tubing for barrels

[jamesthomas]

Just got off the phone with Dehaas barrels and they use 12L14 with .12 grooves, 6 groove 6 land barrel.

 

[mikemeteor]

no argument there.
As noted, I was passing along a post from someone else, posted on a different forum this summer.
As with any info on the internet, it should not be taken as gospel, pigeonhole, or otherwise restraining.
Zonie - could you strike my post above - I shouldn't have copied it over.
thanks,
mike

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Many years back, From Numrich, I acquired some 410 shotgun "liners" meant for smokeless powder gun construction. I was surprised to find they each had a bluish seam/weld line down the side.
I refused to use them for anything with real powder, but made an interesting pea shooter out of one and an old trumpet mouth piece.

I was also given a piece of high pressure seamless steam pipe left over from a rail road steam engine rebuild done at the westinghouse rolling stock plant in West Chester PA. The machinist claimed it was good to over 100,000 psi. I was tempted to use it a few times, until another machinist told me that some such steam pipe has "work hardening" issues and can become brittle. That convinced me not to "re-purpose" unknown metals for muzzle loading barrels.

I do not know whether either piece would be safe for black powder. No sense risking life and limb on such items.

 

[razorbritches]

To help my understanding regardless whether we use tube or drilled, the ductility of the steel involved, and it's ability to resist work hardening seem to be very important. Can anyone verify this? Laffindog is right there is a whole lot of generalization and pigeonholing going on. We need facts to help us all understand.

 

[DickS]

For what it is worth, in Britain during WW2, thousands upon thousands of tubing barrels with cold formed rifling were used in 9mm Sten guns, .303 No. 4 Lee Enfield rifles, and .303 Vickers medium machineguns. The No. 4 barrels were eventually withdrawn because it was observed that the tube sometimes worked loose in the pressed and pinned breech sleeve which carried the shoulder and threads. The Sten and Vickers barrels were retained in service.

Something else to consider is the presence of cuts and notches in a barrel. Sight and lug dovetails. These create stress points.

Those of us of riper years no doubt remember the ongoing discussion of barrel steels in John Baird's The Buckskin Report. I seem to recall that he had no use for leaded steel barrels, and published photos of a number of burst ones.

 

i would sure like to see some pictures of failed barrels, particularly those made of DOM or similar tube that was not drilled stock.

now again i am new here, and have spent some time reading a few posts, and i am amazed at some of the black powder loads folks are using. everything from 58cal 1" barrels and 120 grains to well over 200 grains of both fffg and ffg

wth? 150 to 200 plus grains fffg in a 58cal 1" barrel?

then there seems to be some debate on volumetric measure vs weight of the powder? going by weight and then going to high levels of FFFg seems like quite a test for even the best of barrels?

what am i missing here?

has anyone personally witnesses or seen the aftermath of a dom barrel such as one made of 1" od x .50 id? finished and rifled for 50cal or maybe 54, that catastrophically failed due to common sane loads of ffg or equivalent?

the reason i ask is this, for many years i did welding of various materials everything from cast iron to aluminum, and all sorts of steels.

any quality weld done to steel of good quality should be able to be dissected by a saw and one should not be able to tell the parent metal from the filler. a quality weld should be everybit as strong as the parent metal and there should be no reason to have a failure in the weld zone.

now take this welded part and work the part through a set of dies and the metal structure should be further improved to the point that it ought to be the same strength as the same part machined out of a solid round bar?

is it possible that some of the reported failures of barrels made of dom, were the result of cheap tubing, or maybe the use of something other than black powder, or maybe some other stress riser problem linked to the machining of the barrel?

it just seems like with the jury split on this topic, and given the www/youtube/forums , we would have pictures of dom barrels blown all to bits and easily found with a google search?

lots of questions, looking for answers

bob g

 

[jerrywh]

in reaponse to lifindog.
Joe williams uses 12L14 I asked him personally.

 

[razorbritches]

I would like to see these failed barrels too, not just the tube barrels but the drilled ones as well. If we are going to learn about one we might as well learn about the other.

 

[schloss]

i would sure like to see some pictures of failed barrels, particularly those made of DOM or similar tube that was not drilled stock.

the reason i ask is this, for many years i did welding of various materials everything from cast iron to aluminum, and all sorts of steels.

any quality weld done to steel of good quality should be able to be dissected by a saw and one should not be able to tell the parent metal from the filler. a quality weld should be everybit as strong as the parent metal and there should be no reason to have a failure in the weld zone.

now take this welded part and work the part through a set of dies and the metal structure should be further improved to the point that it ought to be the same strength as the same part machined out of a solid round bar?

is it possible that some of the reported failures of barrels made of dom, were the result of cheap tubing, or maybe the use of something other than black powder, or maybe some other stress riser problem linked to the machining of the barrel?

it just seems like with the jury split on this topic, and given the www/youtube/forums , we would have pictures of dom barrels blown all to bits and easily found with a google search?

lots of questions, looking for answers

bob g

Yeah, I don't think we'll get answers to the questions you're asking, Bob. It's the exact answers that we are all asking on this topic. All I have ever "seen" is recommendations to not use dom, with some people throwing insults and accusations of stupidity at those that ask the question. Fortunately, this thread has remained calm and sane.

Although you should be able to cut into any weld and find good solid material, I UT both machine welds and semi-auto welds, and I can find defects in both styles. The concern is that the machine welds could be inadequate, and no one would know. I'm sure you're familiar with the dom process - the actually drawing over mandrel is under enough force that any visible defects in the weld zone could be smeared shut.

But, I agree, I'd like to see some examples of destroyed dom barrels. I've never seen any. However, I don't think that lack of examples necessarily makes them safe, nor do I think that a few examples of them makes them safe. If you dig around enough, you can find plenty of examples of failed factory barrels, which I would have considered to be safe.

 

[jerrywh]

Personally, I don't need to see a man getting electrocuted to believe that I shouldn't put my finger in the light socket. for what motive would we lie about this subject.
If nobody believes the answers why ask to start with. Or why should anybody bother to answer.

 

bold assertions require equally bold proof

to simply state something is bad without providing some evidence to support the statement is not good science in anyone's book, save for maybe the AGW group.

if someone had first hand knowledge of such a failure, and came forth stating he not only had seen such a failure but was there when it happened, and was able to look over the aftermath, and determine that the failure point appeared to be related to the weld or perhaps it originated at the root of a rifling groove, or ...

at least that might be a good start!

so far all i see is its bad! period! end of discussion! and although no one has called me an idiot for asking yet, the hair on the back of my neck tells me it is coming.

so if no one has seen a busted dom barrel, has anyone seen a bulged dom barrel?

then again, perhaps we need to define DOM as being something with a minimum of .250" wall? and not something like a thin wall product?

please bear in mind guys i am not here trying to stir the pot or raise hate and discontent, i really am trying to learn by evidence not by anecdote.

thanks for everyone's patience

bob g

ps. should anyone feel the need to call me a bozo, please feel free to do so, i have very thick skin and have been called much worse. after all i have an exwife that would make any of you guys look like rank amateurs in that regard.

 

[schloss]

Personally, I don't need to see a man getting electrocuted to believe that I shouldn't put my finger in the light socket. for what motive would we lie about this subject.
If nobody believes the answers why ask to start with. Or why should anybody bother to answer.

I appreciate the logic in that, Jerry, but the reason we know not to grab bare wires is the number of people that have died, and continue to die from that. I still don't see how that addresses the strength or weakness of dom tubing for use in barrels. Problem is, there is no guarantee of detonation if using dom for a barrel. If you're properly grounded, and you grab a hot wire, you're guaranteed electrocution. If you catch my logic.

At this point, I don't see any reason for me to use dom tubing for a barrel. Just so you all know where I stand. But I'd still like to know the real truth.

 

[schloss]

Bob, I see where you're coming from, and that's how most of these conversations usually end. I've been watching these topics for a few years now (I know others have watched much longer), and I've never seen any actual evidence. Only guesses, extrapolation, and accusation.

It might be safe, it could also be potentially dangerous. I personally believe that the general consensus is to stay on the safe side, and I can't blame anyone for taking that position, but it still doesn't get us to whether or not dom is safe. My current guess is that this thread will get no further.

However, I would like to see conclusive evidence on this topic.

 

[razorbritches]

Jerry, I don't want to say any of the pro or con opinions on this topic are lying. From what I can see everyone is giving his best opinion of what he believes is true. What I wanted when I opened this can-o-worms was not just the awnser, but to understand why. What particular properties of a steel make a good barrel, and how each one enhances performance/durability. With the proper understanding we can all make better decisions. Not long ago 12L14 took some bad press but reputable barrel makers still use it I want to understand why. Not just cause somebody said so but because I know what makes a good barrel.

 

[razorbritches]

Gentlemen

As the fellow who opened this topic I wish to thank all who contributed their time and experience to this subject. Rest assured it is appreciated. Although I did not get all my answers , and didn't learn enough to obtain the understanding I wanted, I did as always on this forum learn. I am still hunting answers and should I find them I will share them just as you have shared with me

So I intend to drop this topic till I learn more

RAZOR

 

[M. De Land]

I have read that he Charpy numbers of that alloy (12L14) are very low , which in practice (according to what I read) is supposed to be the shock ,hoop stress loading. It is supposed to be brittle at room temperature because of the cold drawn process. MD

 

hmmmm, brittle and gun barrel don't seem to be two terms one would want in the same sentence, let alone a gun?

and i don't think i would want any barrel made of a material that was brittle or viewed as being such from anywhere between -40F to 1000F

any thoughts on this?

i have seen tools with carbon content such as crowbars and pipe wrenches break cleanly from the shock of being dropped on a concrete floor in sub zero temperatures.

so i don' think i would want those sorts of steels in my barrel and then think about using the gun in sub zero temperatures.

that i could see being a pipe bomb of the worst kind, the fragments would be like shards of glass.

bob g

 

[rich pierce]

There are thousands of posts on barrel steels, some by metallurgists, some by folks who know a metallurgist or read something by one once. Strong assertions are common. Real data is lacking. Some go with "if anyone questions it, I won't use it." So they are stuck with unavailable barrels in "barrel steel" intended for centerfire rifles, and would never shoot an original double barrel percussion shotgun, with miles of welds in the Damascus steel barrels. Many now even refute proof testing!

 

[jamesthomas]

i have seen tools with carbon content such as crowbars and pipe wrenches break cleanly from the shock of being dropped on a concrete floor in sub zero temperatures.

so i don' think i would want those sorts of steels in my barrel and then think about using the gun in sub zero temperatures.

that i could see being a pipe bomb of the worst kind, the fragments would be like shards of glass.

bob g

Why would ANYONE be out hunting in sub-zero weather? No game of any type is going to be active in those conditions so why be out in it? I would think that any metal be it 12L14, 1137 or any other type of barrel steel would shatter in those conditions if exposed to it long enough. I will have a Dehaas barrel (12L14) on my .40 when it's done and will have total confidence in it when I take it out on the range or hunting. I also remember that the barrels are hot-rolled now which is better. I may be wrong but I think I'm right. :grin:

 

agreed, there is no way i would go out in sub zero weather to do anything other than maybe bring in more wood for the fire!

however, my thinking was maybe there are some folks either hardier than me, or more motivated by need, or live far enough north that subzero temps are the norm, or... all the above? maybe alaska or the nw territories?

the spec basically was to not only include those folks, but to provide a larger margin of safety.

if that makes sense?

bob g