Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)

Shooting Forum - Firearms licencing information


Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Proofing

2»

Comments

  • #52
    Tackleberrywho
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,590 ✭✭✭Tackleberrywho


    With the borescope I could see the magnified lands and rifling of my barrel, and see the uniformity and lack of burrs and other common tooling scratches.

    If you ever looked down a factory "proofed" barrel with a bore scope (I have) one would wonder how it even fired a projectile straight.

    My Main point is the Steel is of a much higher grade, and simply more of it than the previous barrel.

    So why in the name of belelzebob would I want to hand it over to some guy to ruin it :eek:


  • #53
    Glensman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,226 ✭✭✭Glensman


    Tackleberrywho wrote: »
    With the borescope I could see the magnified lands and rifling of my barrel, and see the uniformity and lack of burrs and other common tooling scratches.

    If you ever looked down a factory "proofed" barrel with a bore scope (I have) one would wonder how it even fired a projectile straight.

    My Main point is the Steel is of a much higher grade, and simply more of it than the previous barrel.

    So why in the name of belelzebob would I want to hand it over to some guy to ruin it :eek:


    I myself would hate to go to the expense of having a custom rifle built by a man I trust- to then send it off to Birmingham to have them pressure test it with a hot load!

    It's not even cheap! It would be silly to bring it in here. We don't have to copy the same mistakes people make in England...


  • #54
    tac foley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,500 ✭✭✭tac foley


    Tackleberrywho wrote: »
    So I'll ship it over to UK to have some Bozo blow a round in excess of SPEC Just to prove my barrel will not blow; I don't think so.....

    I'm sure that any of the 'Bozos' - skilled firearms technicians and ballistic forensic examiners in either Birmingham or London - would be very happy to hear your opinion of them.

    They might not be doing what YOU want, by testing your gun. But they DO test every one of the hundreds of thousands of guns and moderators sold here in UK, by law. They probably test more guns in a week than are sold in the entire RoI in a year, so let's put it into perspective without invective, eh?

    Delving the depths to insult them is beneath you, and I'm surprised and disappointed to read it.

    tac


  • #55
    tac foley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,500 ✭✭✭tac foley


    Glensman wrote: »
    I myself would hate to go to the expense of having a custom rifle built by a man I trust- to then send it off to Birmingham to have them pressure test it with a hot load!

    It's not even cheap! It would be silly to bring it in here. We don't have to copy the same mistakes people make in England...

    Dear Mr Glensman - a couple of points here, if you will.

    1. You appear, from your title line, to live in Northern Ireland. The gentleman who builds your gun - if he has his business in Northern Ireland, is required by law to proof his product - it's not a matter of 'copying the same mistakes people make in England'.

    2. Please expalin what 'mistakes are made by people in England'. Your comment makes no sense to me.

    Many other countries in the world proof their firearms, as you may have read in the previous pages - are the gunmakers of Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Germany, Finland, Austria, Belgium, et al, all 'silly', too?

    Please remember that every time a soldier in the PDF squeezes the trigger on his AUG he is trusting the veracity of the test applied by 'silly bozos' in the proof-house in Steyr...

    tac


  • #56
    tac foley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,500 ✭✭✭tac foley


    Mr Sparks, Sir - TBH, this thread has become so convoluted now that I'm not sure whether you are for or agin proofing. But just to clear something up - the barrelled action [or chambered barrel] is subjected to an over-pressure cartridge charge, not a gradually built-up over-pressure. I'm not sure whether you said that or not, sorry 'bout that.

    From my own experience of building boilers for small locomotives [the kind you ride hehind], the increase in pressure to a level of retained over-pressure is applied gradually, as this is prezackly how pressure builds up in the real deal. Our small boilers have to be tested and certificated every two years for insurance purposes. If you look carefully at your air rifle/pistol cylinder, you will see that that, too, has been proof-tested - at least, my three Feinwerkbaus have - all six cylinders. A gun barrel is tested explosively, since that is how pressure is applied to it in use, just once in its entire life, unless it is an old gun that is out of proof, and needs re-proofing to be sold on.

    Anyway, I think I've made my opinion clear on this thread. The law - in UK and all the other countries that have compulsory proofing of firearms - is the law, and in my opinion, THIS one, in place here in the UK since 1834, makes sense to me, and to every other conscientious and responsible shooter I know.

    Whether Ireland adopts the the requirements imposed by having its own proof house [and joins in the rest of the EU [and Russia] in that respect] is neither here nor there to me, unless, of course, I somehow become rich overnight and decide to have one of Ireland's custom gun-builders make me something nice for the weekend.

    Since both situations are very unlikely to ever take place, I'm leaving the thread at this point.

    tac


  • #57
    Glensman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,226 ✭✭✭Glensman


    tac foley wrote: »
    Dear Mr Glensman - a couple of points here, if you will.

    1. You appear, from your title line, to live in Northern Ireland. The gentleman who builds your gun - if he has his business in Northern Ireland, is required by law to proof his product - it's not a matter of 'copying the same mistakes people make in England'.

    2. Please expalin what 'mistakes are made by people in England'. Your comment makes no sense to me.

    Many other countries in the world proof their firearms, as you may have read in the previous pages - are the gunmakers of Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Germany, Finland, Austria, Belgium, et al, all 'silly', too?

    Please remember that every time a soldier in the PDF squeezes the trigger on his AUG he is trusting the veracity of the test applied by 'silly bozos' in the proof-house in Steyr...

    tac

    The mistake that was made was in pandering to the proof houses and leading people to believe that a barrel being threaded for a mod 'requires' proof.

    As you have stated I live in 'NI'. Firearms here that are fitted for mods do NOT require proof, that is a fallacy. You require proof once you go to sell that rifle/barrel/mod combination on to a third party.

    and on my point of pandering to the proof houses, this is not an idle statement. I have seen this point made in a number of British based shooting magazines and forums.


  • #58
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    Ireland has the basis for a Proof House – rowa listed it above in his post http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74477290&postcount=47


    Threading a barrel is a modification; I’m not interested enough to wade through 18 Acts ++ to see if a ‘modified’ barrel needs reproof under Irish law, but my guess is that Irish law follows the UK on which it is based. Guns get sold - either by you or your executors, so it is splitting hairs as to whether a modified gun should be proofed or not.

    The Institute for Industrial Research and Standards (IIRS) cited in the Proof Act passed its function of Proof House to Enterprise Ireland when the various ‘enterprise’ agencies were merged. Were I to have a rifle built in Ireland it would be nice to have it proofed here. However, it probably would make economic sense for Ent. Ireland to send it to Birmingham.
    I for one am delighted that the ranges are sufficiently safety-conscious to insist that all barrels are properly proofed/stamped.
    P.


  • #59
    demonloop
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 682 ✭✭✭demonloop


    Tackleberrywho wrote: »
    With the borescope I could see the magnified lands and rifling of my barrel, and see the uniformity and lack of burrs and other common tooling scratches.

    If you ever looked down a factory "proofed" barrel with a bore scope (I have) one would wonder how it even fired a projectile straight.

    My Main point is the Steel is of a much higher grade, and simply more of it than the previous barrel.

    So why in the name of belelzebob would I want to hand it over to some guy to ruin it :eek:

    I have a Bleiker, with a Lilja barrel. As with your barrel, the quality of the rifling is superb.

    There's 4 other Bleikers in the 'circle' I shoot with regularly.

    They were all proofed in Germany.

    They all shoot 11/12mm 10 shot groups at 50m, so to suggest the proofing somehow ruins the barrel/accuracy is a bit, well, wrong.


  • #60
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    tac foley wrote: »
    Mr Sparks, Sir - TBH, this thread has become so convoluted now that I'm not sure whether you are for or agin proofing. But just to clear something up - the barrelled action [or chambered barrel] is subjected to an over-pressure cartridge charge, not a gradually built-up over-pressure. I'm not sure whether you said that or not, sorry 'bout that.
    It was in fact, my entire point, made twice; that you can't compare an overpressure test on a compressed air tank or a hydraulic hose to a proofing test for a firearm because of the enormous difference in how fast the pressure rises during the tests.
    If you look carefully at your air rifle/pistol cylinder, you will see that that, too, has been proof-tested
    It's been tested, yes. And it has a design lifespan, after which I have to throw it away and buy new ones (you wouldn't even be allowed on the line at an ISSF internationl match anymore with out-of-date cylinders).
    The law - in UK and all the other countries that have compulsory proofing of firearms - is the law, and in my opinion, THIS one, in place here in the UK since 1834, makes sense to me, and to every other conscientious and responsible shooter I know.
    I'm sure it does; I'm just not sure that a law published three years before the very first scientific study of metal fatigue makes a whole lot of sense to metallurgists.

    Like I said to Tack, you can't tell the strength of a barrel from surface inspection, not until it's already failed. And if the proofing charge just triggers the failure early, the shooter is no more safe than if it was unproofed - he or she is just going to get a faceful sooner rather than later.

    Now if the law required x-rays of barrels to ensure there were no flaws in the metal, I suspect that would make sense to metallurgists, and since x-ray machines aren't exactly high-end research tools anymore (how many of them are there in the airports alone?), it's a feasible idea for a proof house to check barrels the same way we check welding joints in critical places...


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Tackleberrywho
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,590 ✭✭✭Tackleberrywho


    demonloop wrote: »
    I have a Bleiker, with a Lilja barrel. As with your barrel, the quality of the rifling is superb.

    There's 4 other Bleikers in the 'circle' I shoot with regularly.

    They were all proofed in Germany.

    They all shoot 11/12mm 10 shot groups at 50m, so to suggest the proofing somehow ruins the barrel/accuracy is a bit, well, wrong.

    With the greatest of respect, a .22lr and a centrefire rifle SAAMI pressures are chalk and cheese.

    Did you ever consider your Lilja may do 6mm groups had it not been proofed :D

    The real accuracy of a rifle is not tested until after 50 metres. Several rifles can 1 hole @50 metres, infact my .223 can shoot consistently better groups than your Lilja at the same distance. Should I get that proofed to prove otherwise?
    Custom centrefires are 600-1200 yard Rifles depending on calibre, things only get tricky after 50m;)




    @ Tac Foley.
    I'm not insulting any guy in London or Birmingham. They are only doing their job, as outlined by their laws........
    I'm glad I don't live in England and don't need there help all the same.


  • #62
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Tackleberrywho wrote: »
    The real accuracy of a rifle is not tested until after 50 metres.
    That's just plain wrong Tack.
    Several rifles can 1 hole @50 metres
    Yeah, but they have to make larger holes with far more kinetic energy behind the round than demonloop's do in order to hold that 1 hole group...

    Honestly, you can't compare demonloop's bleiker to your .223; in any fair, accuracy-based metric, you'll lose. They don't cost five grand and up per rifle just for the nametag...


  • #63
    rowa
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,296 ✭✭✭rowa


    The comparison i drew between things like hydraulic hoses and steam boilers and the barrels of firearms was merely to illustrate that a lot of common everyday products are pressure tested. The method of their testing (explosive or a slowly applied load) is in keeping with how they operate.

    As for metallurgy , even a 10% overload would still be in the barrels steel elastic region on the stress-strain curve , as the name suggests the steel behaves in an elastic manner and returns to its original shape , if it doesn't the steel has passed into the plastic region and is unsafe. Sparks the possibility of using x-rays or ultrasound on boilers doesn't mean the pressure test (hydraulic or up to pressure under steam) is not done, it is merely an extra line of testing. I used to be involved in that game , not anymore.

    The government repeeling the proof act was done at a time when there was no firearms
    manufacturing being done in ireland anymore and any new gun sold here came in from abroad
    and was tested abroad, the new custom rifle builders have exposed the lack of independent
    testing of newly made irish rifles.

    Its not just the uk tackleberry that have those laws , but practically every member of the
    european union and the likes of russia and saudi arabia amongst others.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_Internationale_Permanente_pour_l'Epreuve_des_Armes_à_Feu_Portatives


  • #64
    Tackleberrywho
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,590 ✭✭✭Tackleberrywho


    Sparks wrote: »
    That's just plain wrong Tack.

    Yeah, but they have to make larger holes with far more kinetic energy behind the round than demonloop's do in order to hold that 1 hole group...

    Honestly, you can't compare demonloop's bleiker to your .223; in any fair, accuracy-based metric, you'll lose. They don't cost five grand and up per rifle just for the nametag...

    Thats where you and I will differ on opinion.
    I have a vernier calipers that says I can put 10 rounds into a smaller hole than 7mm....

    When your €5k .224 calibre rifle can shoot under an inch at 200 yards I'll take my hat off.
    Your right in one thing, you can't compare a .22lr with a .223 Custom Rifle that stands me ~€2.5K before I scoped it.

    It's like comparing high quality go-carts with F1 cars :D


  • #65
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    rowa wrote: »
    As for metallurgy , even a 10% overload would still be in the barrels steel elastic region on the stress-strain curve
    It's supposed to be. But hell, if you can go by what it's supposed to be rowa, you wouldn't need to test in the first place. That's why I mentioned the sioux city crash above - that was caused by a turbine blade that passed all surface inspection tests, failing catastrophically (explosively in fact) because of a flaw in the metal in the interior of the blade. If such a flaw existed in the steel of your barrel, you could look at it all day and not see it; and proofing wouldn't be guaranteed to spot it, because it takes time for the flaw to develop; one proofing shot might not necessarily cause it to let go.
    Sparks the possibility of using x-rays or ultrasound on boilers doesn't mean the pressure test (hydraulic or up to pressure under steam) is not done, it is merely an extra line of testing. I used to be involved in that game , not anymore.
    Yup, not saying the pressure test wouldn't be done; I'm just saying that proofed doesn't necessarily mean safe; it just means proofed. More than one way for a barrel to fail, and proofing doesn't check them all.


  • #66
    demonloop
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 682 ✭✭✭demonloop


    Tackleberrywho wrote: »
    With the greatest of respect, a .22lr and a centrefire rifle SAAMI pressures are chalk and cheese.

    Over-pressure is over-pressure though.
    Tackleberrywho wrote: »
    Did you ever consider your Lilja may do 6mm groups had it not been proofed :D.

    No, because I have the test group from BEFORE it was proofed too. Its 12mm.
    Tackleberrywho wrote: »
    The real accuracy of a rifle is not tested until after 50 metres.

    Damn, Sparks beat me to it...
    Tackleberrywho wrote: »
    Several rifles can 1 hole @50 metres, infact my .223 can shoot consistently better groups than your Lilja at the same distance. Should I get that proofed to prove otherwise?

    Any measured groups you can post on here? I have loads...
    Tackleberrywho wrote: »
    Custom centrefires are 600-1200 yard Rifles depending on calibre, things only get tricky after 50m;)

    I shoot with my elbows 1m behind the line :p so must be just as tricky then?


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Tackleberrywho
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,590 ✭✭✭Tackleberrywho


    rowa wrote: »
    The comparison i drew between things like hydraulic hoses and steam boilers and the barrels of firearms was merely to illustrate that a lot of common everyday products are pressure tested. The method of their testing (explosive or a slowly applied load) is in keeping with how they operate.

    As for metallurgy , even a 10% overload would still be in the barrels steel elastic region on the stress-strain curve , as the name suggests the steel behaves in an elastic manner and returns to its original shape , if it doesn't the steel has passed into the plastic region and is unsafe. Sparks the possibility of using x-rays or ultrasound on boilers doesn't mean the pressure test (hydraulic or up to pressure under steam) is not done, it is merely an extra line of testing. I used to be involved in that game , not anymore.

    A youngs modulus, I can hear my college lectures still ....


  • #68
    .243
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭.243


    Tackleberrywho wrote: »
    All proofing does is takes the good out of custom polished barrels,
    wrong !!! all proofing does is to make sure the guns chamber can pass a pressure test for firing ammunition safely,
    it basically means that it can be safe to use,
    can you explain how one "hot load" fired in a chamber effects accuracy


  • #69
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    Does anyone really believe a barrel is less accurate as a result of having been proofed? If so, I'd love to hear the rationale.


  • #70
    demonloop
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 682 ✭✭✭demonloop


    It wasn't me! wrote: »
    Does anyone really believe a barrel is less accurate as a result of having been proofed? If so, I'd love to hear the rationale.

    It seems some do. Hard to prove either way though.


  • #71
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    demonloop wrote: »
    It seems some do. Hard to prove either way though.

    Personally I think it's bollocks, and there's certainly no useful rationale behind it. I don't think proofing is particularly useful or necessary, but there's nothing wrong with it either. It's not a bad thing.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Mod note: Split out the .22lr-v-.223 stuff to its own thread.


  • #73
    Tackleberrywho
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,590 ✭✭✭Tackleberrywho


    demonloop wrote: »
    It seems some do. Hard to prove either way though.

    In my experience, the things that shave mm off groups are small and subtle.
    The crown, the machining of the rifling, the chamber, the trigger break setting pressure. (the ammo :eek:)

    I have tweaked with all of these over the past couple of years.
    when shooting under 1/2" @100 from baseline, getting the groups smaller is harder and harder the tighter the groups go.

    So just when you find that sweet spot, go in excess of your SAAMI approved powder charge and try to detune or Burst.:eek:

    would you buy a Ferrari and pay someone to leave it on the rev limiter for an hour?


  • #74
    .243
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭.243


    Tackleberrywho wrote: »
    In my experience, the things that shave mm off groups are small and subtle.
    The crown, the machining of the rifling, the chamber, the trigger break setting pressure. (the ammo :eek:)

    I have tweaked with all of these over the past couple of years.

    So just when you find that sweet spot, go in excess of your SAAMI approved powder charge and try to detune or Burst.:eek:

    in what way have you "tweeked" the chamber to make your gun shoot better???

    unless you are reloading the above quote is void,and if you are reloading and go beyond the max powder charge (which is one of the golden rules of reloading that you should never do)and blow your gun,you shouldnt deserve a gun,
    oh and you also dont have to go to the max powder charge to blow a chamber there is another factor that will cause it,
    its called excessive pressure,


Advertisement