|
Post by hemicuda on Mar 11, 2015 11:33:04 GMT -5
Back to testing-I love it. Didn't think I would ever see it here. That was so worth it, always wondered how much these barrels and breech plugs could take! With that said 5/8-18 is my pick for breech plug thread. Test that with a 9/16 plug and I doubt if there will be appreciable difference. I make my own; also agree with 'edge' that they seal in front. Plus with a good fitting thread and never-seize the threads seal as well. If the nose doesn't touch you will have flame cutting. IMHO. Again thanks for the test!
|
|
|
Post by Savage Shooter on Mar 11, 2015 12:16:28 GMT -5
WOW!!
|
|
|
Post by Mid_Tn_Plowboy on Mar 11, 2015 15:49:08 GMT -5
I use tape so the BP doesn't seize. Never gave it helping hold pressure a second thought. Don't know how it could as it's so d**n fragile fresh off the roll. Thats why I swapped to tape. It sealed and came loose well with me just using antiseize. But building my first custom MLII I am happy with my first Savage of any kind.
|
|
|
Post by Mid_Tn_Plowboy on Mar 11, 2015 15:52:42 GMT -5
And it acts the same with either method for me. As long as the tape is wrapped some what lightly. To much and I blew a primers center out.
|
|
|
Post by rangeball on Mar 11, 2015 16:02:28 GMT -5
Wrapping with too much tape cause a primer failure? Was your load to much and the tape prevented leakage or something?
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Mar 11, 2015 16:15:04 GMT -5
Hank..........actually I was using the tape as an anti-seize as Rangeball had indicated. I actually just mentioned this to Cole as far as the plug fit. The plugs have a very loose fit if you put them in dry. Cole indicated the tap he used and the type of thread fit. When I remove the PN barrel, I tried a clean plug with no tape in it and got that same loose feeling............So yes, I would guess pressure could slip by. If it was up to me, the plug would have a much tighter thread fit to start with\. Cole...........Yes, the shiny contact was around 1/3 of the outside circumference. Meaning the shoulder of the plug and the shoulder inside the barrel were not square to one another. Richard
|
|
|
Post by greenhornet1 on Mar 11, 2015 23:49:20 GMT -5
Another question, if we wanted to change to this plug can we have the barrel re threaded to accept this plug, so we can do away with the savage plug if we choose too? It seems possible. You would likely have to cut the breech end off and rethread the inside and outside.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 8:08:14 GMT -5
Another question, if we wanted to change to this plug can we have the barrel re threaded to accept this plug, so we can do away with the savage plug if we choose too? It seems possible. You would likely have to cut the breech end off and rethread the inside and outside. 12ptdroptine did it I think. And I just did it on a .416 barrel. Just as long as the barrel shank has enough metal on it to thread, you are good to go.
|
|
|
Post by edge on Mar 12, 2015 8:17:24 GMT -5
SNIP. HIS
Arrowhead Plug:
I had erroneously assumed from these pictures that what looks to be a Savage type snout ( which goes into the bore and acts as the first seal ), and after a PM with Luke and watching hankins video I now know that is not the case. So I will amend my comment about them both sealing at the front. The Savage plug seals on the snout, shoulder and threads and this and hankins primary seal is the rear with the threads as a minor secondary seal. That is what happens when you assume edge.
|
|
|
Post by ET on Mar 12, 2015 12:04:06 GMT -5
What I find interesting between the two rear seal plugs is that one has a longer unthreaded snout. I imagine this longer snout extends past any thread cuts exposed in the bore. Without getting another debate going on I will say that if I chose to have a rear seal plug it would definitely be with the longer snout covering any thread cuts exposed directly to the oncoming direction of bore pressure.
Ed
|
|
|
Post by airborneike on Mar 12, 2015 12:44:55 GMT -5
ET,
The only reason the snout is on Lukes plug is to make it easier to install into the threads at the rear of the barrel.
The plug would work fine without the snout
Mike
|
|
|
Post by ET on Mar 12, 2015 13:55:54 GMT -5
ET, The only reason the snout is on Lukes plug is to make it easier to install into the threads at the rear of the barrel. The plug would work fine without the snout Mike Of course the plug will work fine for its intended purpose but it’s not the plug my focus was on. Open stress risers created by thread cuts in the bore doesn’t make me comfortable in any way. Granted if this area is inside the receiver where additional surrounding metal is had for support would be a good point. By extending a snout over any thread cuts would force the flow of pressure to change course/alter direction to access any thread cut areas. Don’t get me wrong because I think the rear seal design is a good step in the right direction but leaving unprotected thread cuts in the bore could possibly create another problem down the road IMO when using high pressure loads that are becoming more popular. You will not probably see any immediate signs with this new approach but cycle stout pressure repeatedly over a period of time may be another story. Ed
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 16:00:07 GMT -5
Ed I don't think your concern is anything to be concerned about. Jeffs plugs have had thousands of rounds fired with no problems and Lukes, a good many as well. where you run into problems is when the snout is very close to surrounding metal, then gas cutting can occur but there is clearance on the front and the sides, no issues.. and there is no where for the gas to escape, in order for gas cutting to occur there has to be a path for the gas to follow, no path, no cutting...
|
|
|
Post by ET on Mar 12, 2015 18:51:49 GMT -5
HillBill
With all due respect I made no mention of gas cutting because you are right there is no condition for it to act on. The snout has nothing to do with the gas cutting as it only directs gas flow. The sealing surface trying to contain the hot gas pressure from entering into an area with less pressure is what gets attacked and drilled through. I’m talking about direct impact pressure to exposed thread cut areas. A snout covering this area would not allow direct impact from pressure.
I’ve spoke my concern of a possible condition than can be reduced with the aid of snout coverage as seen with one of the rear seal plugs. Those that feel comfortable and want to go ahead with this design with exposed cuts in the bore be my guest and I’ll say no more.
Ed
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 18:56:56 GMT -5
Ed, Dave W's ruger no1 had 3600 shots on it with completely exposed threads that extended in front of the plug. These threads showed no deformation whatsoever and he shot stout loads regularly with it. It was a 1.130 contour so thinner than most and no issue. This idea is a non issue I can assure you. I've seen it firsthand not just pondered the idea. Luke's plug is great progress, please don't try to make it sound over technical and unsafe.
|
|
|
Post by ET on Mar 12, 2015 19:28:56 GMT -5
Myers129
I really enjoy people putting words in my mouth and would like to know where I said it was proven unsafe? I only expressed a possible concern and my reasoning why. If you consider this as an unnecessary practice to take all factors into consideration then good luck with any future endeavors.
By the way did you do a dye check or mag particle test on the exposed threads in DW’s exposed bore to verify no development of possible micro cracks starting in the thread depths? In industry they have NDT to cover what the eyes don’t normally pick up on. If all you’ve done is a visual then I don’t buy your assessment.
Ed
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 19:47:12 GMT -5
Ed, just please don't try to cause fear in a new design. It will work fine.....forever.
|
|
|
Post by ET on Mar 12, 2015 20:25:21 GMT -5
Myers129
There is no intent to cause fear but awareness of a possible condition that could be easily remedied IMO. The new design for rear seal and adapting to 209 primer is a great idea in my book but that’s as far as I’ll go with supporting comments of this design.
Ed
|
|
|
Post by lwh723 on Mar 12, 2015 20:48:17 GMT -5
ET, The "snout" cut you're proposing would end in a 90degree cut fully exposed to chamber pressure. A 90* cut is just as much of a stress riser (if not more) than some exposed threads. Also, please provide supporting calculations for how much a 90* turn (with no interference) is really going to lower pressure to exposed threads? Until you can provide actual calculations, you're just making conjectures.
|
|
|
Post by ET on Mar 12, 2015 21:16:23 GMT -5
Lwh723
You’re short snout is fully exposed to bore pressure, so how does a 90-degree cut figure into this at all if the snout is extended? No calculation application here. I never mentioned any lowering of pressure but directing pressure flow to reduce initial impact.
You’re trying to write my comments off as conjecture where your response sounds like nothing more than a guess at what is happening here. If you’re trying to discredit me to push a new design to sell you need to convince potential buyers and not swaying me of its integrity.
Ed
|
|
|
Post by lwh723 on Mar 12, 2015 21:21:03 GMT -5
Lwh723 You’re short snout is fully exposed to bore pressure, so how does a 90-degree cut figure into this at all if the snout is extended? No calculation application here. I never mentioned any lowering of pressure but directing pressure flow to reduce initial impact. You’re trying to write my comments off as conjecture where your response sounds like nothing more than a guess at what is happening here. If you’re trying to discredit me to push a new design to sell you need to convince potential buyers and not swaying me of its integrity. Ed Ed, You better draw me a picture, because I for the life of me can't understand what you're trying to say.
|
|
|
Post by lwh723 on Mar 12, 2015 21:24:57 GMT -5
The plug shown above with the snout has a snout that is a much larger diameter than than the bore as it's a 5/8" bolt. That snout is going to end with a 90* termination at the front of the plug. That's the 90* cut I'm making reference too. Additionally, the savage plug we've been using for years in the 45cal build has a nose that requires a 1/2" cut to fit also resulting in a 90* determination.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 21:32:44 GMT -5
I don't have a schematic with the plug installed but the .500 cut at 1.897 is deeper than the plug can go by design. This in a way gives you the same as a rather deep square root thread.
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Mar 12, 2015 21:39:53 GMT -5
ET...............If the design works and has been working then what is the problem? The proof is in the pudding...as they say? Richard
|
|
|
Post by ET on Mar 12, 2015 22:02:55 GMT -5
The plug shown above with the snout has a snout that is a much larger diameter than than the bore as it's a 5/8" bolt. That snout is going to end with a 90* termination at the front of the plug. That's the 90* cut I'm making reference too. Additionally, the savage plug we've been using for years in the 45cal build has a nose that requires a 1/2" cut to fit also resulting in a 90* determination. Lwh723 In a bore pressure is generated in all directions impacting on the walls of the bore full force. Anything exposed like cut threads is going to take the brunt of it also. Now if the pressure flow is forced to follow a path along the snout and bore it no longer is directed at the thread cuts if the thread cuts are partially shielded from the initial generation of bore pressure force. It will still see the full pressure. Don’t know how I can make it any simpler to understand. Ed
|
|
|
Post by ET on Mar 12, 2015 22:18:10 GMT -5
Richard
Never said a major problem existed but a possible concern, big difference. As I’ve also said if you are comfortable with this design then be my guest and employ it.
Ed
|
|
|
Post by lwh723 on Mar 12, 2015 22:22:34 GMT -5
The plug shown above with the snout has a snout that is a much larger diameter than than the bore as it's a 5/8" bolt. That snout is going to end with a 90* termination at the front of the plug. That's the 90* cut I'm making reference too. Additionally, the savage plug we've been using for years in the 45cal build has a nose that requires a 1/2" cut to fit also resulting in a 90* determination. Lwh723 In a bore pressure is generated in all directions impacting on the walls of the bore full force. Anything exposed like cut threads is going to take the brunt of it also. Now if the pressure flow is forced to follow a path along the snout and bore it no longer is directed at the thread cuts if the thread cuts are partially shielded from the initial generation of bore pressure force. It will still see the full pressure. Don’t know how I can make it any simpler to understand. Ed Still waiting for a picture of your "simple" fix. You're going to end up with a right angle cut fully exposed no matter what.
|
|
|
Post by airborneike on Mar 12, 2015 22:27:01 GMT -5
The arrowhead plug is installed by reaming a .500 x1.875 hole into the rear of the barrel then threading 9/16 x 18 with an h3 tap...not much larger than the .458 bore and yes there is a small 45 degree cut line at the terminance of the reamed bore and a 30 degree line at the thread end.
The .703 bore at the end of the barrel for .500 approx has little or no pressure moment.
The only thing to do is inspect a barrel after many shots with a borescope to see if there are any signs of adverse wear at the end of the threads.
This plug calls for a very small amount of metal to be removed for installation and therefore has to add to the strength of the breech area ......9/16 major dia.= .561 .............5/8 major dia = .623 11/16 major dia =.685
Yes a thread line is a possible fracture line but that is partly why Luke ran the VERY high pressure tests to demonstrate the safety of the system. If there are problems, they will show up over time and I hope no one loads 200 grains of H4198 as a standard load...unless they want to break their shoulder.
Everyones input into this endeavor is welcomed because no one person has all the answers...Luke has put "due diligence" into this product with what I would call very good testing to make sure this product not only works but is safe for everyone to use.
Mike
|
|
|
Post by ET on Mar 12, 2015 23:50:07 GMT -5
Airborneike
Your description provides a good overall view. The 45-degree cut line at the end would not raise any questions with me. My question would be how many thread cuts would exceed past the short snout on this breech plug?
I don’t question anyone’s endeavor to help make this a safe plug and reassuring follow-up inspections will keep an eye out for anything that may appear detrimental.
Lwh723
Have you considered cutting back a few threads on the plug to generate a longer snout and not cutting the threads so deep in the barrel?
Ed
|
|
|
Post by hankinsrfls on Mar 13, 2015 1:03:48 GMT -5
Here is my 2 cents worth and my opinion, it is from what I have learned over the years. Below you will see a picture of two breech plugs. The one on the left is my original plug with a long snout of .300.. The one on the right is the plug that I use now and is the exact same except I eliminated the snout completely. Now I can see Ed's point in saying the exposed threaded portion of the barrel will result in a lower bursting point, and this is true, it does, But it is such a small little difference that we shouldn't even take it into consideration for our uses. If the barrel was made from PVC plastic or some weak material and you were subjecting it close to bursting pressures then yes maybe it should be addressed, but in the rifle barrel I do not think we have any thing to worry about. The snout just takes up extra room and really serves no useful purpose, It just makes the plug longer than it needs to be and forces you to drill a deaper hole into the barrel in order to install it. Plus it you are adding a powder chamber you will most likely drill the tape hole diameter much deeper anyway so it don't make a difference if you have a snout or not. I completely eliminated the snout on my plug, it will retro fit to all the rifles I have built over the years and It has been done in several so if someone needs a replacement plug, this is the one they will be getting. Luke's plug will seal, with out a doubt. It will never get blown out the breech end and I personally think it was well thought out... Lets think of our new major milestone to cross,,, What's next. Thanks Jeff Hankins..
|
|