Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Embrace The Truth - Catastrophic Gun Failure

[/quote]I am far from confused and my statements are spot on from a factual and legal perspective.

I know precisely how an Encore works (used to own a couple), and I also know what you have stated was at issue in your case. That you can't put that together is rather more telling than most anything else you've posted.

It mattered quite a bit what you've posted here and elsewhere. Had you been completely forthcoming from the beginning you'd have been and would be far more sympathetic and believable. As it is, you come across as someone who made a string of errors all of which your own doing and the results were a severe injury that you then sued someone else to cover and a sympathetic jury gave you just barely enough credit for your injury to make an award. You've taken that ball and run with it, and the facts that have come to light sense would give any decent attorney more than enough grounds to request a retrial or grounds for an appeal.

Your actions further have shown a severe and personal interest in damaging T/C's brand and name in spite of (and in fact often due to the concealment of) material facts. Again, T/C - if successful on retrial or on appeal - may very well pursue a libel action and I'd not want to be you trying to explain all these myriad song-and-dance routines to a judge or jury looking to see whether your intent in posting the same was malicious.

That's not an attack, Brian, it's an opinion and one founded on a good bit more than just trying to remember points from 10 years of litigation that are only favorable to my side.[/quote]


4ager,
Your statements are ridiculous.

Feel free have your misguided to opinion.

That would be a big NO!

No there were no instructions to check headspace.

Sir,

I still haven't heard what exactly happened; did the action indeed come open during firing?


4ager,
Your statements are ridiculous.

Feel free have your misguided to opinion. [/quote]

4ager,
Your statements are ridiculous.

Feel free have your misguided to opinion. [/quote]

Given your demonstrated ability to reason, I'm not adverse to you thinking such is ridiculous. Then again, I have more than a clue about what I'm talking about. You've never shown anything approaching the same.

Your benefit of the doubt ran out long ago.

Please, go have some cheese with your whine as it may be all you're left with by the end of this.

Sir,

I still haven't heard what exactly happened; did the action indeed come open during firing?


4ager,
Your statements are ridiculous.

Feel free have your misguided to opinion. [/quote] [/quote]

He hasn't a clue what happened, supposedly.

He loaded a grossly over max charge into a non-factory installed barrel that did not subsequently have the headspace or anything else checked, and the stock broke.

Somehow, he deduces that the over max load, the non-original barrel, the lack of checking for specs and safety were not to blame and that the action - which withstood the blast - is to blame.

Yet, anyone that points that out is "ridiculous".

4ager, he's right. You're ridiculous. Totally

Oh, do tell, BFD. Expound for us on why what is ain't.

GunGeek,

To summarize and very very briefly in my opinion the big take away from my case was the TCA Encore can not keep tolerances and head space grows overtime, especially with larger calibers like I was shooting (300 win mag).
In my trial we had 3 guns with excessive head space. My gun was well out of spec., A gun with 5 shots was out of spec., A gun with no shots was out of spec.

The excessive headspace allows gasses to act on the plunger thus allowing the gun to open. (We are not talking about a bolt gun here….the plunger is held in place with a spring That supposedly needs to be replaced after so many shots that they never tell you about.) The stock breaks in bending when the gun blows open…very violent.

You didn't answer his question as to what actually happened.

Brian,

You're warning people about this rifle yet you say NOTHING about what actually happened, why is that?

We're big boys here (and I'll admit, I'm not a fan of the Encore), and we kinda like to make our own minds up.

If you can tell us just a simple explanation of what happened, that would be helpful.

Just a simple question: Did the action come open upon firing?

Gun Geek, to your question:

Basically, He has said they have witnessed a number of Encores that were "out of spec". 3 in fact, including his, but we have no idea how many they tested.

Not sure what spec that is, specifically, OP mentions headspace, and it was important enough bit of information to bring up as a contributing issue to the "catastrophic gun failure" (GCF)

Yet given this out of spec, we do not know if this condition manifests for all encores, or just those with custom shop barrels? OP mentions develops in magnum cartridges like his 300WM. Curious if that bit of info was ascertained prior to or post GCF?

And are there a similar percentage of catastrophic gun failures analogous to the percentage of "out of specs" guns he cites?

And are there any other common conditions to catastrophic failures? Early in the thread, someone mentioned witnessing a CGF that they were sure involved handloads.

The OP has stated he does not know what happened, does not know the mechanism of injury, and has precious little data on a 10 year trial that cost him an eye.

And with this information, he comes here and about 10 other places with a public service announcement that rails against the Encore, which appears to be a decent gun platform, unless you hotrod reloads in a gun that happens to have the condition of being "out of spec"

My take.

So, he doesn't know what hit him in the eye, but he's pretty sure T/C's flawed design caused it to hit him in the eye.

Makes sense to me.

I have given up trying to make sense of it all. Too many variables and the guy who should have the answers hasn't exactly been forthcoming or straight forward with them.

Encore rifles may have an issue with head space on some or all of their guns. Larger calibers may or may not be more prone to failure. Over pressure loads may or may not have been a contributing factor to the failure, and may or may not have been a contributing factor to the growth of the head space issue. The gun may or may not have opened upon firing and the scope many or may not have hit Brian in the eye. The stock broke but the gun (action) stayed intact. An aftermarket barrel may have been used and head space was not checked. The loads were at but not over max SAAMI pressure but no pressure test was ever conducted. An expert said some stuff, we are not sure who or what was said, but it was thrown out of court. Brian spent 10 years of this life fighting this fight, but we have preconceived notions because we want the above cleared up....

I could go on but I won't

Okay so if the round went off and it broke the stock, he could have just been the victim of "Weatherby Eye"...albeit on the extreme side.

Now we're into some murky waters. The round he chose was on the high end of the recoil spectrum for what T/C offers from the factory. And the load is excessive. So while the extra recoil may have been the straw that broke the camels back, the difference in recoil wasn't tremendous, and that tells me that stock was going to give way at some point anyhow.

But does anyone know what condition the stock was in before the incident? Had it been damaged?

T/C's stocks are pure tupperware, but they're made of graphite which tend to be VERY flexible and typically doesn't break.

Same way you come up with your crap.

With one important difference--no one else here has an axe to grind.

How has this thread gotten this far without pitchers of half-nekkid girls?

GunGeek - thanks for the correction. You are quite correct. I'm referring to the barrel to frame gap - headspace is determined by how the chamber is cut. On bottleneck cartridges, one can adjust the sizing dies to reduce case stretching to a minimum by knowing the barrel to frame gap. On a belted case or rimmed case it's a different ballgame. Thank you for the correction.