|
Post by bigbore5 on Jun 19, 2023 20:28:55 GMT -5
Hoorah for you if you do it! Machinist/toolmaker/gunsmith of 40 years here- spent my most recent career years in medical so 465 comes up regularly. I don’t mind milling, gundrilling etc, but everyone I know hates turning it. Am in virtual lockstep with Lee- 17-4 is good enough. I personally hate 416 and most other 400 series ss. I'm not a fan of 400's either. We do more 300's and 600's than anything. Alot of red brass too. Machines pretty but the noise will wear on your nerves after a week of that screaming.
|
|
|
Post by Lee Martin on Jun 20, 2023 7:22:15 GMT -5
Curious....what do you guys have against 416? Machines beautifully and is plenty strong at Rockwell 38 - 42. My first 5-shot .454 Casull conversion on a Ruger was out of 416. I can't tell you how much it's absorbed since I built it in 1996. -Lee www.singleactions.com"Chasing perfection five shots at a time"
|
|
|
Post by bula on Jun 20, 2023 8:09:21 GMT -5
WileCoyote, welcome to the forum. Enjoy, and just try keeping your wallet in your pocket, well, you can try ! The things pictured, discussed here are SO tempting. Single-action-wise, shooting and handloading in general, this is the deep end of the pool. There are always life guards on duty.
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Jun 20, 2023 8:16:49 GMT -5
My understanding, Ruger selected Carpenter 465 stainless steel to make a 6-shot .480 Ruger cylinder for the Redhawk/Super Redhawk. No one questions strength of the frame, which I believe is 416. To approach strength of the Redhawk frame, S&W gave its side-late design elephantine proportions; still it cannot match Redhawk strength. S&W wisely stuck to the 5-shot bolt pattern a.k.a. chamber layout. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Jun 20, 2023 8:35:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Lee Martin on Jun 20, 2023 8:53:01 GMT -5
465 has become all the rage. And no doubt, it's tough. But when the argument over this steel vs. that steel comes up, I always have to ask....."who shoots proof loads in their gun?". 4140, 416, 17-PH, etc, etc, can all withstand really high pressure. Back in the early 90's, I was testing loads in my .401 Bobcat using a 265 grain cast bullet. Like an idiot, I took new brass, poured too much Unique, and had to pound the brass out. Upon doing so, the primers FELL out of the pockets. Now the Bobcat is made on .220 Swift hulls. A round that works at 62,000 PSI. I'm sure to blow pockets on virgin brass, I was 80,000 PSI or higher. The 4140 held just fine. There's academic "what if's" and then there's common sense reality. We operate in the latter. Is it bad to use 465? Of course not, but none of us should take cartridges to where we need 250,000 ksi tensile strength. -Lee www.singleactions.com"Chasing perfection five shots at a time"
|
|
|
Post by RDW on Jun 20, 2023 9:27:52 GMT -5
465 has become all the rage. And no doubt, it's tough. But when the argument over this steel vs. that steel comes up, I always have to ask....."who shoots proof loads in their gun?". 4140, 416, 17-PH, etc, etc, can all withstand really high pressure. Back in the early 90's, I was testing loads in my .401 Bobcat using a 265 grain cast bullet. Like an idiot, I took new brass, poured too much Unique, and had to pound the brass out. Upon doing so, the primers FELL out of the pockets. Now the Bobcat is made on .220 Swift hulls. A round that works at 62,000 PSI. I'm sure to blow pockets on virgin brass, I was 80,000 PSI or higher. The 4140 held just fine. There's academic "what if's" and then there's common sense reality. We operate in the latter. Is it bad to use 465? Of course not, but none of us should take cartridges to where we need 250,000 ksi tensile strength. -Lee www.singleactions.com"Chasing perfection five shots at a time" I have one of the first Redhawks to grace Alvin Texas 1981. ( Walmart) in 85 it was converted to 454 Casull. Same cylinder, Different Barrel. I just rechambered it and it has gobbled up thousands of full power 2400 rounds in its lifetime. By the way, it is 416SS. ( Cylinder) I went to 17-4 because of the ease of heattreatability! I wonder if that is a real word. hahaha. R
|
|
|
Post by RDW on Jun 20, 2023 9:28:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Lee Martin on Jun 20, 2023 9:32:57 GMT -5
! I wonder if that is a real word. hahaha. R It's plenty real world Ronnie . Like you, I absolutely love 17-4 PH. Machines like a dream, doesn't require oil quenching when heat treating, and I don't need to say anything about its strength. Like you mentioned, 465 can be tough on tooling (I like my reamers). -Lee www.singleactions.com"Chasing perfection five shots at a time"
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Jun 20, 2023 9:36:26 GMT -5
Well, I'm one of the Chief Culprits about posting about steel selections. I've never implied my selection was necessary or superior to what others might choose to use.
But, on my customs, I just feel some self satisfaction in trying different steels.
Not unlike the guy who buys a sports car and drives it like grandpa. Or buying a Heavy Duty Pick-Up to drive around town in. We all have ideas...
I agree about not pushing cartridges to where the strength is needed. But, sometimes is nice to know what equipment is capable of whether we utilize it or not...
|
|
|
Post by RDW on Jun 20, 2023 9:38:54 GMT -5
Here is what i sent Wayne in a private message. I have grown very fond of this Gentleman over the course of the last couple of years! He is inquisitive and always wanting to build a better mouse trap. Reminds me of some one i know well! Why dont you just call one of us thats done it a thousand times and let us tell you what works and what doesnt. The reason for the 465 is and was so you could get away with 6 shots in a 1.780 Od Redhawk Cylinder. The bolt notch is also further from the bore on a redhawk. 475 + p sounds great but ive done it and all you do is flatten primers and blow out the pockets so that it is unreloadable after a couple of rounds. I have purposely Blown up Cylinders to see what they will take. All materials. 1.800 is the ultimate od but it will require some touchy cutting and you really need to block that bolt because the floor gets mighty thin. John Linebaugh prefered 1.790 but i started in 1986 with the 1.800 and i just found ways to make it work. I like round numbers hahaha. Make note that a lot of this is going to depend on the main frame and its allowable dimentions because they are all over the place since 1973. And the new stuff im seeing come out of the factory is plumb scary. I dont see how most of these are making it into the plastic box. I can send you a drawing of all the dimentions to follow and give you the best option on tooling. If you have worked with 465 before, well you already know what you need to. Just take it slow and listen to that cut. when she starts a screaming,,,,,,, STOP. Hahaha. six shot 475 will put you at .042 thou between chambers and all most .012 from bolt notch to chamber. I DO NOT SUGGEST IT.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GO 5 SHOT IF YOU VALUE YOUR HANDS AND ANYONE WHO WOULD STAND NEXT TO YOU. you can add od and gain bolt slot to chamber but you cant get arouund the .546 center to center. 357 on a 7 shooter is about max. 41 chambers will be just like the .475. TO CLOSE FOR COMFORT. R call me i will tell ya what ever you wanna know
|
|
|
Post by RDW on Jun 20, 2023 9:49:23 GMT -5
Well, I'm one of the Chief Culprits about posting about steel selections. I've never implied my selection was necessary or superior to what others might choose to use. But, on my customs, I just feel some self satisfaction in trying different steels. Not unlike the guy who buys a sports car and drives it like grandpa. Or buying a Heavy Duty Pick-Up to drive around town in. We all have ideas... I agree about not pushing cartridges to where the strength is needed. But, sometimes is nice to know what equipment is capable of whether we utilize it or not... Ya well i have seen them ( your POSTS) and i have been doing this forever as well as you have! Your observations have been spot on every time. You do serious research and then you actually try it! THAT IS HOW IT IS DONE CORRECTLY! And that is how we all gain real expertise. Not listening to some DA kid with a degree who has never tried it Huey. Did you catch that snippit about experimentation in 1990 that lee posted! that was 33 years ago. Yessir, there is some serious horsepower available on this forum. I am so glad to be a part of it. R
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Jun 20, 2023 9:56:49 GMT -5
There seems to be no limit to what can be learned on here. The collective knowledge is mind boggling.
As we've discussed before, you can include me on the 17-4 Fan List.
I spoke to Brett at Magnum Research about the New 6-Shot BFR 454 Casull. He said extensive testing showed no problems and added no complaints from customers yet.
That in itself is a testament to 17-4's Stength!!!
|
|
|
Post by bigbrowndog on Jun 20, 2023 10:03:53 GMT -5
I do enjoy the typical responses that follow a post like Ronnie’s……….paraphrased, “yeah but”. Not that Encore is that person by any means, it just seems there are some folks that do not wish to accept factual experience. Again I’m not saying Encore is, was or would reply that way, but I wouldn’t be surprised if someone did. as for me I’m plum stupid when it comes to metallurgy, running a lathe, milling machine or stuff like that, I just shoot.
Trapr
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Jun 20, 2023 10:17:13 GMT -5
You'll never see me post about machining steel as I have zero experience.
As Ronnie said, I tend to research to the extreme.
But, I always leave to final call to the gunsmith.
Ronnie, Dave Clements and Jack Huntington are my most trusted advisors. I don't see that changing...
|
|