Catastrophic Failure

#101
It seems to me that round was not running over pressure and simply unsupported.
The short tenon is a likely scenario and then a major screw up. These things need to be verified and then verified again.

Glad you didn't end up like Stevie Wonder. Keep a spare set of shooting glasses in the car just in case.
 
#103
Jesus H. Christ! Thanks for sharing this with us. Hope you have a speedy recovery. Of course, everybody gets wound up when something like this is posted. We all have questions because we don't want to see this again and we need to learn from it.

What type of bolt extractor was it? Factory, sako, m16?

Did the eye protection fail as well?
 
#107
Culpeper said:
Jesus H. Christ! Thanks for sharing this with us. Hope you have a speedy recovery. Of course, everybody gets wound up when something like this is posted. We all have questions because we don't want to see this again and we need to learn from it.

What type of bolt extractor was it? Factory, sako, m16?

Did the eye protection fail as well?
Click to expand...

I could not agree more. Unfortunately, some of the best lessons come from failure. We are all thankful that the OP's injuries were not more serious, and it should never have happened to begin with. Let's just hope this, or worse, does not happen to anyone else.

Culpeper, as for the extractor, looking closely at the action pic you can get a pretty good guess as to the manufacturer and that will answer your question. Of course that does not indicate who assembled the rifle. I'm hoping for some good technical analysis on the build.
 
#109
Because we are all theorizing about the cause, here's my theory.

Rifle builder took all his bench measurements with a .188" thick lug. He then forms the tenon, cuts the threads and creates the counterbore to match these measurements. Happy with his work, he sets the action and lug back on a bench with other miscellaneous parts while he sets up his flush system and reamer. without any thought, off the bench full of parts he grabs your receiver, bolt and a .300" lug and goes to town on the chamber setting the headspace with this combination. Since his wife is bitching at him for being late for dinner, his thoughts are elsewhere and didn't notice an eighth inch of headspace gauge sticking out the ass end of the chamber. After all, the bolt just closed on the go gauge and didn't on the no-go so all is well. He then snugs the barrel onto the receiver and boxes it up ready for shipping before his brussel sprouts are cold and he has to sleep on the couch.

Moral of the story? I don't know but do people really like brussel sprouts?
 
#110
Missed the pic but I can see now. Blew the pic up a little for better viewing.
 

Attachments

  • 308bCasing.jpg
    308bCasing.jpg
    15.5 KB · Views: 28
#111
Am I the only guy cringing at the memories of how many brand-new rifles I've just thrown ammo into and started shooting?

A scoped bolt gun is the only thing I'm not completely anal about wearing eye-pro while shooting. I guess that just changed and I'll be more disciplined about it in the future.
 
#112
A lot of people keep suggesting that the rifle may have been chambered for 300wm. I'm of the opinion it would be very difficult to enough primer strike force to fire the round. Another thought if it was a 300wm chamber and 308 win case the primer would of been off center.

Mike
 
#113
300sniper said:
Because we are all theorizing about the cause, here's my theory.

Rifle builder took all his bench measurements with a .188" thick lug. He then forms the tenon, cuts the threads and creates the counterbore to match these measurements. Happy with his work, he sets the action and lug back on a bench with other miscellaneous parts while he sets up his flush system and reamer. without any thought, off the bench full of parts he grabs your receiver, bolt and a .300" lug and goes to town on the chamber setting the headspace with this combination. Since his wife is bitching at him for being late for dinner, his thoughts are elsewhere and didn't notice an eighth inch of headspace gauge sticking out the ass end of the chamber. After all, the bolt just closed on the go gauge and didn't on the no-go so all is well. He then snugs the barrel onto the receiver and boxes it up ready for shipping before his brussel sprouts are cold and he has to sleep on the couch.

Moral of the story? I don't know but do people really like brussel sprouts?
Click to expand...
I can see this happening...... That would certainly account for the excessive boltnose clearance and unsupported case, while still "appearing" to be OK.
 
#114
This is why, despite the fact that I reload for every gun I shoot, I always use factory ammo for the first few rounds on a new gun. If there is a defect in the gun that causes a catastrophic failure like this one, you just know the manufacturer/builder is going to blame the ammo first. While factory ammo can also be defective, many manufacturers would automatically void any warranty if reloads were used. So, I shoot a few rounds (a box) of factory ammo and check the spent casings carefully for signs of anything unusual before switching to reloads. It might just be "feel good" stuff on my part, but at least if there's anything seriously wrong with the gun from the start, it would be better to be shooting factory ammo when it shows up (as the OP wisely did in this case).
 
#117
vh20 said:
This is why, despite the fact that I reload for every gun I shoot, I always use factory ammo for the first few rounds on a new gun. If there is a defect in the gun that causes a catastrophic failure like this one, you just know the manufacturer/builder is going to blame the ammo first. While factory ammo can also be defective, many manufacturers would automatically void any warranty if reloads were used. So, I shoot a few rounds (a box) of factory ammo and check the spent casings carefully for signs of anything unusual before switching to reloads. It might just be "feel good" stuff on my part, but at least if there's anything seriously wrong with the gun from the start, it would be better to be shooting factory ammo when it shows up (as the OP wisely did in this case).
Click to expand...

I like to do the same, if its a common SAAMI cartridge.

If it is SAAMI, but rare/obscure (say 284 Win) and its frickin tough to find even a crappy $50 box of Super-X, I just load my own from the get go.

What if you've got a wildcat?
 
#120
E. Bryant said:
But if I'm guessing the action manufacturer correctly, it still tells us nothing about who actually screwed together (and screwed up) the OP's rifle.
Click to expand...


And if I am guessing the action manufacture correctly, several other manufacturers use this (or a variance of) action as their "house" action.

I am pretty confident that the action was not to blame here.
 
#121
300sniper said:
And if I am guessing the action manufacture correctly, several other manufacturers use this (or a variance of) action as their "house" action.

I am pretty confident that the action was not to blame here.
Click to expand...

I think the fact that the action did not grenade and become shrapnel should be considered a good thing here. Considering that I have a build going on one of these actions, I am somewhat comforted by this.
 
#122
Glad that you're OK, Vrybusy, especially your eyes. This incident could have been tragic.

However, in order to rule out myriad conjecture, have you considered firing the rifle AGAIN ... in a safe, distant and controlled environment ... to determine if the CF repeats, or is a one-time failure? In any event, something is woefully wrong with the weapon. The barrel stamp of simply ".308" is particularly suspect.
 
Last edited:
#123
harvey said:
glad that you're ok, vrybusy, especially your eyes. This incident could have been tragic.

However, in order to rule out myriad conjecture, have you considered firing the rifle again ... In a safe, distant and controlled environment ... To determine if the cf repeats, or is a one-time failure? In any event, something is woefully wrong with the weapon. The barrel stamp of simply ".308" is particularly suspect.
Click to expand...

Do not do this!!!!!!

I'd love to be polite about it - but this is the most moronic suggestion ever!
 
#125
vh20 said:
This is why, despite the fact that I reload for every gun I shoot, I always use factory ammo for the first few rounds on a new gun. If there is a defect in the gun that causes a catastrophic failure like this one, you just know the manufacturer/builder is going to blame the ammo first. While factory ammo can also be defective, many manufacturers would automatically void any warranty if reloads were used. So, I shoot a few rounds (a box) of factory ammo and check the spent casings carefully for signs of anything unusual before switching to reloads. It might just be "feel good" stuff on my part, but at least if there's anything seriously wrong with the gun from the start, it would be better to be shooting factory ammo when it shows up (as the OP wisely did in this case).
Click to expand...

I do this too usually because I like to zero guns with well known factory match ammo like FGMM so I know the zero is good before I start working a load for it. Also is a good time to test for function and any issues like you stated to where if there are any, in theory, the ammo manufacturer would pick up the tab.

With AR's I generally send a mag or two of Federal XM193 or 855.
 
#126
OP,

Medical Bills can be expensive. I'm not sure if you have enlisted the help of an Attorney. IANAL, but I would tread lightly on posting too much if you have, and if you haven't, I personally would consider it. Don't call one of those billboard or yellow page ones either, they often are not the best. The BAR in your jurisdiction can help you get in touch with someone specialized in dealing with incidents of this nature.
 
#128
Harvey said:
Glad that you're OK, Vrybusy, especially your eyes. This incident could have been tragic.

However, in order to rule out myriad conjecture, have you considered firing the rifle AGAIN ... in a safe, distant and controlled environment ... to determine if the CF repeats, or is a one-time failure? In any event, something is woefully wrong with the weapon. The barrel stamp of simply ".308" is particularly suspect.
Click to expand...

Please tell me you are an invisible six foot rabbit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
#129
peaceatwar said:
OP,

Medical Bills can be expensive. I'm not sure if you have enlisted the help of an Attorney. IANAL, but I would tread lightly on posting too much if you have, and if you haven't, I personally would consider it. Don't call one of those billboard or yellow page ones either, they often are not the best. The BAR in your jurisdiction can help you get in touch with someone specialized in dealing with incidents of this nature.
Click to expand...

GOOD SOUND ADVISE !!!! And above all do not shoot that gun again as mentioned above.
 
#130
Harvey said:
Glad that you're OK, Vrybusy, especially your eyes. This incident could have been tragic.

However, in order to rule out myriad conjecture, have you considered firing the rifle AGAIN ... in a safe, distant and controlled environment ... to determine if the CF repeats, or is a one-time failure? In any event, something is woefully wrong with the weapon. The barrel stamp of simply ".308" is particularly suspect.
Click to expand...

Harvey,

That sounds like a great idea. PM the original poster and try that out yourself. It was nice knowing you and your short term here at Sniper's Hide. Meanwhile.. there is a fresh list without any known candidates for the 2014 Darwin Awards. You might want to take a look and then re-consider your suggestion regarding re-firing the rifle. This suggestion is just not very prudent. I mean really. It blew up the very first trigger pull!!

Please stop these kind of suggestions. I leave you with this appropriate saying "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
 
#132
turbo54 said:
Sure can!
Click to expand...

This would be one of those situations where one would like to have a vent hole like the Remington action does. I am not saying it would keep all the pressure and crap from hitting the shooters face but it would have bleed off a substantial amount of it by providing a path with less resistance than the bolt channel.
 
#133
Culpeper said:
Please tell me you are an invisible six foot rabbit.
Click to expand...
No rabbit here, just an old fart with over sixty years behind the trigger. But what part of "in a safe, distant and controlled environment" is not clear?

The OP isn't entirely descriptive as to the detail and fallout of CF event. Photos and measurements of the chamber, I suspect, will be forthcoming. But if you ask me right now, there are a number of things that could cause what has been described. In reverse order of potential:

Barrel obstruction - Highly unlikely, as warranted by OP.
Ammo - Unlikely, as OP warrants reputable ammo, and the failure to the brass suggested brass was un-contained.
Human Error - Remotely possible. Bolt not rotated to fully engage lugs, but enough to set firing pin.
Bolt face issue - Possible, but cartridge rim must have been captured by the extractor for ignition.
Head space gap due to sizing for caliber other than .308 WIN - Probable, given rupture above cartridge rim, and ubiquitous ".308" caliber stamp on barrel. Shame on builder's smith.
Head space gap due to faulty installation of barrel - Probable, due to rupture above rim. Chamber OK, but barrel not fully threaded into receiver. Shame on builder's quality control.

The OP mentioned that he did not feel the tangible final "resistance" when closing the bolt. This ever-so-slight resistance is not normally due to the case seating fully into the chamber, but more so the resistance of fully engaging lugs and of the firing pin spring compressing into lock-up. So I don't give this a whole lot of weight.

In any event, once the old brass is cleared from chamber, and no obvious chamber or head spacing measurement errors are evident, forensics will demand that the rifle be fired again under safe and close supervision of OP's third party for the record. As suggested, this will eliminate a number of the possible CF causes listed above.

Don't know about you, but I'd like to watch that ... from a distance.
 
Last edited:
#134
Niles Coyote said:
This would be one of those situations where one would like to have a vent hole like the Remington action does. I am not saying it would keep all the pressure and crap from hitting the shooters face but it would have bleed off a substantial amount of it by providing a path with less resistance than the bolt channel.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. I never thought of that this way until now.
 
#135
Harvey said:
No rabbit here, just an old fart with over sixty years behind the trigger. But what part of "in a safe, distant and controlled environment" is not clear?
Click to expand...

The "not clear" part is - what do expect to happen other than what already happened? You know what Einstein said about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results .... right?

The rifle is broke. It needs to be taken apart and fixed. There is no other way around it. Sticking your head in the toilet to see if you hair smells like poo again doesn't make sense.
 
Last edited:
#136
MoBoost said:
The "not clear" part is - what do expect to happen other than what already happened? You know what Einstein said about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results .... right?

The rifle is broke. It needs to be taken apart and fixed. There is no other way around it. Sticking your head in the toilet to see if you hair smells like poo again doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...
Once again, comrade, if the OP has any thoughts of getting a third party (a lawyer) involved - and unless the problem is so feekin clear by empirical measurements of the chamber as mentioned above - another third party (another lawyer) will allege obstruction/ammo/human error. Forensics will demand that the weapon be fired again. Is another CF guaranteed? By whom? You?

Does this defy common sense? Sure. But when have attorneys ever consulted common sense as an expert witness?
 
Last edited:
#137
Harvey said:
Once again, comrade, if the OP has any thoughts of getting a third party (a lawyer) involved - and unless the problem is so feekin clear by empirical measurements of the chamber as mentioned above - another third party (another lawyer) will allege obstruction/ammo/human error. Forensics will demand that the weapon be fired again. Is another CF guaranteed? By whom?

Does this defy common sense? Sure. But when have attorneys ever consulted common sense as an expert witness?
Click to expand...

Harvey, I am sorry. Just admit it, you made a mistake in your suggestion.

Meanwhile, I can see that you know little regarding litigation and the law. I have a lot of experience in these kind of matters. Your contention that someone would need to fire the rifle again is like saying that two vehicles would have to be smashed into each other again in order to prove injury. No such need would arise in this case, at all, ever. All the OP would need is an expert opinion, if even that was needed. But why are we talking about litigation here? This is not a litigated matter and we are simply discussing this in layman's terms with curiosity towards the truth of the matter.

Let us not sling wild suggestions as you have done.
 
#138
NevadaZielmeister said:
... Your contention that someone would need to fire the rifle again is like saying that two vehicles would have to be smashed into each other again in order to prove injury. No such need would arise in this case, at all, ever. All the OP would need is an expert opinion, if even that was needed. But why are we talking about litigation here? This is not a litigated matter and we are simply discussing this in layman's terms with curiosity towards the truth of the matter.

Let us not sling wild suggestions as you have done.
Click to expand...

I am seconding this^^^. Can we please stop with the lawyer stuff? If someone really wants to discuss how these things might go, please start another thread. Some of us have mounds of product liability litigation experience, but most of us are just flapping in the wind and getting each other wound up. This is a site for riflemen and rifles. And this topic offers more than enough excitement all by itself.
 
#139
Harvey you really didnt mean what you said on another firing did you? Thats insane read below.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Albert Einstein
 
#141
NevadaZielmeister said:
Harvey, I am sorry. Just admit it, you made a mistake in your suggestion.

Meanwhile, I can see that you know little regarding litigation and the law. I have a lot of experience in these kind of matters. Your contention that someone would need to fire the rifle again is like saying that two vehicles would have to be smashed into each other again in order to prove injury. No such need would arise in this case, at all, ever. All the OP would need is an expert opinion, if even that was needed. But why are we talking about litigation here? This is not a litigated matter and we are simply discussing this in layman's terms with curiosity towards the truth of the matter.

Let us not sling wild suggestions as you have done.
Click to expand...
Indeed, counselor, this thread has been pulled off topic. But kindly revisit posts #116,119,120,124,126,127 this page and earlier pages and you'll find litigious considerations are by others (not Harvey). Damn shame, really. I agree. Once "third parties" are involved, it's hard to turn back.

And not to belabor the issue, but sans any measured empirical evidence as I've suggested above, I'm not sure what an expert could testify to - other than obstruction/ammo/human error - without another controlled discharge or other destructive testing. That would suck.

Let's just hope Vrybusy is OK (really OK) the problem becomes obvious when measurements are made, and the rifle gets fixed. Because no one wins when "third parties" get involved. If anything comes of this, hopefully it is a layman's lesson about pressures and head space and again merely validating the importance of safety glasses. Yikes.
 
Last edited:
#146
Harvey said:
without another controlled discharge or other destructive testing.
Click to expand...

Get back on your meds, man. There is a cause and there is an effect. Are you seriously expecting something different to happen on the second go? Or that some third party observation will change the FACTS of the fist incident? Do you keep filling a cup with hot coffee even though it keeps poring through the bottom all over your pants? Or do you look at the bottom of the cup to see if there is a hole there? WTF?
 
Last edited:
#148
MoBoost said:
Get back on your meds, man. There is a cause and there is an effect. Are you seriously expecting something different to happen on the second go? Or that some third party observation will change the FACTS of the fist indecent? Do you keep filling a cup with hot coffee even though it keeps poring through the bottom all over your pants? Or do you look at the bottom of the cup to see if there is a hole there? WTF?
Click to expand...

but he has "60 years behind the trigger" that makes him smarter then use newbs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Ruger extraction help
Replies
3
Views
96
6brshooter
6brshooter
E
5.45x39 Precision Bolt Action
Replies
0
Views
141
Esoteric Junkie
E
A
Firearms MPA 6.5CM 26” Curtis PRS rifle + Pelican case
Replies
0
Views
124
aero22abflight
A
hafejd30
I need some LMT MWS help…..
Replies
34
Views
698
hafejd30
hafejd30
N
Terminus Action Review / Observations
Replies
80
Views
1K
Cody S
Cody S
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts