Some of you are likely still following this thread
http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=357105&page=1

I believe we're going to end up with a cascade of options for non-destructive testing of vintage barrels; fluid steel or pattern welded, starting with external and internal (via a digital bore scope) visual examination then measurement of wall thickness.

The problem with pin and micrometer wall thickness gauges is when pits are present. It is very difficult to position the pin exactly in the bottom of visually identified pits, and impossible if the pits are on the medial wall.

I hope to have the results of radiography on a second barrel tomorrow. This is a negative x-ray image of the first, which enhances the defects in the barrel wall, and may also be useful for measuring wall thickness



Dr Bob asked this question about 2 years ago, and received good advice on the thread and by PM.
The arguments seem to be:
Pro-honing
1. You can't know what's happening at the bottom of a pit, or how deep that pit might be
2. I've had some pretty ratty looking barrels cleaned up by EXPERT honing of as little as .0015", leaving plenty of wall thickness
3. If a barrel is going to be rendered unsafe by EXPERT honing, it's probably unsafe as is
4. The Birmingham Proof House requires honing before accepting a barrel for re-proof. They must have a good reason. Possibly Mike, Steve or Vic could inquire.

Against honing:
1. A barrel is not made stronger by removing metal
2. INEXPERT honing has probably ruined more barrels that anything else

My position is that 'don't look, don't measure, don't tell' is not appropriate. AND if a barrel blows, and a bystander is injured by the shrapnel, you ARE responsible. The personal injury lawyer is going to ask you to share the steps you took to provide some assurance that the barrel was safe, esp. since 'everyone knows Damascus barrels are dangerous.'

Please share your thoughts and opinions.


https://sites.google.com/a/damascusknowledge.com/www/home