Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact
NitroExpress.com: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response

View recent messages : 24 hours | 48 hours | 7 days | 14 days | 30 days | 60 days | More Smilies


*** Enjoy NitroExpress.com? Participate and join in. ***

Double Rifles, Single Shots & Combinations >> Double Rifles

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | >> (show all)
tinker
.416 member


Reged: 12/03/05
Posts: 4835
Loc: Nevada
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: 9.3x57]
      #144439 - 26/10/09 11:45 AM

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

--------------------
--Self-Appointed Colonel, DRSS--



"It IS a dangerous game, and so named for a reason, and you can't play from the keyboard. " --Some Old Texan...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Huvius
.416 member


Reged: 04/11/07
Posts: 3518
Loc: Colorado
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: tinker]
      #144447 - 26/10/09 12:57 PM

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.

--------------------
He who lives in the past is doomed to enjoy it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
500grains
.416 member


Reged: 16/02/04
Posts: 4732
Loc: Salt Lake City, Utah USA
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: 9.3x57]
      #144452 - 26/10/09 01:31 PM

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.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
9.3x57
.450 member


Reged: 22/04/07
Posts: 5500
Loc: United States
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: 400NitroExpress]
      #144455 - 26/10/09 01:40 PM

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.









--------------------
What are the Rosary, the Cross or the Crucifix other than tools to help maintain the fortress of our faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
9.3x57
.450 member


Reged: 22/04/07
Posts: 5500
Loc: United States
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: 500grains]
      #144456 - 26/10/09 01:44 PM

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.

--------------------
What are the Rosary, the Cross or the Crucifix other than tools to help maintain the fortress of our faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Omnivorous_Bob
.333 member


Reged: 03/10/05
Posts: 285
Loc: Montana
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: Huvius]
      #144458 - 26/10/09 01:49 PM

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.

--------------------
"If we're not supposed to eat animals, how come they're made out of meat?"


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
9.3x57
.450 member


Reged: 22/04/07
Posts: 5500
Loc: United States
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: Omnivorous_Bob]
      #144460 - 26/10/09 02:04 PM

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.

--------------------
What are the Rosary, the Cross or the Crucifix other than tools to help maintain the fortress of our faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
400NitroExpress
.400 member


Reged: 26/11/03
Posts: 1154
Loc: Lone Star State
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: 9.3x57]
      #144462 - 26/10/09 02:46 PM

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.

--------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
9.3x57
.450 member


Reged: 22/04/07
Posts: 5500
Loc: United States
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: 400NitroExpress]
      #144465 - 26/10/09 03:36 PM

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.





--------------------
What are the Rosary, the Cross or the Crucifix other than tools to help maintain the fortress of our faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God?

Edited by 9.3x57 (26/10/09 03:40 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
450_366
.400 member


Reged: 17/01/07
Posts: 1068
Loc: Sweden, west-coast.
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: 9.3x57]
      #144468 - 26/10/09 06:02 PM

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.

--------------------
Andreas

"Yeas it kicks like a mule he said, but always remember that its much worse standing on the other end"


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
400NitroExpress
.400 member


Reged: 26/11/03
Posts: 1154
Loc: Lone Star State
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: 9.3x57]
      #144469 - 26/10/09 06:07 PM

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.

--------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Empire375
.300 member


Reged: 18/08/09
Posts: 239
Loc: Victoria, Australia
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: 400NitroExpress]
      #144475 - 26/10/09 06:36 PM

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 !!!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
500Nitro
.450 member


Reged: 06/01/03
Posts: 7244
Loc: Victoria, Australia
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: Empire375]
      #144476 - 26/10/09 06:41 PM

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.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Empire375
.300 member


Reged: 18/08/09
Posts: 239
Loc: Victoria, Australia
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: 500Nitro]
      #144477 - 26/10/09 07:07 PM

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


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
NitroXAdministrator
.700 member


Reged: 25/12/02
Posts: 39065
Loc: Barossa Valley, South Australi...
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: Empire375]
      #144478 - 26/10/09 07:14 PM

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.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike_Bailey
.400 member


Reged: 26/02/07
Posts: 2289
Loc: GB
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: NitroX]
      #144488 - 26/10/09 08:25 PM

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

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
9.3x57
.450 member


Reged: 22/04/07
Posts: 5500
Loc: United States
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: 400NitroExpress]
      #144495 - 27/10/09 12:52 AM

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.





--------------------
What are the Rosary, the Cross or the Crucifix other than tools to help maintain the fortress of our faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God?

Edited by 9.3x57 (27/10/09 01:06 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Paul
.400 member


Reged: 28/08/07
Posts: 1031
Loc: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: 9.3x57]
      #144496 - 27/10/09 01:09 AM

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


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
CptCurlAdministrator
.450 member


Reged: 01/05/04
Posts: 5268
Loc: Fincastle, Botetourt County, V...
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: Paul]
      #144497 - 27/10/09 01:18 AM

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

--------------------
RoscoeStephenson.com

YOUR DOUBLE RIFLE IS YOUR BEST FRIEND.



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
CptCurlAdministrator
.450 member


Reged: 01/05/04
Posts: 5268
Loc: Fincastle, Botetourt County, V...
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: CptCurl]
      #144498 - 27/10/09 01:22 AM

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

--------------------
RoscoeStephenson.com

YOUR DOUBLE RIFLE IS YOUR BEST FRIEND.



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Huvius
.416 member


Reged: 04/11/07
Posts: 3518
Loc: Colorado
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: CptCurl]
      #144502 - 27/10/09 02:13 AM

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...

--------------------
He who lives in the past is doomed to enjoy it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
SharpsNitro
.375 member


Reged: 12/08/08
Posts: 729
Loc: Arizona, USA
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: Huvius]
      #144504 - 27/10/09 02:27 AM

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?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
9.3x57
.450 member


Reged: 22/04/07
Posts: 5500
Loc: United States
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: SharpsNitro]
      #144505 - 27/10/09 02:35 AM

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...

--------------------
What are the Rosary, the Cross or the Crucifix other than tools to help maintain the fortress of our faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
9.3x57
.450 member


Reged: 22/04/07
Posts: 5500
Loc: United States
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: 9.3x57]
      #144508 - 27/10/09 02:53 AM

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.

--------------------
What are the Rosary, the Cross or the Crucifix other than tools to help maintain the fortress of our faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God?

Edited by 9.3x57 (27/10/09 03:07 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
CptCurlAdministrator
.450 member


Reged: 01/05/04
Posts: 5268
Loc: Fincastle, Botetourt County, V...
Re: OSR, Double Damage and Barnes' Response [Re: Huvius]
      #144509 - 27/10/09 02:59 AM

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

--------------------
RoscoeStephenson.com

YOUR DOUBLE RIFLE IS YOUR BEST FRIEND.



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | >> (show all)



Extra information
0 registered and 62 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  CptCurl 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 204763

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us NitroExpress.com

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact


Copyright 2003 to 2011 - all rights reserved