)(*&

Bad handloads or not, I don't like it much, and neither do the British.

umm, am I blind, I don't see anything?

Red

Hard to tell from the NRAofUK article. It doesn't mention anything but "Lift-Off" of the front ring. It didn't say whether or not that the barrel was in one piece. If the barrel was split, I'd agree whole heartedly with you on "bad reload" or a barrel obstruction but still too difficult to tell from the info given.

quote:

umm, am I blind, I don't see anything

You are in: NRA | News | All Site Map

Add News - Submit News for inclusionGeneral
Prohibition Notice
Montana 1999 Rifles in Stainless Steel
In October 2009 there was an incident at Bisley when a Montana 1999 action made in stainless steel suffered a breech explosion and catastrophic failure of the front receiver ring. Fortunately, nobody was seriously hurt. The NRA has carried out a technical investigation on the rifle, including obtaining a metallurgical analysis.

As a consequence of this incident and pending full consideration of the information generated by the NRA's investigation, the use of stainless steel Montana 1999 actions on Bisley ranges is prohibited until further notice.

The NRA will pass its concerns to the manufacturer and is in communication with the Birmingham Proof House. The prohibition will be reconsidered in the light of any advice received from these two sources. Owners of Montana firearms with such actions are invited to supply contact details to the Secretary General so that the NRA can pass on any advice with minimum delay.

It is emphasised that this prohibition applies only to stainless steel Montana 1999 actions. Montana actions made in 4140 CrMo steel are not included in this prohibition.

Glynn Alger
Secretary General



Updated: 23-Feb-10 (Original posting: 23-Feb-10

sorry guys, I'm dumb. I thought the link in the original post was in the signature and so didn't click on it. thought I was looking for a picture. oops.

I think all actions are capable of failing in the right (er wrong) hands. My question is always how the shooter came out of it, how was the gas and debris handling?

Red

May well have changed by now, but believe most competitors use ammunition mfg. by a German firm so all shooters are using the same ammo. I posted elsewhere that the chambers/rifles are inspected and must meet spec in order to be used. No small/tight chamers are used due to fear of excess pressures. Again, may have changed, but in '03,04?? rounds fired were not reloads of competitor. Would be good to see final results of whatever investigation takes place.

Ammo is no longer being issued in Palma matches. It may be requested if a competitor wants to use commercial ammo but it is no longer a requirement. The chamber dimensions however, are still closely monitored to keep shooters from using sub size or "non-standard" chambers and throats in competition. Barrels on the other hand can be any dimension in relation to land and groove dimension. Tight bores and grooves became the fashion several years ago when Palma teams had to use issued ammunition (7.62 NATO) and the bullets were actually a little less than .308 in diameter. Barrel makers responded by making the barrels tighter so that pressures could be increased to keep the bullet supersonic at 1,000 yards. These tighter bores have never gone out of fashion and are still used today even with the premium .308 bullets being made by Berger, Lapua, and Sierra. All this being said, I doubt that a tight bore would increase pressure enough to cause a failure with any reasonably loaded ammo. I would think that this will probably be traced back to a handloading problem.

they have revised their press release and deleted the earlier one twice already since this morning. I think somebody there mentioned the words "multi million pound libel lawsuit" in the same sentence to them. I hope for their sakes they can prove some defect(s). Or else they may be looking for a real good bank of attorneys...

Rich
looks like their version is dumber than ours...