George Hoffman,
Howdy do! Good to see you back in the AR.com saddle! Thanks for a bit of the voice of experience.

And thanks to everyone else above for furthering my education.

Now, if I could just find that bottle of aspirin ...

Todd E,

I, for one, would like to thank you for your obviously informed engineering advice and double rifle prescriptions. Now, just remember this the next time I have something to say about socioeconomic systems!

Regards,

JohnTheGreek

John,

Why do capitalist 3rd world nations (like India) have trouble making economic progress, while a still mostly socialist (despite the news reports) nation like China is making pretty good headway?

Todd,
I get the impression that your trying to baffle us with BS and wordy ca ca of little substance...

I also got that impression when you told Butch Searcy, the number one maker of double rifles in the USA that he didn't know what he was talking about..at which point you lost your credibility IMHO..

Being a very qualified engineer as you profess to be and I do not doubt that can mean you are very well informed or that you may well be an educated idiot that merely ate the covers off his books. In your case apparantly school is still out on that one, according to some of the above posts...

I have built a couple of double rifles, and I do know that Butch Searcy is as well informed on the art as anyone I know..I agree with him totally.

Ray,

Mr. Searcy's comment that was mistaken was that, I did not take into account the lateral loading of the action. I have. That is the extent of his professed incorrectness. Mr. Searcy has not spoken more on the subject. I suspect becaue my analysis correlates well to some statements Mr. Searcy himself made on a thread I started dealing with the fact that his doubles did not have third fasteners. Mr. Searcy stated that with an appropriately sized hinge pin the third bite was not necessary. That is not a direct quote either, it is in fact, a paraphrase. I have no idea how well Mr. Searcy comprehends the load and stress distribution across his double rifles actions.

To address you statement directly Ray. While you may know how to put together a double rifle that does not, unfortunately, make you an expert! I know some VERY GOOD mechanics that while they can build an engine they cannot tell me what that engines dynamic compression ratio is. The dynamic compression ratio is of paramount importance with regard to performance and is a key engine design parameter. The static compression ratio is what you will always see advertised (10:1 compression) it is nothing more than maximum cylinder volume minus minimum cyclinder volume. In reality, a meaningless dimension. Static and dynamic compression ratios are interrelated though. My point being, just because you can build a double (as can I) that does not make you an expert.

You can believe whatever you want. The facts are still as I posted. I have interesting facts which deal with the vaunted mauser action as well. Actually, it is somewhat funny listening to those of you who imbrace ignorance and slander the truth. To those of us that know what we are talking about your blind obedience to ignorance only serves as a good laugh and informs us as to the credibility of personal experience. Again believe what you want I really do not care.

John,
Point taken. If the situation should ever come to pass I will watch my manner, I promise! Now to 500grains question. Why do you think that situation is so John? Personally, I am of the opinion that it has more to do with politics than economics, but those two entities are very difficult to divorce from one another.

[ 06-01-2002, 16:33: Message edited by: Todd E ]

Todd E,
Glad you are still here. We need you to ride herd on us geezers and good old boys. Everybody goes off half cocked from time to time, and it is through mutual surveillance that the truth survives.

I have printed out all the double rifle threads of any interest for the last year. It is an excellent resource that cannot be found anywhere else. Thanks for your contributions.

Todd,

I was just kidding you!

Best,

John

Todd,
Your brilliance has once again smothered me in BS and wordy comentarys only superceeded by another ex-poster, who also could talk more and say less than most anyone I've known..

When one talks constantly of the stupidity of others he, in fact, is doing nothing more than elating his own ego and at the same time totally voiding his own credibility with others, now I ask you do you have to believe everyone that disagrees with you is an idiot...If so , perhaps you need some professional help

Why not keep everything on a conversational level, state your case and let others judge, then someone might listen, but threatening to leave the forum, calling everyone that disagrees with you stupid, asking questions that you already know the answers to, as you have been doing and playing your ridiculas silly games that everyone has seen through, is definatly not good form..

Stick around, share your knowledge, be a big boy

Ray,

I believe that you hit the nail on the head with your last post. You are as guilty however of being a know it all as I. Perhaps even more so. I will give you that due to boundary condition assumptions my calculations may vary from reality as much as 10%. The trend remains unchanged however.

You are arguing with established time proven engineering principles. I did not post them to inflated my ego, but to clear up some of the misinformation that seems to cloud the double rifle action(s). Misinformation may be too harsh for I believe that much of the problem is that the "authorities" on the subject wrote about their discoveries close to 100 years ago. The "authorities" in question did not possess the engineering knowledge base that we enjoy today. In other words, to a great degree they were using trial and error to "fix" problems as they occured. Engineering like medicine has progressed greatly from the time the original patents on the double rifles actions were granted (remember no too long ago doctors bled you to make you better and engineers did not understand notch sensitivity until the Liberty ships of WWII began to break in half on the high seas). Many of these patents did in fact achieve little advantage over the older design. I am positive that the Greener cross bolt is one such invention. What these inventions did inevitably do however, was provide their respective patent holders with an excellent marketing position for the latest and greatest action "better than all before it". Just like marketing is done today.

So please accept the information for what it is engineering analysis. This is not opinion and it was not provided to say you or anyone else was stupid. There is a significant difference between ignorance (not knowing for lack of education) and stupidity (the inability to learn). I consider this an educational post. If you still do not understand it I can provide further explanation. The basic mathematical models are not that complex you may comprehend them much easier than you would expect.

John,
Interesting dissertation, thanks!

Todd E

[ 06-02-2002, 05:55: Message edited by: Todd E ]

Todd,
I'm not a know it all and I don't believe you are either, I think we are both knowledgable. you through education and I through experience..

The difference between you and I is don't call others that disagree with me stupid, and I pass my knowledge on to assist and help others while you pass your knowledge on to bolster your inflated ego, at the expense of others...

You have continued to pose questions on double rifles on this board to show how much you know and how little others know, when you knew the answers all the time and used that to attack the supposed less knowledable, and it backfired on you...that's the difference between you and I....

I don't mind a good arguement and debate and I may be absolutly correct in my mind, but I still respect the ideas of others..I have been in a number of debates with Alf, DaggaRon, and others, wherein I disagreed with them, but I have a lot of respect for their knowledge of guns, hunting and sawing bones

Hi all,
just my 2� worth. Todd is mostly correct

1: I know, for a FACT that a large double's will LIVE through a double fire. It was a 577 in texas.

2: There is NO comparison to a double doubling and a bolt having a super over pressure bomb in it. This is, a rather poor analogy, but close enough, comparable to the difference in a car hitting a wall at 30 MPH and TWO cars hitting each other head on, at 30 mph.

3: A sprung gun is a sprung gun. Double's doubling can cause "interesting" results; like the user being dang near knocked out or other things. An over preassure bolt gun will cause ex. headspace, seared lugs, leaking primers, blows ups, etc.

4: A double, while fantastically fine, is simply not as strong, or durable, as a bolt gun, ATBE. This has been explained several ways, even with remingtons "three rings of steel" being more or less mentioned. A simple way to "show" someone that there is an obvisous difference in strength is to load and un load each. Look.. the bolt gun is still a more or less contiuos tube of steel... the double is held to gether (variously) by a little henge.
jeffe

[ 06-13-2002, 01:10: Message edited by: jeffeosso ]

More good stuff above that needs to be taken to heart for all of us.

A pissing contest can be fun for a little while, but even with proper etiquette observed, it is tedious after a while.

I wonder what the usual deficiency is that causes a double rifle to double fire, and what is the usual fix if it is due to a mechanical problem?

Surely sometimes the problem is the shooter somehow touching the rear trigger when he pulls the front one, eh?

ToddE, just for clarification, I never stated that my rifles didn't need a third fastener because of a larger hinge pin, although it helps obviousely based on your figures. There is two other surfaces on the lumps that absorb the thrust as well as the hinge pin. These two surfaces are located just below the hinge pin, and the front portion of the rear lump. Also my actions have large bolsters on each side similar in design to the H&H actions. I on occasion will add a third extension (not fastener) to compensate the side to side movement of the barrels. Very similar to the function of side clips. Another important factor one must consider in the strength of any mechanical device is the metal used, and it's heat treatment. Just for added info my actions are of 416 stainless hardened to RC38 to 40, and 8640 with the same heat treat.
Monoblocks are of 4140 with same hardness as the actions, making them much stronger than barrel steels. Ask me any question about my product and I'll answere to the best of my ability, but I can't, and will not participate in any academic elitism.

Mr. Searcy,

Since you so graciously offered to answer questions about you product I would like to oblige you and ask some.

This is a general quesiton:

1.) Have you ever conducted any finite element analysis of you boxlock and/or sidelock actions?

The following questions all pertain to a boxlock or sidelock in 500 NE:

2.) What is the width of the lump?

3.) What is the diameter of the hinge pin?

4.) What is the axial distance from the standing breech to the following:
a.) Hinge pin centerline.
b.) Foremost bite (radial centerline)
c.) rearmost bite (radial centerline)

5.) What is the axial distance from the bore centerline to the following:
a.) Hinge pin centerline.
b.) Second barrel's bore centerline.

6.) What is the diameter of your barrel shank at the breech?

7.) Are the bites in line with the hinge pin centerline?

8.) What is the fillet radius at the transition from standing breech to action bar?

9.) What are the dimensions of the bolt? Specifcally, the size of contact area between bolt and bite.

10.) Would it be possible to have the rifle regulated for a load which yielded these ballistics: 535 grain Woodleigh at 2300 fps?

11.) How many shots do you design you rifles to withstand i.e. what is their useful life? Assuming proper maintenance, of course.

Thank you very much for this information.

Ray,

Perhaps I am guilty as you charge. I have one question for you however. Do you suppose anyone has learned anything of value from my egomania?

Todd E

[ 06-03-2002, 01:06: Message edited by: Todd E ]

Wow, Todd, you should be flattered that Butch has taken the time to offer to answer your questions. He has not noticed mine or is too busy to reply. Of course I did not address it specifically to him. Anyone?

I have noted a pattern of frequent double discharges with Searcy double rifles amongst those that post here.

What gives? I have yet to make my Merkel double, and I always load both barrels.

I must say that the millionaire in Botswana with his 500 NE Holland and Holland Royal, brand new, had a double discharge on an elephant brain shot. The elephat dropped dead. I think it was the first time the gun had been fired while hunting, and it was a double fire.

So I ask again, what would H&H be checking and fixing when Mr. Rich Guy returns his 500 NE to London, as he said he would do ASAP? Or did Mr. RG pull both triggers with a big flinch in all the excitement?

I hefted his gun in camp and it was heavier and clumsier than my Merkel 470 NE. At more than $50,000 US there is no accounting for taste, I reckon. It sure was pretty though.

[ 06-03-2002, 09:56: Message edited by: DaggaRon ]

/

Alf,

Thank you for the information it seems to correlate well with the results of my own analysis. Still anxiously awaiting Mr. Searcy's reply RAB, so don't think me "blessed" just yet.

Todd E

[ 06-04-2002, 03:09: Message edited by: Todd E ]