I have blown up 7 guns - Page 2

Clark · July 16, 2000, 02:44 PM

In the movie "Toy World" Syd tortures his toys. This is evil from the point of view that toys have spirits. I see guns as just so much metal.

JackFlash · July 17, 2000, 02:23 AM

Guns have spirits. I learned that in the Army. --Or was it the bayonet that had a spirit . . . ???

If a gun blows up in the forest and there is no one there to hear it, does it make any noise?

And Buddhists want to know if a dog has a soul.

-- I gotta go talk to my guns . . .

alan · July 17, 2000, 06:12 PM

With all this about 10% reductions piled on top of 10% reductions, how soon will we reach the following point. Damage as a result of DETONATION, detonation caused by REDUCED CHARGES OF SLOW BURNING POWDERS.

The above situation has not really been duplicated under lab conditions, but is is or has been described in small arms and reloading literature. By now, it may even have been reproduced under lab conditions. In any event, if that undesirable point is reached, will the lawyers be fired, or taken out and shot, one wonders?

Clark · July 17, 2000, 08:38 PM

10% for temperature
10% for tight chambers
10% for tight barrels
10% for powder lot #
10% for bullet variation
10% for starting point
10% for safety
10% for St. Blastus guardian of reloaders
10% for corporate lawyers
10% for corporate insurance

. · July 18, 2000, 12:56 PM

100% about sums the whole kit-n-kaboodle.

Destructive testing is a standard procedure for firearms, especially for the military acquisition programs. It is essential not so much to determine catastrophic pressure failure but to project component and sub-system reliability and maintainability values for the life cycle logistical managment of the entire "series" of fireams in inventory or proposed to be placed in inventory.

Pressure testing to catastrophic failure has heretofore been close-hold proprietary information. I laud Clark et. al. efforts to initiate the development of credible and reliable data for the public sector. This is no little undertaking, albeit possibly too much fun and a "blast" to do.

[This message has been edited by Mykl (edited July 18, 2000).]

Clark · July 22, 2000, 04:56 PM

I have a car that reaches the bottom of the gas gauge and turns on an idiot light when the tank is still 1/4 full.

I carried gas and ran out. I found that if I set the trip meter when the idiot light came on, I had 80 miles to get to a gas station.

Today's load data is like that gas gauge and has to be worked around to get at the truth.

I am finding that I have to make assumptions about the ratio of change in pressure to change in powder [greater than 2 for fast powders, less for slower] and compensate for the wimpy over all length they tested at, and I have to raise the pressure on 9mm from 35k to 41k to get +P+. I have raise the pressure on 38 specials from 18.5k to 35k to get +P++++++.

Matt VDW · July 22, 2000, 06:19 PM

Clark,

Have you ever tried testing a variety of firearm brands to destruction? I think a S&W versus Ruger versus Arminius test would be interesting.

July 16, 2000, 02:44 PM	#26
Clark Senior Member Join Date: December 4, 1999 Location: WA, the ever blue state Posts: 4,678	In the movie "Toy World" Syd tortures his toys. This is evil from the point of view that toys have spirits. I see guns as just so much metal.

July 17, 2000, 02:23 AM	#27
JackFlash Junior member Join Date: July 8, 2000 Posts: 107	Guns have spirits. I learned that in the Army. --Or was it the bayonet that had a spirit . . . ??? If a gun blows up in the forest and there is no one there to hear it, does it make any noise? And Buddhists want to know if a dog has a soul. -- I gotta go talk to my guns . . .

July 17, 2000, 06:12 PM	#28
alan Senior Member Join Date: June 7, 1999 Posts: 3,847	With all this about 10% reductions piled on top of 10% reductions, how soon will we reach the following point. Damage as a result of DETONATION, detonation caused by REDUCED CHARGES OF SLOW BURNING POWDERS. The above situation has not really been duplicated under lab conditions, but is is or has been described in small arms and reloading literature. By now, it may even have been reproduced under lab conditions. In any event, if that undesirable point is reached, will the lawyers be fired, or taken out and shot, one wonders?

July 17, 2000, 08:38 PM	#29
Clark Senior Member Join Date: December 4, 1999 Location: WA, the ever blue state Posts: 4,678	10% for temperature 10% for tight chambers 10% for tight barrels 10% for powder lot # 10% for bullet variation 10% for starting point 10% for safety 10% for St. Blastus guardian of reloaders 10% for corporate lawyers 10% for corporate insurance

July 18, 2000, 12:56 PM	#30
. Senior Member Join Date: October 6, 1998 Location: My wife's house... Posts: 2,659	100% about sums the whole kit-n-kaboodle. Destructive testing is a standard procedure for firearms, especially for the military acquisition programs. It is essential not so much to determine catastrophic pressure failure but to project component and sub-system reliability and maintainability values for the life cycle logistical managment of the entire "series" of fireams in inventory or proposed to be placed in inventory. Pressure testing to catastrophic failure has heretofore been close-hold proprietary information. I laud Clark et. al. efforts to initiate the development of credible and reliable data for the public sector. This is no little undertaking, albeit possibly too much fun and a "blast" to do. [This message has been edited by Mykl (edited July 18, 2000).]

July 22, 2000, 04:56 PM	#31
Clark Senior Member Join Date: December 4, 1999 Location: WA, the ever blue state Posts: 4,678	I have a car that reaches the bottom of the gas gauge and turns on an idiot light when the tank is still 1/4 full. I carried gas and ran out. I found that if I set the trip meter when the idiot light came on, I had 80 miles to get to a gas station. Today's load data is like that gas gauge and has to be worked around to get at the truth. I am finding that I have to make assumptions about the ratio of change in pressure to change in powder [greater than 2 for fast powders, less for slower] and compensate for the wimpy over all length they tested at, and I have to raise the pressure on 9mm from 35k to 41k to get +P+. I have raise the pressure on 38 specials from 18.5k to 35k to get +P++++++.

July 22, 2000, 06:19 PM	#32
Matt VDW Senior Member Join Date: July 27, 1999 Posts: 1,315	Clark, Have you ever tried testing a variety of firearm brands to destruction? I think a S&W versus Ruger versus Arminius test would be interesting.