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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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

Post Extras