My querry wasn't directed at throwing caution to the wind,but rather at the hope of understanding in greater detail,what actually makes things tick.
<br>
<br>I've no fierce allegiance to ULA,but their design and success struck me as a nice place to start,when weighing relative size vs. relative strength. Especially if it has been deemed,that the brass cartridge case is in itself,the weakest link in the "safety chain". Their(ULA) actions are dainty as compared to most,well received and greatly respected upon many levels("strength",tolerances and quality of materials employed,foremost in my mind).
<br>
<br>Despite being of less mass and diameter than a 96 Mauser,the ULA is chambered in all the "Hot Rod" offerings and I've never heard a hint of a complaint in any regard. Thoughts? Is it superior metallurgy,superior design,or just foolishness? I guess that was my point/question. More aptly,do the technological advances(ala ULA),offset the sheer mass of the '96? Is bigger always better? Is smaller always lesser,when concerning these issues?
<br>
<br>My hopes were to understand,after reading your first Post upon the matter,that if wanting more performance why not look at adding more strength to case design,rather than keep making bigger and bigger cartridges that are of the same relative "strength".
<br>
<br>Meaning,if the actions currently available are of overkill Engineering and the brass is the sole weak link,why not explore the obvious opportunities for performance enhancement? If the brass is the weakest link,why not fix it? I understand that some elasticity must be present,to make it jive,but am not convinced that cases as we know them could not be improved upon(regarding strength). That without negating the properties,that make brass a viable choice for the case proper.
<br>
<br>Further,I would think that of the actions currently available,some are constructed of superior materials and design,as opposed to others. It would seem to me,that the most robust of those offerings,used in conjunction with a superior(strengthened) cartridge case,would easily yield enhanced performance and do so safely. As long as pressures were capably housed,isn't the margin of relative safety the same?
<br>
<br>If that is not the case,I'd be curious to have an inkling as to how that is not so. If it is the case(literally),I'm equally curious as to why R&D isn't headed in that direction.
<br>
<br>Any/all insight appreciated...................
<br>
<br>
