Quote:

---

Can see the point of explaining things - but its still a criminal waste of a good action!

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Purely a guess here but I am thinking that it will digest any "normal" ammunition you put through it.
The back surface of the top bolt lug is still intact and short of a case failure (which I doubt will happen too), I'm not thinking it will blow.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Purely a guess here but I am thinking that it will digest any "normal" ammunition you put through it.
The back surface of the top bolt lug is still intact and short of a case failure (which I doubt will happen too), I'm not thinking it will blow.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Purely a guess here but I am thinking that it will digest any "normal" ammunition you put through it.
The back surface of the top bolt lug is still intact and short of a case failure (which I doubt will happen too), I'm not thinking it will blow.

---

I fail to see why a cartridge fired in a chamber with the top portion cut away would not "blow". How can someone expect a brass cartridge case to resist 50,000 pounds per square inch exerted by firing the cartridge. The principle on which the copper crusher system of chamber pressure measurement is based assumes that the cartridge case will give way and propel the piston which crushes the copper cylinder. The diameter of the piston is only a fraction of an inch, but the cartridge case ends up with a hole blown in it corresponding to the size of the hole bored in the chamber to accommodate it.

If you insist on firing this mutilated rifle, I suggest you use a long lanyard and tie the rifle down to a tire carcass.

---

Barrel has been replaced with an 8x57 barrel from a KAR98a.



Edited by UtahShotgunner (09/08/17 01:44 PM)

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Initial testing would be without me holding onto the rifle, ie; proof testing with full power loads and as noted, careful & bloody accurate measuring.

---

I am not going to shoot this from the shoulder.

Quote:

---

A wooden fixture (block of wood) that would hold the stripped action and trigger could be screwed too would be simple.

Will set up the GoPro type cameras and add a long string.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

---

Barrel has been replaced with an 8x57 barrel from a KAR98a.

---

That's what happens when you spend all your time looking at the photos and don't read the text carefully enough. Boy, is my face red!

I think the action will probably do fine. I have seen any number of rifles fitted with German claw mount bases dovetailed into the receiver ring, where the dovetail extended all the way through the receiver wall, exposing the bolt lug recess. Although those rifles would probably not stand up against modern proof loads, they have been in use in the hunting field for decades with no ill effects.

I would still use the lanyard, however.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

G'Day Fella's,

Utah Shotgunner, please don't take this as criticism but it has already been wrecked, I can't see the point in destroying it.

It could still be used for what it was intended for, as a physical example for Show and Tell (but only with Dummy ammo!), for how these things Load (the magazine), Feed, go into Battery, Fire, Unload and Eject ammo/fired cases.
Maybe you could donate it to your local Gun/Hunting Club, for this purpose?


Regards
Homer

---

No worries Homer.

I bought four cutaways. This Mark X, Browning BAR, Rem 700 and a Ruger M77.
Listing the BAR and 700 for sale today. Will probably sell the M77 to a buddy that is a Ruger collector.

Might donate if I could, but gotta pay the bills. . .

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Good on Ya Utah! This will be a great test and I will be very interested to see how it goes. I am of the opinion that it will do fine. I have taken apart many surplus 98's that showed evidence that only one lug was engaged and there was no telling how many shots had been down the bore. Yours still has an undamaged bottom lug/recess. Years ago, when there was a bunch of old Chinese knock-off 98's coming in for next to nothing, I wanted to pick one up and test it to destruction, just to see what they would endure with their primitive metallurgy, but never got around to getting one. I suspect, even they would have surprised us. Looking forward to your report!

---

Kind of wish it was a cheap milsurp as the Mark X is among the strongest (metallurgically) of the 98's made.

If that proves to be the case, I can put it back together and donate it as Homer suggested.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I think the results will be suprising.

Hatcher did some strength testing of Springfield rifles many years ago:

- He turned down the steel over the chamber in stages until it was 1/16" (1.5mm) thick and it withstood the standard 50,000lb (PSI, CUP?) service loads. The 75,000lb proof load blew it out though.

- In other tests the bolt lugs were ground down in stages until they were 0.1" (2.5mm) thick and they functioned fine with the standard service load. The lugs were then ground off completely and the third safety lug kept the bolt in the rifle when a standard service load was fired through it. It was crushed slightly. He then fired a proof load and it sheared the third safety lug off but the bolt only got pushed back 1/2" and got jammed in the rifle.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

UtahShotgunner,

A thought on your head space testing. My understanding when testing head space is that the bolt should be stripped of the striker group and the extractor so they will not impart any friction to the turning of the bolt. The bolt is then allowed to close on it's own without assistance.

The above is not meant as criticism.

Vlad

---

Vlad,

No criticism perceived.

For a quick and dirty check to make sure that headspace is not excessive, I'll use a 'Field' gauge as shown in the pics. If the bolt had come close to closing I would have stripped the extractor for more careful testing.

Actually, in this case I would probably have just grabbed another bolt.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

...

Hatcher and Ackley did some very interesting testing 'back in the day'.

I don't claim to have a tenth of their knowledge or expect to discover anything new. Just hoping to bring some information into the digital age. For shooters who (sadly) have never heard of folks like Hatcher or Ackley.

---

I've only read Hatcher's Notebook and haven't looked at anything by Ackley. The stuff that Hatcher did was more empirical rather than what would be classed as scientific today - he was largely trying things without have a predetermined, expected, calculated result to compare against, but I guess that's how most practical discoveries are made.

I'm sure firearm manufacturers engineer the appropriate safety margins in their design but they'll never divulge this information - I guess for legal reasons for not wanting to have blame their way if someone modifies based on their data.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

What I will be doing is firing a number of factory loads to see if they lead to any failure. If it is still together, I will move 'up' to the hot Turk ammo.

If there is no failure, I could load some rounds over maximum, but without a pressure gun I wouldn't know the failure point.

It is my suspicion that even if I reach the point of case failure, the action will withstand it, even with the top of the front ring milled away.

---

Quote:

---

I am not going to shoot this from the shoulder.

---

Post Extras: