• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Maggie’s Motivational Pic Thread v2.0 - - New Rules - See Post #1

FB_IMG_1603065345443.jpg
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Wow
Reactions: VargmatII, GhostFace, --BLACKOUT-- and 20 others
168BTHPM said:
Yes there are mods and Frank is getting ready to drop the hammer on everyone.
Click to expand...

besides the site getting bad publicity/heat for a poorly chosen post the largest issue seems to be used server space.

he should just purge everything on a rolling 12 months on this particular thread.

and lock every thread older than 2-3 years old.

gear and training techniques change so often that looking at “what scope is best” from 2012 and asking if a mk4 is better than a SB wastes bandwidth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mark338, Rant Durden, Flyingbullseye and 2 others
mgrs said:
@Maxwell

Generally, I have no problem firing 100+ year old firearms within their limitations.

This particular one is more complicated. As a 1906 production Rock Island, it falls well into the "Low Serial Number" batch of M1903 rifles. These rifles were/are famous for receivers bursting and bolts shattering lugs at a high rate (dozens of documented instances). This tendency is attributed to the 'old school' way they were heat-treated prior to ~1918, which involved expert craftsmen eyeballing the process and relying on their judgement.

No one really had any problems with it, or noticed into circa 1917-1918 when a couple intersecting problems magnified it- wartime production increased throughput with less attention applied to each gun, and more sub contractors were making ammunition, resulting in a lower average ammunition quality.

When the Ordnance Dept went back and applied pyrometers and 'science', they figured out the old eyeballing process resulted in heat treat temps of +/- 300F. Some receivers were just too hard, and brittle, as a result.

These receivers will generally hold if used properly, but will often shatter if: subjected to chamber pressures in excess of 70 000 PSI, a case head fails, or the receiver is stuck laterally with something hard. I suppose they could also crack when being rebarreled, although this seems to be more of a problem with M1917 rifles.

Back to the pictured gun, I'd probably be OK shooting it, but certainly would not push anything harder than M2 ball spec. That receiver has survived two rebarrels without cracking- first when the barrel was pulled and re-chambered to -06 spec, then again when it was re-barreled prior to WW1. Additionally, it has a later (1919) bolt that would have the proper treat and therefore not shear lugs.
Click to expand...

"high rate"...."dozens of documented instances".

High rate of "dozens" and we will be generous on that term dozens, out of a few million is not really a high rate. Plus some got "blown up" with proof loads well in excess of what anyone with half a brain could cram into a case even with modern RIFLE powders.....I am sure you could blow one up using pistol powder....hell I bet you could fill any rifle case up with pistol powder and do some pretty interesting things.

Everyone also leaves out these issues were known at the start of WWII and these rifles got issued to combat units and got used a great deal in the first few years of the war. I don't remember any reports of these things blowing up all over the place from the marines.

Yes it has happened, and after these guns got surplus sold out in the mid 40's they somehow managed to go through the 50's 60's 70's 80's and most the 90's before everyone one of the sub X# serial numbers should be hung on the wall.

We all take our changes, and really we are holding little pipe bombs in our hands when we play with these boom sticks. And we all can go out on the internets and find pics, videos, stories of this or that gun going kaboom. Usually these stories get passed on by people reading it somewhere else, not from personal experience.

(I) choose to shoot mine, (I) have decided the risk is low, I am not telling YOU what to do only what I do. If you choose to hang it on the wall fine, and there are plenty of them out there for sale that have a high number if that makes you FEEL better about shooting a 100+ year old gun good. All I am saying is that the number of guns that have failed vs. the number that has been made is pretty darn small.
 
Lol... funny stuff right there. But not near as funny as when a friend of mine shot a rabbit on Easter and then ran down the street through the neighborhood screaming "i got the Easter Bunny I got the Easter Bunny" needless to say the parents we're not amused stop.. Well most, some were laughing.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 22Hshots, hermosabeach, wh20crazy and 1 other person
rjacobs said:
Ive jumped off a 10m platform before into a 25' deep pool with a bubbler system... I went straight to the bottom and didnt think I would make it back up before i took a breath... And it hurt when I hit the water.

This looks higher than 10m and no bubbler... FUCK that...
Click to expand...
That's almost i.possible to do. At the dive school we had a 10m dive board on our 40' pool. You might make 10-15' deep, but buoyancy wont let you go to the bottom. Unless you are wearing a lot of weight belts....

Doc
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anb618
I wondered too Doc.

I have jumped off a lot of cliffs (several over 50’) into cold lakes and rivers snd just thought it was fun.

For sure have made the 15’ or a bit more down. But I kept as a pencil and didnt go arms and legs out once I hit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rjacobs and Jscb1b
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lowlight
  • Locked
  • Sticky
2021 Sniper's Hide Forum Rules
Replies
0
Views
35K
Lowlight
Lowlight
Lowlight
All of Facebook's Banned Content in One Place
Replies
47
Views
13K
BAMAboy18
BAMAboy18
Lowlight
Forum Rules
Replies
9
Views
11K
MK75
M
Top Bottom
Back