varmint243
Member
- Joined
- May 22, 2012
- Messages
- 516
- Reaction score
- 372
a bulged barrel doesn't necessarily cause problems
load up some target loads and see how it shoots
load up some target loads and see how it shoots
5 screw disaster! a sad story...
- Thread starter blk_vctr
- Start date
DWalt
Member
As others have said, you must shoot it to see if the bulges have affected grouping. Perhaps the closest-shooting .22 rifle I owned sported a visible bulge about 2" behind the muzzle (my fault, mud in the barrel). If there's no bulge at the muzzle, it may shoot fine.
Last edited:
Absalom
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
Obviously, since all three bullets stuck solid in the barrel, the OP's friend was using some not very high-pressure ammunition. Not only did the initial bullet stick, it then got hammered twice more without damaging the barrel in any externally visible way.
Still, this scenario is not the same as a barrel bulge due to mud or some other at least semi-viscous substance in the barrel. This was like firing a gun with a solid barrel plug. Twice after the first bullet stuck.
I don't begrudge anyone their wonderful experiences with bulged barrels, but I would not fire any modern ammo out of that gun like this, not because of accuracy, but basic structural integrity. Feel free to call me over-cautious.
Still, this scenario is not the same as a barrel bulge due to mud or some other at least semi-viscous substance in the barrel. This was like firing a gun with a solid barrel plug. Twice after the first bullet stuck.
I don't begrudge anyone their wonderful experiences with bulged barrels, but I would not fire any modern ammo out of that gun like this, not because of accuracy, but basic structural integrity. Feel free to call me over-cautious.
I too would not worry about the bulged barrel. This was most likely very old ammo that had deteriorated or reloads where someone undercharged the cases. There is room between the barrel and the cylinder face to allow pressure to escape so you are not looking at what happens to a piece of pipe used to make a pipe bomb.
Check the barrel for any signs of cracking using a glass and if the steel looks unharmed, I would have no fear shooting lead rounds out of it. I certainly wouldn't suggest +P+ like some folks like but standard velocity rounds should not be an issue.
Check the barrel for any signs of cracking using a glass and if the steel looks unharmed, I would have no fear shooting lead rounds out of it. I certainly wouldn't suggest +P+ like some folks like but standard velocity rounds should not be an issue.
DWalt
Member
At one time, about 15 years ago, I did some controlled safety tests to determine barrel bursting conditions using the M9 (Beretta 92) pistol in 9mm. I never could get the barrel to rupture, no matter what I did using even extreme 9mm (M885) overloads and the bore plugged with a bullet in several locations (ahead of the chamber, midpoint, and at the muzzle). I had an essentially unlimited supply of condemned M9s and barrels to work with. I got lots of barrel bulges, some quite large, and even some deformed slides, but nothing that would harm the firer. Everything went out the muzzle. The M9 is a tough pistol, no doubt about it. In the case of a revolver, you indeed have a built-in pressure relief opening.
Absalom
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
While I don't doubt the validity of DWalt's testing, an M&P barrel from the early 1920s is not the same as M9 barrels from the 1980s or later.
I think the OP will likely be fine shooting his gun, but I am still not comfortable with the level of certainty with which some contributors here are making safety judgments about a gun they have not seen and examined, and are telling the OP not to worry and to give it a rip.
I'm going to conclude my participation in this thread by repeating my recommendation that this gun should not be put back into regular use without having it checked by a competent gunsmith.
I think the OP will likely be fine shooting his gun, but I am still not comfortable with the level of certainty with which some contributors here are making safety judgments about a gun they have not seen and examined, and are telling the OP not to worry and to give it a rip.
I'm going to conclude my participation in this thread by repeating my recommendation that this gun should not be put back into regular use without having it checked by a competent gunsmith.
