Woodleigh steel jacketed solids are copper washed
are they not ?

I didn't think they had gilding metal on them ?

They are tapered so that only the bullet near the base is full diameter.

Why would the steel jacketed solid not compress
considering the base is open and as you sometimes see, the lead pushed out slightly.

Todd, consider that the steel cup doesn't compress rather deforms to accept the rifling of the bore. All this pressure is carried by the lands of the rifling.
This stress might cause the ORS that has been reported.

OK,

I have been watching this thread deteriorate long enough. Now I will accelerate the process!

First, has anyone seen the process of rifling a barrel called, "button rifling?" That is where metal in the barrel is displaced by a carbide "button" to form the grooves. No OSR there. Wouldn't you think that a thin enough barrel would then be candy striped on the outside?

The only situation I could think of where a case of OSR could exist would require a few variables to be present: barrels made of crappy metal, thin walled barrels, a very large diameter bullet for the barrel ID, a very hard bullet that would not be significantly engraved by the lands, a bullet with a very large bearing surface, and lots of pressure (be thinking about a proof loading).

I think we could determine if these variables could produce OSR by using a thin walled barrel, a bullet that is 5/1000" or greater than the ID of the barrel and made of carbide. Fire that down the barrel at proof load pressures and I think you will have a good approximation of OSR or a destroyed barrel.

Seriously, to avoid OSR I would recommend that anyone shooting an older double rifle slug their bores especially the 450-400s as they seem to have the most variations before using solids.

Like many, I have not seen OSR but know someone who knows someone that has.

Cheers,

Matt

You can draw three absolute truths from this thread.

1. Some people believe in OSR.

2. Some people don't.

3. Mike Nice, aka LionHunter, poser extraordinaire, knows pretty much nothing about double rifles.

Your #3 is a stunner! It applies to several on this post.

If we went back to the original Barnes bullet, would this be the genesis of the OSR syndrome? If so, wouldn't that bullet be the first one anyone would investigate objectively?

Matt

Yes, I think so.


I still think someone would have noticed
it if it had occurred in a gun that was used.

When I clean the barrels or look at buying a gun
I've always looked down the barrels on the outside just like you do a shotgun.

quote:

Originally posted by 505G:
Why would the steel jacketed solid not compress
considering the base is open and as you sometimes see, the lead pushed out slightly.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Brooks:
Todd, consider that the steel cup doesn't compress rather deforms to accept the rifling of the bore. All this pressure is carried by the lands of the rifling.
This stress might cause the ORS that has been reported.

505G, you are describing deformation, not compression.

Mike, the steel jacket or cup should never come into contact with the rifling and will only do so if the copper is too thin. Then you have a problem.

But, if we go back to the original theoretical villan of OSR, it wasn't cup and core bullets such as Woodleigh or Hornady which almost seems to be creeping in here as the new culprit with discussions of whether or not a steel cuped bullet compresses. It was supposedly the original Barnes X or possibly the A-Square monolithics. Funny how A-Square almost never gets mentioned in the OSR debate. It's always Barnes X.

Now, let's think back to when the X bullet hit the market. There weren't any efforts by the other bullet manufacturers to denounce this new development in bullet technology! Was there??? Hmmmm ....

We used to hear about how they wouldn't shoot worth a damn and so on. I used to shoot those original X bullets in my 340WBY, 458 Win Mag and 7mm Mag with no issues what so ever, including accuracy. To the comments that some rifles would shoot them and others wouldn't, I used to load them for two other 340Wbys, one 300Wby, one other 458 Win Mag, and one other 7mm Mag owned by friends of mine. A small sample no doubt and similar rifle makes and calibers. But all 8 of those rifles shot them without issue, other than the fact that they needed to be cleaned more often due to fouling than something like a Partition.

Personally, I have my ideas about where this OSR concept originated. Having owned a rifle with a candy striped barrel, I know that one wasn't caused by a monometal bullet.

Carry on fella's. I'm burned out on this one. It's been a good discussion however. I enjoy discussions where we can challenge each other and force a hard defended position without becoming abusive (with one notable exception who will go unnamed! ) . It makes one think and you guys have certainly made me do that.

"it wasn't cup and core bullets such as Woodleigh or Hornady which almost seems to be creeping in here as the new culprit with discussions of whether or not a steel cuped bullet compresses."

That's because certain people on here love mentioned high pressure et al and then mentioning CEB or others as an alternative.

IMHO, quite a bit of innuendo goes on in this thread and not just to do with bullets but people, manufacturers.

Matt,

I have said exactly what you said that button rifling is a possible cause. Also yes we have shot both original Barnes copper tubing bullets and the mono solids. There is a list of bullets we have shot in the thin barrel tests so far in this thread. More to come. Oh has anybody ever seen that lead bubble sticking out the back of Woodleigh solids after firing? Something had to happen to push lead out the back.

Sam

Sorry Todd. I just can't stand our self described "Internationally known big game hunter and world record holder."

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
Oh has anybody ever seen that lead bubble sticking out the back of Woodleigh solids after firing? Something had to happen to push lead out the back.
Sam

Sam

OK, what do you think it is ?

I said it was compressing the jacket but
others don't seem to think so.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Sorry Todd. I just can't stand our self described "Internationally known big game hunter and world record holder."

Dave, would we both be thinking of "The One" from up north way?!!

505G, Sure its compressing the whole bullet to squeeze that lead out the back thru that little hole. One reason banded bullets work well is that they give the metal a place to go when the rifling displaces it. Another reason a true mono solid seems to be the worst of them all.

Sam

quote:

505G, you are describing deformation, not compression.

Sam

You and Todd disagree then.


Banded bullets have their place but
their is nothing wrong with Woodleigh
softs or Solids, steel or otherwise.

Geoff can't change the design / shape because
Woodleigh was started so as to provide bullets
for the old rifles to the original Kynoch design and you don't hear of rifles suffering because of the pressure the guys on here say occurs. If they did suffer, guns since the 1900's have problems.

IMHO, Making a mountain out of a mole hill
to justify CEB and others being "better"
- which in some ways I am others disagree with
but certain people don't like dissenting voices.
(ie FYI I do not like secondary projectiles).

Uh, Sorry Dave, I misunderstood who you were talking about. I also was not referring to you when I mentioned the one exception to being cordial throughout the discussion here. You can probably figure out who I was talking about from my previous response to you here.

But BTW, I think you are wrong about Lionhunter and doubles. He now owns my old Merkel 500NE and we've discussed doubles often since purchasing the gun. I've not found him to be off base concerning double rifles in our discussions.

Dave Bush is a sniveling little tard who has tried to lecture experienced african hunters on AR about DG hunting. How many DG in your bag, Dave? Oh, wait, still never been there right Dave? And because I called him out and put him on my ignore list, he persists in using the internationally known hunter tag from one of my past product marketing endorsements.

Well Dave, the simple fact is that I am an international hunter and have held some world records over the years. You can look them up. How many do you hold Dave? I may be well known in some big game circles, which you will never be. The only reason you know this about me is because I have been asked to endorse products I've used and liked over the years, and those endorsements have been published.

BTW, I have owned 3 DRs, all of them 500NE. And Dave, envy and jealousy are not attractive traits so how about manning up? You are still on my ignore list so I don't read your silly posts, but saw what Todd posted in reply to your usual snide little remark. It's all you've got.

quote:

IMHO, Making a mountain out of a mole hill
to justify CEB and others being "better"
- which in some ways I am others disagree with
but certain people don't like dissenting voices.
(ie FYI I do not like secondary projectiles).

Nigel,

You, nor anyone else has to agree or disagree, like or dislike anything I do, or Sam does, here. I test, Sam tests with me many times, it gets reported as it is, regardless either way, and I don't mind "dissenting" voices, but I can tell you this, I don't have to "JUSTIFY" anything.

With you being a "Woodleigh Lacky", its you that has to justify the existence of a piss poor performing nose profile during terminal penetration, its you that has to justify why the bullets you support have the highest barrel strain, its you that has to justify the steel jacket that is in the bullet in attempt to improve construction integrity, and the only way you can do that is to degrade anything we might do here.

BBW#13s were designed from the ground up....... Right here on my range. Many generations of bullets were tested to get the nose profile correct, as "Terminal Performance" was my main and first concern. This was accomplished. Then Sam and I went to work on the bands, to reduce pressures and strains on barrels. Multiple bands were tried first, 8-10 bands as I recall. Running the pressure trace, we found that 4 bands reduced pressures and strains on barrels significantly. Then where to place those bands, a couple of generations of bullets tested to do that as well. Neither Sam nor I give a flying crap whether you believe or don't believe, dissent nor not, its of little consequence. Dispute the facts if you want, but the burden of proof is on you, not me..... I already did that and its repeatable, and can be done over and over and over again. Now you can attack the test methods here, but how will you justify the field Results I wonder, as they match exactly what we find here on the range. Amazing eh!

And, as you already know that in PMs we have discussed at length "Secondary Projectiles" so you bring that up outside again, when in PMs you state you understand?

Nigel, do not take a condescending attitude with me, nor think that I overlook your little snide oblique remarks either, most of the time I just pay them little attention as I know what your agenda is. And as normal, don't PM me to make nice, I am not upset at all, and no need to make nice. It is what it is, while you might try and think this post is because I am pissed, you would be sorely incorrect, I am not, don't care, because of your agenda, many things you say are of little consequence to me personally, I will continue to do what I do because I wish to. I enjoy discovery and going places not visited before. But I also realize your oblique remarks are not for me, but for others in attempt to satisfy your agenda. Thats fine with me, but when you get called on it, try not to squirm too much! By the way, didn't you used to be 500N? Sorry, I can't keep up, but back some years ago I thought you went by 500N.

Enjoy, Shot any buffalo lately? I do love to put bullet to buff!

Sam and I will be on the range today doing our best to blow a barrel up, or at least a piece of it! LOL.... He has that thing down to .02500 inches, 7 pages of copy paper thin! Has some Solid STEEL Bullets made too...
Yes, SOLID STEEL BULLETS....... If we don't blow this thing today.............. I will be amazed you can believe that.

Michael

Lionhunter

Reading comprehension is a major issue here at times. Folks just don't read, nor comprehend what they read. This is what I really got pissed of on Sunday about.... Reading Comprehension! Someone thought a post I made was directed to them, it was not. Of little consequence. I could not believe some of the remarks made, when the answer was posted above them.... Oh well, whatta ya do?

On this OSR thing, I would think that some would be pleased, as we can't make it happen, with any bullet thus far? The OSR test is not for BBW#13s or North Forks, but just to see if we can do it, and thus far we cannot, not even with Woollys! Nor Hornys! We might today however, with solid steel bullets and a barrel that the wall thickness is .02500 or paper thin!

Have folks seen OSR candy striping? Absolutely, I believe them all, all are credible folks and no agenda. Caused by bullets? Not so sure, at least not on modern steel or new guns. What could happen with old junk, who knows? I think Sam has located an ancient old steel .458 caliber barrel, I suppose after today we will try and blow it up, but really not sure that will prove much, since I think its American Old Steel, and that might be different from Euro Old Steel???

Later Boys

Michael

LionHunter:

Just so there is no misunderstanding fat ass, I don't like you either.

Nope, never been to Africa but I have hunted in lots of places in North America and Canada and have been a long time reloader. Nor have I ever "lectured" the dangerous game hunters about how to hunt dangerous game but I have talked a lot about double rifles since I really like them and shoot them a lot.

In this particular thread, we were talking about OSR. You probably don't even know what that is do you? All I did was talk about Graeme Wright's book, another thing you probably don't know about and then, for no reason, you told Todd and Michael that's why you had me on ignore.

You are nothing but a pretentious asshole. You don't like me. I don't like you so let's leave at this. Go fuck yourself you wanker. I'm sorry, that should be internationally known and world record wanker.

Todd, do me a favor. Repost this so fat ass gets to see it. He attacks me and then puts me on ignore because he is afraid to see my response. What a coward.

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
505G, Sure its compressing the whole bullet to squeeze that lead out the back thru that little hole. One reason banded bullets work well is that they give the metal a place to go when the rifling displaces it. Another reason a true mono solid seems to be the worst of them all.

Sam

Sam,

I have looked through my collection of lead core solids recovered from elephants. About half, 17 of thirty show at least some lead extrusion from the bullet base. I would suspect that if this extrusion is happening while traveling down the bore that all of the bullets would show it. I also suspect it occurs when the bullet hits flesh and especially bone.

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Sorry Todd. I just can't stand our self described "Internationally known big game hunter and world record holder."

Dave, would we both be thinking of "The One" from up north way?!!

Todd,I am a simple hunter.No articles,no recognition,no contacts whatsoever,no record holder(thats for sure).I am just shooting,hunting,learning and trying to make a few friends along the way.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Sorry Todd. I just can't stand our self described "Internationally known big game hunter and world record holder."

Dave, would we both be thinking of "The One" from up north way?!!

. . . and trying to make a few friends along the way.

You need to either try harder or try a different technique. Telling everyone that they do not know anything and they are all fools means the "few" is likely to be very damn few.

Mac gave you some darn good advice a while back and instead of listening to him like you should have you basically called him a fool too. You should go back and re-read his post.

I have avoided the issue here, but I guess I should be clear, I fall into the category of not believing in OSR. If it did exist then why has it not been observed and documented on military arms, particularly machine guns that have been run red hot, even to the point of melting the steel barrels?

Michael, yes, no doubt reading comprehension is helpful. However some seem to believe everything they read without personal observation or any understanding of research and/or the scientific method. Everything you and Sam have done is readily repeatable by anyone with the desire, time and tools - don't forget the investment of money - to do so. That is what gives your research results so much validity.

When one cites a passage from a book, by any author (even Graeme Wright), one should first look at the copyright date. Information is always evolving - that's how you developed the B&M cartridges and the BBW#13 bullets. Some only read books and cite them as justification of an adopted belief that they are unable to independently confirm for themselves, and most of these have no idea what the word bibliography really means nor how to go about conducting proper research on their own in a library in order to find supporting or refuting documentation.

As an example, the foremost authority on the M1903 rifle was and is still considered by many to be the late Lt. Col. William S. Brophy and his book The SPRINGFIELD 1903 Rifles, copyright 1985. However, during the 28 years since its publication, much new information has been found about these 100+ year old rifles and published by many other authors. Some of this new information demonstrates that Brophy was incorrect in some of the statements made in his seminal book. The late Clark Campbell published more current and accurate information on the M1903, but even his work has what many believe to be errors, because emerging information is evolving. Perhaps the same might be the case with some of Graeme Wright's published comments, even including what he has said about OSR? Ya think?

As to the childish Dave Bush - Nah-Na Nah-Na. And we all know you would never say the things you print here to my face. I'm always at either DSC or SCI, and since I am "internationally known", even you should be able to find me easily. But we all know you wouldn't dare. It's the internet bravery affliction, don't cha know? OK, I'm done with you for awhile, at least until your next stupid comment that someone else re-posts.

quote:

Perhaps the same might be the case with some of Graeme Wright's published comments, even including what he has said about OSR? Ya think?

What you say in general re published information is generally true.

I would say the fact that Graeme has updated his book a number of times would indicate no.

Plus the fact that he is out there talking to people all the time around the world about DR's, loads, testing etc so the topic is continually discussed.

Of course nowadays it is much easier to update information, books, etc and spread the word around about anything.

505G-

Glad you generally agree with my general assertions, generally speaking.

In my example, Clark Campbell printed four updated revisions to his book between 1957 and 2003, yet new and contradictory information continues to be uncovered. So the mere fact that a conscientious author publishes revised editions of his work is not prima facie that everything printed therein is fact. Such is the nature of the information age we now live in.

Perhaps Wright is correct about OSR, perhaps not. In any event, he has presented no incontrovertible evidence to support his assertion nor the means by which it occurs. Anything other than incontrovertible evidence, is by definition only opinion. And please remember that one cannot prove a negative, hence stating that OSR does not exist is not a provable position but does not negate the opinion as it is a negative.

quote:

And please remember that one cannot prove a negative, hence stating that OSR does not exist is not a provable position but does not negate the opinion as it is a negative.

I like that. Very good.


Until someone gets a gun, no OSR, shoots
a bullet, now OSR showing, taks photos,
I don't think anyone can say definitively.

And, even if the above occurred, who is to
say that it is the only cause of OSR ?

I found a previous post on the OSR 404 from 2007. One of the people who saw it said that you couldn't take photos of it.

Anyway, good discussions.

505G-

True discussion is what AR is meant to be about, but in order for it to happen, both sides must understand the ground rules, Yes?

Cheers

Yes.

Sometimes playing devils advocate
gets some good discussions going.


BTW, what are the
ground rules ?????

Lionhunter

PM sent.

Last Report of OSR test..........

I am going to have to break this into several posts to attempt to put this in some meaningful way.

Sam pitched up early yesterday, with our OSR barrel cut and ready for testing......

He had a good spread of really "Dangerous" bullets to put it to the test, and the barrel paper thin.

The easy bullets we planned to begin with were in this lineup... Starting with the 480 gr BBW#13 Solid.



Then Sam had what we are going to refer to as the tapered band bullet, one of which started at .456, and each band going up in size to .460, and the other going up to .461.



Next in line was some full bearing surface, no bands, Brass Monos, in .458, .459 and .461.....



And Finally 4 SOLID STEEL BBW#13 Solids.... .458, .4593, .460, and last .461 caliber.





All of these were fired down this .458 caliber barrel, all with 458 B&M, and after each shot was fired, we measured for any expansion, and checked for any sort of OSR by look and by feel.

Let me guess the results-I guess that you found the barrel better than new after firing the CEB steel bullets!

We approached this fully expecting something to happen as thin as the barrel was. Barrel Wall Thickness measured .0225 inches, we will show you just how thin that is shortly.

We loaded only two test loads to begin with, 480 BBW#13 Solid, fully expecting some sort of disaster. When nothing at all happened after firing two of them, we went back, loaded 2 405 Remingtons and a pair of 515 gr SOFT LEAD bullets. After Firing these 4 rounds, and nothing happened, no change, back to the lab and loaded everything else then, the brass Monos, the Brass banded tapered bullets, and all the solid steel BBW#13s. We skipped on anymore lead loads, if that big soft lead didn't do anything, unlikely the others would.

First up we shot the full Monos, and started getting HEAT expansion, once the barrel cooled, then it was back to original size.

Then the Tapered bullets, same story, heat expansion, then back to original size.

Now with myself being a "Family Man", I allowed Sam to do all the shooting. While I discretely hid myself behind him........ HEH HEH.................

But now it was time to shoot STEEL BBW#13s, and my curiosity got the best of me, and while Sam fired the first shot, I was peeking over the top, and at the shot sparks of fire were being thrown out the muzzle! Two were fired completely DRY.... .458 and .4593. For .460 and .461 Sam put a bit of oil on them, no more sparks of fire out the muzzle......

And the very last shot fired was the big solid brass mono at .461 caliber.

Now all the brass tapered, monos and steel bullets we tried to recover in the terminal box. Not really checking closely for terminals, but to recover the bullets to study bearing surface, especially the steel bullets! We lost two bullets completely, the .461 Steel, and the .461 Brass Mono. The steel bullets did not shot to POI, and one was lost somehow by going down the side of the box. The .461 Brass Mono was NOT STABLE in the box, and came out of the box to go who knows where? Now, the .461 Tapered bullet was also NOT stable in the box, and came out, but we found it laying in the floor. There seemed to be something very unstable with .461 bullets going down a .458 Bore????????????

After the barrel cooled, dimensions all went back to ORIGINAL SIZE, there was no sign at all of any sort of OSR, measurable, visual, or felt.

These are photos of the barrel after this series of test shooting........

At this point in time, I decided to take Sam over to the farm, and show him the incredibly successful Prescribed Burn I had last Thursday. So we took a break, Sam had forgot to bring Dacron, and since we were out, we would pick some Dacron up to do one last test before we cut the barrel off to show you.

Now, what I had forgot about, the day before yesterday we had got at least an inch of RAIN. We get on the backside of one area, very wet, can't turn around, and the MUDHOLE from HELL is in front of us. Can't go back, can't turn around, I make a decision to bust through this extremely wet area, about 200 yards long.................... I was real close, about a 100 feet to DRY GROUND, when the bottom fell out, and here we are, not going anywhere! After gathering sticks and anything else we can find to put under the wheels, it was to no avail, thank goodness Sam had his cell phone, ya'll know where mine was, and we called for HELP.........

About 45 minutes later, my man Chip picked us up, all the chains, straps, and ropes had been carried off by my two boys, so we had zero to pull us out. We decided to pick up some dacron, and complete the test, while Chip went in search of purchasing a 100+ feet of tow straps!

Stuffing the case full of Dacron, we loaded two 405 Remingtons. And then we also remembered Zeyphers request about the oiled BORE.... So we loaded two more 405 remingtons, and took OIL with us back to the range.

We fired the two Dacron....... Nothing. Then we soaked the barrel with oil, dripping wet, and fired two more 405 Remingtons. We didn't see anything happen, but it was only then we remembered leaving the micrometer in the lab!!!!!! We did not measure AFTER THE DACRON.

Taking the rifle back in to the lab, and measuring it we found that the barrel had permanently expanded by .0008 inches after firing the two Dacron Loads, and the two Oiled Barrel Loads......
Which one, or both..... Don't know?

It was time to Hack Saw the barrel off, before doing so, both Sam and I signed the barrel right where we were going to cut it.

After filing away the hack saw burrs here is the actual barrel...........



Here is the barrel compared to a Marlin Guide Gun in 45/70.........




Here is the barrel compared to a Winchester 1886 in 45/70.........



Here is the barrel compared to a 458 B&M..........



The barrel with one of the oversized Monos stuck in the end.........




I would be willing to place a $100 bet that this is the THINNEST .458 caliber Barrel that ever had a bullet put down it!

And here you see the rest of the story......... Feel free to draw your own conclusions concerning anything about this test...................

Very interesting, thanks for posting.

That is thin !!!

"thin" can also be applied to the OSR theory. Check that, change "thin" to non-existent.

Michael does such a good job of posting I hate to even try to add anything.
I do want to point out a few things that he hasn't mentioned. All loads were not pussy cat loads. They were all in the nitro express range of pressures and velocities. Most of the bullets were over 450 grs. The brass used for the monos I made was 360 type which is the same used by CEB. The steel used for the BBW#13 steel solids were made from 1/2" #4 ree bar that I had laying around. This is hot rolled plain carbon steel and was not anealed by me before or after machining. You can see in a couple of photos of the steel bullet dark spots on the bullets. This is scale from the surface of ree bar that didn't quite clean up. I figured ree bar was the softest steel I had available and would be the safest to shoot. As you can see the bullets were engraved perfectly and show no signs of galling. The bore didn't show any adverse effects from firing this other than the sparks flying out the muzzle like a grinder thorws. HEH HEH as M would say. To me the most unsafe bullet we fired was the .461 brass mono and I really thought I'd damage the gun shooting this one. During all of this tests we never had any real signs of high pressure. The bolt opened easily and primers were normal without flattening. It would have been very interesting to have strain gages hooked up during these tests but sadly Michael's PT 1 is no longer working. I hope you have enjoyed these tests as I have.

Sam

OSR? Sure buddy!! Heeeerrrreeeesssss your sign:

Okay,

This is the first time I have seen your set up. The barrel is amazingly skinny. I do think we have a problem with your set up even though your methodology was good. The reason being that the thin portion of the barrel is not the portion that receives the maximum pressure when firing a round. That would be the area directly in front of the chamber.

Think about a bullet going down the barrel or even think of a shotgun firing and how thin the barrel is towards the muzzle. The reason is that the pressure is decreasing as more barrel length (thus more volume)is involved as the bullet travels towards the muzzle and less metal is needed to handle the pressure...like in most shotguns. You just proved that.

I think of OSR as having its origins with a projectile which is signicantly big enough, OD, with the hardness at a high enough level to be resistant to engraving by the lands.

Therefore, if you reduce barrel OD close to the chamber and carry that same, small wall thickness barrel the length of the barrel; you will have the best opportunity to create OSR...if that is your goal.

I would expect in a rifle barrel for .458 bore that .460 would not deform it if the steel is elastic enough to handle it. (Which you proved.) So, .461, .462. and .463 would be the horses I would bet on for deformation/destruction.

Hey, I have been breaking the unbreakable since I was 6!

Be safe!

Cheers,

Matt Moore