Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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
I'm just amazed that knuckleheads such as Harvey (and now, perhaps yourself) would suggest that firing a second round in a rifle that: 1) has already sent one person to the hospital; and 2) has obvious mechanical damage that would preclude the firing of any additional rounds (note that the original post included statements such as "the bolt will not cycle fully to the rear").
Nothing new will be learned from blowing up the gun again. It was a dumb suggestion, and this thread would have been much better if the person who made it would have retracted the comment instead of digging deeper.
I'm amazed that some people can't seem to fully read and comprehend Harvey's comments, specifically to the effect that "Should a complete physical examination of the rifle find no problems, it should be test-fired again in a safe manner to establish whether it was caused by an ammunition problem." Which he also indicated would likely not become necessary, since most people here who have been paying attention are pretty confident that this was caused by an incorrectly installed barrel.
I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to conceive of whether there could possibly be some manner of setting a rifle into a test fixture and discharging it safely from a distance.
I'm amazed that some people can't seem to fully read and comprehend Harvey's comments...
"Should a complete physical examination of the rifle find no problems, it should be test-fired again in a safe manner to establish whether it was caused by an ammunition problem."
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.
Great idea to keep the builder as a guarded secret! This may happen to someone else, because you didn't share the info, but it may help your court case! Or, you could post photos, builder etc. with the aim of preventing another shooter from suffering the same thing.
The question that has been posed my myself and Arbiter is really quite simple and quite hypothetical:
But the reaction by the group has been just that; reactionary. So we ask again. Should a complete physical examination of the rifle find no problems (by any measurements, comparisons, whatever by whomever) what then, should become the fate of the firearm?
The popular position that it should never be fired again under any condition is puzzling.
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.
Moral of the story? I don't know but do people really like brussel sprouts?
After all the conversation, I am left wondering as to the level of emotion and vitriol still invested in this thread.
Even based upon the limited information presented by the OP, the cause of the CF seems reasonably clear as shown by the single photo in post #49. There appears to be about 0.10" anomaly of unsupported brass directly forward of the .308 case rim. Fine. This seems to be the consensus, and has been for some time.
The question that has been posed my myself and Arbiter is really quite simple and quite hypothetical:
But the reaction by the group has been just that; reactionary. So we ask again. Should a complete physical examination of the rifle find no problems (by any measurements, comparisons, whatever by whomever) what then, should become the fate of the firearm?
The popular position that it should never be fired again under any condition is puzzling.
If a real invisible six foot rabbit posted the same advice would anybody react in the same way?
Ralphie as Adult: [narrating] Only one thing in the world could've dragged me away from the soft glow of electric sex gleaming in the window.
Ralphie: I want an official Red Ryder, carbine action, two-hundred shot range model air rifle!
Mrs. Parker: No, you'll shoot your eye out.
Bolt actions and their operations are not some mysterious contraptions that defy logic. It is clearly shown in the OPs photo above that the pressure vessel (brass) failed just above the bolt head. The photo also clearly shows that the primer was not flattened. Pressure inside the case would be fairly equal in all directions and any pressure that would blow out the side would also be placed on the back (primer). So logic would conclude that this was not due to high pressure caused by a bad ammunition or an obstruction in the bore. So what could cause the brass to fail at normal pressure? The only logical answer is an unsupported case by a barrel tennon that was too short. Something that can easily be measured as I have stated in a previous post or observed by a simple test as A10XRIFLE has suggested. But I do realize we don’t live in logical times so shooting the rifle as soon as possible may be the only thing to do. Please take safety precautions when firing and plug yours ears.
After all the conversation, I am left wondering as to the level of emotion and vitriol still invested in this thread.
Even based upon the limited information presented by the OP, the cause of the CF seems reasonably clear as shown by the single photo in post #49. There appears to be about 0.10" anomaly of unsupported brass directly forward of the .308 case rim. Fine. This seems to be the consensus, and has been for some time.
The question that has been posed my myself and Arbiter is really quite simple and quite hypothetical:
But the reaction by the group has been just that; reactionary. So we ask again. Should a complete physical examination of the rifle find no problems (by any measurements, comparisons, whatever by whomever) what then, should become the fate of the firearm?
The popular position that it should never be fired again under any condition is puzzling.
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.
This thread is just an example of how when something good happens, people may tell one person, when something bad happens, everybody knows. Not saying this is a bad thing, just shows how bad news travels fast.
I have not had any correspondence with the gun manufacturer. However, I anticipate that they will be contacted in the very near future. I certainly want to work towards a diagnosis and get some closure on this. If it is in fact a defect with the gun, I hope to be able to obtain enough information that everyone would be able to use for themselves no matter what manufacturer, etc... to prevent anything similar from happening in the future.
There was nothing in the barrel prior to me loading the gun - I visually checked it prior to shooting. I wanted to make sure that #1 it was clear and #2 to see how close they (the company, since they installed the scope) were on with their bore sight; I didn't want to be shooting in the dirt. Turns out, the bore sight was pretty close!
Lawyers are why we have 7 pound triggers coming from the factory and a lack of a clear owner's manual. I would rather deal with a six foot invisible rabbit. If it wasn't for lawyers there would not be such a demand for a "custom rifle" in the first place.
I think this post is either completely fabricated or full of half truths. OP's first post and his gun blew up? I smell shit.
I don't know why you'd blame lawyers. Lawyers just argue the case; it's the legislature that makes the law.
I don't know why you'd blame lawyers. Lawyers just argue the case; it's the legislature that makes the law.
I think this post is either completely fabricated or full of half truths. OP's first post and his gun blew up? I smell shit.
Nope.