As far as a scientifically valid sample goes, you are correct. As far as empirical evidence goes, not so much. Bell and Armbrust tested a small range of guns/barrels they had on hand. Their results fairly well validated those of the Birmingham Proof House. The results also underwrite practical evidence in the real world. A famous British barrelmaker I know has a drawer full of ruined Damascus, Twist and fluid steel barrels. All of the composite barrels failed via bulges and minor splits. The fluid steel barrels simply blew open violently.
Is this scientific proof of anything? Certainly not. But for my part, I'd rather be behind a composite barrel when it fails rather than a fluid steel one... slip-and-fall lawyers aside that is.
|
Threaded Mode