Gentlemen,

I have a Rigby 470NE built in 1926. I have only shot ammo loaded with Woodleigh bullets. Today I shot 12 rounds of Federal Premium with Woodleigh solids. It shot so well with that ammo that I want to try some other Federal ammo.(They don't make that ammo anymore) Research has shown me that Federal now loads Swift A Frames and TBBC bullets in their ammo. Barnes loads their VOR-TX bullets as well. I remember a quite divided discussion here and on NE regarding acceptable bullets for an older DR. Has anything changed? Are these bullets safe to shoot from a vintage DR?

Here are 303 pages of discussion on this topic and more.

http://forums.accuratereloadin...861098911#2861098911

Look for the parts where Michael and Sam performed barrel strain tests on all types of bullets and barrel thicknesses.

Thanks for that Todd,

I remember reading that long ago. If I remember correctly, the conclusion was that Barnes were safe in any DR. I Don't remember if Swift A frames were tested. I'll revisit it.

I guess I'm also asking if factory ammo (not hand loads) are safe. Does anyone shoot new Swifts, Barnes or TBBC's out of their vintage DR?

Todd check your PM

Here we go, here we go, here we go ...

IIRC it was finally established that if you use modern monos with the correct 'driving bands', they may not be a threat to your thin barrels and solder.

The most bizarre pronouncement I recall was H&H warning users not to shoot FMP bullets in their doubles.

quote:

I guess I'm also asking if factory ammo (not hand loads) are safe. Does anyone shoot new Swifts, Barnes or TBBC's out of their vintage DR?

I won't shoot anything but Woodleighs or cup and lead core bullets out of my vintage doubles.

I have handled rifles with OSR and I'm not interested in seeing it happen with my rifles.

Lot's of armchair quarterbacks will tell you different but it's not their 25k to 75k rifle on the line.

quote:

Originally posted by 470Evans:

quote:

I guess I'm also asking if factory ammo (not hand loads) are safe. Does anyone shoot new Swifts, Barnes or TBBC's out of their vintage DR?

I won't shoot anything but Woodleighs or cup and lead core bullets out of my vintage doubles.

I have handled rifles with OSR and I'm not interested in seeing it happen with my rifles.

Lot's of armchair quarterbacks will tell you different but it's not their 25k to 75k rifle on the line.

+1,

Like I said...

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

+1 Todd. I considered using that one myself but worried the green guy may have got that way from eating too much copper.

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

+1 Todd. I considered using that one myself but worried the green guy may have got that way from eating too much copper.

To the both of you,respectfully of course ,how many vintage DR'S have you shot ?

I’ve wondered this and shoot them anyway. Not sure what to think

Not to start up the controversy of whether or not OSR exists (it doesn't, or at least, isn't caused by a bullet traveling down a barrel, and brought about simply from the act of soldering two barrels together, etc., but I digress . ), but from the link I provided above, Michael and Sam went to great lengths to run every conceivable test possible to test bullets and barrel strains. There is a lot of good info there that was arrived at with repeatable results.

Regardless of your persuasion on the theory of OSR, that Woodliegh bullet was consistently shown to produce the highest barrel strains of all the bullets tested. It's a steel shanked bullet with a thin layer of gilding copper.

So as you guys with the vintage doubles stated, it's your investment. I'm just puzzled by the choice of bullet you guys think is "safe"!

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Not to start up the controversy of whether or not OSR exists (it doesn't, or at least, isn't caused by a bullet traveling down a barrel, and brought about simply from the act of soldering two barrels together, etc., but I digress . ), but from the link I provided above, Michael and Sam went to great lengths to run every conceivable test possible to test bullets and barrel strains. There is a lot of good info there that was arrived at with repeatable results.

Regardless of your persuasion on the theory of OSR, that Woodliegh bullet was consistently shown to produce the highest barrel strains of all the bullets tested. It's a steel shanked bullet with a thin layer of gilding copper.

So as you guys with the vintage doubles stated, it's your investment. I'm just puzzled by the choice of bullet you guys think is "safe"!

This is from a soft Hornady .450 Nitro in a Gibbs rifle. Whats your theory?.

Wow, That's horrible. I hope no one got hurt on that.

What caused it? An obstruction?

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Wow, That's horrible. I hope no one got hurt on that.

What caused it? An obstruction?

It was Hornady .450 ammo that caused it.(me really...I pulled the trigger..:LOL).

Old vintage doublerifle shooting modern hard jacked bullet is a no-no. The rifling isn`t able to bite a groove into the bullet. The steel is too soft.

quote:

Originally posted by jens poulsen:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Wow, That's horrible. I hope no one got hurt on that.

What caused it? An obstruction?

It was Hornady .450 ammo that caused it.(me really...I pulled the trigger..:LOL).

Old vintage doublerifle shooting modern hard jacked bullet is a no-no. The rifling isn`t able to bite a groove into the bullet. The steel is too soft.

Interesting Jens. I seem to remember the Hornday's showing some of the highest barrel strains from Michael and Sam's research as well. I think I made mention of it previously but it's been awhile since I read all of that data.

But yeah, it's similar in construction to the Woodliegh bullets with that steel jacket. I'm still surprised it would burst like that, assuming the bullets weren't oversized or some other issue with the specific load? Was that a factory round or a hand load?

Sorry about your rifle and hope you didn't get hurt.

Actually I linked to the wrong thread. There is a lot of good info in that Terminal Bullet thread but for Double Rifles, this is the better information.


http://forums.accuratereloadin...201069141#1201069141

Here is some data for the 470 showing the Woodleigh and Hornady bullets.

http://forums.accuratereloadin...881093841#6881093841

There's a lot more in the thread. You just have to search it a bit to find the bullets you may be interested in.

Here is another where it appears Michael is pointing out extreme barrel strains with the Hornady DGS and Woodleigh FMJ.

http://forums.accuratereloadin...091089071#4091089071


This for the 500 NE.

And I believe this was the final results on the 500 NE.


http://forums.accuratereloadin...381077271#2381077271

Guess I better stick with paper-patched lead in my Damascus .577.

quote:

Originally posted by jens poulsen:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Not to start up the controversy of whether or not OSR exists (it doesn't, or at least, isn't caused by a bullet traveling down a barrel, and brought about simply from the act of soldering two barrels together, etc., but I digress . ), but from the link I provided above, Michael and Sam went to great lengths to run every conceivable test possible to test bullets and barrel strains. There is a lot of good info there that was arrived at with repeatable results.

Regardless of your persuasion on the theory of OSR, that Woodliegh bullet was consistently shown to produce the highest barrel strains of all the bullets tested. It's a steel shanked bullet with a thin layer of gilding copper.

So as you guys with the vintage doubles stated, it's your investment. I'm just puzzled by the choice of bullet you guys think is "safe"!

This is from a soft Hornady .450 Nitro in a Gibbs rifle. Whats your theory?.

There is something wrong here.That can't happen to a vintage double....they are best quality remember! I wonder if its value will still go up even after this.Seriously,this could have been caused by an obstruction.

Why do you need to be a Jerk George. Obviously Jens' expensive rifle is ruined. Who knows the actual cause but no need to rub salt in the wound.

Reading that the hornady DGS 500 in 470 is only slightly more than average? I assume it is far less than proof and still safe. Why would they sell it if it wasn’t?

I have an old 470 but large frameand beefy Krupp’s barrels. I hope I’d safe cause I shoot those for practice ie cheap

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Why do you need to be a Jerk George. Obviously Jens' expensive rifle is ruined. Who knows the actual cause but no need to rub salt in the wound.

Here you again acting like you know it all.How I am I supposed to know whose rifle that is? On a side note, before you tell us all there is about OSR or barrel pressure, didn't you post a picture some time ago of a monumental bullet you fired from your double that was badly engraved from top to bottom? Imagine shooting that in a vintage double.

The barrels is now replaced with new barrels made by Hambrusch. Now I don`t have to worry about what I stuff in it. The originalrip with express sights was unharmed and was used again.
It was factory ammo .450 softnosed I used. The gun had unfortunatly had to go back to a re-regulation, but now everything play max.

Taken into consideration I bought this gun fairly cheaply in England and had a new set of barrels made the gun only is still a sub $20K gun I can play with for years and it shouldn`t be difficult to sell either for $20K either in comparison to a similar rifle of same age and condition.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Why do you need to be a Jerk George. Obviously Jens' expensive rifle is ruined. Who knows the actual cause but no need to rub salt in the wound.

Here you again acting like you know it all.How I am I supposed to know whose rifle that is? On a side note, before you tell us all there is about OSR or barrel pressure, didn't you post a picture some time ago of a monumental bullet you fired from your double that was badly engraved from top to bottom ? Imagine shooting that in a vintage double.

I have no idea what you are talking about George, nor do you. I've posted several photos of bullets I've fired that show engraving. I have no idea what you mean by "badly engraved from top to bottom". All of the mono metal bullets I've posted photos of, or fired for that matter, in my doubles, which by the way is the only bullets I've ever fired in them, show proper engraving along portions of the bullets that come into contact with the rifling exactly as designed.

I assume you are talking about this post, in which several of your statements are discredited?


http://forums.accuratereloadin...711020681#6711020681

Back to your comments to Jens George. I've said it before and I'll say it again. You're an Ass George and I doubt seriously that you even know it. Here is a clue for you. There is plenty to discuss factually as to what caused the mishap without mocking him about the destroyed rifle's value. It goes back to your comments to Cal about his vintage doubles being garbage and other similar comments. You made those comments shortly after you purchased one of Butch's least expensive field grade rifles (which are good solid rifles by the way) and proclaimed it to be the end all be all last word in doubles and yourself as the new DR authority when in fact, you knew exactly jack shit about doubles.

Back to the discussion at hand.

I still don't understand why guys think a bullet made with a steel cup is safer to shoot than a brass or copper bullet, especially when those monometal bullets have driving bands for the engraved material to move into. Those steel cupped bullets do not have such areas of relief. I suspect the reason they don't is that the rifling can't displace steel from the shank of those bullets. I think the thing to consider with steel cup and core bullets is the thickness of the guilding copper. If it's not thick enough to prevent the lands from touching the steel shank, what's happening between the rifling and that steel cup? I've had guys tell me in the past that the lead core allows for compression to ease the strain on the rifling. But I always ask in reply, so the rifling is exerting enough pressure on that steel shank to compress the steel which then compresses the lead it surrounds?

On the OSR question, I said this from the same earlier quoted thread some time back: ( reference found here http://forums.accuratereloadin...101084481#8101084481)


There is nothing associated with soldering two barrels together that would cause rifling to spit out the muzzle or imprint (or is it "outprint") rifling onto the outside of a barrel's surface. Damage to the solder joint, sure; but not rifling on the outside. The amount of pressure it would take to cause a steel barrel to do that would split the barrel long before giving those results.


If Jens barrel wasn't split due to an obstruction, or a problem with the load itself, and was actually caused by shooting a steel cup and core bullet, then my statement about OSR above is accurate in that the pressure required to "outprint" rifling to the outside of a barrel would split the barrel first.

I think the thing Michael and Sam's research concluded was that we've been shooting the bullets that show the highest barrel strains (Woodleigh and Hornady) for years and pronouncing them safe because of those years of experience. For that matter, the Hornady bullets are right at the top of the strain reports yet most manufacturers of new rifles use these very bullets to regulate their rifles with. And if those are safe, the research shows the monometal bullets with properly designed driving bands to be so as well since in almost every case, they produced the same or lower levels of barrel strain.

Glad you were able to salvage that rifle Jens. It's a nice looking rifle.

Jens,
That IS a nice looking rifle and the picture caught my eye so I was able to skip all the preceding discussion!!
I like the dolls head as it reminds me of those on my Parker shotguns.
Is there some sort of cross bolt that engages the lower part of the dolls head?
I see on the lower rear of left side of the receiver something that is reminiscent of the cross bolt of my Beretta.

That rifle is very similar to my 470 double. It’s has been digesting modern loads for a long time and those by design are low pressure rounds so I fail to see the imminent danger from
Using proper diameter loads at proper pressure causing an exceedence by a large margin any proof pressure causing catastrophic damage. A bad losd yes....

Did op contact ammo mfg and have the loaded rounds examined?

quote:

Originally posted by crshelton:
Jens,
That IS a nice looking rifle and the picture caught my eye so I was able to skip all the preceding discussion!!
I like the dolls head as it reminds me of those on my Parker shotguns.
Is there some sort of cross bolt that engages the lower part of the dolls head?
I see on the lower rear of left side of the receiver something that is reminiscent of the cross bolt of my Beretta.

CR there is an extension on the nose of the lever down inside that engages the step on the dolls head once the lever is back locked. That is a very good set-up and makes the lockup very strong.
who ever did the re-barrel job is a fine smith IMO!

With the damage done because of the blow up it is a wonder the rifle wasn't damaged more. The rifle seems to be better than it was before blow-up! Lucky the shooter wasn't hurt as well!

……………………………………………………... Mac

Gentlemen:

As the OP I want everyone to know that I really didn't think that this would blow up. I read the original one and didn't expect this. It wasn't a trolling post.

I apologize.

Todd

Nothing to apologize for Todd.

With the exception of Shootaway's comments, it's just conversation about a topic that people tend to hold strong positions on.

I did direct you to the wrong thread initially, although that Terminal Bullet Performance thread is a good one, but the thread that will give you some really good information that you're looking for is the Double Rifle Bullet of the Future Thread that I later linked to.

I had time to kill today and reread the entire 26 pages. I'd forgotten how much good info is there and the depths of the experiments Sam and Michael went into. If you have a couple of hours and are interested in the subject, it's a good read. Entertaining as well.

So is my rifle going to blow up too? Hmmm. Can’t read it all but the original cordite loads and modern loads aren't very different. It seems the CEB has less pressure but if it’s less than original cordite load what is the real point? Less wear? Are people rifles really detonating? I hope not...and what about modern guns?

quote:

With the exception of Shootaway's comments

There are just to argumentative points I am making.One is that vintage rifles are not indestructible and are probably functionally inferior to quality, modern rifles.Two is that we do not know for sure which bullets are more harmful to the bore, traditional or monumental solids.Just because someone with no steel background did an experiment, it proves nothing.

quote:

Originally posted by gunslinger55:
So is my rifle going to blow up too? Hmmm. Can’t read it all but the original cordite loads and modern loads aren't very different. It seems the CEB has less pressure but if it’s less than original cordite load what is the real point? Less wear? Are people rifles really detonating? I hope not...and what about modern guns?

Sean, I would encourage you to take the time, a little here and a little there if necessary, and read that entire Double Rifle Bullet of the Future Thread. When you hear guys say things like "Accurate Reloading is full of great information from guys with an exceptional level of experience", threads like that one are what they are talking about. Pay no attention to shootacow, (no one else does) and read Michael and Sam's research and determine for yourself.

Here's what I took from the entire thread. First, the dubious claims of OSR which they were not able to reproduce even shooting OVERSIZED STEEL monometal bullets in a barrel that had been turned on a lathe down to the same wall thickness of 5 sheets of typing paper!! Also, one of the things that intrigues me most is how this entire monometal bullet causing OSR myth started in the first place in that most who believe it cite the proof as being what Graeme Wright wrote in his book, Shooting the British Double Rifle. On page 227 he states that he has observed 2 rifles with OSR but here is the catch, he states both were the result of shooting steel jacketed cup and core solids, NOT MONOMETALS!!! But somehow, the OSR guys still think the Woodleigh FMJ and Hornady DGS are "safer" to shoot. Leaves me scratching my head frankly.

That said, I took from the thread, that although the cup and core bullets tended to produce the highest barrel strains, they've been the standard for over a hundred years so they are probably good to go. And if the cup and core's are safe, the properly constructed monos, like the CEB and Northfork which produce lower barrel strains must be also. Interesting point here however is that the old Kynoch bullets produced the least barrel strain of all, even less than the CEB monos. Even though the Woodleigh is based on the old Knyoch, they clearly aren't the same.

I would still like to know more about Jens' rifle that blew up with the Hornady soft. I wonder if there was an unknown obstruction or if maybe there was an issue with that load, albeit a factory round. Any chance there was a bullet defect in that it was oversized? Any prior damage to the barrel? How many like rounds (Hornady softs) had been fired in that barrel previously? It seems like an anomaly to have split that way from a standard factory round without something else going on.

Thanks Todd,

I'll re read the entire thread too.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Nothing to apologize for Todd.

With the exception of Shootaway's comments, it's just conversation about a topic that people tend to hold strong positions on.

I did direct you to the wrong thread initially, although that Terminal Bullet Performance thread is a good one, but the thread that will give you some really good information that you're looking for is the Double Rifle Bullet of the Future Thread that I later linked to.

I had time to kill today and reread the entire 26 pages. I'd forgotten how much good info is there and the depths of the experiments Sam and Michael went into. If you have a couple of hours and are interested in the subject, it's a good read. Entertaining as well.

Thanks I’ll read it started but had to go to work. Agree on all points you make. Really has to be something wrong for that to happen. If mine blows up I’ll post a report

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by gunslinger55:
So is my rifle going to blow up too? Hmmm. Can’t read it all but the original cordite loads and modern loads aren't very different. It seems the CEB has less pressure but if it’s less than original cordite load what is the real point? Less wear? Are people rifles really detonating? I hope not...and what about modern guns?

Sean, I would encourage you to take the time, a little here and a little there if necessary, and read that entire Double Rifle Bullet of the Future Thread. When you hear guys say things like "Accurate Reloading is full of great information from guys with an exceptional level of experience", threads like that one are what they are talking about. Pay no attention to shootacow, (no one else does) and read Michael and Sam's research and determine for yourself.

Here's what I took from the entire thread. First, the dubious claims of OSR which they were not able to reproduce even shooting OVERSIZED STEEL monometal bullets in a barrel that had been turned on a lathe down to the same wall thickness of 5 sheets of typing paper!! Also, one of the things that intrigues me most is how this entire monometal bullet causing OSR myth started in the first place in that most who believe it cite the proof as being what Graeme Wright wrote in his book, Shooting the British Double Rifle. On page 227 he states that he has observed 2 rifles with OSR but here is the catch, he states both were the result of shooting steel jacketed cup and core solids, NOT MONOMETALS!!! But somehow, the OSR guys still think the Woodleigh FMJ and Hornady DGS are "safer" to shoot. Leaves me scratching my head frankly.

That said, I took from the thread, that although the cup and core bullets tended to produce the highest barrel strains, they've been the standard for over a hundred years so they are probably good to go. And if the cup and core's are safe, the properly constructed monos, like the CEB and Northfork which produce lower barrel strains must be also. Interesting point here however is that the old Kynoch bullets produced the least barrel strain of all, even less than the CEB monos. Even though the Woodleigh is based on the old Knyoch, they clearly aren't the same.

I would still like to know more about Jens' rifle that blew up with the Hornady soft. I wonder if there was an unknown obstruction or if maybe there was an issue with that load, albeit a factory round. Any chance there was a bullet defect in that it was oversized? Any prior damage to the barrel? How many like rounds (Hornady softs) had been fired in that barrel previously? It seems like an anomaly to have split that way from a standard factory round without something else going on.

There is no mention of the hardness of the bullet material that contacts the rifling.Brass is almost 2X harder than copper and steel has a hardness about double to brass.Remember that in traditional solids the steel does not contact the lands and the bullet "gives" or "squeezes" unlike monometals.So what is more damaging to the bore? The amount of pressure exerted on the metal by the bullet as it travels down the bore or the hard material scraping or scratching off barrel steel.