If you mean, do I have the Ruger blueprints for the Old Army cylinder the answer is no.shdwlkr said:
Several sources say that Ruger successfully tested the Old Army cylinder with loads of Bullseye powder under a roundball.
If the cylinder was made from any low carbon steel which is the material most reproductions use, Bullseye powder would have instantly blown the cylinder apart.
The only way the Ruger cylinder could have withstood the pressure spike and pressures smokeless powder creates when it ignites is for it to have been made from a heat treated alloy steel.
I say this as a design engineer who has spent his life designing things that require a through knowledge of materials and what they are (and are not) capable of.
Looking at it from another point of view, gun companies that make firearms which use smokeless powder must use alloy steel for their barrels, cylinders and other critical parts.
As a measure of safety, it would be exceedingly wise for them to only have materials on hand that will meet the requirements of those guns on hand in their material warehouse.
If they had some of the typical low carbon steel available, there is the possibility that some of it might find its way into the manufacturing process of a smokeless powder gun part without early detection.
The only way the low strength part could be detected is by the hardness inspection following heat treatment.
Because ALL Quality Assurance testing is done on a few random parts selected from a batch of parts that were all heat treated at the same time there is the possibility that these defective parts could easily slip thru the inspection process.
If they did, I'm sure Dirty Harry would not be amused when his .44 mag blew up taking part of his hand in the process.
Anyway, do I have documented proof? No.
Am I sure the Old Army cylinder is made from a heat treated high strength material? Yes.
That is scary!!!
