Inherent Weakness ?

[Dimitri]

Simply put the design was adequately strong for the intended purpose.

That is the point me and Ed are trying to make nothing more.

No one has produced credentials showing degrees in Metallurgy and the engineering of firearms which I would consider as the minimum required to make a post in this thread and speak with authority.

I went to college for Tool and Die, and learned both in school and at work about the properties of metal, heat treatment and the selection of proper materials for the job and the abilities for metals to withstand excessive forces that they were not designed to do if that counts.

I say the 4% or so difference in pressure between the No.4 chambered in 303 British and the 308Win is not enough to worry about it. Actually its so trivial that if I was to mention this to anyone I know with decades of experience working with the properties of materials that they'd tell me I'm a idiot. Not a personal insult to anyone, just a fact. No design is within 4% of breaking or failing.

Now I ask again , would any here load .303 ammunition to 62,000 PSI and sell it as safe for use in No.4 rifles?

No one would, that is being stupid, look at your reloading manuals I doubt any 308Win max load will reach 55,000PSI. Now look at that same reloading manual where the Winchester Short/Super Short Mags and the Ultra Mags are listed as 62,000PSI loads.

Dimitri