Another Barrel Question

[Phil C]

I have an original 0 frame DH 28 gauge. It has documented factory 2 3/4" chambers. I am curious how common were factory 2 3/4" chambers on 28 gauges? We're most 0 frame 28 gauges built with 2 3/4" . Were any 00 built with 2 3/4" chambers?

[Bill Murphy]

I would guess that factory 2 3/4" chambers are very unusual on 28 gauges. Late 28 gauges probably had 2 3/4" chambers for 2 7/8" shells which became common when the 28 gauge Model 12 Winchester was introduced about 1937.

[Researcher]

When the 28-gauge was introduced in North America, the "standard" shell was 2 1/2 inch with a load of 1 3/4 drams of bulk smokeless powder pushing a load of 5/8 ounce of shot. Instead of offering 2 3/4, 2 7/8 and 3 inch cases as they did in 20-gauge, the only longer length paper hulls for the 28-gauge were 2 7/8 inch. Sporadically the loading companies offered 2 drams of bulk smokeless powder pushing that same 5/8 ounce of shot from the 2 7/8 inch hull. Back before WW-I gun cranks, namely Chas. Askins, were hand loading 2 1/8 drams of powder and 3/4 ounce of shot in the 2 7/8 inch hull and shooting this extremely hot load in his 30-inch barrel 6 3/4 pound Parker Bros. 28-gauge!! The high velocity, progressive burning powder 28-gauge Western Cartridge Co. Super-X load with 3/4 ounce of shot in their 2 7/8 inch case was introduced in March 1931. From the April 1932, Field & Stream --



Shortly before WW-II Western Cartridge Co. began putting up a 3/4 ounce Xpert 28-gauge Skeet Load in a 2 3/4 inch case. See the very bottom load on this table XS83C --

[Dean Romig]

An 0-frame 28 gauge Parker would normally have been chambered for 2 1/2" shells... meaning the chambers would normally have been cut at 2 3/8" or 2 5/16".

A relatively small number of 28 gauge Parkers were built on the 0-frame size (the standard frame size for the 20 gauge gun and for the "light" 16 gauge gun.) The 00-frame was introduced soon after the 28 gauge guns were being offered and these are likely the frame size that were more often chambered for the longer 28 gauge cartridges that "Researcher" refers to - although the 28 gauge built on the 0-frame size had pretty stout wall thickness in the area of the chambers.

2 3/4" original chambers on one of these is extremely rare. It's like a 3" 20 gauge.





.

[Phil C]

Wish I knew more about what E H Hotchkiss wanted his DH 28 gauge for. At 6 1/2 lbs he could have just as easily shot a 20 gauge. Letter states patterned at 40 yards with #8's. Unfortunately does not say what the load actually was. Clearly he had something in mind since he ordered a DH with 28" barrels on an 0 frame and added a recoil pad?

[Dean Romig]

I wonder if E. H. Hotchkiss was related to the Hotchkiss Revolving Cannon's (1882) and the Hotchkiss Machine Gun's (1914) inventor Benjamin Hotchkiss of Watertown, CT... about 15 miles from Meriden.

http://www.madehow.com/inventorbios/...Hotchkiss.html





.

[Researcher]

What is the earliest known 00-Frame 28-gauge?

From these spec. sheets it appears they only chambered a 1/16 inch short for the little guns and 1/8 inch short for the 20- to 10-gauges.



I suppose if anyone ordered one of those "special order" 34-inch .410-bores it is in Murphy's basement now!!

[Dean Romig]

I read that section in TPS about an hour ago and it is stated that at the time of printing the authors didn't know when the 00-frame was introduced but the gun in question is certainly a very late 0-frame.

I have a 1908 DHE 28 gauge on the 0-frame and I have a 1923 VHE 28 gauge on the 00-frame but that isn't indicative of anything.







.

[Double Lab]

I have a VHE 28, 1926, that was ordered with 2 5/8" chambers, on the OO frame and 30" barrels. 6lb. 3oz.
My other 28, a VH, with 26" barrels also on the OO frame, left Parker in 1922. It also has 2 5/8" chambers and weighs in at 5lb. 9oz.

All specs as per Parker letters.

[Bill Murphy]

The research material on frame sizes of 28 gauge guns may very well be available to those who are interested. However, those interested parties may not include PGCA members. No disrepect is meant toward our Research Committee, only to our Board of Directors who prevent our Research Chairman from sharing research information.