Poking around here in the annals of THR knowledge, I came across this gem that exactly describes the threat of tort as the main compliance force WRT SAAMI standards, while CIP standards as mentioned have force of law in countries using CIP standards.
It's found in the article at this address
https://loaddata.com/Article/BenchTopics/SAAMI-90-Years-of-Setting-Standards/502
Which is where one arrives when following this link
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-what-saami-is-and-does.827403/#post-10661779
A part of this section of THR
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/reloading-library-of-wisdom.649184/
And spells out, in part
"
Sometimes much is made of the fact that CIP standards bear the force of law while SAAMI standards are voluntary, but the threat of liability lawsuits lends considerable impetus to voluntary compliance."
Here we see the force of risk of lawsuit is cited as the "hammer" for maintaining compliance with SAAMI standards, as I posted earlier, are considerably less energetic in some cartridges that end in X57mm and 64mm than CIP standards that hold force of law in countries using those standards.
Now, using the example of the 8X57mmJS cartridge just as I did with the 2016 Prvi Partizan catalog, here's photos from a hardcopy of the Accurate Smokeless Powders Loading Guide Number Two manual.
First up is load data within SAAMI standards, and the rationale for this set of SAAMI standards.
Get this: SAAMI standards are based on being able to fire a cartridge with bullet diameter. 323" SAFELY in a firearm barreled for .318" diameter bullets AS WELL AS .323" diameter bullets - as long as the load is within the SAAMI pressure standard of 35,000 PSI. I
I'll tell you right now I don't care to fire a cartridge with a .323" diameter bullet in a firearm barreled for. 318" bullets PERIOD, and how in the world was that cartridge pressure determined by SAAMI as safe for doing so in the first place?
For comparison here's the alternate set of 8X57mmJS load data well outside SAAMI standards in energy, but based on using cartridges loaded with .323" diameter bullets ONLY in firearms barreled for .323" diameter bullets.
Now is it clear that my plans to exceed SAAMI standards when I hand load ammunition for various cartridges that end in 57mm or 64mm is based on using bullets of the same diameter the firearm(s) I will use them in are barreled for yet not exceeding CIP standards, or showing signs of excessive pressure in that specific firearm, using standards that have force of law, just not USA law, (which SAAMI standards don't have in the USA either).
I don't need to be a lawyer in order NOT to choose to fire cartridges loaded with .323" diameter bullets in a firearm barreled for. 318" bullets - a difference of .005" - but the SAAMI standards rationale is to limit the cartridge pressure to a level where I can supposedly do SAFELY? How many times?
The implication is the average US shooter needs to be protected against shooting cartridges with .323" diameter bullet in firearms barreled for .318" diameter bullets by SAAMI but the average European and African and where else - Australian etc. shooters have enough snap not to do this to begin with. And compliance with SAAMI standards isn't force of law because the level of litigiousness in the US is so much higher in comparison so as to exert enough penalty on companies loading factory ammunition in the USA.