How many of you actually prooftest your barrels?

[Cory Joe Stewart]

How many of you actually prooftest your barrels?  And do you do it on all occasions?  Has it ever exposed a problem?

Coryjoe

[gunmaker]

Only on old bbls.  These new ones are very well made. 

[Hungry Horse]

 I only test barrels of unknown provenance, or barrels where sights, or lugs, may have been cut too deep.

                     Hungry Horse

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

I almost never use a recycled barrel - only new ones.  I test fire and roughly sight in every firearm, but do not subject them to the rigors of proof testing.  I probably should.

[WadePatton]

I'll always proof, but i don't go nuts with the charge.  A good stout double powder is good enough for me.   2x the "normal" full-power load for the caliber.  Some may not consider that a real "proofing", but it gives me some peace that first time I light it off under my face.

There always exists a possibility of a manufacturing flaw in the original mill-formed stock.  This is why highly critical metal applications (space, aircraft, F1) are X-rayed.  I don't have an X-ray machine.  And there also exists the possibility that i goofed a dovetail or breech fitment.  

I spent a lot of time studying metallurgy before coming to the making of guns, mostly for high-performance, minimum-material applications.

Proofing removes most any doubt, and someday may save a stock or hand or eyeball.  I do not think it's time/powder wasted-it costs so little.

[jerrywh]

 I proof test using standard black powder proof charges from the Birmingham or Belgian proof houses.
 but most the barrels I use are either self made or altered to my own contours.

[James Wilson Everett]

Guys,

I always proof test my barrels, at the same level as Wade, 2 x normal load.  With store-bought barrels, I do not proof test those.  It can be a lot of fun!  Light the fuse, run away, fingers in the ears, big boom, celebration!  I have never had any failures (so far).

Jim

[David R. Pennington]

Where might one find Belgian or Birmingham proof standards for black powder?

[oldarcher]

I ALWAYS PROOF ANY BARREL THAT I USE !!!! The reason is that it is just common sense! About 15 years ago I built a 1/2 stock Leman style rifle with a flint breech plug. It had a 7/8 GM barrel and was .50 cal. The rifle was complete and really nice and I proof with patch ball/naked ball over 250 gr 2F. ( I then proof with a patched ball over 125 gr 2F.)
The breech failed and destroyed the rifle, I never did find the rear of the breech plug as it parted at the rear of the barrel, probably a void in the plug casting. If I had not proofed it may have held, or it may have failed with a normal load just like it did with the proof load and I would not be here to write this post. I was able to save the barrel as it was undamaged but the lock was damaged, as was the drum/nipple. I completely finish the rifle before I proof as I feel that until I proof the rifle it is just a group of parts, after the proof it's a rifle. When you proof you are not just proofing the barrel, you are proofing the entire system and I feel that the patent breech/drum/plug are the weakest links in the system. I hope that I am not shooting next to you if you don't proof your rifles........Why would you take a chance???

[Mark Elliott]

I don't proof commercially available barrels.   I would certainly proof a barrel I made or significantly modified.    I do, however,  test fire a gun to make sure it is working reliably and shooting a good group in the black. 

[B.Habermehl]

I test fire every gun that leaves my shop. I had a investment cast hawken breech fail, blew the lock off the gun and tattooed my right hand, plus a coupe of minor frags. Thank heaven it happened while I was shooting it. Had to restock the gun as well as re breech with a Pete Allen breech set. It was NOT one of Pete Allen's breeches that failed. I don't expect I'll ever build a gun around any cast breech again. Never had a problem with a normal non cast flint breech plug or any manufacturers barrels. BJH

[PPatch]

"...I built a 1/2 stock Leman style rifle with a flint breech plug."  

Well there's your problem...

**** please disregard my remarks above which were posted in abject ignorance. I had never heard the term "flint breech." My apology if I offended. ****

I'm pretty new to building, have used nothing but store bought barrels.  I proofed my first one with a double charge and two balls. Passed. the three others I have only fired a larger than usual charge in with a single ball. Doing so is for my own peace of mind.

One thought I have is that even if you proof in the standard way, double charge, double shot. How do you know you haven't caused a still hidden fracture in doing so that will show up many shots later?

dave

[Bob Roller]

I test fire every gun that leaves my shop. I had a investment cast hawken breech fail, blew the lock off the gun and tattooed my right hand, plus a coupe of minor frags. Thank heaven it happened while I was shooting it. Had to restock the gun as well as re breech with a Pete Allen breech set. It was NOT one of Pete Allen's breeches that failed. I don't expect I'll ever build a gun around any cast breech again. Never had a problem with a normal non cast flint breech plug or any manufacturers barrels. BJH

The Hawken Shop owned by Art Ressel in the 70's had all breech plugs X rayed and coded.
He wasn't interested in being in court.

Bob Roller

[rsells]

I proof every barrel used in my rifles using 2 times what I consider a normal charge.  I just can't a rifle go without knowing I tested it.
                                                                                          Roger Sells

[Dphariss]

One shot with a service charge to foul the bore a little and then a proof load similar to what is shown in Greener's "The Gun and Its Development". This is double service chrarge and double ball. I video these as well. This not only tests the barrel but also pressure bearing items like vent liners etc.

Dan

[Dphariss]

"...I built a 1/2 stock Leman style rifle with a flint breech plug."  

Well there's your problem...

Yeah, I know it was a simple typo and no big deal. I just happen to be in the mood to make a snide remark... good post.

carry on.

I'm pretty new to building, have used nothing but store bought barrels.  I proofed my first one with a double charge and two balls. Passed. the three others I have only fired a larger than usual charge in with a single ball. Doing so is for my own peace of mind.

One thought I have is that even if you proof in the standard way, double charge, double shot. How do you know you haven't caused a still hidden fracture in doing so that will show up many shots later?

dave

A barrel made of modern alloy of the proper quality  grade approved for barrels will not be harmed with a BP load. Modern smokeless rifle cartridges run 55-65K psi as a normal load. BP simply will not make enough pressure to damage such a steel. UNLESS there is a flaw. This is what the test is about. Flaws in the materials and flaws in the workmanship. This is what is being tested. If the steel is NOT recommended for gun barrels then the proof load may prove nothing.

Dan

[inlikeflint]

I just proofed a 16ga 26" that I threaded and installed a flint plug from tow.  I did not go over board, a 16ga ball  100 gr 2f.  Then same powder  and 1 3/4 oz bb's.  All was fine.  I bought a unchambered nos barrel from numrich.  I used steel wool and 120 volts to set it off.   John

[jerrywh]

 Proof loads may be found in the old Dixie catalogs and also in the Greener book[ the gun and it's development. There are other sources also.

[oldarcher]

"...I built a 1/2 stock Leman style rifle with a flint breech plug."  

Well there's your problem...

Yeah, I know it was a simple typo and no big deal. I just happen to be in the mood to make a snide remark... good post.

carry on.

I'm pretty new to building, have used nothing but store bought barrels.  I proofed my first one with a double charge and two balls. Passed. the three others I have only fired a larger than usual charge in with a single ball. Doing so is for my own peace of mind.

One thought I have is that even if you proof in the standard way, double charge, double shot. How do you know you haven't caused a still hidden fracture in doing so that will show up many shots later?

dave

Dave
 I don't see the error or typo in this statement???
"...I built a 1/2 stock Leman style rifle with a flint breech plug."

I commonly use a flat flint plug to use a drum ignition, I can then either make the rifle a flint or cap.
The question of proofing possibly causing a future failure is valid, that's why I proof a second time with a half proof, generally a normally patched ball on 125-150 gr 2F.  I don't think that will guarantee a fail proof rifle but it is the best that I can do.
As I said in my original post, you are not just proofing the barrel, you are proofing the entire system as failure is generally not in the barrel itself, but in other parts of the system.
I am amazed at the people that trust their lives to a rifle that is not carefully tested. Remember you are placing a "pipe bomb" next to your face and trusting that problems in manufacture did not occur.

[Dphariss]

I just proofed a 16ga 26" that I threaded and installed a flint plug from tow.  I did not go over board, a 16ga ball  100 gr 2f.  Then same powder  and 1 3/4 oz bb's.  All was fine.  I bought a unchambered nos barrel from numrich.  I used steel wool and 120 volts to set it off.   John

The proof loads in "Greener" for a 16 bore run from 295 gr for a BL shotgun and go up from there using a 399 gr bullet.
A 16 gauge rifle would use a 923 gr bullet and 226 gr of powder for the Provisional proof. But these were expected to shoot a bullet over 700 gr. This is from the 1896 Edition.

Dan

[galamb]

I never proof a barrel but I do fire a max test load with the rifle in a gun vice, triggered by a string from distance.

That is to make sure that I put everything together properly before I snug it up to my cheek 

[smart dog]

Hi,
I have not proofed a barrel since I started using only swamped barrels with pretty large breech dimensions.  However, it might be a good routine practice.  I did proof some barrels years ago that were straight octagons and had thinner barrel walls than I use today.  I used a double load of ball and powder.  I also measured the outside diameters around all flats at 6 locations from the breech to about halfway up the barrel.  I compared before and after measurements of those locations as well as visually inspecting the bore and outside.  I am curious how those of you who proof barrels inspect them beyond just detecting an obvious failure.

dave

[Dphariss]

I'll always proof, but i don't go nuts with the charge.  A good stout double powder is good enough for me.   2x the "normal" full-power load for the caliber.  Some may not consider that a real "proofing", but it gives me some peace that first time I light it off under my face.

There always exists a possibility of a manufacturing flaw in the original mill-formed stock.  This is why highly critical metal applications (space, aircraft, F1) are X-rayed.  I don't have an X-ray machine.  And there also exists the possibility that i goofed a dovetail or breech fitment.  

I spent a lot of time studying metallurgy before coming to the making of guns, mostly for high-performance, minimum-material applications.

Proofing removes most any doubt, and someday may save a stock or hand or eyeball.  I do not think it's time/powder wasted-it costs so little.

Better grades are certified as to the level of flaws and inclusions. IIRC the bars that came into Shiloh were stamped. There are at least two grades above "gun barrel". I used to shoot with a welder that worked in the refinerys around Billings. I asked him what grade of steel was used in the piping. Nulcear. They he gave me the hoop jumping needed to weld the pipe and then to check it.  Preheat, reheat afterwards, xray and I am sure other things I have likely forgotten.

Cast breeches can be a worry. The better ones are xrayed. Not every casting firm is a skilled as Ruger for example nor are they as finicky about material.

Dan

[Dphariss]

Hi,
I have not proofed a barrel since I started using only swamped barrels with pretty large breech dimensions.  However, it might be a good routine practice.  I did proof some barrels years ago that were straight octagons and had thinner barrel walls than I use today.  I used a double load of ball and powder.  I also measured the outside diameters around all flats at 6 locations from the breech to about halfway up the barrel.  I compared before and after measurements of those locations as well as visually inspecting the bore and outside.  I am curious how those of you who proof barrels inspect them beyond just detecting an obvious failure.

dave

One can measure if they like. But a proper overload should find any serious flaws by producing a failure. Mill run steel may be riddled with flaws. From actual cracks in the steel to stringers of added metals like lead/sulfur/phophorous. Some that can run end to end in the bar. There are other things to do with proving and steel quality but its not something to discuss here. I have tried in the past....
I will say that W Greener (W.W.'s father) was concerned in the 1820s-30s that some barrels were failing in service after passing proof. This in one of those things "to do" with the alloys used and how they are manufactured.
The British had a pretty severe proof for all barrels. After all a gun maker does not want a peer of the realm or worse HRH getting his head blown off by a barrel failure. Bad publicity and all that you know...

Dan

[oldarcher]

Hi,
I have not proofed a barrel since I started using only swamped barrels with pretty large breech dimensions.  However, it might be a good routine practice.  I did proof some barrels years ago that were straight octagons and had thinner barrel walls than I use today.  I used a double load of ball and powder.  I also measured the outside diameters around all flats at 6 locations from the breech to about halfway up the barrel.  I compared before and after measurements of those locations as well as visually inspecting the bore and outside.  I am curious how those of you who proof barrels inspect them beyond just detecting an obvious failure.

dave

Dave, you have a good point, it is really hard to determine if a unseen failure exists either before proofing or after.
After the second proof with a 1/2 proof load I carefully clean the bore and run a clean lightly oiled patch through the bore and try to feel any irregularities that may exist especially tight/loose spots and do a careful inspection of the breech and drum if a cap gun. If it seems OK I go with it. Failures generally occur in breech/drum area rather than barrels. I believe that most barrel makers use 12L14 steel because it machines smoother and cuts cleaner because of the lead in the alloy. I don't think 12L14 is classed as Gun Barrel Steel especially in smokeless applications. GM uses a much better steel, they use A.I.S.I. 1137 modified, stress relieved, annealed, certified rifle barrel quality steel. Having said that I seldom use GM barrels, not that they are bad, I just prefer barrels from Getz-Colerain-Rice. Check this post for more information on makers and steel used http://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=21944.0