Foxyboy43
Well-Known Member
Screw on caps used to be very popular over here, usually for a .22 and occasionally available inside a wheelbrace or bicycle pump! They were never proofed either!! Ingenuity was incredible but purpose highly undesirable!
Kentucky Ballistics gun explosion
- Thread starter JMikeyH
- Start date
Nothing wrong with the design of that gun. Would a bolt action have fared any better with the same hot round? I doubt it.
In the US, the manufacturer "proofs" their own guns. I suspect the 85,000 psi figure Mark Serbu got was from a test sample sent for independent testing to destruction. They are so litigious in the US, they have to cover many arses to even get insurance.
Basically it wasn't the gun which was the issue - it was the ammo. Plenty of examples of regular rifles blowing up with hot rounds. The 50BMB, being what it is, will just do it much more spectacularly.
In the US, the manufacturer "proofs" their own guns. I suspect the 85,000 psi figure Mark Serbu got was from a test sample sent for independent testing to destruction. They are so litigious in the US, they have to cover many arses to even get insurance.
Basically it wasn't the gun which was the issue - it was the ammo. Plenty of examples of regular rifles blowing up with hot rounds. The 50BMB, being what it is, will just do it much more spectacularly.
Woodsmoke
Well-Known Member
My immediate thought was that if 55Ksi was a standard pressure, why the hell was the cap designed with such a small FOS if only 85Ksi could cause a catastrophic failure??? Especially as the user's head is directly behind it? Very poor mechanical design in my opinion. Very poor indeed
.50 BMG - Wikipedia
If you don't know what pressures the ammo you are loading into your firearm are producing - don't use them!
Perhaps not ideal for that quick second shot!!
The point of this firearm was to create a very low cost entry into 50BMG in the US. It originally debuted at under $1000 - which was unheard of.
He makes a semi-auto 50BMG - but it is over $7000.
It's OK, even when the cap blows off those two raising lugs will catch it.
That went well didn't it
Woodsmoke
Well-Known Member
Safe design of any pressure system has test/proof pressures still waaaaay under that which catastrophic failure should occur . . . . .
It's OK, even when the cap blows off those two raising lugs will catch it.
That went well didn't it
The lugs are there to make sure the gun doesn't close when the cap isn't screwed on fully. There is only so much safety one can put into a firearm to mitigate a bad decision.
The onus is on the shooter to make sure the ammunition they are shooting is safe and within spec. Not the firearms manufacturer. The specification is clear and the firearm design is within that.
Hmm, they look like screw threads...
Which is clearly anticipated. Rather than say a traditional bolt. Handle up, no bang. Handle all the way down, solid lockup, all good.
Cost of machining threaded cap and receiver, $
Cost of machining a lugged bolt, and receiver, $$$
Interesting background facts, his marketing pitch must have been “ let’s get in to the .50 budget market. I am still going down the “Bolt action” road
Is that a future prediction ?
You mean, like these ones ?The onus is on the shooter to make sure the ammunition they are shooting is safe and within spec. Not the firearms manufacturer. The specification is clear and the firearm design is within that.
Hmm, they look like screw threads...
Specsavers time perhaps.
Different pitch.
Pitch and Toss.
Sorry, I thought I was still playing "Word association game for the bored"
We can argue back and forth as much as we like, but at the end of the day it failed. The "victim" says it was an over pressure round, but how does he know that? It wasn't tested. It could have been the same as all the others he shot that day but the rifle design wasn't up to it and finally gave out. We are listening to a chap on the internet who is theorising about why he had an accident. There's no fact presented, just theory.
Similar threads
