It would be a good bet; you'd win it.
That's why I'd bet on it
That'd be очень сильный; pronouned Oh-chen Seel-nuy
Thanks
. I really should have specified "Czesky" though...
Back on Topic (well, sort of):
Okay, I tried for a few minutes to search for Clark's actual article/blog/whatever about his tests, and they are completely obscured by people's references to them. Not to be a doubting-Thomas, but that's eerily similar to all net-lore, so if anyone has a link to the real deal, I'd be interested (and appreciative
).
I can see, with my own eyes (visually
), that the chamber is thinner on the CZ. So, if the chamber/barrel is the point of failure is both pistols (I'll assume it is, until I can read Clark's notes), the CZ will fail first. I don't see what destructive testing has to do with it. It's an obvious outcome. What is probably more interesting, is
how each gun handles the failure, and how other over-stressed parts of the gun held up. With
that data, you could actually seek to improve upon both designs
Still, it seems kinda moot. These are one-time overload events we're talking about. The fatigue damage wrought by the (I'm guessing here) progressively higher overloads probably also artificially
lowered the "true" ultimate strength of a factory new pistol.
And the guns he used had who knows how many rounds through them beforehand. Aside from obvious or qualitative information, there's really not much to be learned from his testing.
Unless you expect to fire your brand new gun
only once at overload, I don't see what value the ultimate burst allowable is to a shooter. And I think it gives false confidence to handloaders who think they can shoot loads slightly below ultimate without any risk.
As far as I'm concerned,
any gun shot at pressures above its cartridge's rating should be expected to fail at any moment. Unless I do the math to back-out the safety factors (and add my own), it's a fool's folly to expect anything different to happen.
TCB