Exploded Rifle

Demiurge

Sami wrote: »

From your OP: "Shiny new, high-powered deer rifle.............. $1200.00 "

Hyperbole. :rolleyes:

BIZILL

let's all put this to rest. everyone has to pitch in for this one. buy me a boresight like the one from the OP. i'll fit it to my armalite ar-10t with stainless steel barrel and floating handguard. i'll find a way to seal off the blow-back tube. i'll don a faceshield and use a benchrest (you all have to supply) and i'll pull the trigger from 3 feet back using some wire at the trigger. i'll post pics and document my results. after all is said and done, ya'll buy me a new armalite ar-10t. or better yet, we'll just settle upon a .50 BMG. any takers? i accept paypal. i don't benefit from any of this. i just get a replacement rifle and benchrest. well, i'll benefit from the .50 BMG!:eek:

Bill Ayotte

Sami wrote: »

As a gun enthusiast, and a hunter, I always thought the weak link is the bolt. I don't see any damage to the bolt, which I do seems odd. Why the damage only extends to the stock, it's not the stock but that's where the barrel starts to get thicker in diameter.

The only damage I have seen was back in military, live ammo and guys forgetting to remove the blocker that was used to splinter the wood on blanks. It's not sealed so that would be a different scenario. Rifle was ok, shooter and the blocker were not.

The new blank adapters seal surprisingly well.....I am an armorer, if you put a new blank adapter onto a new barrel, it is a real tight fit....Even a new adapter into an older barrel...That was a scary sight man...Some people's kids.

jdhdiggs

BIZILL wrote: »

let's all put this to rest. everyone has to pitch in for this one. buy me a boresight like the one from the OP. i'll fit it to my armalite ar-10t with stainless steel barrel and floating handguard. i'll find a way to seal off the blow-back tube. i'll don a faceshield and use a benchrest (you all have to supply) and i'll pull the trigger from 3 feet back using some wire at the trigger. i'll post pics and document my results. after all is said and done, ya'll buy me a new armalite ar-10t. or better yet, we'll just settle upon a .50 BMG. any takers? i accept paypal. i don't benefit from any of this. i just get a replacement rifle and benchrest. well, i'll benefit from the .50 BMG!:eek:

Would Model 82A1/M107 work for you? If you blow up that barrel, you'd be dead....

BIZILL

she's a beaut!

jdhdiggs

The .417 model 99 is supposedly accurate out past a mile. As accurate at 2,500 yds as the 107 .50 is at 1,500. Not that you'd ever really need to shoot that far...

read-alot

Here it is, without the muzzel brake this one would look just like Demi's with the exception of a little more material.

http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/5803/normalmuritempb20e37144fg.jpg


Amazing how the splits and the smoothness of them resemble the Savage.

ben62670

Demiurge wrote: »

I wonder how many saying no way are even active shooters.

I've seen it at outdoor rifle and shotgun clubs before, so it can happen. The only thing I haven't seen is one that has exploded uniformly. So the potential of that happening is not a myth, no matter what Myth Busters says.

savage 30-06
mossburg 12 pump
rugger 10-22
couple bolt 22's
SKS with folding stock, and bayonet adapter, 30 round clips
marlin 35 rem lever
winchester 30/30
fire star 40
marlin goose gun bolt 12 ga with 36" barrel
AR7 survival rifle
and my fav Ruggar Super Redhawk 44mag with 2-6 power scope all stainless

Add my friends weopons to the list I would probally get in trouble for filling up server space!
Just a bunch of country bumpkins here. Not Wacko Texas;)

jdhdiggs

read-alot wrote: »

Here it is, without the muzzel brake this one would look just like Demi's with the exception of a little more material.

http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/5803/normalmuritempb20e37144fg.jpg


Amazing how the splits and the smoothness of them resemble the Savage.

That one I believe. The bulge then break on the Savage is what's bothering me.

Lowell_M

ben62670 wrote: »

There is no way that barrel banana peeled all the way back like that. I don't care if they were using triple loads in an aluminum barrel. When a barrel goes bad it just has a bulge, and a split in it. Even Damascus barrels don't "explode", they just separate. When there is a crack in the barrel the explosive gasses just vent out where it first split.

Exactly. The energy contained in the barrel would be gone as soon as the barrel split.

read-alot

jdhdiggs wrote: »

That one I believe. The bulge then break on the Savage is what's bothering me.

Im getting there jd, at least this one blows the single split advocates opinions away. Looks like 5 almost equal pieces. I believe if that big muzzel break wasn't holding the end together we would see the same as the Savage.

BIZILL

i suppose, just like a chain, a barrel's only as strong as it's weakest link, or in this case, the thinnest wall of material. the riflings ....hold it, if riflings caused the splits to follow the thinnest wall, the barrel would split in spiral fashion. hell, i don't know.

...i still don't like it and have reservations on the validity OF THE OP'S PICS.

ben62670

BIZILL wrote: »

i suppose, just like a chain, a barrel's only as strong as it's weakest link, or in this case, the thinnest wall of material. the riflings ....hold it, if riflings caused the splits to follow the thinnest wall, the barrel would split in spiral fashion. hell, i don't know.

...i still don't like it and have reservations on the validity OF THE OP'S PICS.

I was thinking of also using the chain analogy, but there would be a whole other argument about that. Barrels consist of lands, and grooves. The grooves would be the weakest, but there are more than 4 of them. As for the rate of twist in rifling it is usually around 1 turn per 21". you wouldn't really be able to see that as evidence in a photo.

read-alot

a_mattison wrote: »

Exactly. The energy contained in the barrel would be gone as soon as the barrel split.

Oh really?

Demiurge

FAKE

I'm a scientist. No, seriously....really..

read-alot

a_mattison wrote: »

Exactly. The energy contained in the barrel would be gone as soon as the barrel split.

Oh Really?

SLOCOOKN

Fake for sure! He probably did shoot the bore sight out of the gun. You can see some bulging at the end of the barrel. So the gun in now shot. He went home on the band saw and sawed and pulled the barrel back. Then created this Myth.

read-alot

SLOCOOKN wrote: »

Fake for sure! He probably did shoot the bore sight out of the gun. You can see some bulging at the end of the barrel. So the gun in now shot. He went home on the band saw and sawed and pulled the barrel back. Then created this Myth.

Yeah they probably used the same saw on this one.

SLOCOOKN

If you notice in both of the pictures you posted that the barrel blows from the middle. There is a "blow by" port. It forces most of the pressure back wards. I have now doubt that you can blow a barrel. It is in this example is a farce. IMO.

When a bullet BURNS the powder, some of the gas escapes before the bullet seals the barrel. The seal would not have been great enough. The bore sighting tool would not have created enough of a seal like a jammed bullet would have.

billbillw

SLOCOOKN wrote: »

When a bullet BURNS the powder, some of the gas escapes before the bullet seals the barrel. The seal would not have been great enough. The bore sighting tool would not have created enough of a seal like a jammed bullet would have.

I believe that in the case of the the bore sight, the sight did not seal it, but it obstructed the bullet from escaping the barrel. That's why its blown from the end back. These barrel explosions all vary depending on where the projectile is obstucted.

read-alot

Hey guys a real engineer looked at it and here is what he had to say.

"I'd suggest to the non-believers that the manner in which the barrel split is about what one could expect from explosive destruction. Uniform linear separation from the point of greatest pressure/lowest resistance. Had the barrel been low quality or defective, it would have let go at the defect or any point of irregularity. This one appears to have split evenly BECAUSE it was well made".

Demiurge

Pretty much along the lines of what my chief engineer here said, and we work in metal fabrication all day long.

ben62670

#75
#77
#79
All rough breaks.
You can see the porous look, and no I am not say the metal is porous, but anytime solid metal fails do to expansion you see a rough surface like you do in the above examples. As for pic # 1 way too smooth. As for the quality of the savage it is one of the cheapest high power rifles you can own. I know. That is what my 30-06 is

BIZILL

read-alot wrote: »

http://www.thegunzone.com/kablooey2.html

looking at the higher quality pics contained herein, it becomes a bit more believable. the OP's pics make the sides look overly shiny and 'non-porous' like Ben described.

oh, and i have worked in a manufacturing plant for 12 years as well.;) hands on with metal working machines such as co2 lasers, conventional and cnc mills, lathes, press brakes and presses and heat treat and bandsaws and cold saws.

i still have some reservations. if only we could all view the rifle hands-on. judging solely by pics makes this near-impossible to prove what happened.

ben62670

To me the damage in the front of the barrel looks real. If you look really close you can see where the pin that gets inserted in the barrel has left a mark about 3-4 inches deep. I don't denie that the gun was in fact damaged by the bore sight. I do believe that the barrel being split the way it was so smoothly done is a hoax. It looks like a 4 way wedge was driven down to the stock.