doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com about twist/damascus steel barrelled guns

Here's a relevant thread regarding pinholes. The images and links are gone
https://www.doublegunshop.com/forum...p;Board=1&main=19079&type=thread
Some of the learned comments are very much not; like
"Just under the surface a damascus barrel can look like a piece of swiss cheese."
That has been proven to be wrong with photomicrographs of pattern welded barrels. The high pressure rod rolling and ribband hammer welding (properly done) removes any voids.
There CAN be inclusions; some large.



Here's the link to the 1891 Birmingham Proof House Trial report which Miller referenced
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cvqRzkg0wEjhAAcFWr8gFi7aPFRsSIJ_hahfDxmrNAU/edit?tab=t.0

Formal metallurgical failure studies, without which, unless there is an obvious obstructional burst, no one can make a diagnosis
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZnptAPvQIlWG5n5UU2FmKcFpYtVmOSc4b7K7G9IBs4g/edit?tab=t.0
This includes the study of the Smith barrel which I assume keith is citing. The burst occurred with an obvious over-pressure reload, the failure of the breech braze AND a large inclusion in the barrel wall at the failure initiation.

Keith said it best "at some point it's all a leap of faith". It all boils down to the presumptions you're comfortable living with.

The propaganda of the late 1930s about composite barrels was very effective in that it generated a deep distrust of the technology involved for my grandfather's generation onward. I forget now where I read it but Michael Macintosh reportedly never got comfortable with any type of damascus firearms, he just got comfortable with "not shrieking about them".

It's clearly a hard habit to break.

I have a science background and it's how I made my living. While I'm not claiming any specific expertise here, I do know how to satisfy my own curiosities and concerns and I have done just that (purely for my own selfish reasons). If you aren't comfortable with the use of composite barrels....then don't.

The options to not use them are endless.

your post begs the question...

then, why not use them with black powder loads?

I thought I'd already addressed that Ed, it's because they are inconvenient and largely unnecessary.

The pressure curves for black and smokeless loaded for the load/speed have been shown to be very much the same. Looking at past data published here I think it is very possible to load for a Damascus using smokeless that has virtually the same pressure curve as black. 5k or 6k pressure at the same place is the same regardless of the powder.

How many times has Ed read that? I just stated the same thing in another thread a few days ago. My daddy used this saying often . . . .

"A man convinced against his will,
is of the same opinion still."

Ed proves that quote over and over.

well, Stan...like geco says, it is possible to load shot shells with smokeless powder to emulate shell performances duplicating shells loaded wid black powder...

so watts duh problem you says...

well stan, we live in a real world, where to many shooters use high pressure heavy loads in old guns that were never designed to take such abuse...

really Stan, do you not know that?

or are you one of those more is better types, who could care less about safety and preserving old guns...

i hope not...

an Stan, do yourself a favor...

stop being so impulsive and ready to attack...

sometimes you make yourself look foolish...

an geco, have not noticed your posting here before...

welcome..

in case you don't know, a good source for low pressure smokeless loads is rst.

https://www.rstshells.com/

Welcome geco!

Ed: FWIW this gun will be fed a steady diet of RSTs unless a better option makes itself known.