Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums  

Go Back   Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums Non-Parker Specific & General Discussions Damascus Barrels & Steel

Notices

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 10-30-2012, 01:18 PM   #11
Member
Drew Hause
Forum Associate
 
Drew Hause's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,084
Thanks: 323
Thanked 3,761 Times in 1,245 Posts

Default

Mark - I know nothing about reloading, but do know the ol' boys used some boomers

Jan. 2 1897
http://www.la84foundation.org/Sports.../SL2815017.pdf
Charles Grimm defeats Doc Carver in Chicago for the “Cast Iron Metal”
Grimm used a 12-bore L.C. Smith gun, 7 3/4 pounds, 3 3/4 drams Schultze, 1 1/4 ounce No. 7 shot, in U.M.C. Trap shell.
Carver used a 12-bore Cashmore gun, 8 pounds weight, 4 drams of Carver powder, 1 1/4 No. 7 shot, in U.M.C. Trap shell.

More infro here https://docs.google.com/document/pre...d_SQgaAfUOZEFU
Drew Hause is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Drew Hause For Your Post:
Visit Drew Hause's homepage!
Unread 10-30-2012, 03:13 PM   #12
Member
Bruce Day
PGCA Lifetime
Member
 
Bruce Day's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,993
Thanks: 552
Thanked 15,605 Times in 2,666 Posts

Default

Absolutely. When you start looking at these pre modern loads, some of them were real shoulder busters. I've heard many stories from grandchildren my age ( 65) how grandpa made his special hot loads that belched fire with heavy recoil and that were so much hotter than anything you could buy. Well, what you could buy were 1 1/4 oz 3 1/2 dram loads, and these were way heavier than those. Its no wonder that some guns shot loose, or barrels blew, or stocks cracked. I have a heavy fowler 12ga Bernard that the stock was cracked and the barrels were loose on face. No barrel bulges, no damascus cracks, barrels still fine. I have little doubt that cannon shells were run through those heavy barrels.

I'm kind of fascinated by the mechanics of the Lefever guns, which had their claim to three modes of screw adjustment compensation for wear from use and heavy loads. A Parker had none of them and there are not many loose Parkers, so you know people shot heavy loads and the guns were none the worse for it.

I think I'll order a couple more cases of 1 or 1 1/8 oz 3 dram modern loads for hunting. You know, something easy on the gun and my shoulder. For targets, I get modern shells even lighter than that.
Bruce Day is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bruce Day For Your Post:
Unread 10-30-2012, 05:33 PM   #13
Member
J.B. Books
PGCA Member
 
Pete Lester's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,857
Thanks: 1,639
Thanked 4,793 Times in 1,365 Posts

Default

If liability was such a serious concern why didn't Parker Bros. of any other maker offer a trade in allowance of composite barrel guns? Seems to me they could have further driven the sale of new guns and created a market of factory refurbished/rebarreled with fluid steel guns at a lower price.
Pete Lester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10-31-2012, 07:57 AM   #14
Member
Parker Bachelder (Brad's Profile)
PGCA Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 296
Thanks: 177
Thanked 1,925 Times in 202 Posts

Default

In the "Great Debate over the safety of composite Barrels, A very important consideration needs a much greater focus. Composite Barrels were manufactured in many different configuations and degrees of quality. The top American manufacturers used the highest quality barrels available. The smaller manufacturers and importers used much lower quality tubes. Perhaps the poor quality tubes were not able to withstand the higher pressures of nitro powders.
The expense of high quality composite barrels, drove the industry to create much less expensive fluid steel barrels. Fluid steel and composite co-existed for a period of time, in fact composite became a luxury upgrade.
The unilateral condemnation of Damascus and composite barrels, I believe was primarily a marketing move to reduce costs in materials. Failures in poor quality barrels may have supported the manufacturers position.
Shootability depends on quality and condition. Every set should be individually evaluated.

Brad
Brad Bachelder is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Brad Bachelder For Your Post:
Visit Brad Bachelder's homepage!
Unread 10-31-2012, 08:17 AM   #15
Member
George M. Purtill Member #28
PGCA Lifetime
Member
 
George M. Purtill's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,342
Thanks: 2,039
Thanked 2,291 Times in 861 Posts

Default

Excellent point Brad. My impression from what I have seen is there was a lot of junk coming in from abroad. As in many areas, the good gets painted with the same brush as the bad.
George M. Purtill is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10-31-2012, 12:18 PM   #16
Member
charlie cleveland
PGCA Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12,986
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7,787 Times in 3,967 Posts

Default

after looking and reading remingtons adds it looks like remington did not want to fix or repair a gun with damascus barrels..but then they would sell you a gun with damascus barrels that they said would shoot and stand upo to modern smokeless loads with no harm... i would say these fellows doing the marketing stratys were a little forked tongue... in my opinion ive shot a lot of these old damascus twist stub twist laminated steel about all of the old belgium clunker guns with all known types of odd barrel markings of steel...ive never had a issue with one...the only gun ive not fired yet is a pretty nice old parker lifter gun with plain steel marked on the barrels and it will get tried out here shortly.... charlie
charlie cleveland is offline   Reply With Quote
Remington Barrels
Unread 11-16-2012, 09:59 AM   #17
Member
Hammer Gun
PGCA Lifetime
Member
 
Gary Carmichael Sr's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,616
Thanks: 2,742
Thanked 7,667 Times in 1,642 Posts

Default Remington Barrels

Some of Remington's barrels were very heavy as in this example, Gary
Attached Images
File Type: jpg DSCN0964.jpg (490.8 KB, 12 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN0970.jpg (498.7 KB, 4 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN0972.jpg (516.5 KB, 4 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN0973.jpg (507.5 KB, 4 views)
Gary Carmichael Sr is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-16-2012, 05:33 PM   #18
Member
Ben Rawls
Forum Associate

Member Info
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 112
Thanks: 8
Thanked 55 Times in 28 Posts

Default

In some hearings before a Senate committee on tariffs about 1912, the head of Parker and LC Smith both testified that they were unable to make quality barrels at prices to make their guns competitive. They needed the source of Belgian (et.al) barrels to make good shotguns.
Some other documentation stated that even though they had tried to source their barrel steel from the US,they could not do it reliably enough for their quality control.
It might not have been true but they told the US Senate it was.
Ben Rawls is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-17-2012, 02:35 AM   #19
Member
Steve McCarty
Forum Associate

Member Info
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,238
Thanks: 0
Thanked 306 Times in 211 Posts

Default

I'm just going to toss my 2 cents in here. 19th Century shooters considered damascus barrels as superior, often times, to fluid steel tubes. The transition from BP to smokeless happened gradually starting in the 1860s and was pretty much over by the teens or 20s. Still Damascus and twist barrels were prefered by many shooters of fine shotguns and they continued to shoot them and many folks still do.

Therefore, while I would not suggest shooting high powered shells in damascus barrels the RST and Polywad shells made for such guns are, if properly inspected, perfectly safe to shoot and they do the job they were intended to do.

Within the past few years researchers like Sherman Bell have studied the strength of damascus and twist barrels and have found them strong enough for standard pressure shells and I shoot my damascus Parker with confidence, but only with 8 or 9,000 psi shells, but it would probably do just fine with even more powerful loads. I just don't choose to shoot them.
Steve McCarty is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-17-2012, 07:09 AM   #20
Member
Dean Romig
PGCA Invincible
Life Member
 
Dean Romig's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 31,557
Thanks: 35,430
Thanked 33,039 Times in 12,321 Posts

Default

I have said this before and I'll say it again... Any barrels that would have blown from normal shooting have probably already done so by now. (Operative word - "normal")
Dean Romig is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Dean Romig For Your Post:
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:41 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1998 - 2023, Parkerguns.org
Copyright © 2004 Design par Megatekno
- 2008 style update 3.7 avec l'autorisation de son auteur par Stradfred.