Preacher, back in the Spring of 2019, you argued for days that lengthening the chambers of vintage doubles would actually increase the barrel wall thickness at the end of the lengthened chambers. It took several days for Miller and I to try to convince you otherwise. You obviously still didn't believe us because you paid good money to have Briley lengthen a chamber to see for yourself that you were wrong. That original Thread was deleted, but the follow-up with the results of the needless experiment remain:
https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=542020&page=1And still, you were surprised at the result. Now I wonder why you maintain IN ALL CAPS, that it takes AN EXPERT to lengthen forcing cones, yet the picture of the sectioned chamber shows reamer chatter marks. I also question the second point you made:
2. Buried in Bell's study is a suggestion that lengthening forcing cones can somewhat mitigate the rise in pressure when using long for chamber length shells; ie. slightly more volume in which the gas expands.
Every other source I have ever seen gives the more rational explanation that a lengthened forcing cone simply gives less of a partial bore obstruction created by the end of the shell opening into the bore, so naturally there would be a slight reduction in pressure at that point. You could increase the volume into which the powder gasses expand, but with enough of a restriction, the resulting pressure could still become excessive.
Harry Truman had advice for those who are afraid of being flamed. He said, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen." Good advice indeed!
