Oldred
I grow weary of this thread. Look at the ruptured case.....would the rifle have been destroyed had that case not ruptured? I'm done.....tired of. Simply don't shoot any then...........
Larry Gibson
|
   
   
|
|
Willy Snyder
PO Box 2732
Pocatello, ID 83206
Oldred
I grow weary of this thread. Look at the ruptured case.....would the rifle have been destroyed had that case not ruptured? I'm done.....tired of
Larry Gibson
Larry,Originally Posted by Larry Gibson
Oldred
I grow weary of this thread. Look at the ruptured case.....would the rifle have been destroyed had that case not ruptured? I'm done.....tired of
Larry Gibson
I'd lock this thread if I could. I've never opened a can of worms this big.
I've shot the earliest CF cartridge guns on up. You have to have some clue they are OLD and have had a lot of time to have more problems than they were made with..... Yes, metallurgy was in it's infancy back then up somewhere well past WWII. You also have to realize some people use current commercial ammo to shoot in these firearms.... some bad juju can happen since some of these things weren't meant for the updated pressure levels some of these cartridges have not withstanding the clueless shooters we see making some of the simplest of errors these days. I have shot and will continue to shoot all these rifles with ammo appropriate for their age, condition and metallurgical inadequacies that they have........................... all it takes is knowledge of what to do and what not to do.
45 2.1
Knowledge without understanding is a dangerous thing. For a little knowledge entices us to walk its path, a bit more provides the foundation on which we take our stand, and a sufficient amount can erect a wall of knowledge around us, trapping us in our own ignorance.
Never sleep, never die
Knowledge is easy to get, but worthless if you never use it. However the info is free, so the only person you have to blame is yourself if you chose not to use the information.
Do you know how time consuming it is to correct your incorrect statements?
Since heat treatment changes the physical characteristics of metal we have to accept that as part and parcel of metallurgy.
Please excuse my very abbreviated annotations below. If I was billing you @ $35/hour I'd include the whole of the text but you're cheap and won't pay so make do
656701: not properly case hardened.....materal used appears unrefined...
312249: same as 656701
486640: defective heat treatment
108448: defective material composing the barrel. (signed by metallurgist)
217794: not been properly heat treated...
658742: material used in manufacture of this rifle barrel was very undesireable... slag inclusions..
666263, 662284: not been given proper heat treatment... phosphorus and sulpher content too high...
177232: ..inconclusion, it may be stated that the opinion of this armory is that regardless of what causes such as defective cartridge cases may have contributed to the failure, the ultimate responsibility for the accident is due to the poor receiver, as with a good receiver the accident would not have happened.
326222: improper heat treatment.....lacked shock resisting qualities....improper assembly.
608498: slag streaks in barrel.
146184: receiver not properly heat treated, was too brittle to be suitable for this component. It cannot be said that any receiver would have held, although no broken receivers of Springfield Armory's late manufacture have been returned to this establishment.
759943: barrel contained burnt steel... excessive heating in the upsetting operation...internal oxidation... (signed by metallurgist)
971779: seam in barrel
The above notes and the rest of Hatcher's Notebook are hereby presented as evidence to refute your erroneous statement: "there is no proof any LSN'd '03 ever had a catastrophic failure due to "attributed to bad mettalurgy"...
Read down to "heat treatment"....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallurgy
Please, Larry, for the sake of all mankind....
If I had it, I would pull the barrel and get me a green mountain .452 barrel and fit it to the action with a .45 acp chamber. Knock out the magazine floor plate and fab me up a block to accept 1911 magazines. Inlet the stock and hand guard to fit the new barrel and party on. You'll never hurt the thing with standard .45 acp loads.
I did this very same thing once with a Spanish FR-8 that had been in a house fire. Totally unsafe for .308. It was a really sweet shooter in .45 acp.
Oldred
I grow weary of this thread. Look at the ruptured case.....would the rifle have been destroyed had that case not ruptured? I'm done.....tired of
Larry Gibson
There is no point in taking offense, this is a situation where there are rifles out there that someone may be debating on whether or not to shoot but the results of making the wrong decision could easily be catastrophic so it does merit discussion of both points of view. What we know is we have been warned for many years from credible sources that these rifles are not safe to shoot, it is a known fact they were improperly heat treated and/or damaged from overheating during the forging process, that fact can not be disputed, so the defect is well known and not just a myth! The debate is whether it is worth the risk to assume that these poorly heat treated rifles are safe to shoot IN SPITE of this known defect, much evidence indicates that while some may be others are not. Trying to "second guess" the people who have warned us for years, indeed even people who were involved in analyzing what was wrong, and stating definitively the warnings are without merit and that the failures are due to another cause could possibly result in a serious accident.
It would seem it is up to the owner to "spin the wheel" and place his bet on whether or not he has one of the bad ones and whether or not it's next round could be the one that rings it's bell!
It needs a long ejector to work perfectly but you'd be surprised how well the FR8 worked.
The length needed to accommodate the 1911 magazine will eat up a lot that long action.
A few .45 ACP carbines were built on the 1903 actions for test purposes. They used a target type re4ceiver mounted rear sight. Don't know what they did about the magazine, I don't think they fitted a pistol mag.If I had it, I would pull the barrel and get me a green mountain .452 barrel and fit it to the action with a .45 acp chamber.
That certainly would solve the problem nicely because it would preclude anyone from firing high pressure ammunition in it, full pressure loads would always remain a possibility if it is left in it's original cambering for use with reduced loads. The fact is the rifles were here before any of us were even born and barring any political stupidity they will still be here long after we are all gone so who's to say what someone would eventually load it with. While it may, or may not (probably would), be safe with a current owner using it for reduced loads full power loads could eventually find their way into it.
Yep and if'n you use some vintage magazines and ammo, you couldn't call it a blaspheming bastardized rifle like some people consider sporterized rifles.
Man what a post...I coughed my beer out my nose when I got to the "stickpeople" !.Do you know how time consuming it is to correct your incorrect statements?
Since heat treatment changes the physical characteristics of metal we have to accept that as part and parcel of metallurgy.
Please excuse my very abbreviated annotations below. If I was billing you @ $35/hour I'd include the whole of the text but you're cheap and won't pay so make do
656701: not properly case hardened.....materal used appears unrefined...
312249: same as 656701
486640: defective heat treatment
108448: defective material composing the barrel. (signed by metallurgist)
217794: not been properly heat treated...
658742: material used in manufacture of this rifle barrel was very undesireable... slag inclusions..
666263, 662284: not been given proper heat treatment... phosphorus and sulpher content too high...
177232: ..inconclusion, it may be stated that the opinion of this armory is that regardless of what causes such as defective cartridge cases may have contributed to the failure, the ultimate responsibility for the accident is due to the poor receiver, as with a good receiver the accident would not have happened.
326222: improper heat treatment.....lacked shock resisting qualities....improper assembly.
608498: slag streaks in barrel.
146184: receiver not properly heat treated, was too brittle to be suitable for this component. It cannot be said that any receiver would have held, although no broken receivers of Springfield Armory's late manufacture have been returned to this establishment.
759943: barrel contained burnt steel... excessive heating in the upsetting operation...internal oxidation... (signed by metallurgist)
971779: seam in barrel
The above notes and the rest of Hatcher's Notebook are hereby presented as evidence to refute your erroneous statement: "there is no proof any LSN'd '03 ever had a catastrophic failure due to "attributed to bad mettalurgy"...
Read down to "heat treatment"....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallurgy
Please, Larry, for the sake of all mankind....
No , I did not read that in a manual or stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.... it's just the facts Ma'am.
What's the difference between a pig and an Engineer ?
You can argue with the Pig.
It pains me to see Larry Gibson and Dutchman, both of whom I like and respect from afar, at odds. I cannot see where they disagree. If an LNS with slag inclusions blew up at 150% pressure using 8x57 ammo, and a high-number Springfield would have survived, then bad metallurgy contributed decisively to the Kb. But the rifle might have been fired with the proper ammunition in relative safety. Both can be true.
It's indisputable that an indeterminate number of LNS's might have burnt steel, and cannot be identified.
The facts appear to be that this might result in failure at 150% of normal load, when they were supposed to fail at 250% of normal load.
Everything beyond that appears unproven and maybe hype. I resist hype, and I think Larry does too. Aging steel, risk of failure at 40k lbs, etc. people seem to be repeating these ideas from other people who, as far I can tell, pulled it from their hats. It sounds to me like a mix of fact and imagination. It's not clear to me that the worst LNS is any more dangerous than a lot of old guns that we never question because nobody documented whether they were forged at the correct temperature in the Remington factory or the Iver-Johnson factory a century ago.
Sometimes it's a fine line between heeding warnings from experienced people, and being cowed by people who never questioned orthodoxy. "Why take the risk?" Because if you don't decide for yourself, you'll live your life boxed in by other people's fears. And that's not what shooting is about.
People repeat what they heard or read without finding out what the real story is. That happens a whole lot.... here and many other places. If you look in the Lyman manuals, the 30-06 is a very well documented cartridge with cast and jacketed. There are a bunch of starting loads in the 25K pressure range if you're a nervous type person.
45 2.1
Knowledge without understanding is a dangerous thing. For a little knowledge entices us to walk its path, a bit more provides the foundation on which we take our stand, and a sufficient amount can erect a wall of knowledge around us, trapping us in our own ignorance.
Never sleep, never die
Knowledge is easy to get, but worthless if you never use it. However the info is free, so the only person you have to blame is yourself if you chose not to use the information.
the problem is, if you've got a brittle one, it may not handle the next 25,000psi put through it. 25K isnt exactly low pressure when its let loose.
Not my picture. It was taken by Blastit37:
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...-project/page3
This was a former 1903A3 drill rifle, that had been welded at one time or another, although the heat affected zone was said to have been restricted to the recoil lug area.
Apparently, cause of death was due to an overcharge of AA5744 (60 grains).
What I find interesting is how the receiver fragmented in a similar way to the low serial number rifles.
... a little post script.
Here's a picture of a A bolt that had a .308 Win fired in its .25-06 chamber. This one also looks like it shattered.
Last edited by John 242; 07-14-2014 at 10:34 PM.
Just a passing thought and a question for those more knowledgeable on the subject than I am. If a low number receiver is determined to be too hard and thus brittle, would it be possible and safe to fully anneal the receiver to soften and stress-relieve it, then properly heat treat with modern equipment and techniques?
Dutch
Nice play on words with the last sentence of mine you quoted. Problem is you've taken it out of context as you've deleted the quotation marks from my original sentence. I was quoting someone else. Nice play on words and twisting meanings though as you've listed M1093 "rifles" mentioned in "Hatchers Notebook", some with defective barrels. However, the content of this thread centers on the receivers being defective. Nice try though.
However, I've taken the time (you want to pay me $35/hour?) to add to your descriptions with quotes from Hatcher's Notebook which you so thoughtfully neglected to put in. From the complete descriptions we see that Hatcher was correct in his assessment on the direct causes of the damaged rifles; defective cartridges (excessive pressure or case head failure), burst barrels, use of wrong ammunition and bore obstructions.
656701: not properly case hardened.....materal used appearsunrefined...
Rifle had been fired “252 rounds” and “Note; Rifle burst while in use for proof of .30 caliber ball cartridges.”.......”It is the opinion of this Armory that the bursts reported are primarily due to the causes indicated in this paragraph (cartridge cases not up to standard).....”
312249: same as 656701
Same as for 656701
486640: defective heat treatment
No record of rifle being fired when it “broke”. No mention of this rifle “bursting” during firing.
108448: defective material composing the barrel. (signed by metallurgist)
You betcha, a burst barrel. Absolutely nothing to do with the heat treatment of the receiver.
217794: not been properly heat treated...
Uh, not quite; “the reason for rifle 217794 bursting at the receiver is in all probability in accordance with the facts as stated in report attached hereto. The firing pin rod was evidently broken and allowed the striker point to project thru the firing pinhole of the bolt. Therefore, when the bolt was thrown smartly forward, thus allowing the striker point to come in contact with the cartridge primer before the cartridge reached its position in the chamber, a premature explosion occurred, causing the rupture of the receiver.”
Thus a cartridge fired out of battery was the cause. Are you postulating a modern, well heat treated action is safe to fire out of battery and would survive in better condition? Lots of slam fired M1s, AKs, SKSs, M1As and AR15s that would disagree……..
658742: material used in manufacture of this rifle barrel was very undesireable...slag inclusions..
This rifle had fired 10,890 rounds. “Rifle burst about 2” from the muzzle.” “It is the conclusion of the laboratory that the metal used in the manufacture of this rifle barrel……The metal contained numerous long slag inclusions.”
Obviously it was the barrel that burst on this rifle not the receiver.
666263, 662284: not been given proper heat treatment... phosphorus and sulphercontent too high...
“Bolt head broken on face and one lug knocked off.” Rifle failed during accuracy tests of Armor piercing cartridges.”
Obviously testing ammunition that had high pressure problems at Lindsay Arsenal, Canada. Had the receiver just burst on its own the bolts would not have sustained such damage.
177232: ..in conclusion, it may be stated that the opinion of this armory is that regardless of what causes such as defective cartridge cases may have contributed to the failure, the ultimate responsibility for the accident is due to the poor receiver, as with a good receiver the accident would not have happened.
“Hand loaded ammunition using 48.9 grains of powder, service bullet.”
“Probable cause: 1. (a.) Excessive pressure.
(b.) Failure of the cartridge head, possibly due to lamination or other defect.”
2. The chances are that a somewhat excessive pressure, combined with a defective cartridge, allowed the gas to escape into the receiver well and disrupt the receiver.”
326222: improper heat treatment.....lacked shock resisting qualities....improper assembly.
That is “Second (cause), improper assembly of the receiver, bolt and barrel.” This is one with the “GuardCartridge”. We do not know the actual cause of destruction as the report does not state whether the cartridge ruptured or not. If it was not the cartridge we would have to say if the rifle had been assembled correctly the receiver may not have “shattered”. With this one we just don’t know as sufficient information is lacking.
608498: slag streaks in barrel.
Another burst barrel with nothing happening to the receiver.
146184: receiver not properly heat treated, was too brittle to be suitable for this component. It cannot be said that any receiver would have held, although no broken receivers of Springfield Armory's late manufacture have been returned to this establishment.
“Ammunition; Pyro blank cartridge s and combination rifle andhand grenade “white phosphorous.”
“Probable Cause; Excessive pressure …….It cannot be said that any receiver would have held……..”
759943: barrel contained burnt steel... excessive heating in the upsetting operation...internal oxidation... (signed by metallurgist)
“Nature of failure; Barrel burst…..”
Another burst barrel. Nothing noted on the receiver bursting.
971779: seam in barrel
“Nature of failure; Barrel failed.”
Another burst barrel and again no mention of the receiver shattering.
I was trying to back out of this thread before you entered. Seems is you who are beating the dead horse, eh? Those who are going to shoot LSN'd M1903s will do so regardless of what you or I say. Can we stop this now
BTW; I find the "cheap" as quite humorous, how on earth did you come up with that?
So in closing; how about okay, I agree with all of the doomdayers. Bad juju to shoot a LSN'd M1903. I won't do it (probably because I don't have one) so why should anyone else? By golly if anyone shows up at a range I'm on I'll just head for the hills screaming death and destruction is about to happen and watch for the mushroom cloud in my rear view mirror. By golly you guys sure got it figured out as I must have been stepping over so many bloody bodies before with disintegrated LSN'd '03 in their hands (or what was left of their hands) and am lucky to have survived being in the same state let alone the same county when a LSN'd M1903 was shot. Thanks to you guys I will probably now live much longer and be around here a whole lot more with you guys......what a good time, eh?
Larry Gibson
Last edited by Larry Gibson; 07-15-2014 at 01:41 PM.
Where did you get the 25K figure? Because if you just pulled it out of the air, stop doing that.
This now seems rather silly that some that wont shoot one want to convince some that will not to and some that will shoot one want to convince some that wont to do so.
I think everyone that has commented knows the history so why is it not OK for everyone to decide for themselves either to shoot them or not to.
All the red in the face ranting seems well rather silly since I doubt there has been even one convert made on either side of the issue. Since all have the same information why would anyone feel that they have to convince someone with an opposite opinion that "" you are wrong and I am wright"". Some of you guy need to get away from the keyboard and go shooting more often. Maybe cut some wood that works for me.
why? 25k is as good a number as any, and i dont see what it matters as the vast majority of whats being said here is purely arbitrary!it is just merely to point out that even a low pressure cast load may have the potential to be the final round when the reciever finally has fatigued enough and fails. oh , well this is almost as bad as arguing religion, now im getting told what i can and cant write. some of you guys are too much. lol
Posting Permissions
| BP | Bronze Point | IMR | Improved Military Rifle | PTD | Pointed |
| BR | Bench Rest | M | Magnum | RN | Round Nose |
| BT | Boat Tail | PL | Power-Lokt | SP | Soft Point |
| C | Compressed Charge | PR | Primer | SPCL | Soft Point "Core-Lokt" |
| HP | Hollow Point | PSPCL | Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" | C.O.L. | Cartridge Overall Length |
| PSP | Pointed Soft Point | Spz | Spitzer Point | SBT | Spitzer Boat Tail |
| LRN | Lead Round Nose | LWC | Lead Wad Cutter | LSWC | Lead Semi Wad Cutter |
| GC | Gas Check |
