|
|
|
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
|
31
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,522
Posts545,776
Members14,419
| |
Most Online1,344
Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,085 Likes: 478
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,085 Likes: 478 |
Drew, Miller, thanks for your time and effort. Gil
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,430 Likes: 315
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,430 Likes: 315 |
Under the theme of “God protects the clueless” (Psalm 116:6) with .016" MWT, I personally measured the wall thickness of a 1906 L.C. Smith 16g No. 0E with “Good Two Rod” Damascus at .016”, 14” from the breech which had survived 75 shots with 7/8 oz. at 1145 fps. (about 8000 psi) and 500 3/4 oz. at 1100 fps RSTs without rupture or bulge. The barrels have been retired.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 906 Likes: 30
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 906 Likes: 30 |
A note on proof, "hillbilly" or any other. Proof firing is necessary to get to after proof viewing. The test is only as good as the viewer and the viewing. Guns most usually don't disappear in a blinding flash and a resounding thunderclap. But, sometimes parts deform beyond their elastic limit. It is the duty of the viewer to "see" this deformation - via eyeballs or gages. The "hillbilly" method usually skips over the viewing. I'd bet sporting money that Dennis (above) gives every gun he proofs a really good viewing.
DDA Rocketman, You are absolutely right. I wouldn't make much of a technical writer. My wife always tells me I skip over important parts of instructions when dealing with my boy. I skip what I think is obvious. Probably not a great trait.  HB proofing without the viewing would just be stupid.
Bill Johnson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,964 Likes: 89
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,964 Likes: 89 |
2-piper's several comments on this thread warrant re reading. They just make sense. I have been guilty in past years of searching for ultra low pressure loads that do the work of more muscular combinations. It is just common sense that to attain X velocity of a payload it requires Y energy. The difference being where the energy is released--in the chamber or further up the barrel.
When an old man dies a library burns to the ground. (Old African proverb)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743 |
The "Only" way to reduce total pressure is to reduce total ballistics, IE reduce the shot load, reduce the velocity OR Both.
It has often been stated that shooting a factory light 1 oz load (12ga) is just as hard on the gun as shooting a Hi-Vel 1Ľ oz load because they both have the same allowable max pressure. This is only partially true. True they "MY" Reach the same Max pressure & point of max pressure may be no more than Ľ" apart, but it will be closer to the breech in the 1 oz load so the walls will be just a bit thicker. The pressures for the rest of the bbl will be a bit lower, the strain on the action, stock & shooter will be less with the 1oz.
Miller/TN
I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
