I need opinions on the damage that these may cause to Double guns, vs Bolt action rifles
I have a 500 NE Hambrusch and a 470 Searcy and have used BArnes for years in y calibres from 416RM to 280AI and love them, but I understand their may be something I don't know about effect on Double
Appreciate solid help
Thx

NitroExpress.com had a long thread on this topic. You might want to look it up.
Some of the Barnes were claimed to ruin DR barrels.
Bob Jurewicz

Do you have Graeme Wright's book on Shooting the British Double Rifle? The 3rd edition was out about 8 months ago & it is a MUST for double owners. Though I do not own a double rifle (I have been longing to own one for over 35 years) I bought the first edition of the book long ago and got the vastly expanded 3rd edition last year directly from the author.

This book is very informative and it strongly advises against using mono metal solids in double rifles as they cause OSR (over stressed rifling). The Nitroexpress forum thread on this subject is very controversial and at times confusing.

Good luck with your DR shooting & hunting.

First of all, contact Hambrusch and Searcy and ask them what they have to say on the matter.

Ambrose,

Have you considered the North Forks, at least for the 470?

Several of us shoot them and feel they place less stress on the barrels than Woodleighs. GS Customs is another choice and I believe guarantees their bullets will not harm your rifle.

Personally I have enough faith in NF them to special order some for my 105 year old 450-400 Boswell.

It is not a bad idea to have your barrel slugged to confirm bore diameter.

I know the initial question was about Barnes, justed wanted to make certain you knew about other choices.

Ambrose,
I own a vintage British double rifle and two modern doubles. I will not use monolithic solids in my vintage rifle. I personally do not see the advantage of using the monolithic solids in my other doubles. I can't see the advantage at double rifle speeds.

Double rifles have been killing game with lead core bullets for a long time. It is all about regulation and consistency of velocity.

I think that monolithic bullets do a great job when driven fast enough out of a single shot, semi auto or bolt action rifle!

Each person ought to make up their own mind about what to shoot in their rifles. You bought it, you should be able to shoot whatever you want in it.

Go to it! Let us know how it works out!

Rusty:

You can take this for what it is worth. I just got off the phone with Ty, one of the technical guys at Barnes. While I was mostly asking about the Barnes banded solids, he said there is absolutely no issue with Barnes bullets in double rifle. He said they will not cause OSR or cause your rifle to de-laminate and in fact, they are getting very close to finishing up and publishing the results of their testing with strain gauges and such to finally put this issue to rest.

Ty told me that the OSR question came up with homogenous bullets because some of them were fired in vintage guns and were not the correct size for that particular bore. Again, when in doubt, slug your bore, right?

Anyway, I think you are being prudent. I wouldn't shoot them in a vintage gun but in a newer gun, I honestly don't think there is a problem. I picked up a box of banded solids for my .470 and I intend to give them a try. I know I could always just stick with the Woodleigh copper clad steel solids but I just think the banded solids with the flat meplat are a whole bunch better and I think the the tests the Michael458 has done bear that out. I will keep you posted.

I've been listening to this debate for years about the barnes bullets. I still haven't heard anything that would change my mind about the monolithic barnes banded bullets. My personal opinion is that it's all bullshit. Feel free to use the barnes bullets in my rifles, if they have a problem, I'll fix it.
Also in the last 30 yrs. I've never had a problem with the monolithic bullets. I will say that I wouldn't use them in the old English rifles. I worry about the steel in them. This comment is based on experince with them.

I don't know about the bullshit but the OLD solid Barnes brass solids were hard on barrels and a few anyway burst barrels on doubles.

My one time PH friend Barry van Heerdon used the OLD Barnes solids in his .470 William Evans, until one of the barrels split, about at the half way point of its length.

Until the banded stuff came along everyone that didn't use the traditional jacketed solids used the OLD Barnes brass solids. Until a barrel got busted!

The problem with the OLD Barnes solids is it was pushing an incompressible 10 pound bag of shit down a nine pound shit hole in the barrel. Sumpin' gotta give, like the rifle barrel.

It ain't mysterious, it ain't magic, it's just physics, and they just never should have been used in doubles.

Of course, my hindsight is apparently a hell of a lot better than my foresight! (Cause I used them in my double too!)

A number of sources have told me that the banded solids to quite well as they have a slighly smaller diameter coupled with the bands makes it doable. I'm not sure about the TSX.

Brett

Will it isn't Physics per say. It's the trash steel in the pre war guns. And I did say banded bullets. Also I've rebarreled old English rifles that burst half way down that used the Woodliegh softs. Looked like a tripod. There's no mystery in my mind.

What people who blame the solids has not told you all is that the old English made barrels were not all to spec. as to the bore and groove diameters.

quote:

The problem with the OLD Barnes solids is it was pushing an incompressible 10 pound bag of shit down a nine pound shit hole in the barrel.

Here goes Will trying to impress us with all that highly technical talk again!
Peter.

Butch,

I don't disagree with anything you had said or say now.

But (you knew a but was coming, didn't you?) it just doesn't make sense to push an incompressible bullet down a barrel, be it in a double rifle or not.

I don't want any barrel of mine with a big bulge going down the barrel every time I pull the trigger. Though the rifling might wear off before the barrel fatigues to the point of busting a barrel using better steel, there is just no point.

And the guys that said their barrels busted using Woodleigh softs, do you really believe that? Those must have been some weak barrels (or old Barnes solids!).

quote:

I've been listening to this debate for years about the barnes bullets. I still haven't heard anything that would change my mind about the monolithic barnes banded bullets. My personal opinion is that it's all bullshit. Feel free to use the barnes bullets in my rifles, if they have a problem, I'll fix it.

I understand the concept how a monometal bullet will stress a barrel and break it off the rib. I'll be the first here to say I just don't know.

My collage rifle team toured the Marlen plant when we were shooting in the northeast. I watched a rifleing button swell the barrel as it passed through but I don't think you could ever compare any bullet to a rifleing button.

What I do know is that Mr. Searcy really impressed me the first time I ever spoke with him about 15 years ago and his comment above cements that opinion. I feel pritty sure that no other double rifle maker is makeing this gaurentie and I would guess some of them may hide behind it if you ever had a prblem and they found out you had been shooting Barns bullets in them.

A friend of mine is convinced that a beretta 92 is the most reliable c.c.w. gun. We all know that we all have opinions but what do we base them on? In his case he decided to wear one out and see. After 86,000 rounds he broke the slide release ( go figure) at a little over 106,000 rounds he swelled the chamber and cracked it. A new barrel and he got a couple thousand more rounds untill finally he broke the lock on the right side looking down with the slide off.

The point is I want someone to do this type of test so we all will know. In the mean time I probably will avoid shooting any mono metal bullets just because they make me nervous and I don't like them anyway.

I will also continue to carry a Beretta and I will really consider a Searcy as my next double rifle purchas.

And the ironic thing about those OLD Barnes solids was they didn't penetrate for crap.

I hope that is not the case for the A-Square solid brass solids, but .....

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
Butch,

I don't disagree with anything you had said or say now.

But (you knew a but was coming, didn't you?) it just doesn't make sense to push an incompressible bullet down a barrel, be it in a double rifle or not.

I don't want any barrel of mine with a big bulge going down the barrel every time I pull the trigger. Though the rifling might wear off before the barrel fatigues to the point of busting a barrel using better steel, there is just no point.

And the guys that said their barrels busted using Woodleigh softs, do you really believe that? Those must have been some weak barrels (or old Barnes solids!).

I'd say that you are off base. Here it is from a man that acctualy tested them

quote:

Originally posted by Ganyana:
Pressure is just one issue. Barrel expansion is another matter entirely.

I have a little device to measure barrel expasion at the muzzle. woodleigh and Barnes give the same amount of expansion at a rifles muzzle in both .375 and .458 (sorry haven't tested other cal's yet).

Haven't tried Northforks, did try some other 'copper alloy' bullets from a big maker..02mm less expansion than woodleigh, but I don't think those will be launched commercially unless the US bannes lead or something strange.

quote:

Originally posted by Ganyana:
And Butch is spot on re bore size in English doubles. .375 flanged uses .373 bullets. Stick Barnes .375 bullets through an early one and you are asking for touble (all the later ones I have seen have regular .375 bores but the early ones didn't and the CIP specifications still show the smaller bore size). The .450/400's came in 5 version and 3 bore sizes. .405, .408 and .411. I would hate to stick a .411 Woodleigh or a Barnes through a .405 bore. same story with the .475's etc.

IF you have the correct size bullets for your bore, then I would be very happy shooting Barnes banded solids. NB- I tried some of their very old solid shank .458 bullets in my lott and they gave 0,01mm More expansion than woodleighs.

http://forums.accuratereloadin...1043/m/272109883/p/2

Not sure what the point is, but I ain't changing my mind. Nothing there to get me to do so.

I think you must be thinking banded solids. I am not talking about them.

Banded solids are a very old German idea that a hundred years later showed up on the doorstep of bullet makers. Not the same as the OLD Barnes solid shank brass bullets.

Will

I sometimes think with all these discussions on bullets etc
that we need 1 Picture with labels that shows all of the bullets
we are talking about in a line next to each other.

Your thoughts ?

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
Butch,

I don't disagree with anything you had said or say now.

But (you knew a but was coming, didn't you?) it just doesn't make sense to push an incompressible bullet down a barrel, be it in a double rifle or not.

I don't want any barrel of mine with a big bulge going down the barrel every time I pull the trigger. Though the rifling might wear off before the barrel fatigues to the point of busting a barrel using better steel, there is just no point.

And the guys that said their barrels busted using Woodleigh softs, do you really believe that? Those must have been some weak barrels (or old Barnes solids!).

But the bullets are compressible and are softer than steel. The fact that the bullets are engraved by the rifling shows that the bullets are compressible

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
Butch,

I don't disagree with anything you had said or say now.

But (you knew a but was coming, didn't you?) it just doesn't make sense to push an incompressible bullet down a barrel, be it in a double rifle or not.

I don't want any barrel of mine with a big bulge going down the barrel every time I pull the trigger. Though the rifling might wear off before the barrel fatigues to the point of busting a barrel using better steel, there is just no point.

And the guys that said their barrels busted using Woodleigh softs, do you really believe that? Those must have been some weak barrels (or old Barnes solids!).

But the bullets are compressible and are softer than steel. The fact that the bullets are engraved by the rifling shows that the bullets are compressible

But that is the problem, brass is not compressible.

There are probably many combinations of bullet diameter, bore (land) diameter, and groove diameter to have the many different results of bullet effects in barrels.

When the bullet first jumps out of the cartridge and engages the rifling the lands push the bullet material out of the way or partially crushes the bullet in case of jacketed softs.

In my Taylor it looks like the bullet jacket material just squeezes into the corner (radius) between the land and the groove. And the bullet diameter is probably just slightly less than the groove diameter.

And if there is no place for this jacket material to go, or not enough room for it to go somewhere, the barrel expands.

So my 416 bullets wind up with a little ridge of jacket material along the grooves cut by the rifling.

The extent to which a barrel expands will depend on all that and the number of lands, how they are cut, and probably lots of other parameters I haven't thought of!

Besides that I can't give everything away or you won't buy my next book.

Hey guys I thought I'd post some info on here for you. Cal Pappas has an article on his website about this very topic. Here's the link: http://www.calpappas.com/id14.html Look half way down the page for the article. Here's some pictures of some Barnes solids shot out of Cal's 600NE.





Brett

Exactly what I'm talking about.

The rifling doesn't cut into the shank and at least there is a bit of room for the brass from getting displaced by the barrels and lands has some place to go. The harder the brass (or copper, or whatever) the less it is going to get pushed into the grooves and the more the barrel will expand, and vice versa.

Searcy gaurantees they're fine in his barrels, so shoot them in his barrels. He's in the US, and stands behind his guns, so if there is a problem, there is a reletively easy solution.

But Hamrusch doesn't, so far as I know, and until they do, it would be wise to not shoot them in the Hambrusch. And Hambrusch is in Austria - or Germany? - and sending the rifle back to them would be a pita at best.

As far as any advantage, I agree with the poster who said that at NE velocities, there isn't much that is gained over a Woodleigh, maybe nothing over the steel jacketed, flat nose Hornaday solid.

However, North Forks or GS Customs offer greater penetration over round nose steel jacketed solids. And with their proper driving band design, where the bands which are engraved are small in width, and the grooves between the bands larger in width than the bands, to accomodate material displaced by engraving, they are safe in doubles for sure.

I find that for elephants, a Woodleigh solid in the first barrel and a North Fork (or GS Custom) in the second is a perfect combination. North Forks for second and all subsequent shots, but Woodleigh for the first.

JPK

Here, my friends is an easy selution to this problem (or debate) Butch says use them in his rifles, some other say no! I say use them if you want and if you are willing to live with that decision ! With the Searcy you have no problem outside not having your rifle for a while if it does hurt the barrels.

My decision is I will not use any mono-metal bullet in one any of my doubles except the North Fork, or the GS Custom, all others need not apply, and then only after the barrels are slugged to make sure of the bore & land measurements.
I will say here, that the new Barnes banded solids are a vast improvement over the earlier ones, but I'll let others use them!

If mono-metal bullets without properly designed pressure rings or with very hard metal float you canoe then paddle on up stream. I'll walk or wait here for you!

For the 500NE, Barnes Banded solids are .509" Other makes eg. Woodleigh are .510"
Peter.

Well, now there are three companies that seem to be OK with Barnes Banded Solids in their big bore doubles.

Searcy - per his own message above;
Merkel - I have an email from them last year saying they had no issue using them in their doubles;
Verney-Carron - I sent an email two weeks ago and promptly received a response that they too "had no issue" using BBS in their doubles.

Anyone hear anything from Chapuis?

I agree with Rusty - do what you think is best, accept the responsibility of having done so and report your results.

For me, I'll be trying BBS, RGB, Macifej and AHR monometals in my 600 NE. All worked profoundly well in my 600 OK. Whatever keeps both barrels where I want at the velocity I want is what will be going to Africa with me next.

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37: I will not use any mono-metal bullet in one any of my doubles except the North Fork, or the GS Custom.

+1

Kind of off the subject, but can I slug the barrel or does a gunsmith need to do it. How is it done, pardon my ignorance!