quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

Remember that in traditional solids the steel does not contact the lands and the bullet "gives" or "squeezes" unlike monometals.

Interesting concept, this business of a "traditional solid" constructed of a copper washed, steel shanked bullet, with lead core inside the steel jacket, squeezing or giving, without being in contact with the rifle lands or bore.

I'm intrigued by this steel jacket compressing enough to compress the lead inside it without coming into contact with the rifling or bore.

What magical force could possibly cause this "give" or "squeeze", compressing the steel, thereby compressing the lead.

Critical thinking minds want to know?



THIS type of old wives tale is exactly what the Double Rifle Bullet of the Future thread addressed in detail.

Barrel steel should be much harder than any bullet steel or material you put in it. If not you got a problem. Copper billets would be much softer it would be a pressure issue only? And if proper size and load should not exceeed design fail limit unless something else going on. Cleaning usually causes more wear that’s why I use wipe of foam and minimize putting a rod down the bore.

What is the proof load pressure on a English 470 nitro express? 500 gr bullet abd 75 grains cordite?

quote:

Originally posted by gunslinger55:
Barrel steel should be much harder than any bullet steel or material you put in it. If not you got a problem. Copper billets would be much softer it would be a pressure issue only? And if proper size and load should not exceeed design fail limit unless something else going on. Cleaning usually causes more wear that’s why I use wipe of foam and minimize putting a rod down the bore.

What is the proof load pressure on a English 470 nitro express? 500 gr bullet abd 75 grains cordite?

If anyone thinks a foam cleaner is going to remove the carbon, which IMO is the no.1 cause of fouling, then they have still a lot to learn.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

Remember that in traditional solids the steel does not contact the lands and the bullet "gives" or "squeezes" unlike monometals.

Interesting concept, this business of a "traditional solid" constructed of a copper washed, steel shanked bullet, with lead core inside the steel jacket, squeezing or giving, without being in contact with the rifle lands or bore.

I'm intrigued by this steel jacket compressing enough to compress the lead inside it without coming into contact with the rifling or bore.

What magical force could possibly cause this "give" or "squeeze", compressing the steel, thereby compressing the lead.

Critical thinking minds want to know?



THIS type of old wives tale is exactly what the Double Rifle Bullet of the Future thread addressed in detail.

Is everybody stupid on these forums?

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

Remember that in traditional solids the steel does not contact the lands and the bullet "gives" or "squeezes" unlike monometals.

Interesting concept, this business of a "traditional solid" constructed of a copper washed, steel shanked bullet, with lead core inside the steel jacket, squeezing or giving, without being in contact with the rifle lands or bore.

I'm intrigued by this steel jacket compressing enough to compress the lead inside it without coming into contact with the rifling or bore.

What magical force could possibly cause this "give" or "squeeze", compressing the steel, thereby compressing the lead.

Critical thinking minds want to know?



THIS type of old wives tale is exactly what the Double Rifle Bullet of the Future thread addressed in detail.

Is everybody stupid on these forums?

As much as I'm tempted to take that inquiry and



I think it's low hanging fruit considering the source.

I have zero idea what Shootaway is referring to in the post above, but to my knowledge the only bullet that is jacketed not actually contacting the lands and groves in a rifle barrel is a PAPER PATCHED BULLET, in either a cartridge rifle, or muzzleloader. The paper patch is the only thing that is actually engraved by the rifling! Any normally jacketed bullet, or mono-metal does engrave the actual bullet material.

…………….I hope that is clear enough as far as it goes with what ever Shootaway is trying to get across! Though it doesn't matter as far as this discussion goes!

Fellas:
Go easy on ol' Shootaway. He is just having a simple spell that's happened several times in the past. He's like Jeckel and Hyde: when he goes off his meds his personality changes from tolerable to dumb shit. When the doc refills his script(s) he will return to the normal world again.
That said, on or off medications he is the owner of the finest double rifle ever made on the planet. We all kneel to that.
Cal

An interesting thread for the lovers of old English doubles.

I myself have given the matter a lot of thought when looking to buy a
premium English double for big game .

I specifically wanted to shoot monometals like CEB and Woodleigh hydros.

In the end , from talking to many reputable gun purveyors in the US and UK,

The biggest issue that came up was mattalurgy and metal fatigue in a seT of barrels of between 80-100yrs of age.

There is No way of determining this properly without cutting and testing the steel.

This being the case, I chose to have a new rifle made and eliminate all issues associated with this risk.

I now happily shoot anything through them and I sleep easy at night!!

Seeing Jens lovely Gibbs suffer that fate makes me cringe!. If the barrels had separated a little further back.........

quote:

Originally posted by WR500:
An interesting thread for the lovers of old English doubles.

I myself have given the matter a lot of thought when looking to buy a
premium English double for big game .

I specifically wanted to shoot monometals like CEB and Woodleigh hydros.

In the end , from talking to many reputable gun purveyors in the US and UK,

The biggest issue that came up was mattalurgy and metal fatigue in a seT of barrels of between 80-100yrs of age.

There is No way of determining this properly without cutting and testing the steel.

This being the case, I chose to have a new rifle made and eliminate all issues associated with this risk.

I now happily shoot anything through them and I sleep easy at night!!

Seeing Jens lovely Gibbs suffer that fate makes me cringe!. If the barrels had separated a little further back.........

WR500 you were given some very good advice! The new steel in most double rifles today are far more tolerable to stress than the older rifles. Stress tests done on barrels made from new barrel blanks only prove one thing and that is modern steels are better than the 80-100 yr old steel in older barrels. In the case of the older barrels one never knows what has been put through them over the last 100 years.
Especially if you want to shoot mono metal bullets, I agree, you will be far better off with a quality new rifle.

………..Opinions are only as good as they are true or false!
………………………………………………………..

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:



Especially if you want to shoot mono metal bullets,

Comments like these still make me scratch my head.

Mac, did you read that Double Rifle Bullet of the Future Thread with all of Michael and Sam's testing?


Across the board, the CEB and Northforks produced the lowest barrel strains other than the old Kynochs which are no longer in production. All of the Woodleigh and Hornady cup and core bullets with their steel cups, produced the highest barrel strains in every DR caliber tested. Yes, the Woodleigh are based on the old Kynoch but that is based on shape alone. Construction is very different with the steel shank being much thicker on the Woodleigh than the old Kynoch.


I know you are an OSR believer as we've had that conversation before several times. If I remember correctly, you are a Graeme Wright disciple. Graeme Wright wrote in his book about seeing two "OSR" afflicted rifles, and without any testing to determine what caused the phenomenon he was looking at, proclaimed it to be "OSR" caused by a "steel jacketed solid", NOT a monometal. Yet, because someone somewhere heard a factory sales rep for some current rifle company say upon being shown one his company's rifles with a defect, that the problem had to have been caused by a monometal, it has become the gospel amongst DR shooters, when that statement clearly flies in the face of what Wright stated? No questions asked beyond that?

As I stated to the late Dave Bush at one time, a lot of guys take Graeme Wright's comments about OSR as the end word on the matter. I take it as the starting point to ask additional questions because if it is real, and if it is really caused by a bullet traveling down the bore, why is it sacrilege to conduct experiments to reproduce it or seek to really get down the actual cause of the barrel markings? Is there a vested interest by some in not finding the truth? We aren't speaking of religion and God here, we are trying to figure out why some rifle barrels have some candy striping shading that's observable in certain light, notwithstanding this shading has never been reported to affect any rifle's accuracy or performance, and is so slight as to not be photographable. Remember, I had that early 1980's Ruger M-77 in 338WM that had the same striping and that wasn't a DR, came that way from the factory, never had a monometal bullet fired in it, and was a tack driver accuracy wise.

Strange, this business of taking on accepted lore with scientific testing. Reading that DRBoftF thread, it was interesting to see over the 26 or so pages, numerous people from time to time would pop into the middle of the conversation without going back and reading the experiments that had been conducted to that point, and once again interject the monometal OSR lore.

At one point, Michael gave up and decided the work wasn't worth continuing as people didn't seem to really want to find out the truth and would rather cling to stories of OSR as passed down by the DR elites without questioning the proclamations or attempting to find out what really caused it if it did exist. When he presented his data, showing the cup and cores to be the highest barrel strain producers, several folks tried to discredit him as simply being a bullet salesman spinning the results, when in fact, he has never been in the bullet manufacturing or sales business. He simply set out, with his friend Sam Rose, to develop a bullet design that would produce a measurably lower level of barrel strain for those who worried about their vintage double rifles. Very similar to how Saeed designed and turns his own Walterhog bullets. To the best of my knowledge, Saeed isn't in the bullet business. He just makes his own bullets of his own design because of the performance he gets with them. In Michael's case, it just so happened that CEB saw the work done and adopted his design. Michael and Sam were never part of the CEB company.

To put a fine point on that fact, the owner of Northfork also saw their work and flew in to spend a couple of days with Michael to see his data and designs first hand. He then took that information back to the factory and made changes to the Northfork bullets to take advantage of the performance improvements witnessed. Shame they are now closing shop as I think most, if not all who have used the Northfork bullets swear by them today. At least some of that loyalty is a result of Michael's research on bullet design.

Long way around to ask the question, why continue to single out the properly designed monometals as not safe in DR's when we have some pretty extensive research conducted by parties independent of the bullet making business showing exactly the opposite. I can only surmise that the thread wasn't read in its entirety. Again, what I got out of the entire thread was that more than likely, since there is a long history now of shooting the Hornady and Woodleigh bullets, not withstanding Jens' rifle, they appear to be "safe". And if they are safe, then the monometals, since they produce lower barrel strains, must be safe as well.

Of course there is the other consideration and that is to assume Shootaway isn't a loon.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:


Comments like these still make me scratch my head.

Mac, did you read that Double Rifle Bullet of the Future Thread with all of Michael and Sam's testing?


Across the board, the CEB and Northforks produced the lowest barrel strains other than the old Kynochs which are no longer in production. All of the Woodleigh and Hornady cup and core bullets with their steel cups, produced the highest barrel strains in every DR caliber tested. Yes, the Woodleigh are based on the old Kynoch but that is based on shape alone. Construction is very different with the steel shank being much thicker on the Woodleigh than the old Kynoch.


I know you are an OSR believer as we've had that conversation before several times. If I remember correctly, you are a Graeme Wright disciple. Graeme Wright wrote in his book about seeing two "OSR" afflicted rifles, and without any testing to determine what caused the phenomenon he was looking at, proclaimed it to be "OSR" caused by a "steel jacketed solid", NOT a monometal. Yet, because someone somewhere heard a factory sales rep for some current rifle company say upon being shown one his company's rifles with a defect, that the problem had to have been caused by a monometal, it has become the gospel amongst DR shooters, when that statement clearly flies in the face of what Wright stated? No questions asked beyond that?

As I stated to the late Dave Bush at one time, a lot of guys take Graeme Wright's comments about OSR as the end word on the matter. I take it as the starting point to ask additional questions because if it is real, and if it is really caused by a bullet traveling down the bore, why is it sacrilege to conduct experiments to reproduce it or seek to really get down the actual cause of the barrel markings? Is there a vested interest by some in not finding the truth? We aren't speaking of religion and God here, we are trying to figure out why some rifle barrels have some candy striping shading that's observable in certain light, notwithstanding this shading has never been reported to affect any rifle's accuracy or performance, and is so slight as to not be photographable. Remember, I had that early 1980's Ruger M-77 in 338WM that had the same striping and that wasn't a DR, came that way from the factory, never had a monometal bullet fired in it, and was a tack driver accuracy wise.

Strange, this business of taking on accepted lore with scientific testing. Reading that DRBoftF thread, it was interesting to see over the 26 or so pages, numerous people from time to time would pop into the middle of the conversation without going back and reading the experiments that had been conducted to that point, and once again interject the monometal OSR lore.

At one point, Michael gave up and decided the work wasn't worth continuing as people didn't seem to really want to find out the truth and would rather cling to stories of OSR as passed down by the DR elites without questioning the proclamations or attempting to find out what really caused it if it did exist. When he presented his data, showing the cup and cores to be the highest barrel strain producers, several folks tried to discredit him as simply being a bullet salesman spinning the results, when in fact, he has never been in the bullet manufacturing or sales business. He simply set out, with his friend Sam Rose, to develop a bullet design that would produce a measurably lower level of barrel strain for those who worried about their vintage double rifles. Very similar to how Saeed designed and turns his own Walterhog bullets. To the best of my knowledge, Saeed isn't in the bullet business. He just makes his own bullets of his own design because of the performance he gets with them. In Michael's case, it just so happened that CEB saw the work done and adopted his design. Michael and Sam were never part of the CEB company.

To put a fine point on that fact, the owner of Northfork also saw their work and flew in to spend a couple of days with Michael to see his data and designs first hand. He then took that information back to the factory and made changes to the Northfork bullets to take advantage of the performance improvements witnessed. Shame they are now closing shop as I think most, if not all who have used the Northfork bullets swear by them today. At least some of that loyalty is a result of Michael's research on bullet design.

Long way around to ask the question, why continue to single out the properly designed monometals as not safe in DR's when we have some pretty extensive research conducted by parties independent of the bullet making business showing exactly the opposite. I can only surmise that the thread wasn't read in its entirety. Again, what I got out of the entire thread was that more than likely, since there is a long history now of shooting the Hornady and Woodleigh bullets, not withstanding Jens' rifle, they appear to be "safe". And if they are safe, then the monometals, since they produce lower barrel strains, must be safe as well.

Yes I read the whole thing when it was new on this sight and my opinion has not changed for use in old rifles which may have had some close calls in it's history that have not come up yet! I will say the North Fork solids are the only ones that I use in my NEW doubles, because they were made right to start with IMO! I don't use them in my old doubles, but that is simply my opinion.

quote:

Of course there is the other consideration and that is to assume Shootaway isn't a loon.

The above may have some truth to it, but I have no way to know if that is true either ???????????? …………………………………….Over and out!

So let's get this straight Todd.Your friend(who wouldn't accept any criticism), who did the test, is an expert on building rifle stocks with an aluminum chassis, short actions, hand guns, lever action rifles,bullet penetration on animal and wet newspapers, double rifles, and barrel erosion.I thought you were the only "know it all".

Removes it great. You ever try it??

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

quote:

Originally posted by gunslinger55:
Barrel steel should be much harder than any bullet steel or material you put in it. If not you got a problem. Copper billets would be much softer it would be a pressure issue only? And if proper size and load should not exceeed design fail limit unless something else going on. Cleaning usually causes more wear that’s why I use wipe of foam and minimize putting a rod down the bore.

What is the proof load pressure on a English 470 nitro express? 500 gr bullet abd 75 grains cordite?

If anyone thinks a foam cleaner is going to remove the carbon, which IMO is the no.1 cause of fouling, then they have still a lot to learn.

quote:

Originally posted by gunslinger55:
Removes it great. You ever try it??

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

quote:

Originally posted by gunslinger55:
Barrel steel should be much harder than any bullet steel or material you put in it. If not you got a problem. Copper billets would be much softer it would be a pressure issue only? And if proper size and load should not exceeed design fail limit unless something else going on. Cleaning usually causes more wear that’s why I use wipe of foam and minimize putting a rod down the bore.

What is the proof load pressure on a English 470 nitro express? 500 gr bullet abd 75 grains cordite?

If anyone thinks a foam cleaner is going to remove the carbon, which IMO is the no.1 cause of fouling, then they have still a lot to learn.

I was new to foam cleaners having been using molly coated bullets and JB exclusively beforehand.After that I started using a lot of uncoated bullets and foam cleaners. In about 3 or 4 years time I 'd say I used close to a hundred cans.What I discovered was that three of my Lott's stopped shooting with barrels that did not have more than one hundred rounds through them-something that never happened before, and only when I went back to JB would they shoot and shoot well again.

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
Fellas:
Go easy on ol' Shootaway. He is just having a simple spell that's happened several times in the past. He's like Jeckel and Hyde: when he goes off his meds his personality changes from tolerable to dumb shit. When the doc refills his script(s) he will return to the normal world again.
That said, on or off medications he is the owner of the finest double rifle ever made on the planet. We all kneel to that.
Cal

Yes here is the finest-another of my masterpieces.My Searcy 450NE. at 11.5 lbs with ejectors and intercepting sears.The only double rifle with a soul!

[URL= ]Searcy 450NE[/URL]

Shootaway,
That 450 deserves more than cardboard to lay on, lets have more pictures with a suitable background to appreciate your fine rifle

quote:

Originally posted by Bill73:
Shootaway,
That 450 deserves more than cardboard to lay on, lets have more pictures with a suitable background to appreciate your fine rifle

Are you kidding man. Standby for him to lecture you now on his extensive photographic skills that only he has mastered!

quote:

Originally posted by Bill73:
Shootaway,
That 450 deserves more than cardboard to lay on, lets have more pictures with a suitable background to appreciate your fine rifle

True.I am too busy.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill73:
Shootaway,
That 450 deserves more than cardboard to lay on, lets have more pictures with a suitable background to appreciate your fine rifle

Bill,do you own a Searcy?

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill73:
Shootaway,
That 450 deserves more than cardboard to lay on, lets have more pictures with a suitable background to appreciate your fine rifle

Bill,do you own a Searcy?

No I do not own one built by Searcy yet,in the future though? there might be a 450 NE headed my way.

There are a lot of things that can cause a blow particularly in vintage doubles, like bore size and chamber, some of those old gents just bored out a gun to who knows what, particularly 40 calibers, 408 to 413 has been my experience in the 450-500-3 and 3 1/4"....and others caliber close but no ceegar..

the world of thd double is wrougt with old wives tales, rumor and is a fairly tale in the making, most times what blew one up is nothing more than guess and by gosh..

A good English double as a rule will shoot monolithics all day long, it will shoot the dreaded 4831 powder that was claimed to double explosions and blowing up guns...This is just some of the tales..True or not, Ive never had any of these problems, but my guns were not ventage to my thinking and they were proofed. NOt sure where ventage begins or stops as a matter of fact..Id suggest if its BPE and has hammers, Id be particularly careful..

So i bought some Nosler 470 solids. Is my vintage gun going to blow up?

quote:

Originally posted by gunslinger55:
So i bought some Nosler 470 solids. Is my vintage gun going to blow up?

I just looked at a picture of the Nosler solids,there is only one driving band,the shank is uncut all the way,I would not shoot these bullets in my Heym's or my K-guns,you better slug your bore,check the bullet diameter very carefully,but this is just my opinion.

You saying you would not even shoot it in a modern gun? So how exactly would the pressure differ from a conventional bullet? I’m still not following this. This gun has fired many many .474 bullets factory and handloads. If Nosler says it is a safe pressure for a 470 how is it going to blow up? How many guns have blown up due to just firing a saami compliant factory round unless there was a major defect? Granted an older gun may not be as strong? This is a 20th century nitro express proofed gun. Would be the same in a bolt action as well I would think if it was age of the steel? This whole thing is perplexing. Previous owner and I’m sure last 100 years shot woodleighs out of it. I would hope there would be a disclaimer by nosler if unsafe?

More believable than this monometal bad / steel cup good / OSR myth.

quote:

Originally posted by gunslinger55:
You saying you would not even shoot it in a modern gun? So how exactly would the pressure differ from a conventional bullet? I’m still not following this. This gun has fired many many .474 bullets factory and handloads. If Nosler says it is a safe pressure for a 470 how is it going to blow up? How many guns have blown up due to just firing a saami compliant factory round unless there was a major defect? Granted an older gun may not be as strong? This is a 20th century nitro express proofed gun. Would be the same in a bolt action as well I would think if it was age of the steel? This whole thing is perplexing. Previous owner and I’m sure last 100 years shot woodleighs out of it. I would hope there would be a disclaimer by nosler if unsafe?

Look it's your choice ,maybe you should call up John at North Fork or some one at Cutting Edge bullets & ask why their bullets are safe in DR'S,WHY DO THEY CUT BANDS IN THEIR BULLETS? a very respected gunsmith advised against using Monolithic bullets in DR's,you can call him as well,his name is JJ Perodeau

quote:

Originally posted by Bill73:

quote:

Originally posted by gunslinger55:
You saying you would not even shoot it in a modern gun? So how exactly would the pressure differ from a conventional bullet? I’m still not following this. This gun has fired many many .474 bullets factory and handloads. If Nosler says it is a safe pressure for a 470 how is it going to blow up? How many guns have blown up due to just firing a saami compliant factory round unless there was a major defect? Granted an older gun may not be as strong? This is a 20th century nitro express proofed gun. Would be the same in a bolt action as well I would think if it was age of the steel? This whole thing is perplexing. Previous owner and I’m sure last 100 years shot woodleighs out of it. I would hope there would be a disclaimer by nosler if unsafe?

Look it's your choice ,maybe you should call up John at North Fork or some one at Cutting Edge bullets & ask why their bullets are safe in DR'S,WHY DO THEY CUT BANDS IN THEIR BULLETS? a very respected gunsmith advised against using Monolithic bullets in DR's,you can call him as well,his name is JJ Perodeau

That funny. JJ never advised me of that when I had him regulate my 500NE with CEB's.

Bill

its his money, his gun--
Let him experiment--

Those of us who have seen it in the older barrels won't use a non-driving band mono in our vintage guns.

Heck maybe he should have some lathe turned out of Titanium , tungsten or depleted uranium if he truly believes the old steel is up truly hard projectiles

Todd CEB's with driving bands are NOT the same

also was this a vintage barrel set or modern steel-- BIG difference

Pressure is pressure. I don’t see how one produces more pressure than the other and of it did everyone would know about it ie guns blowing up left and right, warning labels (not for use in vintage doubles) and I’m sure they would not be selling then to me. So I am not supposed to use monos in a modern double either? Sad not to be able to use a superior bullet in my gun

How many guns have you seen blow up in this fashion? Just curious. Just trying to determine if it’s an old wives tale or not. So copper bullets are harder than steel shanked bullets? If they are loaded to a certain pressure how does it exceeed that pressure in a vintage gun? If the bore or bullet inproper size yes but everything else being equal how does it cause more “drag” going down the bore than the test barrel and spike the pressure to beyond the factory pressure level and fail the barrel?

quote:

Originally posted by Clan_Colla:
Bill

its his money, his gun--
Let him experiment--

Those of us who have seen it in the older barrels won't use a non-driving band mono in our vintage guns.

Heck maybe he should have some lathe turned out of Titanium , tungsten or depleted uranium if he truly believes the old steel is up truly hard projectiles

quote:

Originally posted by Clan_Colla:
Todd CEB's with driving bands are NOT the same

also was this a vintage barrel set or modern steel-- BIG difference

Right, but Bill specifically mentioned CEBs and Northforks and I'm quoting in caps here as he used caps "WHY DO THEY CUT BANDS IN THEIR BULLETS".

I'd still like to see someone address Michael and Sam's research as to why they don't believe the data. The Woodlieghs and Hornady's are being touted as being the gold standard of safe but they produced the highest barrel strains due to the thickness of the steel shank. If you believe this thing is caused by barrel strain, and the mono's are shown to produce less barrel strain than the Woodleigh and Hornady, why are they still considered unsafe?

Personally I try to develop opinions based on data derived from repeatable experiments, not hearsay. I say hearsay because of those who say they've seen the stripped "OSR" barrels claim it was caused by a mono bullet and that's the end of the discussion. I say it's the beginning of the discussion. I want to know more. Did these folks start with a clean barrel, observe the barrel prior to a mono being shot, then after the mono was shot, saw without question that this phenomenon was caused by the bullet? If the mono's are the issue, and much of this is based on what Graeme Wright wrote, has anyone paid attention to the fact that Graeme stated this was the result of shooting a "hard steel jacketed solid bullet" and not a mono?

If you've read my comments on this topic in the past, you'll remember I don't discard the existence of "striped barrels" as I had a Ruger M-77 in 338 WM back in the early 80's that had a striped barrel from the factory and that rifle never had a mono fired in it.

My opinion is based on Michael and Sam's experiments / data and my ownership of a non DR, pre mono metal bullets, rifle with the same "OSR" symptoms primarily. Secondarily based on Graeme's pontification of seeing OSR caused by a steel jacketed bullet(not mono) as I don't believe this barrel striping is caused by a bullet but rather something in the manufacturing process.

So, for those who don't give credit to the Double Rifle Bullet of the Future thread research, which by the way I have no problem with if of that persuasion, I'd like to know the reason for the skepticism. Is it you believe this "OSR" thing is caused by something other than "barrel strain" as they measured? Is it because you believe the principles conducting the experiments are biased and working for bullet companies? Etc.

As to the vintage / modern steel question, Sam Rose, being the Double Rifle aficionado between the two, was trying to get to the bottom of the OSR theory and find out if it did exist, is there a better option for shooters of all DR types. The data they produced was surprising in that if we do believe Barrel Strain is the appropriate measure of safety, the "accepted" info is incorrect.

Yeah I am having a hard time following the logic here but I don’t want to trash my 100 year old gun but it really does not make sense from an engineering mechanical sense to me. A messed up home load yes blow it up all day long. Incorrect bore size you would find out real fast. I don’t have any “striping” on my barrels. These are not Damascus or non NE barrels. Standard bore size. Birmingham proofed. At least a half inch of steel around chamber. German Krupp barrels(assume decent steel).

I’ll call Nosler and see if they have had issues or been sued by a vintage rifle owner for having a gun blow up. I am curious now

I did read a lot of that gun test data and most 470 running in the low 40000 psi range. So you would need maybe 60-80k psi to fail? I don’t see that happening with any proper load

Bill, I'll take issue with one additional comment you made regarding the CEB and Northfork bullets. They DO NOT cut bands into their bullets. As far as I know, of the bullets we are discussing as modern mono's the only one that "cuts bands" in their bullet is the Barnes TSX.

The CEB and Northfork bullet shank is undersized and the bands or "driving bands" are the parts that are actually of bore diameter and the only part of the bullet with any significant contact with the lands, hence the moniker "bore rider". This is to allow the material a place to move as the rifling displaces the softer copper or brass in the engraving process.

This in of itself should give you some indication of how much less friction is being created by these bullets than the steel shanked bullet with copper gilding as those bullets have no place for the displaced copper to flow into.

Just making the point that if we are to discuss the topic from a critical thinking perspective, we need to make sure we understand the actual construction of said bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill73:

quote:

Originally posted by gunslinger55:
You saying you would not even shoot it in a modern gun? So how exactly would the pressure differ from a conventional bullet? I’m still not following this. This gun has fired many many .474 bullets factory and handloads. If Nosler says it is a safe pressure for a 470 how is it going to blow up? How many guns have blown up due to just firing a saami compliant factory round unless there was a major defect? Granted an older gun may not be as strong? This is a 20th century nitro express proofed gun. Would be the same in a bolt action as well I would think if it was age of the steel? This whole thing is perplexing. Previous owner and I’m sure last 100 years shot woodleighs out of it. I would hope there would be a disclaimer by nosler if unsafe?

Look it's your choice ,maybe you should call up John at North Fork or some one at Cutting Edge bullets & ask why their bullets are safe in DR'S,WHY DO THEY CUT BANDS IN THEIR BULLETS? a very respected gunsmith advised against using Monolithic bullets in DR's,you can call him as well,his name is JJ Perodeau

That funny. JJ never advised me of that when I had him regulate my 500NE with CEB's.

That funny because when he re-regulated my Chapuis 9.3,his words were that mono's were not that advisable in DR'S,you see he said that because TSX's were what I was shooting in my gun,loaded by Superior ammo at the time,& it's later that I heard of another such incident on NitroExpress.com

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Bill, I'll take issue with one additional comment you made regarding the CEB and Northfork bullets. They DO NOT cut bands into their bullets. As far as I know, of the bullets we are discussing as modern mono's the only one that "cuts bands" in their bullet is the Barnes TSX.

The CEB and Northfork bullet shank is undersized and the bands or "driving bands" are the parts that are actually of bore diameter and the only part of the bullet with any significant contact with the lands, hence the moniker "bore rider". This is to allow the material a place to move as the rifling displaces the softer copper or brass in the engraving process.

This in of itself should give you some indication of how much less friction is being created by these bullets than the steel shanked bullet with copper gilding as those bullets have no place for the displaced copper to flow into.

Just making the point that if we are to discuss the topic from a critical thinking perspective, we need to make sure we understand the actual construction of said bullets.

Todd,
No need to take issue with anything,I am not the last word on anything around here,shank,band,etc are all machined cuts,what came first? the shank or the bands? how do you put driving bands on a undersized shank ? do you cut the bands & end up with an undersizes shank sheesh,no offense bud,what came first? the chicken or the egg ,critical thinking perspective? no,just learned common sense,you shoot what works & you take good care of your gun.

I am curious however,does anybody shoot Nosler solids in their DR?

Any of these bullets would be thouroghly tested in factory Ammo configuration for pressure issues. If it did not move down the bore and became a barrel obstruction I think someone would notice. Until I hear a logical explanation On how a bullet gets lodged in a vintage barrel vs a modern barrel I’m gonna file under “ old wives tale”. That’s the only way you would get a catastrophic pressure spike and barrel detonation.

Apparently Noslers pcustomer service is slow still waiting for a call back

They load then in lots of big bores including 470 abd 500. Would love to hear of any known problems....

quote:

Originally posted by Bill73:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Bill, I'll take issue with one additional comment you made regarding the CEB and Northfork bullets. They DO NOT cut bands into their bullets. As far as I know, of the bullets we are discussing as modern mono's the only one that "cuts bands" in their bullet is the Barnes TSX.

The CEB and Northfork bullet shank is undersized and the bands or "driving bands" are the parts that are actually of bore diameter and the only part of the bullet with any significant contact with the lands, hence the moniker "bore rider". This is to allow the material a place to move as the rifling displaces the softer copper or brass in the engraving process.

This in of itself should give you some indication of how much less friction is being created by these bullets than the steel shanked bullet with copper gilding as those bullets have no place for the displaced copper to flow into.

Just making the point that if we are to discuss the topic from a critical thinking perspective, we need to make sure we understand the actual construction of said bullets.

Todd,
No need to take issue with anything,I am not the last word on anything around here,shank,band,etc are all machined cuts,what came first? the shank or the bands? how do you put driving bands on a undersized shank ? do you cut the bands & end up with an undersizes shank sheesh,no offense bud,what came first? the chicken or the egg ,critical thinking perspective? no,just learned common sense,you shoot what works & you take good care of your gun.

I am curious however,does anybody shoot Nosler solids in their DR?

quote:

Originally posted by Bill73:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill73:

quote:

Originally posted by gunslinger55:
You saying you would not even shoot it in a modern gun? So how exactly would the pressure differ from a conventional bullet? I’m still not following this. This gun has fired many many .474 bullets factory and handloads. If Nosler says it is a safe pressure for a 470 how is it going to blow up? How many guns have blown up due to just firing a saami compliant factory round unless there was a major defect? Granted an older gun may not be as strong? This is a 20th century nitro express proofed gun. Would be the same in a bolt action as well I would think if it was age of the steel? This whole thing is perplexing. Previous owner and I’m sure last 100 years shot woodleighs out of it. I would hope there would be a disclaimer by nosler if unsafe?

Look it's your choice ,maybe you should call up John at North Fork or some one at Cutting Edge bullets & ask why their bullets are safe in DR'S,WHY DO THEY CUT BANDS IN THEIR BULLETS? a very respected gunsmith advised against using Monolithic bullets in DR's,you can call him as well,his name is JJ Perodeau

That funny. JJ never advised me of that when I had him regulate my 500NE with CEB's.

That funny because when he re-regulated my Chapuis 9.3,his words were that mono's were not that advisable in DR'S,you see he said that because TSX's were what I was shooting in my gun,loaded by Superior ammo at the time,& it's later that I heard of another such incident on NitroExpress.com

I also own a Chapuis 9.3x74R. It's never had anything but mono metal bullets fired in it. Probably somewhere around a thousand rounds now. Shot TSX's in it with no issue until I put the scope on it. With the scope, I can only get it to regulate with CEB's, both Safari Raptors and BBW#13's.

I'm still waiting to hear why Michael and Sam's research isn't considered the gold standard info on bullet safety in double rifles? Not that I have a problem with disagreement, just wanting to know the basis of the disagreement. Again, is it that you (not you specifically Bill) don't believe "Bullet Strain" is the cause of OSR? Think "Bullet Strain" is the right culprit but disagree with their method of measuring it? Or that it's simply easier to believe the unconfirmed word of an expert who's seen a lot of rifles, but hasn't done extensive objective testing to confirm his theories? Not meaning to come of snarky with the last comment but I don't know of another way to express the comparison of untested theory against tested theory and the results thereof?

Also as to the OSR, I've still yet to have someone explain, critically thinking now, about how a bullet traveling through a barrel will cause a perfect "outprint" of rifling on the outside of a barrel? Doesn't make sense. If a bullet is going to damage the rifling, I can see how that might happen; flatten it, round it off, scrape it off (although the bullet is much harder than even vintage steel), but how are you going to get a miniscule ridge of steel on the inside to transfer though the thickness of the barrel, and appear on the outside? How does that happen? Again, not saying striped barrels don't exist. I had one. A Ruger M-77 that never saw a mono metal bullet. I just can't see any logical method by which that relatively tiny raised strip of steel rifling is all of a sudden going to appear on the outside of the barrel when if there is an issue with the bullet, it's much more likely to burst the barrel or flatten or otherwise damage said rifling.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill73:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Bill, I'll take issue with one additional comment you made regarding the CEB and Northfork bullets. They DO NOT cut bands into their bullets. As far as I know, of the bullets we are discussing as modern mono's the only one that "cuts bands" in their bullet is the Barnes TSX.

The CEB and Northfork bullet shank is undersized and the bands or "driving bands" are the parts that are actually of bore diameter and the only part of the bullet with any significant contact with the lands, hence the moniker "bore rider". This is to allow the material a place to move as the rifling displaces the softer copper or brass in the engraving process.

This in of itself should give you some indication of how much less friction is being created by these bullets than the steel shanked bullet with copper gilding as those bullets have no place for the displaced copper to flow into.

Just making the point that if we are to discuss the topic from a critical thinking perspective, we need to make sure we understand the actual construction of said bullets.

Todd,
No need to take issue with anything,I am not the last word on anything around here,shank,band,etc are all machined cuts,what came first? the shank or the bands? how do you put driving bands on a undersized shank ? do you cut the bands & end up with an undersizes shank sheesh,no offense bud,what came first? the chicken or the egg ,critical thinking perspective? no,just learned common sense,you shoot what works & you take good care of your gun.

I am curious however,does anybody shoot Nosler solids in their DR?

Yeah, I get what you're saying Bill about which comes first, the chicken or the egg with the bands. My point is that the CEB and Northfork shank is undersized and the bands touch the rifling while with the TSX, the shank touches the rifling and the bands are cut into the shank to provide a place for the displaces copper to move into. Basically the difference being the TSX has a larger area of contact with the rifling due to the shank having bands cut into it where the CEB and Northfork's shank does not touch the rifling.

Semantics, but that's all. That said, the TSX should produce more barrel strain than the CEB and Northfork, and Michael and Sam's research confirms that to be the case across the calibers they tested.