|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 members (j7l2),
478
guests, and
6
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics39,568
Posts562,859
Members14,597
| |
Most Online9,918
Jul 28th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,468
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,468 |
A barrel pollishing removes about 2 thousandths. A honing removes about 8 thousandths.
I doubt a single pit is of any significance.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,188 Likes: 69
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,188 Likes: 69 |
Rob,
I didn't intend to convey that the .008" change to wall thickness was inconsequential, but rather that a reduction in outside diameter by .008 compared to an increase in inside diameter of .008 was likely inconsequential. That comparison would have both barrels of the same wall thickness but different diameters by .008". This diameter difference, IMO, would be somewhat inconsequential in practical application, even though theoretically the smaller tube with the same wall would be able to contain higher pressures. thanks Chuck, now I understand what you meant.
My problem lies in reconciling my gross habits with my net income.
- Errol Flynn
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,188 Likes: 69
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,188 Likes: 69 |
A barrel pollishing removes about 2 thousandths. A honing removes about 8 thousandths.
I doubt a single pit is of any significance. Pete, in this theoretical case a barrel polishing have to remove as much as needed to remove the pitting, 0.004. Here's a picture of the gun that has prompted my questions. It's a Sauer sidelock that has some severe exterior pitting. The bores are fine and still in proof, no pitting at all but I'd have to strike off a good bit of this area to be able to get a decent re-blue and it's right where my left fingers would rest while firing the gun. 
My problem lies in reconciling my gross habits with my net income.
- Errol Flynn
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,883 Likes: 19
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,883 Likes: 19 |
I think Pete may have been relating his personal experiences. But, I'm of the opinion that trying to quantify how much honing removes is misleading. Several prominent barrel modification businesses use custom made honing machines to "backbore" whatever size is required. They will hone .010" or more. On the other end of the honing scale is the little 'bottlebrush' style hones with balls of abrasive on the ends of brush tines and the 'brake cylinder' style hones. Neither of these could remove .008 or even .004" diameter in the life of the hone let alone any time that would be reasonable. Nor could you hope to have a bore that was consistant diameter using those types of hones. And what about the choke lead angles? A machine operated hone that controls stroke and diameter would be the most practical method but still needs to have the choke lead angle on the stones. Barrels I have had honed have lost much of the lead angle and some have lost part or all choke. I'm not all that enamored with any honing I have had done. I would prefer reaming with a proper choke lead angle and light honing/polishing internally.
Last edited by Chuck H; 01/29/08 01:00 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,188 Likes: 69
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,188 Likes: 69 |
Thanks for the information men. My good sense has taken control over my lust and the above picture frightens me. That barrel got the way it did because of someone's fingers being there and I may need my left hand digits as I get older. I'm sending it back but I will hold onto the good information from this thread.
Rob
My problem lies in reconciling my gross habits with my net income.
- Errol Flynn
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
