Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
The Solid Bullet Debate
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="noel carlson" data-source="post: 289653" data-attributes="member: 16138"><p>Component #2... THEN THERE WERE BARRELS...</p><p> </p><p>One of the immediate realizations made upon hearing Hay's dismissal of the feasability of high explosive propellants for small arms use, was the default 4150, or 416, alloy justification. Their primary reccomendation has little to do with the application. Other than ease of machining, there is nothing to reccomend them for a high temperature environment.</p><p> </p><p>Is there any barrel-maker in this forum that would care to take issue with this statement?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="noel carlson, post: 289653, member: 16138"] Component #2... THEN THERE WERE BARRELS... One of the immediate realizations made upon hearing Hay's dismissal of the feasability of high explosive propellants for small arms use, was the default 4150, or 416, alloy justification. Their primary reccomendation has little to do with the application. Other than ease of machining, there is nothing to reccomend them for a high temperature environment. Is there any barrel-maker in this forum that would care to take issue with this statement? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
The Solid Bullet Debate
Top