quote:

Originally posted by Huvius:

For example, if one was looking for a decent 8bore Holland and Holland in the last four years or so, $40K seemed to be where you would have to be. In fact, I was trying to get into one myself a couple years ago a little under that price but came up short.
Just this month, no less than four 8bore Holland rifles came on the market and all sold for less than $40K. Every one a better rifle than the one I was pining for.
All it takes is for one of the big collectors to decide to sell off or pass away and suddenly the rare and unobtainable is on the market in quantity that hasn't been seen since the '70s.
Big sell-offs can really hurt the values short term so you better buy what you like and plan on holding for a while.

This is what I have experienced in regards to Winchesters and Colts. You buy vintage and expect priceincrease over a decade. You sell and after another decade you want to return to buy a vintage Colt or Winchester and there you suddenly realize that everything cost 2x-3x as much as what you sold it for 10 years earlier.
If one wants to go the vintageroute and expect a return on the investment, normally a full generation is expected. I have also experienced a few priceincreases on specific items over a few years, but in generel where there has been a long collectable established tradition on certain things it doesn´t happen because marked has regulated it self.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Good Grief. The old OSR wives tale raises its ugly head once again. For anyone who practices critical thinking, pray tell WHAT it is about soldering two barrels together that would cause this phenomenon. You just never hear of OSR being an issue in bolt or other single barreled rifles. Not to mention that I had that Ruger M-77 in 338WM back in the 80's that had "striping" along the length of the barrel, from the factory, long before the first Barnes bullet was on the market.

Todd, you obviously have no idea how comical it is that (whenever osr is mentioned) you keep bringing up that candy striped Ruger of yours.

Your arguments concerning that Ruger and osr may well be somewhat irrational and totally irrelevant, but they sure are amusing.

quote:

Originally posted by 5seventy:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Good Grief. The old OSR wives tale raises its ugly head once again. For anyone who practices critical thinking, pray tell WHAT it is about soldering two barrels together that would cause this phenomenon. You just never hear of OSR being an issue in bolt or other single barreled rifles. Not to mention that I had that Ruger M-77 in 338WM back in the 80's that had "striping" along the length of the barrel, from the factory, long before the first Barnes bullet was on the market.

Todd, you obviously have no idea how comical it is that (whenever osr is mentioned) you keep bringing up that candy striped Ruger of yours.

Your arguments concerning that Ruger and osr may well be somewhat irrational and totally irrelevant, but they sure are amusing.

Yet NO proof of OSR has ever been presented here. In fact, Michael and Sam went out of their way to turn down a barrel's thickness equal to 5 sheets of typing paper, then fired multiple oversized STEEL monometal bullets down said barrel. NO OSR.

I'm still waiting for a photo of OSR or just an explaination of how soldering two barrels side by side will cause rifling to appear on the outside of a barrel but it's somehow not an issue on a single barreled rifle! It's entirely possible to have a barrel with "stripes" but not a chance it was caused by shooting a "too hard" or oversized bullet. The barrel would bulge or burst. Hence the reference to the Ruger.

Rifling on the on the outside? Now that's funny!

Or rather ... crazy!

I'm more than happy to entertain you but when it comes to irrational comments I have one rebuttal ... OSR!

And yes, I'm laughing. No, not with you. At you! lol

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Rifling on the on the outside? Now that's funny!

Or rather ... crazy!

Actually your description (rifling on the outside) is totally irrelevant, but at the same time very funny and indeed crazy.

Candy striping, rifling popping out the muzzles, rifling migrating to the outside, they're just some of the crazy descriptions you keep repeating over and over.
Funny stuff for sure!

Hey by the way, I couldn't care less whether osr exists or not, or who believes it's real or not.
The whole osr thing has been turned into an amateur internet circus here, where guys like yourself seem to be totally clueless as to what osr actually is, or is not.

Some of the stuff has been damn funny though, with your candy striped Ruger topping the list at this point.

quote:

Originally posted by 5seventy:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Rifling on the on the outside? Now that's funny!

Or rather ... crazy!

Actually your description (rifling on the outside) is totally irrelevant, but at the same time very funny and indeed crazy.

Candy striping, rifling popping out the muzzles, rifling migrating to the outside, they're just some of the crazy descriptions you keep repeating over and over.
Funny stuff for sure!

Hey by the way, I couldn't care less whether osr exists or not, or who believes it's real or not.
The whole osr thing has been turned into an amateur internet circus here, where guys like yourself seem to be totally clueless as to what osr actually is, or is not.

Some of the stuff has been damn funny though, with your candy striped Ruger topping the list at this point.

So, what, pray tell, is YOUR version of this OSR phenomenon? I'm very pleased you're getting a laugh out of the "rifling on the outside of the barrel" and "rifling spitting out the end of the muzzle" versions. I've been laughing at those myself ever since I heard them the first time. Just to be clear, those definitions are NOT MINE. Those are the definitions of OSR put forth by the "experts" here on AR. Personally, I find them hilarious!!



Lots of yapping of your trap, but yet, still no proof of the ever elusive OSR. Or in your case, no explaination of what the term means to YOU! Please do, educate us. Then we can add that to the "candy striping", "rifling on the outside of the barrel", and "rifling spitting out the end of the barrel" definitions. I'll not hold my breath waiting!

A little video of the OSR proponents!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSr1VOuVwbg

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
A little video of the OSR proponents!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSr1VOuVwbg

Now that is funny, and is a perfect example of what I said before......


'The whole osr thing has been turned into an amateur internet circus'

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Lots of yapping of your trap, but yet, still no proof of the ever elusive OSR.

You know when it comes to yapping, you might just be top dog with over SEVENTY 'OSR' posts on AR.

Me, well I think I've got maybe TEN.
Yup, you win.

Just what I thought 570. No proof, no photos, not even your own definition.

No substance. No substance at all. Carry on yapping!

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Just what I thought 570. No proof, no photos, not even your own definition.

No substance. No substance at all. Carry on yapping!

Nobody could ever prove anything to you on this subject, and these days I doubt anyone would even bother to try. You would just keep yapping the same old story about your candy striped Ruger.

The funniest thing is that you are still totally clueless as to how irrelevant that particular Ruger is in any discussion about OSR.

If you ever figure that one out, you let us know, won't you.

quote:

Originally posted by 5seventy:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Just what I thought 570. No proof, no photos, not even your own definition.

No substance. No substance at all. Carry on yapping!

Nobody could ever prove anything to you on this subject, and these days I doubt anyone would even bother to try. You would just keep yapping the same old story about your candy striped Ruger.

The funniest thing is that you are still totally clueless as to how irrelevant that particular Ruger is in any discussion about OSR.

If you ever figure that one out, you let us know, won't you.

Yip Yap. Yip Yap!

quote:

Originally posted by Huvius:
I wonder, in a gun such as this one, can restriking and reblacking the barrels eliminate any evidence of "overstressed rifling"?
Also, and this is a question for another topic entirely, can OSR be detected on the outside of a button rifled barrel? Maybe they are button rifled before any contouring is done so it is never observed?

At the risk of fielding cannon balls by posting on a thread with any mention of OSR I say...................

That post-rifling after turning to final profile is a thought but I don't believe any barrels are rifled after turning to it's final shape.
However on the re-striking, I'm sure that would hide some existing OSR! OSR is sometimes not detrimental to regulation or accuracy. One of our guys who used to post here on AR has a vintage Belgian .470 double with very mild OSR on the last 4 or 5 inches at the muzzle end of both barrels. he brought it down to one of the DRSS get togethers, and the rifle still shoots just fine.
....................................................................

General FYI-
have a 1878 Colt Hammer Pedersoli Trail Guns Armory and a Sabatti hammerless 45-70 that I am willing to part with--

Both in great condition

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
OSR is sometimes not detrimental to regulation or accuracy. One of our guys who used to post here on AR has a vintage Belgian .470 double with very mild OSR on the last 4 or 5 inches at the muzzle end of both barrels. he brought it down to one of the DRSS get togethers, and the rifle still shoots just fine.

IIRC the main worry about OSR was that over time it might threaten the soldering between barrels. As to why it it has rarely been noticed or complained about in single-barrel rifles: first, they generally don't need such slim barrels to keep weight down and, secondly, don't have the soldering to worry about.

Sorry if someone has already trotted out these considerations.

I don't know if there is anything in OSR but, since hammer forging can put rifling into a barrel, I don't see why hard, unyielding bullets could not eventually take a thin barrel some distance the other way.

quote:

Originally posted by Colin Masters:
http://www.gunbroker.com/Aucti....aspx?Item=546627626

I scour the ads for doubles and this one is the best deal in a vintage nitro express rifle anywhere.

That is actually my wife's rifle. She asked me to sell it because she never personally bonded with it.

The history on the "OSR" has been interesting.

I bought the rifle from Shawn Joyce here on AR in the classifieds some years ago. There was no mention of OSR at that time and this doesn't surprise me. I never noticed it. I doubt Shawn ever noticed it. Mark Sullivan never noticed it when he guided Shawn to buffalo. Cal never noticed it when he examined it and shot it. Another friend that collects high end doubles (many pictured on Cal's books) examined the rifle when I had the inspection period while buying it from Shawn. He never noticed it.

We ended up with a buyer on Gun Broker and he is the one that "discovered" the OSR. I refunding his shipping and took the rifle back.

It took very careful examination with the lighting just right to talk yourself into seeing the image of a swirl at the ends of the barrels. It does not surprise me that Cal, Mark, Shawn, Myself, and the local high end collector never saw it.

Bottom line is that it means zero!! This gun shoots great. It just doesn't fit Joyce well, thus it's for sale.

Cheers
Jim

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
OSR is sometimes not detrimental to regulation or accuracy. One of our guys who used to post here on AR has a vintage Belgian .470 double with very mild OSR on the last 4 or 5 inches at the muzzle end of both barrels. he brought it down to one of the DRSS get togethers, and the rifle still shoots just fine.

IIRC the main worry about OSR was that over time it might threaten the soldering between barrels. As to why it it has rarely been noticed or complained about in single-barrel rifles: first, they generally don't need such slim barrels to keep weight down and, secondly, don't have the soldering to worry about. IIRC the main worry about OSR was that over time it might threaten the soldering between barrels. As to why it it has rarely been noticed or complained about in single-barrel rifles: first, they generally don't need such slim barrels to keep weight down and, secondly, don't have the soldering to worry about.

Sorry if someone has already trotted out these considerations.

I don't know if there is anything in OSR but, since hammer forging can put rifling into a barrel, I don't see why hard, unyielding bullets could not eventually take a thin barrel some distance the other way.

SO, what you really mean to say is that a "too hard" bullet might create "excessive strain" on the barrel by producing an excessively large bulge as the bullet travels down the barrel, thereby placing strain on the solder joint. That's plausible. But that IS NOT the description given for "Over Stressed RIFLING". Disrupting the soldering joint is not forcing rifling to appear on the outside of a barrel due to a bullet's traveling down it.

Again, I draw attention to the bullet strain research Michael and Sam conducted whereby they showed the highest producing strains actually came from one of the most widely accepted DR bullets on the market, the Woodliegh Solid, while the monos built by CEB showed the lowest strains. These strains were measured by the magnitude of the bulge driven by the bullet on it's path down the barrel, the very thing likely to affect a DR's solder joint. Later, their testing evolved into an attempt to produce evidence of OSR. In these tests, even an oversized STEEL Monometal bullet, fired down a barrel that had been turned to a thinness equal to 5 sheets of printer paper, failed to move rifling to the outside. Now, did that steel mono damage the rifling at all. Probably. But it didn't push it to the outside of the barrel.

For those wanting to revisit the tests, or for those who missed it the first time around, here is a link to the pertinent parts of the thread. Here you can see the oversized steel monos and the thinness of the test barrel. Definitive? No, but certainly a step in the right direction in terms of conducting experiments on the OSR theory. From my way of thinking, what needs to be tested next is a barrel made of the old "fluid" steels as this entire OSR thing has morphed a bit lately from "don't shoot monos in ANY DR" into being a "mono bullet in vintage DRs" theory now days! A bit like how "Global Warming" has morphed into "Climate Change" now that there hasn't been any warming for the past 18 Years. lol

http://forums.accuratereloadin...781002681#8781002681

I continue to bring up the Ruger example solely because with that single barreled rifle, there existed the exact evidence that all the descriptions of OSR, being a shadowing of "candy striping" on the outside of the barrel visible under certain lighting conditions. It was there from the factory and long before monos hit the market. Point being that for whatever reason, one might find evidence of that same shadowing on the outside of a barrel, but it has yet to be proven from a critically thinking perspective, that said shadowing was caused by the passage of a bullet. More than likely, it's some minor issue directly from the factory.

Critical proof of OSR? One would need to start with a barrel that has been thoroughly examined and declared to be OSR negative. Then fire a suspect bullet down the tube. Immediately afterward, re-examine said barrels for signs of the striping. Just seeing a "striped barrel" at a gun show and having the owner state it was caused by firing a Barnes bullet, without casting dispersion on the owner, is simply speculation on his part. This entire OSR theory reminds me a lot of the Global Warming issue as mentioned above. Normal scientific processes of postulating a theory, then conducting experiments to disprove said theory, only adopting the theory at the point that the experiments fail to disprove it, has completely been abandoned in favor of a near religious belief in unsubstantiated speculation and wives tales.

quote:

I continue to bring up the Ruger example solely because with that single barreled rifle, there existed the exact evidence that all the descriptions of OSR, being a shadowing of "candy striping" on the outside of the barrel visible under certain lighting conditions. It was there from the factory and long before monos hit the market.

Todd true OSR will show the stress in the exact rate of twist as the rifleing inside the barrel. I can assure you your Rugers’ pattern was not the same as the rifleing inside the barrel, and was as has been said many time caused by the cold hammer forging of the barrel that had not been polished away by Ruger.

As Frotbit stated mild OSR is very hard to see, and even harder to photograph, and if it is mild it doesn't usually effect shooting accuracy. However that doesn't mean it does not exist.
................. Over and out believe what ever you want, it's a free country!

One thing Frostbit's rifles does demonstrate is that even very slight OSR can effect re-sale, something which would be of great concern to me. If I'm going to all the trouble of bringing a nice vintage double into the field in pursuit of game then I might as well spend a bit of time developing a load to match. Boat loads of dangerous game were harvested with traditional bullets, no need for me to re-invent the wheel just so I can be state of the art. I'm pretty sure there is not much walking this plant that I would be under gunned for with a .450NE and some Woodlieghs. Rigby figured all this out nearly 120 years ago. Just one guys view.

I feel like I'm hijacking this thread since I have nothing to add about OSR. I would like to put in my 2 cents for the double I would buy tomorrow if I was in the market. I absolutely love the large action VC shown by Ozhunter in another thread. I went through a period where I was fortunate enough to own several British double rifles from 318 through 600. My favorite was always a WR Droplock. This large action by VC absolutely reminds me of the WR rifles. For the money it looks like the one to have.

quote:

Originally posted by skb:
One thing Frostbit's rifles does demonstrate is that even very slight OSR can effect re-sale,

I suspect it's more fear of the unknown when it comes to the declaration of the OSR.

As I said many folks with extensive double rifle experience handled and shot that double and no one even noticed. It's so slight I had to talk myself into actually "seeing" it. I'm just a full disclosure kind of guy and don;t really care if it sells so I had my gunsmith add the OSR declaration to the ad on gun broker.

I guess if someone was looking for a 1905 British double simply to occasionally pull it out of a safe and never actually take it in the field then the OSR might mean something.

I personally could't care less. I took my 1902 Army Navy elephant hunting in Zim. I had plenty of other rifles in an adequate caliber to take that weren't "collectibles" all the time knowing I could get some wear marks taking the double.

They are tools to be used as far as I'm concerned. The Army Navy is no worse for wear from the trip and now when I hold it, show it to someone, or in the case of this Saturday, take it to the double rifle shoot, it will be offered for anyone to shoot it. When they do I will think of the time in Zim.

That's what these guns are for.

That Lawn and Alder is an excellent shooting double with exquisite engraving. Someday someone else will own it and cherish it.

Cheers
Jim

quote:

Frostbit;
I suspect it's more fear of the unknown when it comes to the declaration of the OSR.

As I said many folks with extensive double rifle experience handled and shot that double and no one even noticed.

Your rifle sounds like the one another poster here brought to the 4K ranch in Texas for our annual DRSS get together. It had OCR on the last 4 or 5 inches of both barrels but it was like yours very difficult to see until it was pointed out to us by it's owner. It was also hard to photograph with normal digital cameras we had at the ranch. The rifle, however, shot very well,and so was not a problem.

Having said the above because the two rifles belonging to Frostbit, and Paul were not effected by it doesn't mean anyone should disregard the possibility of causing it by using very hard bullets like the original A-square brass mono-metal solids with no so-called pressure rings that give the displaced metal a place to go between the rings.

However just to claim OSR doesn't even exist simply because it hasn't been seen in pictures is, IMO, placing ones' head in the sand! You don't have to believe it exists but why take the chance shooting very hard bullets in a very expensive double rifle?

I have a full box Minus two that were installed in a pair of dummy rounds of those .458 A-square mono-metal brass 400 gr solids that I will give to anyone who wants take the chance and shoot them in his double rifle!
..................................................................

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

A bit like how "Global Warming" has morphed into "Climate Change" now that there hasn't been any warming for the past 18 Years. lol

This entire OSR theory reminds me a lot of the Global Warming issue as mentioned above. Normal scientific processes of postulating a theory, then conducting experiments to disprove said theory, only adopting the theory at the point that the experiments fail to disprove it, has completely been abandoned in favor of a near religious belief in unsubstantiated speculation and wives tales.

Whatever the truth of the OSR matter, Todd, you do your argument no favours by comparing it with global warming. The world's temperature has been rising this century and consilience on the evidence and effects have pretty well laid to rest any doubts now, notwithstanding Lord Monkton and the fossil-fuel-funded fossils.

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
...It had OCR on the last 4 or 5 inches of both barrels but it was like yours very difficult to see until it was pointed out to us by it's owner. It was also hard to photograph with normal digital cameras...


However just to claim OSR doesn't even exist simply because it hasn't been seen in pictures...

..................................................................

These two points are part of what I am trying to get to the bottom of.

How would a rifle exhibit OSR at the muzzle end when the bullet, regardless of construction, would be well engraved with the rifling of the barrel long before it gets to the end of the bore?
And, if it cannot be photographed or even measured (as often mentioned) and only observable with the naked eye, wouldn't that mean that OSR as explained here is a visual sign of something going on but maybe not overstressed rifling at all?
Without details of the particular rifles, I wonder if this OSR could be heat related or a change in the finish on the barrels?

In Todd's case, it's not OSR, but OCD :-)

Hovius, here is a quote from the book Dangerous Game Rifles that may shed some light on the subject!

quote:

DANGEROUS GAME RIFLES Page 250

The A-Square Monolithic solids in 700,577 and 416. The monolithic is one of the best solids on the market today. The perfectly radiused nose reduces feeding difficulties; however, its’ naval-bronze construction has been blamed for problems in some double rifles.

That being said the Monolithic has not been universally welcomed. When A-square began loading ammunition for the Nitro-express cartridges in the mid-1980s some owners of old double rifles complained that the bullets were damaging their barrels. The tubes on a double rifle have much thinner walls than the barrels on a bolt action, and there was considerable variation in bore diameters in the early days. Being softer a standard copper-and-lead solid will allow itself to be squeezed down if it encounters a slightly under sized bore. The monolithic being harder will not.
No less a figure than David Winks, former manager of the Holland & Holland factory and director of the company, insisted to me in 1993 that he had seen barrels that had been deformed by firing Monolithics. He said the rifiling had been pushed through the walls “imprinted “ so that, if you looked down the exterior surface of the barrel at a shallow angle , you would actually see the rifling reflected in the blueing.
At the time Art Alphin vigorously denied that such did or could occur, and the controversy was never finally resolved. I have not seen evidence of it myself , but I’m not about to doubt the word of David Winks. If I owned an old double, I would have the bores slugged before I fired any modern solid through it , Monolithic or otherwise. A buyer of a new double rifle should get the opinion of the maker and abide by it!

.....................................................................

Are there any photos of cross sections, poss etched and stained, of barrels with this anomaly?

After reading through this thread, you guys have confirmed with doubles what I have come to understand with nearlt all vintage items. Some vintage items have collector value, but when it comes to function, newer--excluding the cheap stuff--is almost always better.

I went through that older is better phase with pre-64 M-70s vs classics and new M-70s, vintage trumpets vs new, even old automobiles be new. In nearly every case I had to fuss WAY more with the old items than the new to get optimal performance.

Obviously, I am not a sentimental guy and while I can appreciate the craftsmanship in some of the old stuff, I appreciate the precision, strength, and function of the newer stuff much better. Your mileage may vary......

quote:

Originally posted by Huvius:

These two points are part of what I am trying to get to the bottom of.

How would a rifle exhibit OSR at the muzzle end when the bullet, regardless of construction, would be well engraved with the rifling of the barrel long before it gets to the end of the bore?
And, if it cannot be photographed or even measured (as often mentioned) and only observable with the naked eye, wouldn't that mean that OSR as explained here is a visual sign of something going on but maybe not overstressed rifling at all?
Without details of the particular rifles, I wonder if this OSR could be heat related or a change in the finish on the barrels?

Huvius, stop and think for a moment! The metal in the barrels are progressively thinner as they go down the barrel from breech to muzzle. The fact may be that OSR is also in the thicker end of the barrels as well, but being thicker has a better chance of rebounding, and so is simply not visible on the outside till it reaches the thinner wall thickness at or near the muzzles.

As I've said on several occasions I have only seen two examples of OSR and in both cases it was only visible on the last 4 or 5 inches of the barrels near the muzzles.
I think the word of No less a figure than David Winks, former manager of the Holland & Holland factory and director of the company,would be enough for even those who are looking for Sasquach behind every tree!

........................................................................

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

A bit like how "Global Warming" has morphed into "Climate Change" now that there hasn't been any warming for the past 18 Years. lol

This entire OSR theory reminds me a lot of the Global Warming issue as mentioned above. Normal scientific processes of postulating a theory, then conducting experiments to disprove said theory, only adopting the theory at the point that the experiments fail to disprove it, has completely been abandoned in favor of a near religious belief in unsubstantiated speculation and wives tales.

Whatever the truth of the OSR matter, Todd, you do your argument no favours by comparing it with global warming. The world's temperature has been rising this century and consilience on the evidence and effects have pretty well laid to rest any doubts now, notwithstanding Lord Monkton and the fossil-fuel-funded fossils.

To the contrary. That the earth has warmed a bit (actually none over the last 19 years or so now), is provable. WHAT caused it is the heart of the question. To the old "97% of scientist agree" statement, one has to go back and look at the actual study that produced that statement. In fact, the study said that of all the peer reviewed articles written on global warming, 34% stated GW to be accepted as absolute, and of the 34% of articles written claiming GW to be real, 97% stated it was man made. Here's a bit of a discussion on the issue:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...ok&utm_medium=social

I see this as exactly the same type of "out of context" argument. That you might find a bit of "striping" or "shading", as some have called it, on the outside of a barrel, in no way confirms it is a reverse print of rifling cause by a "too hard bullet" traveling down the barrel. More than likely, a bit of lack of finishing detail from the factory ... an occurrence I suspect certain "established" rifle maker's representatives would be embarrassed about and want to quickly redirect attention away from. Not to mention certain writers who make a living off of having access to said "established" rifle makers representatives carrying water for their redirection efforts! wink wink!!


So yeah. Right in line with the entire global warming debate. Is the earth very slightly warmer than 100 years ago? Yep. Is it much warmer than a few thousand years ago ... say as compared to the last ice age? Absolutely! Is that temp change man made? Hmmmm. Not so sure. Can you find imperfections on the finish of a rifle barrel? Sure. Was it caused by a "too hard" bullet? Bwaahahahaha!

quote:

Originally posted by Huvius:

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
...It had OCR on the last 4 or 5 inches of both barrels but it was like yours very difficult to see until it was pointed out to us by it's owner. It was also hard to photograph with normal digital cameras...



However just to claim OSR doesn't even exist simply because it hasn't been seen in pictures...

..................................................................

These two points are part of what I am trying to get to the bottom of.

How would a rifle exhibit OSR at the muzzle end when the bullet, regardless of construction, would be well engraved with the rifling of the barrel long before it gets to the end of the bore?
And, if it cannot be photographed or even measured (as often mentioned) and only observable with the naked eye, wouldn't that mean that OSR as explained here is a visual sign of something going on but maybe not overstressed rifling at all?
Without details of the particular rifles, I wonder if this OSR could be heat related or a change in the finish on the barrels?

I think we have a winner! Bingo. An issue with the finish on the barrel! Just like my M-77 had.

Absolutely nothing special about soldering two barrels together that would cause rifling to appear on the outside of the tube of a double but not a single barreled rifle!

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:

Huvius, stop and think for a moment! The metal in the barrels are progressively thinner as they go down the barrel from breech to muzzle. The fact may be that OSR is also in the thicker end of the barrels as well, but being thicker has a better chance of rebounding, and so is simply not visible on the outside till it reaches the thinner wall thickness at or near the muzzles.

As I've said on several occasions I have only seen two examples of OSR and in both cases it was only visible on the last 4 or 5 inches of the barrels near the muzzles.
I think the word of No less a figure than David Winks, former manager of the Holland & Holland factory and director of the company,would be enough for even those who are looking for Sasquach behind every tree!

........................................................................

Mac, the only way this could be is if the bore was tapered.
I don't care what composition the bullet is, if it is softer than the barrel steel, it will be well drawn down to the bore dimensions long before it gets to the last few inches of the barrel.
Why is it that we don't hear reports of OSR in 8mm, 9mm, and 9.3mm drilling barrels which have the thinnest barrels of any rifle and often shoot partition and solid bullets?

Finally, one true method of measuring OSR is to use a finely drilled 'C' shaped ring, sized to fit tightly at the point of the observable OSR, fit it over the barrel and shine a light from behind. No light coming through, no material deformation.

quote:

Mac, the only way this could be is if the bore was tapered.
I don't care what composition the bullet is, if it is softer than the barrel steel, it will be well drawn down to the bore dimensions long before it gets to the last few inches of the barrel.

Mud is quite a bit softer than barrel steel as well but it bulges and blows barrels every duck season!

quote:

Why is it that we don't hear reports of OSR in 8mm, 9mm, and 9.3mm drilling barrels which have the thinnest barrels of any rifle and often shoot partition and solid bullets?

There is a large difference between a Barnes Monolithic solid and partitions and many other solids. Most mono-metal solids today have so-called pressure rings cut into the shank of the bullet so the rifling doesn’t have to engrave the SOLID bore size shank, and give the displaced metal a place to go in between the pressure rings, and are made from softer material as well.

There has been at least one report here on AR of a Chapius 9.3X74R double rifle which has very thing barrels having OSR, and barrels separated by shooting a Barnes Monolithic solids in it. We seldom get reports of any kind with drillings here AR.

Be my guest and believe what ever you want thousands of people used to believe the world was flat, maybe some still do. If YOU haven't seen it OSR must not exist.
....................................................................

When I said "solid" I meant monolithic.
If it is there, it can be measured. Otherwise it is a surface discoloration.
Now, I suppose that discoloration could be caused by deformation and subsequent return to spec if the steel's elasticity will allow it.
Strain gauges prove that all barrels experience this deformation and rebound with every type of projectile.

quote:

Originally posted by Huvius:
When I said "solid" I meant monolithic.

Huvius, The word “Monolithic” is a product name for one particular solid made by Barnes. This has a long shank that is groove diameter while the nose is bore diameter. This bullet is made of very hard naval bronze and has no so-called pressure rings with cuts between them deeper than the bore diameter designed to give the engraved material a place to go. The Monolithic solids increase chamber pressure enough to lock a double rifle closed in many cases if nothing else. I have a full box of Barnes Monolithic 400 gr .458 solids less five bullets loaded for my double years ago. I fired two of them and had to break the rifle over my knee to get it open. I will give those bullets, free of charge, to anyone stupid enough to fire them in a double rifle. These are the bullets that H&H was referring to in the quote I posted from the book “Dangerous Game Rifles”!

The newer mono metal solids are made far different than an original Barnes Monolithic solid. Not only giving the displaced metal by engraving a place to go between the pressure rings but is also made of much softer material. These mono-metal solids are made of softer alloys utilizing copper in most cases, and are fine for use in double rifles as long as the proper bore dimensions are present in the rifle. The bullets like the North Fork, Gs Custom, and others with the same basic changes in design, IMO are fine for a proper bored double.

I use North Fork in all my doubles that the proper diameters are available for.
...................................................................... BYE! Over&Out

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

To the contrary. That the earth has warmed a bit (actually none over the last 19 years or so now), is provable. WHAT caused it is the heart of the question. To the old "97% of scientist agree" statement, one has to go back and look at the actual study that produced that statement. In fact, the study said that of all the peer reviewed articles written on global warming, 34% stated GW to be accepted as absolute, and of the 34% of articles written claiming GW to be real, 97% stated it was man made. Here's a bit of a discussion on the issue:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...ok&utm_medium=social

I see this as exactly the same type of "out of context" argument. That you might find a bit of "striping" or "shading", as some have called it, on the outside of a barrel, in no way confirms it is a reverse print of rifling cause by a "too hard bullet" traveling down the barrel. More than likely, a bit of lack of finishing detail from the factory ... an occurrence I suspect certain "established" rifle maker's representatives would be embarrassed about and want to quickly redirect attention away from. Not to mention certain writers who make a living off of having access to said "established" rifle makers representatives carrying water for their redirection efforts! wink wink!!


So yeah. Right in line with the entire global warming debate. Is the earth very slightly warmer than 100 years ago? Yep. Is it much warmer than a few thousand years ago ... say as compared to the last ice age? Absolutely! Is that temp change man made? Hmmmm. Not so sure. Can you find imperfections on the finish of a rifle barrel? Sure. Was it caused by a "too hard" bullet? Bwaahahahaha!

Could it be, Todd, that like the comedian's sardine, you are in oil? That article you present reminds me of Mark Twain's quote about lies, damned lies and statistics. That particular university survey is just one of many different studies and scientific observations on the matter.

That about 95 per cent of scientists think man-made global warming is likely doesn't really matter, it is the triangulating focus of many different scientific studies (the consilience) that carries the weight, just as it has for the theory of evolution, impossible to 'prove' in one place but plainer by the decade to anyone with eyes. May I suggest it is possible that either the Brietbart story or the university study it critiques might not be the last word.

Perhaps the Murdoch and Dogpatch press refuses to run these stories, but other respectable media sources report that many years this century have been found to have world-aggregated temperatures above the long-term average; wine vintages have come forward about a month within the last 30 or 40 years; rising seas and increased storms are making many Pacific islands untenable; the Great Barrier Reef corals are becoming (as predicted) more-and-more bleached; the seas are becoming acidified by increased carbon dioxide absorption; forest fires are being seen throughout the world at levels not see in previous centuries ... the list goes on.