Proof Firing

[bulldog_mack13]

So then if the barrel is good like im told by the people who have inspected it in person then the barrel would have been changed out at higher up and not at company or battalion level. Im learning something new with the info you guys are giving. Now was the Navy to the same specs. as the Army when it came ot all that? Gene said he was in the Navy and stamped barrels just like this one aboard ship.

On current note:
Being a Company armorer in 2008 we had a civi team come in and change barrels in my arms room on a few M4's but alot of 16A4's were changed up cleaned up by them.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Joe W]

So then if the barrel is good like im told by the people who have inspected it in person then the barrel would have been changed out at higher up and not at company or battalion level. Im learning something new with the info you guys are giving. Now was the Navy to the same specs. as the Army when it came ot all that? Gene said he was in the Navy and stamped barrels just like this one aboard ship.

On current note:
Being a Company armorer in 2008 we had a civi team come in and change barrels in my arms room on a few M4's but alot of 16A4's were changed up cleaned up by them.

Things are quite a bit different since the days of the M1 and the M14. As far as the Navy, I am pretty sure that they followed the same weapon repair specs as the Army and Marine Corps. Only place I know of that the Navy did 5th echlon repair would be Navy Rebuild Facility at Crane Indiana but I would guess there are others. Crane would be the Navys equivilent of the Marine Corps Logistics Bases at either Barstow Ca. or Albany Ga. I really don't see the Navy finding the need to change barrels while shipboard. They didn't use M1 rifles aboard ship other than maybe standing watch so the chance of wearing out a barrel seems pretty slim. I can't see M1 Garands having barrels changed and proof fired while aboard a ship. Just makes no sense to me.

[Bill Ricca]

The following are from Frankfort Arsenal Small Arms Ammunition Pamphlet 23-1, July 1967. Each round is designated as "Cartridge, Caliber__, Test, High Pressure, M_.

1. Caliber 5.56mm, M197, 70,000 plus/minus 3,000 psi., Ord. Part Number D10533839
2. Caliber .30 Carbine, M18, 47,500 plus/minus 2,500 psi., Ord. Part Number B6176267
3. Caliber .30, M1, 67,500 psi., Ord. Part Number B6016308
4. Caliber 7.62mm NATO, M60, 67,500 plus/minus 2,500 psi., Ord. Part Number C7553703
5. Caliber .45, M1, 22,000 psi., Ord. Part Number C6000502
6. Caliber .50, M1, 65,000 psi., Ord. Part Number C5544097
7. Caliber .50, Spotter, T251, 55,000 psi., Ord. Part Number D10534770

There are special powders used for high pressure test cartridges. The pressure alone is not sufficient. The cartridge pressure must have a certain pressure increase rate (known as pressure curve) which copies the standard cartridges, but with the higher level as specified.

[Ramboueille]

So then if the barrel is good like im told by the people who have inspected it in person then the barrel would have been changed out at higher up and not at company or battalion level. Im learning something new with the info you guys are giving. Now was the Navy to the same specs. as the Army when it came ot all that? Gene said he was in the Navy and stamped barrels just like this one aboard ship.

On current note:
Being a Company armorer in 2008 we had a civi team come in and change barrels in my arms room on a few M4's but alot of 16A4's were changed up cleaned up by them.

Jay,

The "P" mark is for a reason: Tested with a high pressure proof round. This is not done manually but in a firing fixture because of the danger involved. I know of no instances that the Navy has these aboard ships and they would have no reason to during WW2 . They weren't infantry units, they were maritime sailors. These firing fixtures are of the highest echelon equipment. This whole story does not contain any logic whatsoever. Please post any marks found under the rear handguard.

[DaveN]

Question, Why would someone go to the trouble of forging a barrel and leave off the most important stamp, the maker ie. SA,WRA, HRA, LMR,IHC. I know all are not WWII but you get my point. And I can't remember if IHC made barrels....oh I digress.

[Ramboueille]

Question, Why would someone go to the trouble of forging a barrel and leave off the most important stamp, the maker ie. SA,WRA, HRA, LMR,IHC. I know all are not WWII but you get my point. And I can't remember if IHC made barrels....oh I digress.

No one ever declared all fakers are Albert Einsteins. Strict Ordnance procedures are and always were to mark the drawing number and heat lot (Except WRA WW2 bbl heat lots). SA did this throughout, so did HRA , Marlin, Buffalo Arms and LMR. The dates weren't handstamped nor was the drawing number and barrel heat lot handstamped except by the fakers. A Photo of this proof lies under the rear handguard for SA WW2 barrels. If they are not there then this would be proof of what some of us already know: The barrel is a fake. Once one becomes dillilusioned and disbelieving, then the excuses become evident that what they have is an "exception." It's not. Forget the "story" that is always is offered or what some "expert" stated, just show the proof which in this case is quite easy to do.

[Bob Seijas]

The only IHC barrels are found on WARDORs