doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Baited Breath, Waiting for "Digs" Up-Date.

I guess I've never really understood the determination of parameters for proof testing. If a a piece of machinery is built to withstand specific stress limits, how do you determine how far beyond those limits should be considered safe? To me, it's kinda like taking my new car out and revving the engine a few thousand RPM beyond the redline just to make sure everything's o.k. If it was o.k. before, it very well might not be afterward. I'd be interested in knowing how many guns failed proof testing during the lifetimes of the Parker Brothers, Smith, Fox, or Ithaca companies. Bill Frech

I'm surprised that it's taken this long for this to pop up on a BB. This has been a problem for quite some time. I was warned off and redirected to Birmingham a while back. What I keep getting from the trade is it's the London PM.

It maybe just another way of taking dear ol'grandpop's gun off the moors(streets in the New World Order lingo).
Oh sorry mate - it went to bits yesterday!

Thorny, very insightful of you. And in the case of the alleged blown Purdey pair,
not only are two guns off the street but a "bloody capitalist pig" gets it.

(I am almost serious here.)

JC

JC, do you think Al Gore works for the London Proof House?
It's a funny world, with alot of fingers in alot of pies!

BF - you have brought up two differing cases; destructive testing and non-destructive testing. During the design phase, it is common to test to failure to see if the article meets expectations. If not, the designer will strengthen the design. If expectations are exceeded too much, the article will get "cut back" a bit. It may or may not be necessary to fully test serial production. If you do, for sure you will be using non-destructive tests. Proof is just such a non-destructive test. The gun is examined and measured prior to firing a known heavy load. After firing, it is re-examined for any damage or change in dimensions. Guns are designed in such a way and built of such materials that failure after proof testing is very, very unlikely, barring abusive use or conditions.

Your car design underwent a whole series of destructive tests before release to production and your individual car underwent a whole series of non-destructive tests as it progressed down the assembly line. The design of car building is such that it is not envisioned that the consumer needs to perform tests of his/her own beyond normal operation. Same with gun proof; the consumer does not need to reproof the gun on some schedule. Actually, only gunmakers are allowed to submit guns for proof (as I recall). They submit only guns that have had modifications or repairs that could possibly make the gun unsafe; for example, lengthening the chambers or honing/reaming out deep pits.

American guns are self-certified by the manufacturer, so we have no idea as to failure rates (although I'd be they were very low). European guns are tested at government proof houses, so there may be records as to failures. I'd still bet on low rates - makers can't afford to have big investments disappear in a flash of light and a puff of smoke.

Not true, at least until about 5 years ago. I submitted my own gun to the Birmingham House, mailed it direct (pre-1898 gun). They accepted it, proved it, the charge was less than $100.

They would not, however, return it to me. Seems they don't have an export license so I had to pay the $400 "carriage" charge our cousins love to collect for mailing a gun back to the states.

Are these brand new guns or old and possibly altered guns, or don't we know?

Sorry, I missed the original post that must have discussed this.

Why don't you hold poor billionaires hand and cry together, oh please!

Tacky, Jag, very tacky!! What reason do you have for depricating anyone's misfortune, reguardless of his financial status?? Purdey's is the one who will take it on the chin. There are some very fine people who's jobs are put at risk by this event, if true.

Second part to consider. If this can happen to a new gun, as seems likely if the story is true, consider that your 'ole beater could be next if it ever requires reproof.