doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Southern SxS barrel burst

For some reason I cannot add on to that post so started a new one.

I was sent an message saying that the 16 ga. Herters hull was not cut open, that is the way it was picked up on the course. Adds a new light on the subject.
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL1373/6511424/24513874/414205901.jpg

Looking at that hull, I would agree with those who suggested (in the now locked thread) that the case mouth did not open properly. That could be the result of some sort of obstruction. Stuck base wad from the previous round fired?

What is abnormal about it? Other that being ripped from stern to stem, it looks normal enough to me on that end.

How the brass sheared so neatly in half is the odd part in my opinion.

I see nothing in that picture that suggests the case mouth did not open properly. What I see is a curling in, on the two corners adjacent to the tear, where the piece of the hull is missing. That shearing could very well cause the curling.

Not that it means much either way. We'll likely never know the cause, but I can easily see how, if the chamber wall gave way first, the shell casing would be ripped in this way.

SRH

I am still going to shoot my Smith, and it does not have any cracks in the stock.

Seen some badly crashed cars just like mine. Think someone got killed. Be driving it for three hours straight next monday, 300 kilometers. Risky hey ?

O.

Far, Far riskier than enjoying that Smith. Been a while since I have seen actual statistics but I recall "Accidental" firearms injuries or deaths are at an all-time low. Even if you were Shot while engaged in some shooting sports the odds would still be it would be at the hands of another.

Not saying, of course, one should not exercise care in what they feed a shotgun, but with reasonable care, that type of injury is at the bottom of the totem pole.

Of course we're still all speculating. However, it's interesting to compare the photo of that hull to a couple hulls we know to have blown due only to what was IN the hull, not any possible obstruction. I refer those who may have a copy of the magazine to Double Gun Journal, Winter 1999, and the destruction test involving author Sherman Bell (Finding Out For Myself, Part II), with technical assistance from ballistician Tom Armbrust and doublegun smith Dennis Potter. The hulls in question look nothing like the above example. They're badly twisted as well as being torn. But that's what nearly 30,000 psi pressure--the load required to complete the destruction of the gun in question--will produce.

I no longer have the magazine, retaining only a Xerox copy of the article for my files. If anyone has it and can reproduce the photo, posting it here would provide an interesting comparison.

The odds are heavily in favor of our shooting our old doubles without major failure. I figure tens of thousands of old doulbles get used every year. A burst like this one is so rare it is news we talk about for a couple weeks or more. We have a great interest in the failures and probably mention the majority of them on boards like this one. If failures were common they would not hold our attention so long.

Caution and common sense precautions reduce the risk to a minimum but every time a gun is fired there is an infinitesimal risk of failure. A few years back there was a string of K80 trap gun failures. Multiple burst, over a year or so. Final cause never clearly determined but more than a few decided it was either a metal problem or the new AA two peice hull separation that caused a barrel obstruction. Neither view was conclusively proven but I know many K80 shooters who refuse to use AA ammo as a precaution.

Some suggested reloads were the true cause. The one gun I saw personally, was owned by a friend who has never reloaded a shell in his life. He was shooting AA factory ammo at the time. Every failure is unique and must be evaluated on its own facts. What we learn is caution and precautions are very important when shooting these old doubles.

That hull looks about as normal as any. My Krieghoff is 52 years old, some of my Smiths are 125 years old or more and my AA empties are from 1 to 20 years old. I try to stay away from two piece hulls, but I have enough one piece AA hulls to last me a lifetime. I feel that the switch away from compression formed hulls was a ridiculous decision that causes all this confusion about blow up accidents. I have never had an accident in 60 years of shotshell reloading.

Reifenhauser hulls have been around since the very beginning of plastic shotgun hulls.
I too like AA CF hulls, but they were just one type of hull design from the beginning. Nobody switched away from them.
Different companies had different solutions to hull construction.

I decided to look at some of my own doubles to see what their breeches look like relative to this Smith. Some were indiscernible without pulling the extractors, which I did not do. I did discover along the way that I've been neglectful of cleaning the junk out from under the extractor. Lots of oil laden lint from patches and an occasional grass fiber here and there. So, that has been rectified.

Meanwhile, my Facile Princeps looks MUCH thinner than the Smith. In fact, the joining line seems to run into the rim cut. So I guess this gun should have blown along time ago...



I also discovered that my waterheater appears to have let go last night. It has leaked under one of my safes. Not a danger to the safe or contents since it is on some boards for just this reason, but clean up is in order while sorting out the exact explanation.

Interesting Brent, and thank you.

The barrels are on the way.

Bro. Dewey gave me permission to post this

I'd like the Preacher to tell us who made the notations in red pertaining to the photos above.

Since he obviously does not yet have the blown barrels in hand for in depth metallurgical analysis, it is apparent that these notations in red must be based upon visual analysis and observation of the photos alone. The Preacher attempted to thoroughly discredit me for saying much the same thing in his earlier locked thread. He cried that it wasn't possible to know the cause without his precious metallurgical analysis, and also felt that the missing piece of chamber would be crucial to learn the cause of this burst... something that I could never possibly see from just looking at photos. So just what is going on here, and who made these observations and this post mortem???

I still think the dark spot that is now acknowledged to be the initiation point of the burst was probably due to an inclusion or internal flaw in the barrel steel such as rolled-in scale. That dark spot would have been just as thick as the clean area immediately adjacent to it. If the braze joint was that compromised ever since the gun left the manufacturer, I think odds are that it would have digested some higher pressure ammunition over those many decades, and blown sooner. That was why I seriously doubted that these barrels had undergone a twice normal pressure proof test, as someone asserted.

I also said much the same thing pertaining to the tearing of the hull due to suddenly being unsupported by the part of the chamber that suddenly departed. I said that earlier in this thread, but that post got deleted, probably due to complaining to Dave by the Preacher, or one of his loyal flock.

Apparently, he didn't like me mocking his lack of knowledge to analyze a barrel blow-up, and his hysterics over the idea that a burst like this could result in a piece of shrapnel hitting a child in the skull... and oh my gosh, there would be a civil suit because the defendant didn't measure the barrel wall thickness in this area... which incidentally cannot be measured with conventional wall thickness measuring tools. He said that even though he has admitted that he continues to shoot his only Damascus barreled gun, an L.C. Smith with thin and pitted barrels. Gotta get stuff like that deleted. We can't go on speaking the truth around here, or someone might look like a disingenuous ass.

It is your compulsive lying and criminal activity that has discredited you Willie the Weasel. No board member could possibly discredit you like you have done to yourself William.




Steve

Another "Crap-fest".. I trust Dewey Vicknair's analysis of this FUBARed "Elsie"-- the only one of my 12 gauge doubles with smooth chamber walls is the M21 my late Father bought slightly used in 1948, and gave me in 1981-- All my pre-1913 graded Smiths show some slight chamber roughness, another reason why I clean them thoroughly after a shooting session.

I believe Dewey tends to view the Smith design as overly complicated (the HOT) and prefers NOT to take one in his shop for repairs, etc. I bought the Smiths I own (and shoot) over the past 20 years from the late Brad B-- as they were priced lower than Parkers, and especially the fine A.H. Fox guns- being a cheap SOB, that factor appealed to me- still does today. If my Father hadn't bought the M21 in 1948, and gave it to me before he and Kay moved to Florida, I would NOT own one- RWTF

Foxy;
I hear you loud & clear. When I bought most of my Lefevers they were the most under-rated of all the American Classics. I paid less for my first one, an FE, than what a Parker Trojan would have cost or even a nice field grade, Smith, either with only extractors.

Very shortly I began studying its features & design & the Lefever very quickly became my Favorite of all the American doubles. Even today with Lefevers being more recognized I could still buy a very nice higher grade Lefever for what a Plain Jane 21, which in my opinion is about as ugly as a mud fence, would cost me.

Concurr-the "plain Jane M21- like mine- and the Parker Trojan- both fall in the "mud fence ugly niche"-- but if the stock dims, barrel length and chokes are suited to you and your shooting style-- hard to put "ugly gun" in the same bag with 3 dead rooster pheasants for 3 shots fired-- Sometimes: "uGLY IS AS UGLY DOES"- even an "Oklahoma 2-bagger at zero dark thirty at your neighborhood biker bar. RWTF

This thread has reinforced my sympathy for monobloc barrel construction. I would rather see the "joint" than these thin brazed walls.

Drew, seems like your friend is about spot on with what I have been thinking from the get go. The gun was doomed the day it left the factory. Just biding its time before blowing.

In the previous thread, Doc Drew showed a blow up picture, on May 6, with braze showing a clean bronze color. That braze was not likely to have been exposed to oxidizing conditions until the moment of the blow up.

Is the thought now that the factory sent this gun out the door with what appears to be a large pit in the chamber area and what appears to be a braze joint that was never complete? Nothing changed or affected the chamber area of this gun in the last hundred years?

I did not think the braze looked at all clean. Quite the opposite.

I don't think there was a pit originally, maybe not even a crack, but rather just a weak spot with nothing behind it to support and eventually that worked into a crack and it was all downhill from there. But in any event, it was bad from the beginning.

Lacking magic x-ray vision glasses I will ask (pay) the metallurgical engineer at METL to examine the presumed failure initiator point and if photomicrographs can confirm failure of the braze and/or some defect (inclusion? corrosion and pit?) in the barrel wall.

Douglas Adams, �Wonko the Sane�, The Ultimate Hitchhiker�s Guide to the Galaxy
"I'm a scientist and I know what constitutes proof. But the reason I call myself by my childhood name is to remind myself that a scientist must also be absolutely like a child. If he sees a thing, he must say that he sees it, whether it was what he thought he was going to see or not. See first, think later, then test. But always see first. Otherwise you will only see what you were expecting. Most scientists forget that."

And since numbers are good, and not dependent on pre-existing expectations or prejudice, a 1907 Hunter Arms engineering drawing specifies 16g chambers as .745" tapering to .732" with a 1/2" forcing cone to a bore of .650", so we can know if there has been any chamber/cone/bore modification IF the left chamber was also worked on.

P.S. Be kind to those moms, and children of moms, who are grieving this day. Many are. And many need both forgiveness and healing.