Re: Bolt Thrust....Big Bore Vs Small Bore on same

01 July 2004, 08:25

ASS_CLOWN

Mike,

Whatever is the matter? Come on I thought this was a trolling bait thread for sure! Oh darn, I was getting all psyched up for some good belly laughs too.

ASS_CLOWN

01 July 2004, 14:39

Pecos41

Quote:

Pecos,
we are talking loading vs sheer...

you tell me... a wings load rating is FAR less than it's sheer rating, right?

jeffe

Jeffe, you're quite right about wing loading. But what I'm saying, to relate it to your analogy, is that the wind is designed for this loading. Stay within the designed loading range and the wing will last "forever." TIME flown within the designed wing loading envelope is anticipated and built in.

Exceed that design loading, however briefly, and you risk breaking things.
---------------

I think back to my first rifle...the old tank-like Eddystone 30/06. I reloaded practically every round this rifle fired and know for a fact that I fired over 8,000 rounds thru it. As a young reloader many of the loads I put together were in the "twilight zone" for pressure. (Young and Dumb Syndrome)

When I got the hots and money for more guns years later and traded this faithful piece away it had developed .007 headspace.

I'm telling this story to say that IF there is anything to all the fretting about "bolt thrust," it is no negligable as to be of zero consequence to a shooter.

Which is NOT to say that any of us can't put together a load that will blow the gun up and wrap the barrel around our necks.
----------------

I'm just saying I think the whole thing of "bolt thrust" is like worrying about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Who cares? Let um dance!

-----------------

I'll conclude by wondering if any of us KNOW what we are talking about and have the proven research from some labratory to back this issue up one way or the other. Or are we all just armed with myths, pet theories and "common sense?"

Anytime the subject gets into mathematical theories and calculations I'm poorly armed. I may have learned to speak a few words of algebra, but I'm sure as hell no number cruncher.

I think it's gonna take some actual lab results and testing to convince me there is anything here to worry about. But thanks to one and all for patiently trying to convince this stubborn old dog.

01 July 2004, 14:18

Paul H

Mike,

The round with the higher peak pressure would put more wear on the lugs, ie 300 weatherby.

Hmm, looks like the aliens have re-inserted the mind probes in our friend

either that or he needs to get another dose of his medication.

01 July 2004, 16:04

ASS_CLOWN

Pecos,

Not saying that "I know it all" by a long shot, but I have quite literally thousands of hours of number crunching and lab time to myt credit when it comes to steel, aluminum, and iron.

If you really want to learn more the knowledge is out there, you simply need to search for it in the proper places. Unfortunately, it is heavily math intensive.

Paul, no not off my meds, but most of Mike's threads are troll bait. He is afterall, one of ARs original "trolls".

I did answer his post in the simplest terms possible. I also pointed him toward vast quantities of knowledge relating to his question.

Heck, I am still waiting for someone to tell me the riddle of the steel question I asked! What no guts?

ASS_CLOWN