Re-barreling UK

[Ronin]

That was the price plus shipping quoted for the barrel specced to the customer requirements in the UK, I can’t comment about AUS prices

No, I don’t like pre fits

1, you do not know how carefully the chambering job (or any of the prep ) has been done

2, if it’s wrong it’s a royal pain to sort out and rectify

3, having seen several manufacturers processes when prepping and chambering barrels for their rifles, I do not believe their attention to detail compare them to my own standards (many gunsmiths won’t fit customer supplied barrels, it’s the same thing)

I don’t care what the rifle is being used for (plinking tin cans to international competition) all my work gets done to the same high standard

The only way I can control that is use profiled barrel blanks and I do the rest

 

[MarinePMI]

Perhaps you shouldn’t jump to conclusions either.
You assume that it was not factory, sorry wrong. The firearm in question is not known for failing either.
Your comment “Greatly reduce” is telling. In the fact you didn’t say won’t have.
While you can mitigate the risk you cannot remove it completely. It can and does happen. Even with modern rifles and factory ammunition.

True, but the question is: Does proofing mitigate that risk any, or at all?

IMO, no it does not. As I have stated many times, and someone has still yet to prove, how does an anecdotal proof test prove the integrity of firearm, when metallurgy, manufacturing and materials already achieve a designed strength limit?

As far as my "greatly reduce" comment; of course it is telling. Most intelligent statements are not ones of absolutes. Only simpletons speak in absolutes. Anything can go wrong (or more precisely, any series of things can go wrong) that would cause a firearm to fail. But it isn't very likely it would have solely to do with the integrity of an action alone, assured by proofing, that was the culprit of a failure. A lot of things have to go wrong these days for a firearm to fail. So please, don't "jump to conclusions" that I assumed a modern, well made action failed all by itself.

 

[MarinePMI]

True, but the question is: Does proofing mitigate that risk any, or at all?

IMO, no it does not. As I have stated many times, and someone has still yet to prove, how does an anecdotal proof test prove the integrity of firearm, when metallurgy, manufacturing and materials already achieve a designed strength limit?

As far as my "greatly reduce" comment; of course it is telling. Most intelligent statements are not ones of absolutes. Only simpletons speak in absolutes. Anything can go wrong (or more precisely, any series of things can go wrong) that would cause a firearm to fail. But it isn't very likely it would have solely to do with the integrity of an action alone, assured by proofing, that was the culprit of a failure. A lot of things have to go wrong these days for a firearm to fail. So please, don't "jump to conclusions" that I assumed a modern, well made action failed all by itself.

Also bear in mind, rifles are also test fired by the factory. Yet another reason proofing is a waste of time.

 

[griff]

In the event of a catastrophic failure(and most are), I am 'absolutely' convinced that a claim against you for damages would not be easy to defend without "proof".
While I agree that proof is not the be all and end all,it does show that your work is within the parameters set out by SAMMI and CIP. it also shows that due diligence has been observed, and in this day and age of liability claims you cannot be too careful..

 

[aris]

I wonder if the two UK proof houses publish statistics on the number of firearms which fail proof.

Remember too that the proof houses test the firearms at a much higher pressure than standard - I seem to recall double maybe (could be wrong).

 

[MarinePMI]

In the event of a catastrophic failure(and most are), I am 'absolutely' convinced that a claim against you for damages would not be easy to defend without "proof".
While I agree that proof is not the be all and end all,it does show that your work is within the parameters set out by SAMMI and CIP. it also shows that due diligence has been observed, and in this day and age of liability claims you cannot be too careful..

In the US we don’t proof, and that doesn’t stop people from suing manufacturers for a faulty item. Just ask Remington.

The test firing of rifles as part of the QA process covers the manufacturer for pursuing due diligence in delivering a safe product. I know of no one, company or gunsmith, that doesn’t test fire a firearm after any significant work is done to the action or barrel.

 

[aris]

In the US we don’t proof, and that doesn’t stop people from suing manufacturers for a faulty item. Just ask Remington.

The test firing of rifles as part of the QA process covers the manufacturer for pursuing due diligence in delivering a safe product. I know of no one, company or gunsmith, that doesn’t test fire a firearm after any significant work is done to the action or barrel.

This is why every single firearm imported from the US is proofed in the UK.

 

[Wapinschaw]

".....Also, 600+ is fairly pirateacle price - someone’s placing a very very hefty markup on LW barrels. A LW prefit is au$540 here - and Pricing is generally on par with other shooting related products between the two countries if you convert $2 to 1GBP (standard pay equivalent), or about double what Americans pay. I can’t see why they would be so much in the UK, but I guess that’s the way it is...

Most of the price differences between the UK and the USA can be explained by taxation i.e. import taxes, VAT which is in many cases a tax on tax, then the Post Office, who collect some tax on behalf of the government, add a surcharge on top of it all to charge you for the letter they send telling you how much tax you have to pay to get your goodies! We will likely be in the same position now for European manufactured items.

 

[aris]

Most of the price differences between the UK and the USA can be explained by taxation i.e. import taxes, VAT which is in many cases a tax on tax, then the Post Office, who collect some tax on behalf of the government, add a surcharge on top of it all to charge you for the letter they send telling you how much tax you have to pay to get your goodies! We will likely be in the same position now for European manufactured items.

Not necessarily. Imports from the EU did not incur UK VAT before - yes - but they did incur VAT from the country of origin. I'm no VAT expert - but the way I read it, they can now sell to us exclusive of their VAT (which is typically higher than ours), and then UK VAT is added here. In theory could be a bit cheaper for imports - though perhaps not personal ones as there are other fees involved.

 

[MarinePMI]

This is why every single firearm imported from the US is proofed in the UK.

Lol! No, that’s because the UK has retarded, outdated laws. And no 2nd Amendment to force them to change.

Just look at the discussion thread on shotgun shells. Smh...

 

[aris]

Lol! No, that’s because the UK has retarded, outdated laws. And no 2nd Amendment to force them to change.

Just look at the discussion thread on shotgun shells. Smh...

Charming!

 

[MarinePMI]

Charming!

That’s me, “Mr. Charming”..... Because that’s my highest priority in life...

 

[ejg]

Factory rifles are normally not a huge issue proofed or not as they run through several tests. I'd be more worried about some so called rifle smiths that manufacture some exotic creations. Some of these might be caught by proof houses. Even a good rifle smith might not be fault free throughout his career and a second set of eyes or test could be a good thing.
Like Marine, I would also be very dubious if one or two shots of higher charge will be of any great benefit if the after test/check of the rifle is just to see if it blew. No crack checks. No material specific tests.
Recent blown up rifles I know of were all home loaded, in one case possibly showed up faulty hardening process with the steel.
I'd be a bit on the wall regarding Proof house being essential or not.
edi

 

[MarinePMI]

As I understand it, magnafluxing (or something similar) is not done during the proofing process, to test structural integrity of the action/bolt. It's a simple "bang" with several over pressure loads, and inspection that nothing broke, and sign off the paperwork.

If I'm mistaken, I'd love to hear the documented process...

 

[alberta boy]

I wonder if the two UK proof houses publish statistics on the number of firearms which fail proof.

Remember too that the proof houses test the firearms at a much higher pressure than standard - I seem to recall double maybe (could be wrong).

That would be an interesting statistic , along with suspected causes of failure .

AB

 

[Stalker-of-the-deer]

I've seen a few pictures of ones that have failed. Some look most spectacular.

Looking at the metallurgy it tends to be a flaw in the structure of the material, so even if a Smith did a perfect job they wouldn't know that the floor is in the material was there.

Did a fair bit in the labs at uni and just because somthing looks good in the flesh it doesn't mean it's good to go.

I fully support proofing for that reason. It means a product is safe and fit for purpose and covers everyone's arse. One set standard for everyone to pass.

 

[finnbear270]

From a shooter's point of view, rather than a builder / manufacturer, ..... Proof just means it didn't let go at the proof house.

 

[Sharpie]

As I understand it, magnafluxing (or something similar) is not done during the proofing process, to test structural integrity of the action/bolt. It's a simple "bang" with several over pressure loads, and inspection that nothing broke, and sign off the paperwork.

If I'm mistaken, I'd love to hear the documented process...

Clearly you know nothing of what CIP proofing entails, nor have bothered to educate yourself.

Here is a charming video showing the procedure for shotguns. Observe at 3 minutes in where the barrels are crack tested post proof firing using a fluid method. Including a rifle barrel with a longitudinal crack all the way from breech to muzzle. Otherwise invisible.



At 5.5 minutes observe some of the dramatic failures under test, which BTW is only, I think, x1.2 CIP pressure for rifles, and x1.25 for shotguns, but stand to be corrected.

Then, if you can bear to put up with the dire, inane, seasick making mobile phone footage from "racknload" getting a look around Birmingham proof house, just ignore him, listen to the employees, and even appreciate some subtle dry wit at his expense. More wreckage exposed, the 50 BMG barrel cracked from end to end didn't really need the crack test to see it.



BTW, I spoke to their ammo lab today, enquiring about future possibilities of testing some things (none lead, they seemed pretty clued up and interested) for which there is no data (, just guesswork, maybe quickload imaginings, who knows what.)

Instant connection to a really switched on Brummie. £54 plus vat to test 20 rounds on their calibrated pressure barrel and chrono setup. His advice, develop best load but also submit higher and lower loads to get a feel, four lots of five different rounds could be done for the standard price.

Request form asks for sensible things, primer make, type, batch number. Ditto brass and powder. And of course the load(s). Recommended to set to CIP oal because that is how their pressure barrels are chambered.

But perhaps you know better and can divine how far you might be pushing things when you are outwith the comfort zone of reputable published load data, by looking for "pressure signs", or chronoed velocity, or chicken entrails.

Now, MarinePMI, is there such a reasonably priced testing service for homeloads or commercial loads in the US ? Two week turnaround. Or independent proofing of guns, whether they be mass manufactured or cobbled together by " 'smiths" of whatever level of competence, knowledge, experience, access to the important tooling, whatever ?

 

[Sharpie]

From a shooter's point of view, rather than a builder / manufacturer, ..... Proof just means it didn't let go at the proof house.

It covers far more than just that.

 

[glasshalffull]

Why bother with a re- barrel at all when tis a throw away culture we live in