Thread: The lightening project

Originally Posted by Stocky

I wouldn't. Doing an analysis on hoop stress shows most rifles have a factor of safety well into 5x. A contender barrel is only 20.5mm and has 2 tig welds and 2 scope mount holes right over the chamber areas. Even looking at ar15 or ar10 barrel extensions gives an idea how much "extra" is in most actions. With careful consideration it can be done. Even with huge overpressure loads failures usually occur via barrel splitting vs actions failure. I usually use a kimber as a safe minimum dimensions and they are significantly smaller than a tikka.

The German proof house stopped accepting for proof Mauser actions with the transverse dovetail cut (for a scope base) through the receiver ring. Nothing to do with Tikkas but an example of a long "accepted" practise ultimately being found not to be a good idea. It's not known if this decision resulted from testing or from the gathering of information on failures, both functions of a proof house.

There are many variables in the engineering of rifles but given you have a potential grenade right in front of your face pushing the limits isn't usually a good idea. I for one am always deeply mistrusting of "engineering assumptions", incorrect assumptions lie at the root of most cock-ups.

That's not to say anything about Robs project, it's likey fine and dandy.

Originally Posted by Tentman

..... I for one am always deeply mistrusting of "engineering assumptions", incorrect assumptions lie at the root of most cock-ups....

It's not uncommon for engineering assumptions to generate a lot of work for testing labs. Helps to keep me employed.
Less keen on assumptions to contain an explosion in front of my face though.