Replying to no one in particular, just taking my turn....
I subscribe to the theory that loads far in excess of any recommended or reasonable maximum, in a modern barrel, are more likely to damage the tube than to reveal a hidden flaw. Just my opinion, no facts or figures to back it up, and you're free to do as you think is best -- but I won't stress a barrel that way. I do have two guns built around original barrels of unknown age (a .68 caliber musket and a .50 smoothrifle), but I keep loads in those pretty tame, and I think it may indicate a certain lack of trust that neither is my favorite gun to take out.
I test-fire every gun I build -- obviously the ones I'm going to keep, but also the ones built for others. They get a target with five to ten shots fired at it, with the range at which it was fired written in one corner. This demonstrates two things: the gun is safe with reasonable loads, and if the new owner can't hit anything it ain't the gun's fault.
I did do the remote-fire thing with a .30-06 barrelled action, just recently, using a string to trip the trigger while I courageously hid around the corner of a shed. I can disassemble a muzzleloader and note things like rusted or worn breech threads, visible bulges, overall shabby condition, etc (which is not to say I can spot every potential flaw -- just that I can spot some of the more obvious), and if I'm the one who puts it back together, or builds it to begin with, I feel safe enough shooting it. The pressures involved with the '06 and the fact that I was dealing with a 1943 Mauser action caused me to decide to exercise a bit more caution than usual. Those things are just so finicky about little details like the heat-treating of the receiver ring....
I firmly believe that there is no such thing as too much safety, and if what someone else considers "excessive" measures of caution are what make you feel safe, go for it. By telling you otherwise I would be implying that on some level I'm willing to have your life and health in my hands, and the harm done to you on my conscience if it turns out I was wrong. I refuse to take the "thou shalt --" tone in giving advice, for the simple reason that once, long ago, when no one was looking, I made a mistake. Having thus disqualified myself from perfection, I forfeited the right to tell anyone what they absolutely, positively should or should not do.
I subscribe to the theory that loads far in excess of any recommended or reasonable maximum, in a modern barrel, are more likely to damage the tube than to reveal a hidden flaw. Just my opinion, no facts or figures to back it up, and you're free to do as you think is best -- but I won't stress a barrel that way. I do have two guns built around original barrels of unknown age (a .68 caliber musket and a .50 smoothrifle), but I keep loads in those pretty tame, and I think it may indicate a certain lack of trust that neither is my favorite gun to take out.
I test-fire every gun I build -- obviously the ones I'm going to keep, but also the ones built for others. They get a target with five to ten shots fired at it, with the range at which it was fired written in one corner. This demonstrates two things: the gun is safe with reasonable loads, and if the new owner can't hit anything it ain't the gun's fault.
I did do the remote-fire thing with a .30-06 barrelled action, just recently, using a string to trip the trigger while I courageously hid around the corner of a shed. I can disassemble a muzzleloader and note things like rusted or worn breech threads, visible bulges, overall shabby condition, etc (which is not to say I can spot every potential flaw -- just that I can spot some of the more obvious), and if I'm the one who puts it back together, or builds it to begin with, I feel safe enough shooting it. The pressures involved with the '06 and the fact that I was dealing with a 1943 Mauser action caused me to decide to exercise a bit more caution than usual. Those things are just so finicky about little details like the heat-treating of the receiver ring....
I firmly believe that there is no such thing as too much safety, and if what someone else considers "excessive" measures of caution are what make you feel safe, go for it. By telling you otherwise I would be implying that on some level I'm willing to have your life and health in my hands, and the harm done to you on my conscience if it turns out I was wrong. I refuse to take the "thou shalt --" tone in giving advice, for the simple reason that once, long ago, when no one was looking, I made a mistake. Having thus disqualified myself from perfection, I forfeited the right to tell anyone what they absolutely, positively should or should not do.
