doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Southern SxS barrel burst

Reifenhauser hulls have been around since the very beginning of plastic shotgun hulls.
I too like AA CF hulls, but they were just one type of hull design from the beginning. Nobody switched away from them.
Different companies had different solutions to hull construction.

I decided to look at some of my own doubles to see what their breeches look like relative to this Smith. Some were indiscernible without pulling the extractors, which I did not do. I did discover along the way that I've been neglectful of cleaning the junk out from under the extractor. Lots of oil laden lint from patches and an occasional grass fiber here and there. So, that has been rectified.

Meanwhile, my Facile Princeps looks MUCH thinner than the Smith. In fact, the joining line seems to run into the rim cut. So I guess this gun should have blown along time ago...



I also discovered that my waterheater appears to have let go last night. It has leaked under one of my safes. Not a danger to the safe or contents since it is on some boards for just this reason, but clean up is in order while sorting out the exact explanation.

Interesting Brent, and thank you.

The barrels are on the way.

Bro. Dewey gave me permission to post this

I'd like the Preacher to tell us who made the notations in red pertaining to the photos above.

Since he obviously does not yet have the blown barrels in hand for in depth metallurgical analysis, it is apparent that these notations in red must be based upon visual analysis and observation of the photos alone. The Preacher attempted to thoroughly discredit me for saying much the same thing in his earlier locked thread. He cried that it wasn't possible to know the cause without his precious metallurgical analysis, and also felt that the missing piece of chamber would be crucial to learn the cause of this burst... something that I could never possibly see from just looking at photos. So just what is going on here, and who made these observations and this post mortem???

I still think the dark spot that is now acknowledged to be the initiation point of the burst was probably due to an inclusion or internal flaw in the barrel steel such as rolled-in scale. That dark spot would have been just as thick as the clean area immediately adjacent to it. If the braze joint was that compromised ever since the gun left the manufacturer, I think odds are that it would have digested some higher pressure ammunition over those many decades, and blown sooner. That was why I seriously doubted that these barrels had undergone a twice normal pressure proof test, as someone asserted.

I also said much the same thing pertaining to the tearing of the hull due to suddenly being unsupported by the part of the chamber that suddenly departed. I said that earlier in this thread, but that post got deleted, probably due to complaining to Dave by the Preacher, or one of his loyal flock.

Apparently, he didn't like me mocking his lack of knowledge to analyze a barrel blow-up, and his hysterics over the idea that a burst like this could result in a piece of shrapnel hitting a child in the skull... and oh my gosh, there would be a civil suit because the defendant didn't measure the barrel wall thickness in this area... which incidentally cannot be measured with conventional wall thickness measuring tools. He said that even though he has admitted that he continues to shoot his only Damascus barreled gun, an L.C. Smith with thin and pitted barrels. Gotta get stuff like that deleted. We can't go on speaking the truth around here, or someone might look like a disingenuous ass.

It is your compulsive lying and criminal activity that has discredited you Willie the Weasel. No board member could possibly discredit you like you have done to yourself William.




Steve

Another "Crap-fest".. I trust Dewey Vicknair's analysis of this FUBARed "Elsie"-- the only one of my 12 gauge doubles with smooth chamber walls is the M21 my late Father bought slightly used in 1948, and gave me in 1981-- All my pre-1913 graded Smiths show some slight chamber roughness, another reason why I clean them thoroughly after a shooting session.

I believe Dewey tends to view the Smith design as overly complicated (the HOT) and prefers NOT to take one in his shop for repairs, etc. I bought the Smiths I own (and shoot) over the past 20 years from the late Brad B-- as they were priced lower than Parkers, and especially the fine A.H. Fox guns- being a cheap SOB, that factor appealed to me- still does today. If my Father hadn't bought the M21 in 1948, and gave it to me before he and Kay moved to Florida, I would NOT own one- RWTF

Foxy;
I hear you loud & clear. When I bought most of my Lefevers they were the most under-rated of all the American Classics. I paid less for my first one, an FE, than what a Parker Trojan would have cost or even a nice field grade, Smith, either with only extractors.

Very shortly I began studying its features & design & the Lefever very quickly became my Favorite of all the American doubles. Even today with Lefevers being more recognized I could still buy a very nice higher grade Lefever for what a Plain Jane 21, which in my opinion is about as ugly as a mud fence, would cost me.

Concurr-the "plain Jane M21- like mine- and the Parker Trojan- both fall in the "mud fence ugly niche"-- but if the stock dims, barrel length and chokes are suited to you and your shooting style-- hard to put "ugly gun" in the same bag with 3 dead rooster pheasants for 3 shots fired-- Sometimes: "uGLY IS AS UGLY DOES"- even an "Oklahoma 2-bagger at zero dark thirty at your neighborhood biker bar. RWTF

This thread has reinforced my sympathy for monobloc barrel construction. I would rather see the "joint" than these thin brazed walls.

Drew, seems like your friend is about spot on with what I have been thinking from the get go. The gun was doomed the day it left the factory. Just biding its time before blowing.