Are you sure it is justthat you are broke and not that your BPI barrelexploded andblindedyou? LOL.

I guess that I am just a wimp. Anything over 100 grains of loose 777 or 110 grains of pyrodex makes me flinch too much and leaves my shoulder sore the next day. But to each his own, I only shoot open sights out to 100 yards, so why would I need more? I realize that I am in the minority though. Most people use scopes and push the limits of their gun. Fine by me.

And maybe I am just naive, but I guess I would figure if what some prominent people were saying publically about guns blowing up was not true, why wouldn't those companies be suing the pants off those people. I'm sure T/C or Knight would be all over someone stating "untruths" about their guns. Maybe it hasn't made any impact on sales so they justdon't give a damn, but it makes you wonder.

nope never been blinded by my bpi.. well blinded by the accuracy .

Broke as in, i got screwed over by a friend and had to pay for it with my own money which in turn was money for someone elses Huge package i have to ship off, in turn, means im about $70 short and really hurting. As of right now ive laid it down that i dont care how good of a friend they seem to be, to hell with them! [:@]

But to get back on subject, i found bpi's email very helpful to me. I may up my charge to 100 grains once i try out some 350 grain maxi balls and see how i do with them. Im good to go with 4 different bullets so far.

Dave, I feel the pain also (being spent out). But on a more serious note, a test or series of tests would be feasible if enough people pitched in. I don't think it would take a whole lot per each person if enough were really interested. One thing is for sure, you would be a good choice as the one to conduct testing in a safe manner applying proper scientific controls. If others wanted this test to take place and were willing to help with funding it, I also would participate giving my share. I think it would be great to answer the questions scientifically through experiments.

That may be right.A guy could start with small gaps and increase them maybe.

One could could design a whole series of tests actually, each designed to one-up the last, so that if a rifle failed, it could not continue to participate in the tougher tests.

Whoa....... reality TV, muzzleloader survival, Wisconsin......

I would say that the jury isn't necessarily out but because there have probably been settlements, I figure there were some "hold harmless" agreements arising from conditions of settlement.

One other thing to think about. For BPI to have a jury of "peers", they would need to be in Spain. Maybe Randy shouldn'ttan at the Costa del Sol or shop the Mercados of Valencia .

My Knight MK 85 will burn 120 grains of 3F Blackpowder in a high humiditry situation. I have to load a heavy bullet to get it to burn that much. The bullet weighs 525 grains. Tom.

120 grains powder/ 525 grain bullet = You got biggers balls than i do. or atleast a bigger shoulder . 120grains 3f! jeeez, you can keep that load all to yourself!lol

Pglasgow

Sorry about jumping in here so late... but I have been saying this for years now and it falls on deaf ears... If Randy wanted to make his case or the law firm that he works with - buy a BPI/CVA gun and send it to Browing (or Weatherby - I can not remember where Doc White sent his barrels to be tested)in Utah - have them proof the barrel to max... Problem solved. I have no idea of the cost, but it is only a phone call away. I actually think they (the law firm) probably have already done but it didn't come out as expected.

You and I testing a barrel doesn't mean a thing without the instruments needed to measure all the varibles. It has to be done professionaly.

But it is an easy solution to problem that has persisted in staying alive far to long.

Just 25 cents worth....

Another thing you need to remember, while Randy was shouting about CVA - A&H had exactly the same proof mark on their barrels, but he was a sokesman for them at that time, and trufully the 1" octogon portion of the A&H barrel was rated way beyond the proof mark. The proof mark is necessary to get the barrel out ofSpain to America - It is not the maximum that the barrel can shoot, it is a stamp set by House of Elbar, the higher the stamp the more oney it costs. The Spanish government set the minimum proof mark, not hte House of Elbar of BPI/CVA. BPI/CVA has to pay for the proof mark - the higher the proof mark the more it cost to test and ship... and gues what happens to the profit margin.

Well it would be best done that way, but do consider it possible that tests, (that you, I, or Dave might do), could have considerable meaning. For example, one could learn the most dangerous errors, one could learn, given identical errors, which rifles were able to withstand the pressures associated with that errorwithout damage. One could learn alot of things other than the specific pressures it takes to burst a barrel. One could find how much powder it takes to do it and just what kind of error it takes with that chargefor rupture to occur. One could learn if Spanish barrels "bulge faster" for example. There is an endless number of things which can be learned even though a proof pressure isn't determined.

I agree.

Sabotloader,
I have done some testing with proof loads significantly higher than the recommended loads for a sidelock CVA but I do not have the testing equipment or funds to buy it as the facilities you mentioned. I for one would be willing to contribute to a fund for doing the full blown testing you mentioned if someone could get a reasonable price that we could work toward. I already have invested maybe $100 or sodoing the testing I have already done and feel confident that the guns are more than safe within the recommended loading limits. But I also get tired of this subject coming up and being beat like the dead horse that it is (no pun intended). It would be nice to have an answer that proves one way or the other to point to.