What makes the Ruger No.1 such a strong action?

[AbitNutz]

I have a Ruger No.1 a Winchester 1885 (Miroku) Lyman 1878 (Pedersoli-Sharps)

The Ruger is touted to be hella strong. Why? They're all falling blocks and look more or less similar to almost every other falling block I've seen. The Ruger seems to resembles the Farquarson more or less, not sure how strong it is.

The Winchester 1885 Miroku is also crazy strong as it is chambered for the .375 H&H but they all kinda sorta look alike to me. Genuine 1885 are said not to be as strong...not sure if this is really true but it's what I've read.

What makes the No.1 blowup resistant? Are there stronger falling block single shots? It's not just metallurgy, is it?

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Three things make a rifle receiver unlikely to explode. One is the amount of metal, and the other isl the nature of that metal. The Miroku etc. might be made of modern investment cast alloy steel, but we know the Ruger is. An original 1885 would be made of low to medium carbon steel, case hardened, which resists scratching and denting pretty well, but makes almost no difference to tensile strength.

The third thing is what happens to the powder gases if a case ruptures. We all know the action had better not provide an exit for them in the direction of your eyes. But if the gases are confined after they have started their escape, they can rupture a confined area of the receiver. The classic example is the receiver ring of a front-locking bolt action, and most falling-blocks are far safer.

[Doc Highwall]

If I remember correctly the side walls on the receiver, where the breach block goes up and down the metal is .218" thick which is thicker then most bolt actions where the lugs are.

[country gent]

Modern steels are more consistant in the alloy, blending, and making than the older steels. One plus to the investment cast process is that grain structure is more alighned to the shape if done right. Heat treat procedures are more consistant and more complete than they were. Oven are now controlled not only to heat temp but atmosphere and conditions. Low carbon steels sometimes leaded even machined well and were used in the original with a very simple bone charcoal pack to case harden, this helped to keep oxegon out and depending on temps produced a surface with colors and case hardening .015-.060 deep. Temperatures in the old ovens werent as easily maintained at a set level, oxegon was in the mix, quench oils were ussually whatever was handy and not as refined as today. Add to this modern casting machining process induce less stress into the parts. Small changes in an angle or addition of a small radious instead of a sharp corner, better materials, and better machining processes all contribute to newer actionns being stronger.

[EDG]

The height and thickness of the receiver side walls support the breech block. The amount of metal that is bearing the load is about 10X the amount of metal in the locking lugs of a bolt gun. The receiver size walls are also relatively short which means there is less length to stretch. By contrast a Lee-Enfield receiver is loaded at the back end, the right wall is flimsy and the material loaded is about 4" long.
The secret of a front locking bolt action is the very short heavy receiver ring. But a falling block is even heavier.

A very short heavy cross section is very difficult to stretch.
A long skinny receiver is like a rubber band by comparison.


The falling blocks are not just strong but they are massively strong.

[Paul_R]

Personally I'm of the opinion that the modern Winchester/Browning Hi Walls are every bit as strong as the Ruger.

[Char-Gar]

Both the the Japchester and Ruger falling block rifles are plenty strong for any cartridge any sane person would put in a rifle. I see no need to discuss which is stronger as that is an academic question.

[AbitNutz]

I would like to know if there are any significant differences between the Miroku/Winchester 1885 and the Ruger No.1 that may make a stronger action.

[Clay M]

I would like to know if there are any significant differences between the Miroku/Winchester 1885 and the Ruger No.1 that may make a stronger action.

I believe they are equally strong.
The modern heat treated steel is a significant factor as well as design.

[AbitNutz]

Anyone familiar with ESR steel? (Electro-Slag Refined) Is this type of steel making process above and beyond what we normally use for gun/ordnance steel? I saw that it is used in modern tank barrels...

From some of the descriptions, it sounds obscenely expensive.

[Clay M]

The Modern 74 Sharps is also strong because of good quality, modern, heat treated steel.
I only shoot black powder, or low pressure loads in my Shiloh's, but they are strong none the less.
The old originals are considered somewhat weak.

I never run dangerous ,high pressure loads in my #1's, but I am confident in their strength.
The Miroku 86's and 95's are also a great deal stronger than the originals.

[AbitNutz]

My Winchester (Miroku) 1885 is in 375 H&H. I just looked up the pressure that cartridge runs at...62,000 PSI. Wow! That action must be stupid strong.

Just out of curiosity...what's the highest pressure commercial cartridge available?

[Clay M]

My Winchester (Miroku) 1885 is in 375 H&H. I just looked up the pressure that cartridge runs at...62,000 PSI. Wow! That action must be stupid strong.

Just out of curiosity...what's the highest pressure commercial cartridge available?

No idea. I would think the .460 Weatherby would be on up there, as well as the .50 BMG

[EDG]

The most importance is which one do you think would break the butt stock from heavy recoil.
The only way to damage the actions would be deliberate over loads with too fast powders.


I would like to know if there are any significant differences between the Miroku/Winchester 1885 and the Ruger No.1 that may make a stronger action.

[AbitNutz]

The most importance is which one do you think would break the butt stock from heavy recoil.
The only way to damage the actions would be deliberate over loads with too fast powders.

You may well be right. While it is nowhere in the same class as the Ruger or Winchester regarding strength. My principle concern about my Lyman 1878-Pedersoli-Sharps 1877, That has been rechambered in 450 Nitro Express, is breaking the stock in the pistol grip area. That would be a real shame as the wood on this rifle is very good considering it is not a custom rifle.

[DocSavage]

Ages ago I read a blurb on how strong the No.1 action is.
Ruger load a 7 mm Remington mag case with a 175 gr bullet behind a case full of Bullseye. Bolted the rifle down and fired remotely and IIRC the fore stock was blown off and barrel bulged but the action stayed in one piece. Ruger engineers figured the load was in the 100,000 psi range.

[newton]

I know that its downright unlawful to mention Rossi in a Ruger No1 thread, but I have to ask.

Looking at the way the Rossi, and H&R for that matter, single shot guns are made and reading about how the action is what makes Ruger No1 good - would you consider the break open actions, like mentioned, stronger than bolt actions? Or does the strength of the metal come into play with the "cheaper" guns?

I know metal composition has a lot to do with strength, but I always attributed the cost of a rifle to the design, fit, and finish. And when you look at a Rossi it has simple design, minimal fit and finish. Nothing like a Ruger for sure.

[DerekP Houston]

I know that its downright unlawful to mention Rossi in a Ruger No1 thread, but I have to ask.

Looking at the way the Rossi, and H&R for that matter, single shot guns are made and reading about how the action is what makes Ruger No1 good - would you consider the break open actions, like mentioned, stronger than bolt actions? Or does the strength of the metal come into play with the "cheaper" guns?

I know metal composition has a lot to do with strength, but I always attributed the cost of a rifle to the design, fit, and finish. And when you look at a Rossi it has simple design, minimal fit and finish. Nothing like a Ruger for sure.

I believe it is the cheaper metal Rossi uses for the guns that makes the difference. I have a 92 357/38 and its a fun gun, but when I was "finishing" my gun the burrs and metal were very soft and easy to remove. For a knockoff brand they work great and I don't expect it to have the same quality controls as the other names. Save a few bucks and finish it yourself or buy something nicer for a bit more.

[JHeath]

I know that its downright unlawful to mention Rossi in a Ruger No1 thread, but I have to ask.

Looking at the way the Rossi, and H&R for that matter, single shot guns are made and reading about how the action is what makes Ruger No1 good - would you consider the break open actions, like mentioned, stronger than bolt actions? Or does the strength of the metal come into play with the "cheaper" guns?

I know metal composition has a lot to do with strength, but I always attributed the cost of a rifle to the design, fit, and finish. And when you look at a Rossi it has simple design, minimal fit and finish. Nothing like a Ruger for sure.

I don't think it's the metallurgy, but the nature of the design. Break opens are hinged, the thrust has leverage on the hinge, and the lock is not that robust. The load on a No. 1 pushes straight back against against a block which is butted up against the receiver walls. It's like the difference between trying to kick open a door vs. trying to kick down a stud wall.

[BAGTIC]

On a hinged action the hinge can have more cross sectional area than the lugs on bolt guns. The lock (latch) doesn't need much strength as the hinge carries most of the load. Because the only force against the latch is due to the small offset between the bore centerline and the hinge pin it is only a small fraction of the total force.

[JWT]

Frank de Haas wrote a series of books that examine single shot actions in great detail. After all of his research he was a big fan of the #1.

Single Shot Rifles And Actions (ISBN 0-910676-01-x)
A Potpourri Of Single Shot Rifles And Actions
More Single Shot Rifles And Actions
Mr. Single Shot's Book Of Rifle Plans

All interesting reading for fans of the single shot rifles.

[JHeath]

On a hinged action the hinge can have more cross sectional area than the lugs on bolt guns. The lock (latch) doesn't need much strength as the hinge carries most of the load. Because the only force against the latch is due to the small offset between the bore centerline and the hinge pin it is only a small fraction of the total force.

Yeah but the OP wanted to know why the No. 1 is stronger. I think because the No. 1 has no hinge, no offset, and much greater locking surface. The falling block does not swing shut so needs no clearance to swing. The falling block design puts large bearing surfaces in compression: the pressure actually pushes the block and receiver together. To kb it the entire receiver walls would have to fail in tension, or the barrel and ring explode. The pressure in a hinged gun puts the latch in tension. A kb would need only that latch to fail or the barrel which has no ring.

[Doc Highwall]

The strength of a action is dependent upon
1:The design which includes the cross sectional area at the thinnest point that contains the pressure
2:The metallurgy
3:The tolerance that are used to manufacture the action.

A chain is no stronger then it's weakest link!

[Clark]

My father was chief engineer gun designer for 40 years.
He knew famous people and was a high power guy.
It is not easy being an average engineer and being his son.
But... he showed me how to calculate the strength of my NEF handi rifle 45/70.

I am a big fan of De Haas and the Ruger #1.
I have calculated the strength of lots of guns and tried to blow them up.
They never yield when they should because peak chamber pressure is only for a millisecond and the steel ratings come from static tests.

Cut to the chase:
The Ruger #1 is so strong, it does not matter how strong it is.
The brass will flow like mud before the action is the primary failure.
The way the Ruger #1 deals with destroyed brass is beautiful. The gas never gets me, and the #1 can extract anything.

http://i757.photobucket.com/albums/xx220/ClarkM/PrimersFallingOut223tiny.jpg

Here is some brass coming out of one of my Ruger #1 rifles.

[ebner glocken]

I'm most curious what load it took to make brass flow like that. If you're uncomfortable publishing that in an open forum feel free to PM the loads you used to me. Don't worry, I have NO intentions of actually using them.

Ebner

[AbitNutz]

I wish I had the budget and the internal fortitude to be able to test rifles to destruction. There's a youtube channel where some good Ol' boys pack a 7.62x54R with "range trash"...all manor of powder swept off the range...not exactly sure what that is.

They then try to blow up an old Mosin...it took a while but they finally did it.

I have a Ruger No1 in 450/400 Nitro Express and that has a max pressure of 39,000. I understand that brass starts to fail at about 65,000, which seems to be the max pressure of today's hottest magnums. I wonder what would be the results of loading the 450/400 NE to 65,000....No, I have no intention of finding out but as a thought experiment, it's interesting.

[NavyVet1959]

I understand that brass starts to fail at about 65,000, which seems to be the max pressure of today's hottest magnums. I wonder what would be the results of loading the 450/400 NE to 65,000....No, I have no intention of finding out but as a thought experiment, it's interesting.

Sounds like time to start experimenting with steel cased ammo.

[Clark]

I'm most curious what load it took to make brass flow like that. If you're uncomfortable publishing that in an open forum feel free to PM the loads you used to me. Don't worry, I have NO intentions of actually using them.

Ebner

Those were all the same load, 18 gr Blue Dot 35 gr Vmax.
Blue Dot works well at 15 gr ~ 35kpsi 3500 fps, but at 18gr it makes 4100 fps and is easy on the brass or 4200 fps and destroys the brass. It is very erratic.

155444

Here is a work up in a different Ruger #1 223
Left to right H335 55 gr 223 brass and Quickload prediction:
unfired, extractor groove .329"
28 gr, extractor groove .329", 11% overload 69 kpsi
29 gr, extractor groove .329", 15% overload 80kpsi
30 gr, extractor groove .3295", 19% overload 92kpsi
31 gr, extractor groove .3320", 23% overload 106kpsi

Notice how steady the increases are?
H335 in 223 is more predictable.


155446
Here is 18 gr of Blue Dot again, but in an AR15.
Notice the mark of:
1) extractor
2) ejector
3) stretch in front of the web

The AR15 is also not gas adjustable. The Ruger #1 is far more versatile in loading.

[leebuilder]

Niffty stuff. Thanks for sharing. Gonna get my no1 tropical in 375 H&H out and crack off a few rounds.
be safe

[JHeath]

Those were all the same load, 18 gr Blue Dot 35 gr Vmax.
Blue Dot works well at 15 gr ~ 35kpsi 3500 fps, but at 18gr it makes 4100 fps and is easy on the brass or 4200 fps and destroys the brass. It is very erratic.

155444

Here is a work up in a different Ruger #1 223
Left to right H335 55 gr 223 brass and Quickload prediction:
unfired, extractor groove .329"
28 gr, extractor groove .329", 11% overload 69 kpsi
29 gr, extractor groove .329", 15% overload 80kpsi
30 gr, extractor groove .3295", 19% overload 92kpsi
31 gr, extractor groove .3320", 23% overload 106kpsi

Notice how steady the increases are?
H335 in 223 is more predictable.


155446
Here is 18 gr of Blue Dot again, but in an AR15.
Notice the mark of:
1) extractor
2) ejector
3) stretch in front of the web

The AR15 is also not gas adjustable. The Ruger #1 is far more versatile in loading.

Clark, thanks again. Your research into safety margins and failure modes is really welcome. Too many sources say what's safe and end with "beyond this place there be dragons", which is a poor substitute for knowledge. I build rigging. Some hardware manufacturers list safe working loads for products. I always need to know the design factor, and work backward from the ultimate strength. It means little to be told "safe working loads" if the design factor of mixed components could be anything from 3 to 10. . The progression you list above, with extractor groove threshold, is really interesting.

[AbitNutz]

This is a bit of a stretch but does anyone know what heavy artillery and the like pressure out at? Like the 120mm gun on an Abrams or the 16" gun on an Iowa class. The 120mm throws a round at well over 4000 fps...no idea what the velocity is of one of the Volkswagen sized projectiles out of a 16 inchers are. Are the pressures on these type of weapons huge as well?

[Good Cheer]

Considering how to max the velocities in an Indiana compliant 1.8" case length and .35 minimum caliber I'm looking seriously at another Ruger single shooter. Not going to butcher my Texas deer rifle to do it though!

[oldred]

This is a bit of a stretch but does anyone know what heavy artillery and the like pressure out at? Like the 120mm gun on an Abrams or the 16" gun on an Iowa class. The 120mm throws a round at well over 4000 fps...no idea what the velocity is of one of the Volkswagen sized projectiles out of a 16 inchers are. Are the pressures on these type of weapons huge as well?

Not sure about the pressures so I can't answer that question but those 4000+ FPS rounds are sabots so the pressure may not be all that high.


EDIT: Wow! I just asked Mr Google that question and the abrams round is from 5200 to 5700 FPS!!! :shock:


That must be a sabot round but still!!!!!!!!!!

Yep it's a sabot round but look at the cost of that sucker, $8,500 a shot!!!!!!!!

"Muzzle velocity of 1,555 m/s (5,100 ft/s).[citation needed] The sabot is of composite material. This variant is unofficially referred to by Abrams tank crews as the "super sabot".[6] It costs around $8,500"

[Clark]

This is a bit of a stretch but does anyone know what heavy artillery and the like pressure out at? Like the 120mm gun on an Abrams or the 16" gun on an Iowa class. The 120mm throws a round at well over 4000 fps...no idea what the velocity is of one of the Volkswagen sized projectiles out of a 16 inchers are. Are the pressures on these type of weapons huge as well?

My father designed guns and vehicles to haul guns from 1946 to 1988.
The first thing he did on guns is now called the M55 and it is still used by Israel to shoot up Lebanon.
He worked with a 1938 book called
http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Ordinance-Colonel-Thomas-Hayes/dp/B016FU7YBG/ref=sr_1_1

The math is hard. Should be at least a senior in engineering college to use that as a text book.
It will lead you through the Le Duc equations
http://www.mindspring.com/~sfaber1/leduc.htm

So much math... one interesting thing i just read page 82 is the 14" guns in 1938 were only getting 250 accurate rounds.
A 220 Swift does better than that.

Also on page 82, gun powder has 1.4M ft pounds of energy per pound.... hmm

[BAGTIC]

Chamber pressure on 16 inch Mk 7 battleship gun was 37,000 psi. Pressure on 120 mm tank gun is 62,000 psi, same as 30-06, 308, 270, etc.

[AbitNutz]

Chamber pressure on 16 inch Mk 7 battleship gun was 37,000 psi. Pressure on 120 mm tank gun is 62,000 psi, same as 30-06, 308, 270, etc.

Wow, that's interesting. I would have thought that such meg guns would develop mega pressures.

[Shooter6br]

I may never find out how strong a Ruger #1 is since I shoot 45-70 350g bullet at 1200FPS ( but accidents can happen !)

[EDG]

If you investigate the M829A1 Silver bullet round the pressure is given as 5600 BAR = 81,200 PSI.

Anectdotally a former tank armorer told me the pressure with the electric primed ammo with the short sealing cups would run up to 90,000 PSI

[AbitNutz]

Anecdotally a former tank armorer told me the pressure with the electric primed ammo with the short sealing cups would run up to 90,000 PSI

No wonder they have to use "Super Steel". The stuff that is using ESR (Electro-Slag-Remelting) and VAR (Vacuum-Arc-Remelting) Refinement processes.

I can only imagine what a forged receiver and barrel made from that stuff would cost.

[Fotis]

Personally I'm of the opinion that the modern Winchester/Browning Hi Walls are every bit as strong as the Ruger.


They are!

[EDG]

The steel in the gun is not the big deal. You can just make the gun breech bigger. The sealing cups with the electric primers seal the breech and they are made out of steel. I don't think 90,000 PSI is much pressure for a steel seal.


No wonder they have to use "Super Steel". The stuff that is using ESR (Electro-Slag-Remelting) and VAR (Vacuum-Arc-Remelting) Refinement processes.

I can only imagine what a forged receiver and barrel made from that stuff would cost.

[JHeath]

The steel in the gun is not the big deal. You can just make the gun breech bigger. The sealing cups with the electric primers seal the breech and they are made out of steel. I don't think 90,000 PSI is much pressure for a steel seal.
More is better. With special steel I could have a 4 lb Ruger No. 1 at 90k psi.

And since we can't exceed about 4000fps velocity anyway, I could only use the extra power for heavier bullets.

So I could shoot 500gr bullets out of my 4lb rifle at 4000fps.

Who could resist that? If only I had the money.

[AbitNutz]

Meh?... special steel, muzzle brake and hydraulic butt recoil decelerator...4lb rifle and a 500gr bullet at 4000fps....priceless.

[JHeath]

Meh?... special steel, muzzle brake and hydraulic butt recoil decelerator...4lb rifle and a 500gr bullet at 4000fps....priceless.

The hydraulic decelerator for that one would need to be on my butt, not the rifle's. I'm recoil averse anyway.

My interest in the No. 1's strength is not "power." Just the opposite, it's in reducing muzzle pressure with modest loads in short barrels.

If I could use the No. 1's strength to launch 7mm/175s at 2100fps out of a 16" barrel using Bullseye, with less muzzle pressure than using 4831 out of a 26" barrel, that's more interesting.

Less noise and less rocket-effect recoil.

I wimped out with 300gr CorBon in a .454 Rossi.

[AbitNutz]

Just to put things in perspective...I just ran the numbers for a 4lb rifle, firing a 500gr bullet at 4000fps.

Free recoil is 713 fr/lbs
For comparison...a typical 30-06 comes out to...
15.1 ft.lbs

As the old saying goes...One end kills, the other end cripples. Or in this case, both ends kill.

[JHeath]

Hm. What if I have it MagNa Ported?

[BAGTIC]

The Army and Navy wanted guns that would last not hangar queens. One can have a small chamber at high pressures or a larger chamber at lower pressures and get the same performance. That is why the old British big game cartridges had such large cases, to keep pressures low.

[BAGTIC]

The problem with super high pressures is not in sealing the breech. It is with un-sealing the breech, extraction. A case, any case, loaded to high enough pressure will exceed the resiliency of the case. It will expand to conform to the chamber and stay there like a press fit part.

[BAGTIC]

Muzzle brakes do not reduce muzzle pressure. They redirect the exhaust jet to the rear to counter some of the recoil. The price is that high pressure gas directed toward the shooter increases audible noise. Easiest way to reduce muzzle pressure is to increase the expansion ratio by lengthening the barrel. The obsession with short barrels is just that, an obsession. When WW2 began the Army thought the Japanese had invented some new super quiet flashless smokeless powder. After considerable experimenting they realized that all they had to do was lengthen rifle barrels to the same length as the Japanese rifles. Voila!

[RPRNY]

Informative and civil. How rare.

[AbitNutz]

It's funny you should mention the Japanese cartridges of WW2. The 6.5x50 Arisaka they used in the type 66 has almost the same design and case capacity of the latest 6.5 wonder cartridges. It was a fantastically efficient little cartridge.

Somehow they were convinced that their 6.5 was inadequate compared to the American 30-06, the 303 British, 8mm Mauser and Russia's 7.62x54r. So they bumped up to 7.7x58, almost identical to the 30-06 but with a .311 bullet. Which then turned out to be a little too much for the smaller framed Japanese soldiers...so they loaded it down. Kind of where a healthy 6.5x50 would be....go figure.

THE 6.5X50 cartridge has a case head diameter of .447, the same as the later 7.62x39 which the 22 PPC is based. It has a nice long neck like the the 6.5mm Mannlicher, which some folks really, really like. When you look very closely at the 6.5 Arisaka, with modern powders and bullets it is a really nicely balanced cartridge.

Sooner or later someone is going to make a 6.5mm cartridge that has the head size of the 7.62x39 with a length of the 5.56x45 and call it the 6.5 miracle.

[EDG]

Both the Dutch and the Italians found that the long heavy 156 grain 6.5mm bullets were not real effective killers. They both tended to be so stable they penetrated through and through.

Proof of this is the Italians partially executed change over to the 7.35 Carcano round and the Dutch playing around with a 8X57R based on the 6.5 Dutch case.

(It is humorous to see the US 5.56 start out with something close to the .222 Rem Mag case and find out it will not penetrate a helmet at longer ranges. This has resulted in very fast twist barrels in .22 and very long bullets and lower velocities. In the end they still have an underpowdered infantry rifle.)

[Ric-san]

Now if I could only find a Ruger No. 1 in .308 ....

[NavyVet1959]

Now if I could only find a Ruger No. 1 in .308 ....

http://www.armslist.com/posts/4930783/birmingham-alabama-rifles-for-sale--river-no1-b-308

Looks like a Ruger to me. Maybe a typo when he said "River" since the "i" is by the "u" and the "v" is by the "g"?

[Hickory]

What makes the No.1 blowup resistant? Are there stronger falling block single shots? It's not just metallurgy, is it?
Ruger #1 are not blowup resistant.
Ruger had a recall back in the early 70's because their 22 hornet was blowing out the extractors.

[Good Cheer]

Both the Dutch and the Italians found that the long heavy 156 grain 6.5mm bullets were not real effective killers. They both tended to be so stable they penetrated through and through.

Proof of this is the Italians partially executed change over to the 7.35 Carcano round and the Dutch playing around with a 8X57R based on the 6.5 Dutch case.

(It is humorous to see the US 5.56 start out with something close to the .222 Rem Mag case and find out it will not penetrate a helmet at longer ranges. This has resulted in very fast twist barrels in .22 and very long bullets and lower velocities. In the end they still have an underpowdered infantry rifle.)

Yeah, corporate planners aren't stupid. They know that whatever weapon system they come up with will soon be obsoleted, so like a truck load of diseased hogs had better get sold before they start keeling over, any weapon has a possibly brief sales span. On that basis the planning for the replacement system is part of the game.
But about the military cartridges developments, got interested and started reading about it when the NRA sold me a 1888 for thirty-five dollars. Back during the run up to WWI those new whoopty-doo smokeless cartridges were equipped with a pencil looking bullet for greater penetration on logs and masonry, whatever the enemy soldier might be hiding behind. Then next was the new (insert flourish of trumpets) design concept of higher velocity lighter bullets of diameter to produce greater wounding. At one point the development of high velocity 6mm's started to gain ground but quickly faded away. There was an historically ignored general in Mexico that was somewhat of a manic (some say evil) genius way back when that was producing semi-auto high velocity designs. It's all kind of like looking at the evolution of battle ships on a minor scale. Just sorta interesting stuff.

[Kevinkd]

The Army and Navy wanted guns that would last not hangar queens. One can have a small chamber at high pressures or a larger chamber at lower pressures and get the same performance. That is why the old British big game cartridges had such large cases, to keep pressures low.

Yes, but they also have unlimited budgets dont you know? It's your money they get to spend. :kidding:

[jonp]

"The hydraulic decelerator for that one would need to be on my butt, not the rifle's. I'm recoil averse anyway."

I'd pay $20 to watch you pull the trigger on a 4lb rifle shooting a 500gr bullet at 4,000fps. I won't pay any of the emergency room tab to fix your shoulder, concussion or teeth.

[jonp]

http://www.armslist.com/posts/4930783/birmingham-alabama-rifles-for-sale--river-no1-b-308

Looks like a Ruger to me. Maybe a typo when he said "River" since the "i" is by the "u" and the "v" is by the "g"?

Errrr...""$1,100 scope can be added for $1,800"????? yeah...pass....

[NavyVet1959]

Errrr...""$1,100 scope can be added for $1,800"????? yeah...pass....

Yeah, the guy is missing a couple of punctuation marks in his ad. Maybe he made the mistake of trying to type it out on a touchscreen device.

[Good Cheer]

Tomorrow the No.1 9.3x74R arrives.
Breech seating the boolit and loading the bagged powder charge is being considered.
After all, Indiana says the brass can't be longer than 1.8".

[Good Cheer]

The 9.3x74R came in with Hornady dies, four boxes of brass, an unopened box of Barnes and half a box of Hornady's, two sets of rings (low and medium), after market recoil pad as well as the original butt plate, a soft case... what a trove to behold!