My expert is a gunsmith / firearms maker / customizer. I did not ask if I could post his name online so I will not be doing so. I don’t think he or anyone would want to be a part of the bashing....IMO mainly because people can see past their preconceived notions.
Like I said, if pressure were even the issue, they would have let him put on his expert, no matter how much of a shade tree expert he was. Because they could have then put on one with multiple PHDs behind his name who could have used the same shoddy sources to testify to the exact opposite WITHOUT HAVING TO RISK ACTUALLY TAKING APART ONE OF THE LOADS AND TESTING IT.
I don't think either side wanted pressure discussed or it would have been, there was too much to lose for both sides by bringing it up, the gamble wasn't worth it. TC's lawyers likely wanted that testimony out because they didn't want to open up pandora's box with regards to the pressure. Brians attorney steered clear of actual testing the ammo as well. Also the experts testimony may have included more information that just pressure, such as design flaws that were damaging to TC's case.
He lost me when he stated that he uses cracked case necks to judge pressure signs. Also, apparently he has Quickload and didn't comprehend that placing the bullet closer to the throat raises shot start pressure and also max pressure.
I loaded Accubonds for a .300 RUM when the bullets were first introduced, Nosler lumped them with Partitions for reloading data. The manual even had a warning that the Accubonds developed higher pressure than ballistic tipped bullets.
