithic bullet to obturate, it may allow the shank of a non-undersized bullet to remain larger than if the pressure were higher, resulting in damage farther down the barrel where it is thinner even though pressure is far, far below max there. Perhaps extremely detailed testing could answer this by detailed measuring of bullets fired at varying pressure levels.

Lastly, I think barrel construction plays a role. I personally think cut rifling is the only way to go on a DR or custom/non-production gun. Having said that, the act of buttoning could strengthen the barrel steel to resist the stress of monolithics. If it is enough to prevent OSR is an open question, but the act of forcing a hardened button down a barrel with the purpose of inducing stresses beyond the metal's elastic limit should impart some resistance to similar stresses in the future. Even if so I'd still alway opt of chopper lump cut rifling if given the choice.

All of this is simply theory and conjecture on my part and could be wrong across the board. It isn't unknowable, but would take a LOT of testing to determine.

Bob


DarylS
(.700 member)
18/02/10 03:14 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Normal throat angles are 1 1/2 to 3 today. I don't know what they were 100 years ago - but, corrosive primers, throat errosion from exceptionally hot gasses but to blowby in the throat prior to obturation of a leadcored bullet are what cause throat wear. Soft steels and Damascus steel/iron barrels are also worn noticably by hard bullets, ie: the nickel jackets of years gone buy. This all results in longer throat angles as the rifling origin, the throat is moved down the tube/s, the angle becomming shallower and shallower.
As Bob noted, this also could be a contributor to bore damage.
We haven't addressed rough bores sloughing off soft bullet metal, which builds upon itself making the bore even smaller - many times in a few areas only, at the breech and again at the muzzle where the barrel metal is thinnest.

I'd wager there are a number of shooters who still don't know how to get the copper out, but use something useless for the job, like Hoppe's or Kerosene, then ragoon oil and call it done. The fouling merely builds upon itself every time the gun is fired, the bore becomming tighter and 'stickier' over time.


iomskp
(.300 member)
18/02/10 09:49 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Hello I have done a quick scan of the OSR thread and one thing I have not found is what is OSR it may well be there and I have missed it, could somebody could tell me please.

500Nitro
(.450 member)
18/02/10 09:52 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Hello I have done a quick scan of the OSR thread and one thing I have not found is what is OSR it may well be there and I have missed it, could somebody could tell me please.






Over Stressed rifling - the rifling appears on the outside of the barrel but is hard to see.


iomskp
(.300 member)
18/02/10 11:28 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Thankyou

500grains
(.416 member)
19/02/10 03:25 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:


I think the shank between the bands needs to be sufficently smaller than bore diameter in order to give the displaced metal somewhere to go.





This goes without saying because otherwise the bands serve little purpose. Also, a bullet whose shank does not contact the rifling in one gun may in another.


500Nitro
(.450 member)
19/02/10 03:31 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:


I think the shank between the bands needs to be sufficently smaller than bore diameter in order to give the displaced metal somewhere to go.





This goes without saying because otherwise the bands serve little purpose. Also, a bullet whose shank does not contact the rifling in one gun may in another.





"Also, a bullet whose shank does not contact the rifling in one gun may in another."

CORRECT - And that is the problem.

Apart from my 470's and 500's, I can't think of one of my doubles that is spot on with dimensions.


Omnivorous_Bob
(.333 member)
20/02/10 03:48 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:


I think the shank between the bands needs to be sufficently smaller than bore diameter in order to give the displaced metal somewhere to go.





This goes without saying because otherwise the bands serve little purpose. Also, a bullet whose shank does not contact the rifling in one gun may in another.




I agree, but think the shank should be quite a bit smaller. In a 30 cal for example, if the band is .004" high (.308" groove and .300" bore nominal barrel), the groove between equal width bands should be at least .004" deep, that is .296" or less, not just .300", in order to give the metal a place to go. This would also help with barrels that don't conform to todays cip specs.


Ruger_450
(Banned)
13/04/14 04:57 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I DNS about Double rifles, but I do seem to call reading that the famed solids of the past had copper plated steel jackets and no grooves at all. One would assume they were quite hard.

I DNAL about Barnes bullets because they are my favorite big game bullet. I also know Ty pretty well and he is a very nice guy. While they may or may not own Africa, I have read that many PHs now treat the 300 gr 375 TSX as the best 375 H&H Buff bullet as it expands and penetrates. I have seen American Bison with both shoulders broken and dropped on the spot with a 130 gr .277 TSX.

From all these posts, what I see is a lot of opinions with no "scientific method" data or photos to support either side.

I do know I can push an 80 gr TTSX out of my 30" high wall (thin barrel) @4000 fps, into sub moa groups and take a mature Antelope Buck end to end with the bullet still flying. "bang, flop".

JMHO, but every gun site I have ever been on has those who laud or hate Barnes bullets. With the advent of all the new mono metals they have to spread themselves around a bit.

Until there are some verifiable facts, I'm going to treat this like the "explosive ignition" stories about reduced loads of 4831.


NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
20/08/19 06:45 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


BTTT. Remembering Mark - 400NitroExpress 's last post.

I wonder if he was upset in some way, that that was his last?


Ash
(.400 member)
20/08/19 09:03 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

To anyone reading this thread. To summarise: shoot Woodleighs and all will be well

DUGABOY1
(.400 member)
07/10/19 08:32 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:


BTTT. Remembering Mark - 400NitroExpress 's last post.

I wonder if he was upset in some way, that that was his last?




400Nitroexpress (Mark Cash)has passed away but he quite posting all over the net for some time. He was a good friend of mine, and a charter member of DRSS, and was a very knowledgeable man who had forgotten more than most know about double rifles, and what will damage them!

……………………………………………………………………………….Dugaboy1 ( Mac)
)


tinker
(.416 member)
07/10/19 09:27 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I'll touch a couple off to honor Mark.
He was always pleasant and generous with his knowledge every time I spoke with him.


NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
07/10/19 07:27 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

To anyone reading this thread. To summarise: shoot Woodleighs and all will be well




But use the extra 'stiff' FMJs sparingly ... use any FMJs sparingly, not a target bullet. And some FMJs were thickened and as is recommended, use sparingly.


NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
07/10/19 07:30 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:


BTTT. Remembering Mark - 400NitroExpress 's last post.

I wonder if he was upset in some way, that that was his last?




400Nitroexpress (Mark Cash)has passed away but he quite posting all over the net for some time. He was a good friend of mine, and a charter member of DRSS, and was a very knowledgeable man who had forgotten more than most know about double rifles, and what will damage them!

……………………………………………………………………………….Dugaboy1 ( Mac)
)




Thanks Mac. I think I posted about Mark's passing away on another thread. When looking for his posts, his last on this thread so mentioned it here.

Another good member shooting doubles on the Elysium Fields.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
08/10/19 02:21 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

To anyone reading this thread. To summarise: shoot Woodleighs and all will be well




But use the extra 'stiff' FMJs sparingly ... use any FMJs sparingly, not a target bullet. And some FMJs were thickened and as is recommended, use sparingly.




Been years ago now, but IIRC for this or another thread, I did an experiment to compare effort needed to draw/resize:

1) mono bullets
2) copper/gilding-jacketed lead-core bullets
3) Hornady steel-jacketed lead-core FMJ's

All in .375 cal using a variety of dies I've used to reduce to .366-.369 caliber. The gilding jacketed lead-core jobs are rather easily re-sized, as Daryl and I have been doing for many years now {re-sizing .375 lead-core bullets for use in 9.3 rifles}. The monos are almost all impossible to reduce and the steel-jacketed lead-core FMJ's were an absolute no-go, presenting an absolute stop to attempts to resize them using the same equipment used to draw the lead-core jobs.

In my mind, if the monos actually are capable of damaging a rifle bore, the FMJ's would absolutely wreck it in a few shots, depending on all the standard variables, of course {bore/groove diameter vis a vis bullet diameter, etc.} I have no experience {I don't think, it's been years...} with "extra stiff" Woodleigh steel jacketed bullets, but if they are anything like the Horny's I tried, would be no-go's with my equipment as well, and maybe even worse.

To me this entire issue involving OSR remains a mystery.

PS: There was one one mono bullet I could resize that had multiple, very narrow driving bands. Took effort, but could be done. Can't remember which it was. Been so long.....


NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
08/10/19 02:47 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

There was reportedly an H&H double rifle ffffed in Melbourne this year (or last) using the wrong sort of projectiles ... I wasn't there to see it, but was told about it. I think it was quite a new one, and therefore very expensive.

Some of the Melbourne members on here would know all the details, if they are willing to share the info.

Since this thread (?) maybe since its beginning, I have spoken to the gunmakers at Verney-Carron and Heym, and they didn't warn against using mono metal projectiles. SO presumably their modern firearms are OK with them.

BUT personally I would ONLY use monos with raised driving bands such as the hydros, not examples with 'driving' grooves instead. Just MO. Not going to use either most probably and stick to what I already use.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
08/10/19 04:29 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

There was reportedly an H&H double rifle ffffed in Melbourne this year (or last) using the wrong sort of projectiles ... I wasn't there to see it, but was told about it. I think it was quite a new one, and therefore very expensive.

Some of the Melbourne members on here would know all the details, if they are willing to share the info.

Since this thread (?) maybe since its beginning, I have spoken to the gunmakers at Verney-Carron and Heym, and they didn't warn against using mono metal projectiles. SO presumably their modern firearms are OK with them.

BUT personally I would ONLY use monos with raised driving bands such as the hydros, not examples with 'driving' grooves instead. Just MO. Not going to use either most probably and stick to what I already use.




Seems like safe approach.

I've always found it very interesting that these gunmakers do not warn against monos. Or hard steel jacketed bullets?


DarylS
(.700 member)
08/10/19 04:33 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Thought someone a while back posted a warming by Woodleigh to not use their guilding metal coated steel jacketed FMJ's in side by sides.
Friend if mine is using TSX's in his Merkle's 7x65R barrel as a hunting bullet. Mind you, he doesn't shoot it a lot, but has been using them since their inception. They are very accurate for him - 160gr., I think and not a light load.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
08/10/19 05:20 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Thought someone a while back posted a warming by Woodleigh to not use their guilding metal coated steel jacketed FMJ's in side by sides.




Based on my attempts to break a Rock Chucker getting steel-coated Horny's to pass thru a mere 3-4 thousandths of smaller hole, this seems like a good idea.

My questions about it have always including a wondering about the ACTUAL dimensions of the barrel, both groove and land vis a vis the bullet. I mean, from what I've read, the internal bore/groove diameters can be all over the map on old British guns, so I suppose one could run into a combination of bullet diameter, hardness and barrel specs that would result in trouble, whereas other guns being shot with the exact same bullet may exhibit no damage at all, tho I still don't see how a mono bullet could create an evenly distributed expansion of the barrel to produce the tell-tale shadow lines for all the reasons we discussed in the past.

Another thing I've often wondered about is the actual reduction in barrel wall thickness that might occur on a gun that has seen numerous rebluings, with barrel striking before bluing reducing the wall thickness over time to a dimension susceptible to stretching. Is THAT the cause of the elusive OSR?

It seems like all these theories were fronted with no proof ever being found of what combination of dimensions, jacket/type of bullet or modification of barrel ever being found that DEFINITIVELY proved the cause {-es} of "OSR".

Thus the generic "Don't use monos" approach, which when one is dealing with guns of the values represented with many of the old Brit doubles, certainly is understandable.


CptCurlAdministrator
(.450 member)
08/10/19 11:31 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

All I can say is that I have seen it, and it was caused by Barnes X bullets. It wasn't there before firing the X bullets, and it didn't take but a few.

This is not hearsay.

Curl


NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
08/10/19 04:37 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Now I remember ....

9.3x57
(.450 member)
08/10/19 11:14 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

All I can say is that I have seen it, and it was caused by Barnes X bullets. It wasn't there before firing the X bullets, and it didn't take but a few.

This is not hearsay.

Curl




I seem to remember you posting that back in the day!

Do you know/remember if the rifle in question had been re-blued? Older gun/newer gun?


Postman
(.375 member)
09/10/19 03:17 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

All I can say is that I have seen it, and it was caused by Barnes X bullets. It wasn't there before firing the X bullets, and it didn't take but a few.

This is not hearsay.

Curl




I seem to remember you posting that back in the day!

Do you know/remember if the rifle in question had been re-blued? Older gun/newer gun?




I too have PERSONALLY experienced OSR on my rifle..., A brand spanking new Weatherby MK V in .378. The culprit? Barnes X. The Hornady Interlocks shot fine and I got it sighted in with them. Back home for a cleaning. Barrel wiped and polished with a soft oily cloth, nice and shiny beautiful deep blueing removing the unsightly finger prints from the surface.

Then to the range with a fist full of 300 grain Barnes X..... back home for another cleaning and voila! Lovely spirals matching the rifling clearly visible in the blueing on the entire outside length of the barrel starting from just ahead of the chamber. I wish they had come up with the stress relief grooved bore rider design BEFORE I pooched a beautiful rifle with this original Barnes X. I would still own that rifle had it not been destroyed like that.

Believe it or not.

OSR DOES exist as a very real phenomena. I just recently raised an eyebrow in another recent post when I found a Woodleigh Hydro that had both riveted and bent after having hit a hippo broadside shoulder shot, the bullet taking a sharp right hand turn and somehow ending up in the neck. The hippo expired (obviously since I was able to recover the bullet!), but I think that with both stress relief grooves and the somewhat softer alloy of the Hydro, I am confident in shooting them in modern doubles without complete fear of OSR, although to be honest, I sure do spend a great deal of time looking for OSR to see if I’ve managed to damage a fine double..... so far, so good. Whether a riveted bent Hydro causes me calamity via angry big biting stomping animal violence is the opposite side of the hard/soft equation, but I believe this was an anomaly under extenuating circumstance and I tend to think the Woodleigh people have struck a reasonable balance with their alloy and grooved design.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
09/10/19 03:38 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:


I too have PERSONALLY experienced OSR on my rifle..., A brand spanking new Weatherby MK V in .378. The culprit? Barnes X. The Hornady Interlocks shot fine and I got it sighted in with them. Back home for a cleaning. Barrel wiped and polished with a soft oily cloth, nice and shiny beautiful deep blueing removing the unsightly finger prints from the surface.

Then to the range with a fist full of 300 grain Barnes X..... back home for another cleaning and voila! Lovely spirals matching the rifling clearly visible in the blueing on the entire outside length of the barrel starting from just ahead of the chamber. I wish they had come up with the stress relief grooved bore rider design BEFORE I pooched a beautiful rifle with this original Barnes X. I would still own that rifle had it not been destroyed like that.

Believe it or not.




Did you take any measurements of the barrel exterior to see if there was any variation between what would be the grooves and pressed-out lands and or internal slugging to determine if any interior change occurred?

Seems like these questions have been asked before w/ non-committal responses. I just can't remember. If there aren't any dimensional differences, might one conjure variable heat stress showing in color of steel? But how many would have to have been shot in what time to generate something of that sort? Who knows.

But certainly the latter, as I've mentioned in the past, gives cause for pause thinking of all the billions of French solid brass 8mm Lebel bullets sent down range in everything from bolt guns to Hotchkiss machine guns as well as some of the early steel-core HARD AP military rounds that might have been shoved thru low-end tolerance mil barrels.

The mystery goes on!!

And on!!


DarylS
(.700 member)
09/10/19 04:44 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Yes - lots of questions. .5's with steel cores, .223 with tungsten cores - same deal. Is ball 7.63x39 ball lead or steel core?

Postman
(.375 member)
09/10/19 04:47 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:


I too have PERSONALLY experienced OSR on my rifle..., A brand spanking new Weatherby MK V in .378. The culprit? Barnes X. The Hornady Interlocks shot fine and I got it sighted in with them. Back home for a cleaning. Barrel wiped and polished with a soft oily cloth, nice and shiny beautiful deep blueing removing the unsightly finger prints from the surface.

Then to the range with a fist full of 300 grain Barnes X..... back home for another cleaning and voila! Lovely spirals matching the rifling clearly visible in the blueing on the entire outside length of the barrel starting from just ahead of the chamber. I wish they had come up with the stress relief grooved bore rider design BEFORE I pooched a beautiful rifle with this original Barnes X. I would still own that rifle had it not been destroyed like that.

Believe it or not.




Did you take any measurements of the barrel exterior to see if there was any variation between what would be the grooves and pressed-out lands and or internal slugging to determine if any interior change occurred?

Seems like these questions have been asked before w/ non-committal responses. I just can't remember. If there aren't any dimensional differences, might one conjure variable heat stress showing in color of steel? But how many would have to have been shot in what time to generate something of that sort? Who knows.

But certainly the latter, as I've mentioned in the past, gives cause for pause thinking of all the billions of French solid brass 8mm Lebel bullets sent down range in everything from bolt guns to Hotchkiss machine guns as well as some of the early steel-core HARD AP military rounds that might have been shoved thru low-end tolerance mil barrels.

The mystery goes on!!

And on!!





And on and on and on. As memory serves, I shot maybe 20 rounds of the Barnes..... Not very many at all. It was around 18 years ago, I was much younger and far less affluent to the point that buying a ‘bee MK V was the outer edge of financial extravagance, one which I could not afford at the time and certainly not one I could afford to ruin the second trip to the range with it. Nope, I did not take measurements but I did stare at it a hundred ways to Sunday and it didn’t appear in the least as a simple discolouration. To these eye it looked raised and certainly NOT a normal barrel. At the time it did not occur to me to measure it, in no way anticipating having this “he said, she said” debate on an Internet forum. Down the highway it went as fast as I could churn it. .

Looking back, some of my rifles now are far more expensive, but I will avoid like the plague trying to recreate that experiment in any event. Maybe some members here with a scientific bent can find a good donor rifle and a few boxes of the old original non-stress grooved Barnes X, and go to the range with a micrometer?



9.3x57
(.450 member)
09/10/19 05:14 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Yes - lots of questions. .5's with steel cores, .223 with tungsten cores - same deal. Is ball 7.63x39 ball lead or steel core?




Ball 7.62x39 varies, some mild steel core, some lead.

Generally, there is a lead sheath of varying thickness between the core and jacket, allowing impression of the lands into the bullet. However, some hard-core bullets are said to be VERY hard indeed and of course these bullets are known to increase wear on barrels as well.

Even so, one wonders how hard {really, difficult to engrave} such bullets would be compared to the Barnes or other monos.

What's a bummer is that it seems that every time we find an OSR'd barrel, measurements or other observation for those of us who have never seen it is, for some reason, not possible. IIRC, Mark Cash did post a pic of one back in antiquity, but I don't recall the details, nor do I remember if there were any dimensional changes noted.


3DogMike
(.400 member)
09/10/19 05:26 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Graeme Wright's book "Shooting the British Double Rifle" , 3rd Edition, Chapter 13 has a decent discussion about barrel damage due to various suspected causes.
Would I shoot modern "solids" in my vintage doubles? No.....
- Mike


Postman
(.375 member)
09/10/19 10:12 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

Yes - lots of questions. .5's with steel cores, .223 with tungsten cores - same deal. Is ball 7.63x39 ball lead or steel core?





What's a bummer is that it seems that every time we find an OSR'd barrel, measurements or other observation for those of us who have never seen it is, for some reason, not possible. IIRC, Mark Cash did post a pic of one back in antiquity, but I don't recall the details, nor do I remember if there were any dimensional changes noted.




I wish I could show you that Weatherby barrel, particularly because it was so blatantly obvious to the naked eye. I tried a bit of surfing and there isn’t any pics on the net that I’ve managed to uncover. I suppose that this type of barrel ruination must not be terribly common and I sure wish it hadn’t happened to me because I had a really powerful attachment to that Weatherby with the idle dreams of the young to one day somehow hunt Africa with it. Don’t know what else to tell you.... It happened to MY rifle and I dumped it with a broken heart. People can shoot whatever they want through their guns and disbelieve that OSR even exists, but I’ve learned my lesson.

So as curiosity killed the cat, I couldn’t sit still and went to dig out the remaining Barnes X bullets that I knew I’ve been sitting on since dumping the Weatherby. They measure out at 0.3741 or 0.3742..... Hard to tell with the .001 increment Starrett dial micrometer, but it is definitely at least 0.0001 bigger than 0.3740. The box is labelled as follows:

50 BULLETS
37585
375cal. 375dia.
270GR “X”
CANNELURED
938/1 9/1/98

It appears that at some point I consolidated the partially finished 1st box as there are 71 bullets in this box, ergo it is probable I fired 29 of them in that Weatherby .378.

And that’s all I’ve got in forensic material other than my memory and my Internet say so concerning what I experienced wrt to OSR.


DarylS
(.700 member)
09/10/19 11:05 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response


I've shot 50 rounds of TSX bullets through my .375 at mostly 2,650fps to highest speed 2,740fps for just a few. 'Course, these were grooved. No damage I guess as rifle is curently shooting into just under 2" at 200 meters with Norma RN's, at 2,410fps, using 56gr. Re#15.

The barrel is a mite heavier than light sporter weight - about a #3 Shilen (magnum) taper.

This really doesn't mean anything, just that the Barnes TSX's went into small cloverleafs mostly. I shouldn't have wasted them shooting tiny groups. Oh well - got a bunch of 300's and 310gr. cast to shoot.
Full case of Trail Boss runs 1,385fps with the 310gr. cast FN's. Good deer load, I guess.


Ash
(.400 member)
09/10/19 11:52 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Woodleighs, all ya need, ever, for anything.

Postman
(.375 member)
10/10/19 04:24 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Woodleighs, all ya need, ever, for anything.




Yes, I’m becoming a Woodleigh believer.... But I still like the TTSX & Banded Solids, Partitions, and A-Frames. I’ve not shot the Swift copycat Breakaways.


Rule303
(.416 member)
10/10/19 07:55 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Woodleigh make their Solids a few thou undersized so as to help avoid barrel stress problems.

Until now I had not heard of a Hydro bending or going off course. I have seen them start to rivet but not badly. Might have been a faulty batch????


9.3x57
(.450 member)
10/10/19 07:59 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Woodleigh make their Solids a few thou undersized so as to help avoid barrel stress problems.

Until now I had not heard of a Hydro bending or going off course. I have seen them start to rivet but not badly. Might have been a faulty batch????




Help me out here.

I have little experience with Woodleighs, just some softs I tested years back and also the Hydros, but as for the solids, none.

What is Woodleigh jacket material made of? Seems there are two types or something, a regular and a extra-hard jacket?


tinker
(.416 member)
10/10/19 12:23 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:


What is Woodleigh jacket material made of? Seems there are two types or something, a regular and a extra-hard jacket?




Years ago the Woodleigh 458 350gr SNRN had been suggested to me as a good candidate for the black powder express. I got a box, tried them, and I was immediately struck with how hard they were. I sectioned one and compared the jacket and core hardness to the Hornady of similar weight and design. The W bullet was much harder than the H bullet.

Following up I later learned that there was a 350 SNRN designed for BPE loads and there was a 350 SNRN designed for the 458 Winchester loads. I never ended up sourcing any of the softer W bullets for comparison, as the H bullet is cheap and easy to get here in North America.

There might be other examples of the W softs where "some are softer than others"...


3DogMike
(.400 member)
10/10/19 01:44 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

The whole OSR thing seems to me to be roughly similar (I said "similar" not exactly the same) to the early on problems encountered with steel shot in vintage shotgun chokes and visibly ringing the choke forcing cone onto the exterior of the barrels.
More modern steel and harder steel choke tubes have eliminated this problem.
The older shotguns, just like "vintage" double rifles have to be careful not to use "harder, less malleable" projectiles.
That's my opinion and 2 cents.....

- Mike


9.3x57
(.450 member)
10/10/19 01:47 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:


What is Woodleigh jacket material made of? Seems there are two types or something, a regular and a extra-hard jacket?




Years ago the Woodleigh 458 350gr SNRN had been suggested to me as a good candidate for the black powder express. I got a box, tried them, and I was immediately struck with how hard they were. I sectioned one and compared the jacket and core hardness to the Hornady of similar weight and design. The W bullet was much harder than the H bullet.

Following up I later learned that there was a 350 SNRN designed for BPE loads and there was a 350 SNRN designed for the 458 Winchester loads. I never ended up sourcing any of the softer W bullets for comparison, as the H bullet is cheap and easy to get here in North America.

There might be other examples of the W softs where "some are softer than others"...




That's pretty interesting.

So there is something to it.

"Use Woodleighs" might be the wrong advice. Maybe "Use the right Woodleighs" is better.


Rule303
(.416 member)
10/10/19 07:56 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Woodleigh Solids have a copper jacket over a Steel jacket containing a lead core from memory.

Postman
(.375 member)
11/10/19 12:47 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Woodleigh make their Solids a few thou undersized so as to help avoid barrel stress problems.

Until now I had not heard of a Hydro bending or going off course. I have seen them start to rivet but not badly. Might have been a faulty batch????




I must preface this post with a disclaimer that I have had little experience hunting Africa, and much less experience hunting the big boys..... My sampling size is thus very small, but is simply one data point in a broader discussion.


Take a look at the pics that Daryl graciously posted for me a few posts back in this thread. From the hippo, out of the 10 or so fired, only 2 Hydros were recovered and are shown in the posted photo. The rest were passthroughs. Dead is dead so I can’t say the bullet “failed”. I can say that it didn’t perform quite as expected. The small amount of riveting witnessed is probably not a really big deal, certainly not compared to the handful of Hornady DGS retrieved from previous hunts that the PH showed me that were twisted up, shredded, and otherwise mangled. The bending of the hydro was not terribly impressive though.

When shooting really truly heavy game, it would be really hard to make a bullet that works perfectly in game but does not inflict grievous harm to an expensive barrel set. The one Barnes Banded solid that I have recovered from an earlier hunt, having passed from brisket to deep in the soggy chewed grasses inside a buffalo, and all others witnessed by my PH as he related to me, looked perfect save for rifling marks. They are solid enough to withstand deformation, but just maybe a bit too hard for an older double? The Woodleighs are specifically designed to not harm the older doubles as I understand it, and maybe that’s what is the deciding factor when they cooked up the alloy?

When loading the traditional Woodleigh Steel jacket solids along side the Hydros, one can hear, and feel the difference between the two upon firing, with the traditional steel jacket solids making a much sharper “crack” and recoiling more, given similar loadings. At least to me this means higher pressure with the steel core solids.

I’ll opt for the Hydros for buffalo followups, although I just may select the Barnes Banded solids for elephant or hippo if ever again I am afforded opportunity to hunt these very large beasts.

The hydros give me a sense of confidence that my rifle barrel will not likely be harmed. The Banded Solids give me confidence that I won’t be harmed and situation dependent, I may not give a damn about the gun barrel.


Rule303
(.416 member)
11/10/19 08:41 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Postman, I am not doubting what you say at all. I have taken two Elephant and one Cape Buffalo with 416 Hydros. All one shot kills. The Buff was not quite square on from the front about 50mts and ran about 50mts. Took the top of his heart after going through the first rib, ended up just shy of the skin in his rump after going through the pelvic bone. Some riveting but a straight line.

My PH on my first trip had shot a Buff with a 458Lott and Hydro. Went in through the brain, out the neck, reentered and through the spine ended up in down the back somewhere.

The Elephants were brain shots and projectiles not recovered. I like the hydros for a couple of reasons. They travel in a straight direction even if hitting something before hitting the animal and create a bigger wound channel than other solid type bullets. I will now in all but one instance I know of.

Some monometals are bore riders. That is the band is grove size and the rest if bore size. Some are grove size with the groves of the projectile machined into it, if this makes sense. The bore riders create less pressure all things being even.

Postman I would write to Woodleigh and send a pic of the hydro. They are always interested in analyzing what happens with their product.


Postman
(.375 member)
11/10/19 09:55 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Hi Rule303:

I will keep using the Hydros as I don’t think my limited experience is enough to pass firm judgement. I’ve seen a few pics of them here on the NE forum retrieved from game and other than the rifling marks, the only deformation sometimes evident was a slight bending of the lip of the nose cup. This slight bending of the lip was also evident in my other hydro retrieved from the inside of the off shoulder and was something I would fully expect to see in any event.

Your description of bore rider is in alignment with my understanding of the design.

As to the straight line penetration, yes, it is entirely possible that my one Hydro in question entered at a quartering away presentation and ended up forward in the neck. Things happen very fast with a dry land hippo heading for water at full tilt, and my sample size of one riveted and bent bullet is too small to draw any firm conclusions. I do feel however that the Hydros are not over stressing my rifle barrels, whereas other solids may not be so kind and this is a good thing!

Either way, a hunter can’t go too far wrong with a Hydro or a Barnes banded solid in a good modern double.


CptCurlAdministrator
(.450 member)
11/10/19 11:41 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

I posted this on October 24, 2009:

Quote:

In reading this thread two things are immediately apparent. First, 9.3x57 is not a double rifle owner, but he should be. Second, 9.3x57 is from Missouri. To believe in the existence of OSR he must be shown.

I suggest this test. It will be 9.3’s task to get Barnes to agree to participate. We can hammer out all the details once they are on board.

First both Barnes and 9.3 deposit with me the full cost of a new Chapuis double rifle in 9.3x74R. I will place the funds in escrow in my professional trust account.

Next, procure a brand new Chapuis double rifle in 9.3x74R from Champlin Arms, an authorized distributor. The rifle will be paid for using funds from the escrow deposit.

Third, load 200 rounds of ammunition using brand new brass, an appropriate powder charge known not to produce excess pressure, and topped with the old style "X" bullets.

Lastly, fire the rounds in the Chapuis with both 9.3 and Barnes' representative present. Carefully avoid over-heating the barrels, and clean them every 20 rounds. This should be a fun day of shooting.

The entire test is to be conducted under the supervision of J. J. Perodeau, and I suppose it all shall occur in or near Enid, OK. 400NitroExpress will be invited to attend, and I will be invited also. We may help you shoot up the ammo if asked.

J. J. will carefully inspect the barrels when new, before the test, and then again following the test. He will determine whether any OSR or other damage has occurred. I don't think his qualifications for the task can be questioned.

If in the end the barrels visibly show OSR or other damage then Barnes pays for the rifle and all the ammo and posts an appropriate confession on its website. Barnes gets to keep the rifle. 9.3 gets his money back from my escrow deposit.

If no OSR or other damage is visible, then 9.3 pays for the rifle and all ammo, and he keeps the rifle. Barnes gets its money back from the escrow deposit. In that event 9.3 becomes the newest member of DRSS. It will be a truly great step for him.

In either event, the occasion will be reported in minute detail here on NE.com.

Before this goes any further, let me say I am a strong believer in OSR. I think the chance that 9.3 will have to buy the rifle is practically nil.

Rod, you have been in contact with Barnes. You get them to agree to these terms, and we're on. What say ye?

Curl






The above quote is a challenge I posted to this very thread nearly 10 years ago, on October 24, 2009. You can go back and find it like I just did. I still think it is a fair challenge. There was no response to my challenge. I suppose Barnes didn't want to take the risk.

Notice that the challenge involved the old Barnes "X" bullets. Those are the culprits that put spiral marks on a lot of double rifle barrels.

Curl


Postman
(.375 member)
12/10/19 12:37 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response



Dear Mr Curl:


Reading your post immediately previous to this response just caused me to spit my coffee out all over my new silk tie and custom tailored shirt and the pants of my expensive favourite suit!!!!!

You sir, have given me a great big belly laugh!!!!!

I am NOT from Missouri, but as the southern Baptist preacher did declare: “Ahhhh Beeeleeeve!”

Best,

Postman


3DogMike
(.400 member)
12/10/19 12:45 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:



Dear Mr Curl:
........ to this response just caused me to spit my coffee out all over my new silk tie and custom tailored shirt a.......

Postman



Let’s just hope it was not a nice Jerry Garcia silk tie!


9.3x57
(.450 member)
12/10/19 08:29 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

That was a good one, too.

I don't dis-believe in OSR, but I have yet to be shown the actual mechanism that causes it. By that I don't mean "hard bullets", I mean how a "brass bullet" actually passes the length of a barrel causing the lands to impress outward evenly and produce the "swirl effect" on the outside.

I did contact Barnes and I forget all the but IIRC, they were willing to test the theory on a barrel turned to "double" diameter.

BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW, THEY NEVER DID IT.


Postman
(.375 member)
12/10/19 09:54 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

The mechanism? i.e., as in a science based explanation as to what causes OSR? I too would like to understand it as would many others I’m sure.

Maybe an oversized hard bullet somehow “irons” the bore and displaces metal when the elastic properties of the barrel steel is overcome or exceeded. Maybe because the barrel lands are not able to displace the bullet material because there just isn’t enough space/time to displace bullet material and all things being equal, the barrel loses the battle? Or maybe it has nothing directly to do with the hardness of the bullet as surely high grade super strong modern barrel steel is far and away harder than the brass or bronze bullets with no stress grooves that seem to be the catalyst for this anomaly. Maybe the super high pressure wave that follows the bullet as it travels down the bore causes it?

Who knows???

Certainly an explanation as to “why” it happens would be much appreciated..... In lieu of that, I am smart enough to recognize some of the factors that come together to create it and to avoid it like the plague.... once burned, twice shy.

Interestingly enough, for the longest time, nobody knew what caused chamber ringing until some French dude decided to mess with things and set up elaborate controlled experiments with a pressure vessel. Now any reloader with half a brain knows not to stoke a large cavernous case with overly light charges of slow powder and they know to ensure that fillers are used in conjunction with reduced loads and appropriate powders. Chamber ringing happens due to a pressure wave of expanding gasses violently colliding with the bullet base..... who would have thought that expanding gasses could move chamber steel like that?


DarylS
(.700 member)
12/10/19 09:59 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

OSR might be the "cause" of grooved mono-bullets & not only by Barnes. Seems to me, the North-Forks were grooved from their inception though, ahead of the Barnes TSX's and banded solids.

9.3x57
(.450 member)
12/10/19 11:10 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

The mechanism? i.e., as in a science based explanation as to what causes OSR? I too would like to understand it as would many others I’m sure.

Maybe an oversized hard bullet somehow “irons” the bore and displaces metal when the elastic properties of the barrel steel is overcome or exceeded. Maybe because the barrel lands are not able to displace the bullet material because there just isn’t enough space/time to displace bullet material and all things being equal, the barrel loses the battle? Or maybe it has nothing directly to do with the hardness of the bullet as surely high grade super strong modern barrel steel is far and away harder than the brass or bronze bullets with no stress grooves that seem to be the catalyst for this anomaly. Maybe the super high pressure wave that follows the bullet as it travels down the bore causes it?

Who knows???

Certainly an explanation as to “why” it happens would be much appreciated..... In lieu of that, I am smart enough to recognize some of the factors that come together to create it and to avoid it like the plague.... once burned, twice shy.

Interestingly enough, for the longest time, nobody knew what caused chamber ringing until some French dude decided to mess with things and set up elaborate controlled experiments with a pressure vessel. Now any reloader with half a brain knows not to stoke a large cavernous case with overly light charges of slow powder and they know to ensure that fillers are used in conjunction with reduced loads and appropriate powders. Chamber ringing happens due to a pressure wave of expanding gasses violently colliding with the bullet base..... who would have thought that expanding gasses could move chamber steel like that?




Ditto.

For example, a brass mallet can BEND a strip or plate of steel place over the jaws of an open vise. But a brass blade cannot cut steel. So the mechanism must be something approaching the former and absolutely not having anything to do with the latter. The problem Daryl and I tried to present a long time ago was how a brass bullet could pass thru and cause an EVEN displacement of land metal when it would seem the rifling would...get ready for it...CUT...grooves in the brass bullet within the first inch or several of the barrel. Now, if the lands do not CUT the brass bullet, then the displacement might occur by the bending mechanism we see above.

So..................................

Would round cut or otherwise rounded {worn, corroded, etc} lands then be subject to pressure that would cause the collapse of the barrel walls a la the bending mechanism of the brass hammer/sheet steel?

I don't know. It would be interesting to find out if NEW {sharp-land} barrels are LESS susceptible to OSR than old {or rounded-land} barrels.

Quote:

OSR might be the "cause" of grooved mono-bullets & not only by Barnes. Seems to me, the North-Forks were grooved from their inception though, ahead of the Barnes TSX's and banded solids.




Ding-Ding-Ding!!

Daryl always comes thru.

It was the North forks I could send thru my sizer.


Rule303
(.416 member)
12/10/19 08:18 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

There are a couple of south African bullet manufacturers that make banded type solids. From what I can gather they use a different material to the Hydros. I'll google them when i have some time.

tinker
(.416 member)
12/10/19 10:58 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

GS Custom is another of the smaller builders of driving band mono solids. They started in '97


http://www.gscustomusa.com/fn.html

Here is their South Africa website, the home of the business.

http://www.gsgroup.co.za/12about.html


Postman
(.375 member)
13/10/19 04:06 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

“I don't know. It would be interesting to find out if NEW {sharp-land} barrels are LESS susceptible to OSR than old {or rounded-land} barrels. ”



NOPE!!! The OSR I personally experienced was with a brand spanking NEW Weatherby MK V in .378 Weatherby. Hardly a worn out soft steel equipped withering flower of a rifle....

I really think OSR results from high pressure caused by a bullet that does not allow the barrel lands to properly displace the bullet material, either through or due to a combination of hardness, size and design. It is generally desirable to use non jacketed lead bullets oversized by 0.001 or 0.002, and these bullets do not cause OSR.

In the case of monometal solids, they are far harder than plain lead bullets, or gilded jacket bullets. My hypothesis is that the barrel lands simply cannot displace the monometal bullet material appropriately and or quickly enough and maybe an overly high pressure wave follows the bullet on it’s path all the way down the tube, displacing barrel steel all along the way. This doesn't seem to happen with monometal bullets equipped with stress relief grooves, and following the hypothesis above, they simply do not cause high pressures of examples with no stress grooves......

Without an elaborate test scenario to back up or test out the hypothesis, we may never know. Suffice to understand the Barnes X without stress relief grooves will almost certainly bugger your barrel.


NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
13/10/19 10:00 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

This doesn't seem to happen with monometal bullets equipped with stress relief grooves, and following the hypothesis above, they simply do not cause high pressures of examples with no stress grooves......





I wouldn't rely on "grooves" in the full calibre width of the bullet one little bit. Instead the best monometal bullet examples have RAISED bands with the 'shank' being sub calibre. The rifling can groove the rainsed bands without excessive pressure or displacement. The grooves hardly change it at all. My hypothesis.

Interesting you observed the OSR on a bolt action Weatherby. Usually the reports of it are on much thinner barrelled multi barrel firearms.


Postman
(.375 member)
13/10/19 11:39 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

This doesn't seem to happen with monometal bullets equipped with stress relief grooves, and following the hypothesis above, they simply do not cause high pressures of examples with no stress grooves......





I wouldn't rely on "grooves" in the full calibre width of the bullet one little bit. Instead the best monometal bullet examples have RAISED bands with the 'shank' being sub calibre. The rifling can groove the rainsed bands without excessive pressure or displacement. The grooves hardly change it at all. My hypothesis.

Interesting you observed the OSR on a bolt action Weatherby. Usually the reports of it are on much thinner barrelled multi barrel firearms.




Yes John, you are correct and have sharpened the point quite accurately. Bore rider mono-metals are the ONLY bullet one would want to use if one is to use monometals. Simply carving a few grooves in a full caliber width bullet would give me no comfort whatsoever.

Yes, my first rifle bigger than a small bore (aka typical North American 30 cal love affair, aka .30-06, .30-30, .303, and a 7mm Rem mag thrown in for fun) was that brand spanking new .378 Weatherby and yes, it died a horrible and premature death due to OSR. Weatherby used nothing but forged rifling barrels at that time. It had incredible deep deep blueing and gorgeous pimped out beautifully figured wood that would make the most hardened person cry. And I killed it. I bought it in October, joined my first gun club in December of that year so I'd have a place to shoot it, and by January it was royally fucked with OSR. The only good thing that came out of it was that the gun club I joined because of it, started me on 20+ years of formal competitive shooting of all sorts.


NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
14/10/19 12:19 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

SAD! Big gun to shoot at a range! .378 Weatherby. Ouch. :O

I assume there was no functional problems with the rifle after the OSR? Other than appearance?


Rule303
(.416 member)
14/10/19 09:15 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

GS Custom is another of the smaller builders of driving band mono solids. They started in '97


http://www.gscustomusa.com/fn.html

Here is their South Africa website, the home of the business.

http://www.gsgroup.co.za/12about.html




They are one of the companies I was trying to remember. Also Impala Bullets, Peregrine and Rhino Bullets.


Rule303
(.416 member)
14/10/19 09:32 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

This doesn't seem to happen with monometal bullets equipped with stress relief grooves, and following the hypothesis above, they simply do not cause high pressures of examples with no stress grooves......





I wouldn't rely on "grooves" in the full calibre width of the bullet one little bit. Instead the best monometal bullet examples have RAISED bands with the 'shank' being sub calibre. The rifling can groove the rainsed bands without excessive pressure or displacement. The grooves hardly change it at all. My hypothesis.

Interesting you observed the OSR on a bolt action Weatherby. Usually the reports of it are on much thinner barrelled multi barrel firearms.




John I read an article from Barnes when they first brought out the banded bullets. It claimed the groves were cut into the full sized-grove sized - bullet to allow the displaced material from the lands to fill into. Like you I would have no real confidence in this.

I must add that I can not remember moist of that article so it may well have gone on to say that was a trail only set up. Can anybody tell me if the current Barnes X bullets are bore riders or full size.


jvw
(.275 member)
14/10/19 05:38 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

The other SA manufacturer of banded solids is Dzombo. They actually supply the bullets used by the Kruger National Park rangers. A lot of Dzombo's are used on buff, ele, hippo and other critters every year.

NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
14/10/19 05:52 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

This doesn't seem to happen with monometal bullets equipped with stress relief grooves, and following the hypothesis above, they simply do not cause high pressures of examples with no stress grooves......





I wouldn't rely on "grooves" in the full calibre width of the bullet one little bit. Instead the best monometal bullet examples have RAISED bands with the 'shank' being sub calibre. The rifling can groove the rainsed bands without excessive pressure or displacement. The grooves hardly change it at all. My hypothesis.

Interesting you observed the OSR on a bolt action Weatherby. Usually the reports of it are on much thinner barrelled multi barrel firearms.




John I read an article from Barnes when they first brought out the banded bullets. It claimed the groves were cut into the full sized-grove sized - bullet to allow the displaced material from the lands to fill into. Like you I would have no real confidence in this.

I must add that I can not remember moist of that article so it may well have gone on to say that was a trail only set up. Can anybody tell me if the current Barnes X bullets are bore riders or full size.




NOTE to qualify my stated opinion on not relying on the grooves. The comment was limited to use on non raised banded monometal bullets in thin walled barrels such as might be on a double rifle, combination rifle, some single shots etc.

On MOST bolt action and modern rifles with thicker barrels and good modern steels, they probably are not an issue.

I've used some of these eg Barnes X, without an issue in bolt action rifles with thicker barrels.

However it should be noted the earlier comment where OSR was observed to occur on a Weatherby .378 bolt action rifle.

Personally I do like good old lead core projectiles on good controlled expansion design. These may not be an option in all legal jurisdictions nowadays due to the idiocy of some lawmakers.


Postman
(.375 member)
14/10/19 11:02 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

SAD! Big gun to shoot at a range! .378 Weatherby. Ouch. :O

I assume there was no functional problems with the rifle after the OSR? Other than appearance?




I was much younger then with dreams of Africa dancing about my brain - I was and am a big Capstick fan. Gotta start somewhere, and getting a suitable rifle seemed to be a good first step. Don’t know where else I’d have shot any of my rifles? Maybe in a Walmart parking lot in downtown Toronto? I don’t live on a farm in the middle of nowhere, and unless I’m willing to drive 5+ hours directly north, there is nowhere to shoot around my home. Even going north, one just can’t go blazing away without Smokey the Bear showing up and grilling you and putting you on the spot to prove you’re not poaching. Thus, go to a range or don’t shoot. THAT is sad, but it is reality.

Anyhow, the rifle was functional afterwards, but my level of trust in it’s viability as safe to shoot was disrupted, not to mention my absolute horror at the destruction of it’s appearance. I did not and do not know if OSR destroys a rifle barrel integrity or if one can continue to shoot it until the barrel is worn out or shot out. In any event, my sense of self preservation suggests to me that firing what might cause grievous harm to my well being is not a terribly bright idea.


DarylS
(.700 member)
15/10/19 03:31 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

If the law on rifles is the same as when I lived back there, nothing South of Peterborough, Ontario seems to me, over 6.5mm, hence the "drive North".

Too, it's all farm country & you can just about see your neighbours in every direction, but a lot less daily farms than when I was living there.


Postman
(.375 member)
15/10/19 07:20 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

If the law on rifles is the same as when I lived back there, nothing South of Peterborough, Ontario seems to me, over 6.5mm, hence the "drive North".

Too, it's all farm country & you can just about see your neighbours in every direction, but a lot less daily farms than when I was living there.




Thats correct Daryl..... Nothing over .275” south of the French and Mattawa Rivers, so that means anything less than a .270 Winchester If and only IF you have some land to shoot it on..... It’s pretty much all private with crown land difficult to find or access without a major excursion northwards..... The caliber restriction really relates back to the game laws more than anything. I have a small game license and there’s usually something in season, whether it be crows or rabbits, so there is a bit of freedom, but any caliber of substance is an issue as is land to shoot on.

So, gun clubs are where we go and I shoot whatever I like from .22 to .500 Nitro... It’s my shoulder to do with as I please, The reality is that if you don’t get regular practice with your field guns, you will not be as sharp with it as you should when you do get opportunity to be in the field with it.


9.3x57
(.450 member)
15/10/19 08:38 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Why, guys?

Do they really think a 140 grain 6.5 is safer or has less range than a 180 grain .30-06? Or is it something else?


DarylS
(.700 member)
15/10/19 12:22 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Had to so with .303 and '06 hard ball bouncing around the farm land I assume. I guess 6.5x55 FMJ stuff is OK?

I'd forgotten about the actual calibre, I thought the regs. used to say nothing larger than .270, but of course, the .270 shoots a .277" bullet, but I guess it's OK.

I used a 6.5 Rem. Mag. for wood chucks in Middlesex and Oxford counties when I was a kid (post high school). Worked a treat on them. In those days, it was dairy country, with lots of grazing fields abounding in ground hogs.


Postman
(.375 member)
15/10/19 09:20 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Quote:

Why, guys?

Do they really think a 140 grain 6.5 is safer or has less range than a 180 grain .30-06? Or is it something else?




It doesn’t matter much what I think. Because it’s a government derived regulation is your first indication that it makes no sense whatsoever, but Daryl is right. It has everything to do with worries about ricochets etc. The farms here are typically and on average 100 acres each. Some a little bigger, some a little smaller. The laws go back to the days where small high velocity bullets were much more frangible than they are today, and the ubiquitous and extremely common in large quantities army surplus .303 etc was mostly FMJ. High population density farm land and high powered rifles are not a great mix. There is ongoing argument about whether a .270 Winchester is legal to shoot in southern Ontario, but because it is .277”, it does indeed exceed the legal limit of .275”. The law was written to state that “in southern Ontario, it is not permitted to use a caliber of .275” or greater to hunt small game.”. Then in next section it goes on to detail what types of firearms are legal to hunt big game in all the counties in southern Ontario - mostly bow, muzzle loaders and shotgun only seasons with high powered centre-fire rifles mostly excluded.

Long story short, one cannot go about firing centre fire rifles as one pleases in southern Ontario. Need practice with that .500 Nitro Express? Sure, then join a gun club. I don’t like it, but it is what it is, so off to the range I go to piss off all the fudds shooting their .30-30s, and the target guys shooting their target .22 rifles. I shoot what I like and I like big bores. I want to hunt with them and I question the marksmanship capabilities of a man who dusts their rifle off once a year, scrapes the old mold off the lead tip with a fingernail, shoots one or two rounds off a rest to see if it hits a rock on out yonder, and calls it good for deer season. I firmly believe that one MUST practice practice practice in order to achieve and maintain a reasonable level of marksmanship with whatever a man chooses to shoot.


DarylS
(.700 member)
16/10/19 01:23 AM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Ditto. Was out yesterday with both the 6.5x55 and the .260 Rem.

Postman
(.375 member)
16/10/19 08:12 PM
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

Love those 6.5 calibers!!! I use a Grendel as my primary hunting rifle these days and a .260 Remington as my “heavy” deer rifle.


Contact Us NitroExpress.com

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact


Copyright 2003 to 2011 - all rights reserved