Because I got confused. I am getting info on this from a number of forums. Sometimes I have difficulty "locating" the original post on a particular forum. My apologies.Originally Posted by thomae
I understand your sentiment on the SAAMI spec and probably your contempt for my question. While SAAMI can be considered the "final" word, I am finding many credible sources that are not in agreement with SAAMI let alone each other. There is sufficient conflict to raise questions in my mind and that not being a challenge. Safety is always my concern. But, safety is like perfection in that it is a goal that has never been achieved 100% by me on any day that I opted to get out of bed. With safety taken as the prime and only objective I think I would be strictly into AirSoft "with" eye protection. I can't see where a single Wild-Cat would ever have seen the light of day with certified specification being the ruling factor. To be sure, I am not trying to invent anything but more to follow what has been proven to work by some. Now, Savage, as it turns out, has made exactly the chamber and rifling combination that I "want" to make and they sold it commercially. That should meet the "BETA test" requirement. It doesn't meet SAAMI spec, apparently, though it gets very good reviews. I don't think I have a single cartridge that meets, exactly, the SAAMI spec. and I, and numerious Smiths at my behest, have measured a bunch of ammo from numerous sources and quality levels. Maybe the SAAMI spec is a goal but I have always regarded it as the rule but then"rules are meant to be......" Not that I actually believe that. Again, thank you for your interest in my dilemma and taking the time to share your credible opinion. Sincerely, now.
Thanks,
John
John
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks