What to say!

[CINDERS]

I posted this on another forum which Patrick Chadwick indicated I should move to here so as I may get the correct course of action.
As always I appreciate the replies of the members here.

The question;

A well respected gun writer here has just brought in some new measurements for the H/S limits for the 303 cartridge.
He has done allot for the sport of shooting and is quite knowledgeable but I find the information he has given on the matter a bit well out there.
He is talking about reloading for the 303 and the article is quite good right up until you get to this bit;

He explains how the Lee headspaces which is fine but then goes on to say;
.064" Minimum (Fine), .074" Normal Maximum (Not sure here as this should be No GO right there) then this one .098" (No Go Gauge) Wartime Maximum?

I thought there was an EYO of .078 like you were being overun and these were the only rifles left in the rack of wherever but .098 may be a bit much I stand to be corrected on my understanding of this.

Personnally I would rather go on what advice I get here and may drop this person a line that although well intentioned his reasoning may be I think the correct figures need to be stated otherwise someone will say yep at a .074 H/S I can shoot the ol' 303 with not too much concern as they did as it is the normal maximum.

Any advice on this one gents so I can get the correct information to the person concerned.............what would you do!

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.

[browningautorifle]

Why don't you just PM him? I expect he'll see it here shortly...

[Baal]

I'm not sure what info you're looking for.

If it's about the 0.098", I call typo.

Or is it about whether 0.074" is safe to shoot?

[CINDERS]

I am trying not to flood him Jim as I am sure given his knowledge he would receive a zillion PM's requesting information, besides if it has visibility others may learn from the info just like I and other newbies do........

---------- Post added at 09:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:40 AM ----------

Hi Baal,
Nope its the .098 just getting clarification on the .078 "Emergency Use Only" the .074 is well known as the "No Go"

[Peter Laidler]

On the other hand, you could just stick to what you know, what the designers decided was best, what it was made to accommodate and what is known to work - in the mechanical sense. Let me think................ Mmmmmmmmm I'd say that you HAVE to have a min and max spec here due to the complexities of tolerance and firing pin protrusion tolerance HAS to come into the mix. So on that basis I would go .064" CHS must close - so GO and plus .010" and say .074" must NOT close....., so we'll call that NO-GO. There it is. .064": GO and .074" NO-go!

If a rifle needs a larger bolt head size to fit into these specs, it is ZF. There was no emergency spec after the emergency was over.

[CINDERS]

So just to clarify Peter understanding the Min-Max tolerances is fine but am I understanding there was never .078" EYO at all I ask as this is the right thing to do before I tactfully alert the writer politely of possible inaccurate information contained in the article and if I may use your name and experience as my reference source I am not trying to start a war but just getting the right message out there.
The .074 was a No shoot measurement there being nothing other than these 2 measurements anything above the latter as you said was ZF'ed.
Appreciate your time to reply.

[Peter Laidler]

The TROUBLE is there was no officlal .078 spec CHS gauge for the rifle that I can see recorded after 1945....... when the emergency was over. END of story! Think about it and .078 would be(?) the size of bolthead IF there were a No4. A No4 size bolt head is something that I have never seen except on this forum, never used in the UK MIlitary and was never available from Ordnance. On that basis, a .078" CHS was only a factory relaxation so far as I can ascertain*. Extensive field, engineering and manufacturing trials were carried out in the 60's to ascertain whether there could be a relaxation in the specification. But it was proven beyond doubt that if a rifle could not CHS betwen those specs, the locking shoulder hardness had failed. That is FAILED as opposed to the body 'stretching' (it doesn't). Just my opinion as a bit part amateur of course, based on nothing more than a bit of experience really. Can't comment further as this is all 3rd hand
*there was a 00 size bolthead for 41x(XL-Colin, correct this figure ?) L39's and L42 during manufacture in order to utilise otherwise perfectly serviceable but tight barrels

Another thing the person ought to take into account is that if he pontificates about this that and the other and it goes pear shaped. Can't comment further as this is all 3rd hand.

[30Three]

Let's face it. The correct spec' is the only spec'!
It's a safety issue so should not be messed with.

[CINDERS]

Sent them my concerns will update once they reply Thanks Peter, Jim & Baal.

[CINDERS]

Had a call from the author in person explained the situation as to what I considered misinformation that may catch an unwary person and well that's about as far as it went, there was no movement of clarifying the .074 "Wartime Maximum" and not saying anything instead of saying if it closes on a .074 it is dire for that rifle and is classified as a No Go.
They also stated about fitting a new bolt head to which I explained as I have learned here that if that is the case then there is more to it than just another bolt head as there are Helical lock ups on the bolt (Bruce in Oz posted that term/information) so you just cannot slap one one, I also said that it may be a case the receivers hard facing where the lugs contact may have failed and this is why the head space is out of spec.

Anyway I have done what I thought was the correct thing may get shot to pieces but when I read the figures stated I said oops!
On lighter note he knew neither Captain Peter Laidler nor Ian Skennerton as I mentioned these two names and got the deer in the headlights response and here is a writer/hunter/shooter I have been reading his articles for 50 years!!!!!!!