8-bore;
I totally agree the Parker frame is stout enough to hold up to all normal use without the doll's head, as is also the Lefever as proved by the DS grade which omited it. Where I believe it definately would come into play would be on loads heavier than normal as used in this So-Called "Test". I would have to dig out the old issue & re-read, but as I recall from Bell's test the frame itself was undamaged & was said it could likely still be re-fitted with bbls & be usable. I personally would take that as positive proof the Doll's Head was working. What it is there for is "IF" a heavier load than normal gets fired it "Stops" the bending/flexing before it can cause frame stretching. The thrust comes straight back along the bore axis. Containing it from both above & below that axis is far more efficient than from only one side & depending totally upon the strength of the frame. This is basic mechanics, know ever since the "Clevise" (shackle) was designed to hitch a mule to a plow. Incidently I have hitched a few mules, perhaps that is why I understand the principal involved. I do not believe the Win engineers mised this when they chose the Trojan over the more common VH, but that's just my opinion. Incidently I have tried a couple of Lefevers on which the ball screws had been loosened & with the ball backed out of engagement upon closing the bls they snug right up against the breech with the top lever still centered. Even with the ball tight there can be no more than about a .001" clearance on that doll's head. There in lies the secret for any top fastening, IT Has To Fit, or it is of no value. It has been shown, that in spite of A T Brown's original design intent, the vast majority of rotary bolts built over the yrs do not fulfill their mission. This likely was the short coming of the NID "Tested" by Win. Perhaps they picked it to be sure, who knows.
