60947 Fires it's last shot

[Big Friend Ten (BFT)]

There are plenty of times, especially after a day's work that I am so brain dead that I never reload!
When I do reload I do not even turn on the radio. I want tunnel vision toward my loading!

[OH Osthaus]

if you think "confidence" in your ability is the defining factor - you don't drive on public highways

I load in an area with no distractions and still set rounds aside to pull apart because i did not like the way the wad felt going in or didn't like the crimp.

If something does interrupt me- that round gets rejected

I weigh sample charges often - even if I am sure its the same bushing I used last time. and the left over powder goes back in the can so that i don;t have to remember or trust having labeled the MEC bottle

I shoot reloads in doubles so that I can look down the tubes,

and this stuff still makes me nervous

BTW - having shot flintlocks for years in friendly competitions - every one of the few incidents I saw were due to the loader being distracted in the process.

[Drew Hause]

John: To my knowledge, neither shooter measured the wall thickness nor made any other effort to diagnose the blow out. I contacted the gentleman using the Winchester No-Tox and had no response. That is why I so appreciate that a few fellas were interested enough to send me their barrels for an evaluation, but frustrated in the knowledge that there are a lot more out there and simply for the cost of shipping one way we could develop a data base of 'disasters afield'.

This Sterlingworth had been honed to .739" with resultant wall thickness of .018"



I've got a Smith 4E Chain Damascus getting radiography right now that was honed to .016

[Double Trouble]

Drew: Are you having the barrels radiographed to look for cracks, etc. ? How obvious is a crack in the barrel on these radiograph films ? Reason I ask is this: I had my ca. 1886 hammer gun radiographed, and although they stated there was a "linear defect" - I'd challenge anyone to see it on the film. My dilemma was that my naked eyes saw what looked like a partial circumfrential crack (as if it was following the weld lines in my twist barrel), but the radiograph flim didn't seem to show much at all... How can eyes be more telling than an X-ray ? (I should probably just send the barrels to Brad !)

[Drew Hause]

John: I believe (hope) that radiography is the best non-destructive means to assess what is happening within the barrel wall; inclusions, voids, weld failures, non-weld cracks. Just as with an MRI of any body part, interpretation of course requires an expert and experienced human eye. No one at TEAM has x-rayed Damascus barrels, but they have lots of experience in industrial applications of radiography.

I would very much suggest that a 'linear defect' seen on radiography is real, and really a crack, and really an indication that the barrel is unusable. Of course, sectioning the barrel for photomicrographs would confirm the diagnosis if you would like to donate the barrel to science

Unfortunately, the two barrels I've had x-rayed so far show only what is very likely to be pits on (not within) the bore wall; defects that are not linear and can be correlated to the findings on visual exam of the bore

Negative image - defects grey/black. The white stuff is felt to be porosity in the solder



I'm meeting with the techs at TEAM again in the am and should have more images thereafter, and another barrel is arriving today with an apparent crack visible on the outside of one barrel. SO I will have at least three more barrels to x-ray for the data base (total of 5).

One thing clearly shown is that the mythology that pattern welded barrel walls are 'a mass of welds, voids, inclusions, slag, etc.' is wrong. We'll have more evidence when the photomicrographs are done on the barrel blow out analysis.

[Double Trouble]

My radiograph wasn't as "nice" as that one (it appeared to be darker, overall). In some areas (my radiograph), it did look like you could see the twist pattern, so I can see where the "mass of welds" crowd may have formed that opinion. What still stuns me is that you can PLAINLY see my "defect" with your eyes when you look down the barrel. (Plus, you can get a dental pick to "grab" the defect, too.) With all of that "low tech" evidence, if it still only shows up (on an X-ray) as a faint line that only the most acute & trained eyes can see, I have little faith in it being able to catch cracks that aren't so obvious. But obviously, it's the best method available, short of a destructive test...

Don't mind me - I'm just bummed out that the only gun that ever fit me perfectly has a cracked barrel.


Thanks - take care !

[Bruce Day]

I have seen two ruptures in fluid steel, both 20ga, one a Parker, the other an L C Smith. At the rupture line, the Parker was .008, the Smith was .010. Both barrels where not torn could be flexed by heavy thumb pressure.

[Parker Bachelder (Brad's Profile)]

Drew

The examples you posted of mid-bore longitudinal splits tend to occur frequently in fluid steel barrels. This usually happens due to one of the following:

Barrel wall thickness under .025 thickness.

Partial bore obstruction. cocked wad or Item in the bore IE: spider nest, stick, snow etc.

Overpressured factory load or reload.

If there is a bulge at or near the terminal end of the split, it confirms an obstruction.
The lack of bulge indicates insufficent barrel wall thickness usually combined with an agressive choke constriction.
Over pressure generally manifests in multiple splits with 90 degree tears at the terminal ends.

Brad

[John Truitt]

thanks Dr Drew.

Brad thank you. That's the kind of info we need.

A data base would be great. Please keep up the good work.

All my best,

John

[Ed Blake]

The Brits regularly proof barrels under 25 thou. Kinda makes me wonder.