Proof Testing Big Bore Flinter

As a habit...I usually proof all my new rifles with roughly a double charge of my max anticipated hunting/shooting load. However, I have a .62 project coming to an end and a little concerned. It has a 1"x42" rifled Rice barrel and built as a Southern Mountain to use on some bigger game. A double load of max anticipated load would put me in the 240 grain range.....and quite frankly I'm worried about possibly hurting the HEAVILY figured maple stock. No concern with the barrel, but I have nightmares about initiating a crack at the tang, etc from the force. The tang and breech areas are reinforced with Acraglas.....but she's gonna have quite a punch. Do I just pucker up and pull the string or back down my proof load :grin:

Old Master Gunsmith(70+ years of building,94 yrs old) said once to me,,"Proof testing is foolish, just means it didn't blow up that time..You might have weakened it to the next time it will.. But if it makes you warm and fuzzy load her up and touch her off.

Rice Barrel = all the proof I need to be assured it won't blow up if I don't exceed the max charge posted on the Rice website for the caliber...

I'm with the others. Not needed. But, whatever you do, shoot holding offhand. With that stock braced you are risking breaking it even with more 'normal' loads.

Take barrel off stock and put barrel breach in an old tire tie barrel down with some rope and touch off charge with a fuse.

It's an excellent quality barrel and as long as the breech plug was installed by the barrel maker, I see no reason whatsoever to put a double charge in that rifle! If you're head long into proofing this barrel, I'd do as another member recommended and remove the barrel from the stock and attach it to an old tire, placing the barrel against maybe a tree or a stump, and then ignite it using a fuse.
IMHO, fire it with a normal hunting load. 240gns of 2F may, very well, blow out the breech plug or split the barrel, for no good reason. These barrels are made of modern steel, not wrought iron as 200 years ago.

AZ Longrifle said:

...
These barrels are made of modern steel, not wrought iron as 200 years ago.

Click to expand...

That is an important thing to note.

Barrels made "back in the day" from wrought iron often had flaws in them.

These ranged from non-metallics and uncontrolled elements in the iron to poor quality weld joints and these could greatly weaken the barrel.

Also, wrought iron is weak relative to modern low carbon steel.

All of this made it very necessary to proof test the barrels made from wrought iron.

Modern steels like the ones used by Rice and other barrel makers have tight controls on the metals chemistry and the lack of welds make proof testing on a muzzleloading barrel unnecessary, provided the design and wall thickness has been proven.

As some have mentioned, there is always a possibility that proof testing a modern made steel barrel can over-stress it, creating the very flaws that the test was intended to find.

I do not recommend proof testing a modern made muzzleloading gun's barrel. :td:

I've taken my 62 up to 140 grains, proofing to myself that I'd really rather shoot it at 120.

Proof tested fer sure! :rotf:

Send to an actual proof house and pay to have it tested. Anything else is suspect IMHO [sarcasm/off] Huh? don't trust the maker don't buy it.

No need to proof, Rice barrels are top notch :thumbsup:






William Alexander

If you're worried about cracking the stock dismount the barrel and shoot it off with a fuse.

But I would not. L.C. Rice uses 12L14 and that's a great machining steel that is fine for the use of barrels (my .54 Lehigh has one of his barrels). Your "proof testing" won't find any imperfectons but may succeed in bulging the barrel ahead of the ball.

" As a habit..."

Find a different habit.

Shooting your gun w/ 240 grains of powder is a fools game, hope not to offend. Nothing to be learned or gained except your anticipated cracks or splits. If you don't plan to shoot 'er with that much powder then what is the point?

Old Master Gunsmith(70+ years of building,94 yrs old) said once to me,,"Proof testing is foolish, just means it didn't blow up that time..You might have weakened it to the next time it will..

Click to expand...

Well I guess those 14 nations that maintain CIP treaty proof houses are just foolish, and have been so for the past century, and longer for the European nations who maintained proof houses in the age when the only gunpowder was what we now call black powder.

LD

About the European proof houses....
Of course that response is a sensible one and had occurred to me also....there is a "but" coming, isn't there......but their existence still begs the question. Metal fatigue is cumulative. Stressing a barrel once proves only that it did not fail that time.....not that it will always be safe.
The assumption of a proofing is that the barrel will not be subjected to the same stresses ever again and, thus, a window of safe use has been created.
Nevertheless, what quarantee does proofing give us?
Pete
PS: I am fairly sure that the procedures followed by a Proof house involve considerably more than merely firing a very heavy load in a particular barrel.

Loyalist Dave said:

Old Master Gunsmith(70+ years of building,94 yrs old) said once to me,,"Proof testing is foolish, just means it didn't blow up that time..You might have weakened it to the next time it will..

Click to expand...

Well I guess those 14 nations that maintain CIP treaty proof houses are just foolish, and have been so for the past century, and longer for the European nations who maintained proof houses in the age when the only gunpowder was what we now call black powder.

LD

Click to expand...

That's just because they have inferior steel mills. ;-)

Think I will go with the Mastergunsmith who is/has built up to 50 cal Modern sniper rifles Barrett style..Built more rifles then I have handled,Some of his builds were used at Camp Perry..And did built many BP Rifles/barrels in any size the customer wanted,,no matter how foolish it was,,counsel and built is how Bill said it,,,,
Proofing is like parachute jumping just cause it worked this time don't mean it will next time.
How ever if that floats your stick,,step up to the line,,,I don't build so I do not proof I just shoot,, :surrender: :idunno: :v

I dreamed I was boarding an airplane last night and before entering the plane I asked the man has this plane been tested. He replied heck no! stressing it might cause a flaw to develop. I never got on the plane. Would you?
I wouldn't worry about the barrel very much but I still wouldn't fire it from the shoulder with a double load in it. I proof test every gun I make. Nasa tests space ships. I test barrels for the same reason.

I've been machining steel since 1971. I once saw a 20ft bar of 7/8" 4140 chromemoly with a crack in it the entire length from the center out.

It was just barely visible after machining. If someone had made a barrel of this piece they would have had an event.

Truth is, you never know.
you only get one set of eyes.

Jack

With all the MLing bbls being shot...how come very few published or "word of mouth" instances of bbl failures? Of those that are reported ,many are caused by using smokeless powders or faulty loading.

Asre breechplugs blowing out.....have seen a few pics of bbl blowups and the breechplug is always in the bbl.

I function fire all my builds w/ a "stiff hunting" load and leave it at that.....Fred

If I want to proof one of my guns, I load it with a stout load.
Invite by brother-in-law for a few beers, get to talking about guns, then let him try my new one :shake: :bull: :rotf:
Fred