Remington's policy on shooting Damascus barrels

[Hammer Gun]

Interesting stuff!

[Steve McCarty]

I was blown away by Drew's post wherein old shotshell loads was outlined. Those guys were shooting cannons. I guess they didn't buy into the, lighter loads of shot pattern better, philosophy.

I'm sure most of those old, heavy loads were being shot through damascus/twist tubes. So, why should we worry? As stated above, if a gun was going to let go, by now it would have.

For my entire life I have been told, or have heard over and over again that damascus shotguns were unsafe to shoot, and I still hear it all of the time. I've passed on some very nice damascus guns over the years that were pretty inexpensive because I thought them unsafe.

If damascus guns are indeed unsafe we'd be hearing of explosions and failures. We are not. Still, however; I shoot Polywad.

[Researcher]

The "big difference" in "modern" progressive burning powder shells (I'll use the 12-gauge example) is that they pushed the 1 1/4 ounce payload at a higher velocity, with an equal or perhaps a bit lower pressure, than the older bulk or dense smokeless powder loads could. Or, the progressive burning powders could be used to push a heavier payload, ie the 1 3/8 ounce 12-gauge Super-X load in Western Cartridge Co.'s 3-inch Record shell, at a equal or even slightly higher velocity.

Western Cartridge Co. had led the way in introducing progressive burning smokeless powder to shotgun shells with the 1922 introduction of their Super-X loads in 2 3/4 inch 12- and 20-gauge Field shells.



The next year they added a 16-gauge Super-X load in their 2 9/16 inch Field shell, and a bit later the 12-gauge 3-inch Super-X load put up in their Record shell.



By 1926, Western had added the .410-bore Super-X load and had breathed new life in the moribund 10-gauge by introducing the 2 7/8 inch Super-Ten load with 1 5/8 ounces of shot, a terrific increase over the previous maximum 10-gauge loads of 4 1/4 drams of bulk smokeless powder and 1 1/4 ounces of shot or 32 grains of dense smokeless powder, such as Ballistite or Infallible, and 1 1/4 ounces of shot!! By this time only Parker Bros. and Ithaca Gun Co. were offering 10-gauge guns in North America. About 1928, Western Cartridge Co. introduced their copper plated Lubaloy shot. The Lubaloy Super-X loads were all put up in their high brass Record shell.

The first smokeless powder for shotgun shells was probably Wood powder, introduced in 1876. Shotgunners being a hidebound lot were rather slow to embrace smokeless powder, but by the 1890s it was coming on strong. In 1890, Captain A.W. Money came to America from England, and established the American E.C. and Schultze Powder Company in Oakland Park, Bergen County, New Jersey, with offices on Broadway in New York City, to manufacture smokeless shotgun powders. In 1893, Union Metallic Cartridge Co. was already offering smokeless powder shotshells, and that year Winchester was providing them to selected shooters with Winchester offering them to the general public in 1894. The American ammunition companies held their smokeless powder loads offered in the 2 5/8 inch 12-gauge shells lower than those offered in the 2 3/4 inch and longer shells. Same thing holds for the 2 9/16 inch 16-gauge shells and the 2 ½ inch 20-gauge shells. The very heaviest 2 5/8 inch shells I find offered were 3 1/4 drams of bulk smokeless powder or 26 grains of dense smokeless powders such as Ballistite or Infallible with 1 1/4 ounces of shot. In 2 3/4 inch and longer shells they offered 3 1/2 drams of bulk smokeless powders or 28 grains of Ballistite or Infallible dense smokeless powders with the same 1 1/4 ounce of shot. These loads were very high pressure according to a DuPont Smokeless Shotgun Powders (1933) book I have. It shows the 3 1/2 drams of DuPont bulk smokeless powder pushing 1 1/4 ounces of shot as being 11,700 pounds; 3 1/2 drams of Schultze bulk smokeless powders pushing 1 1/4 ounces of shot being 11,800 pounds and the 28-grains of Ballistite pushing the 1 1/4 ounces of shot being 12,600 pounds!!! There were plenty of lighter loads being offered, but American shotgunners being what they are, I'm sure many were opting for the heaviest loads available. The same situation held with the 16- and 20-gauge shells. The "standard" 2 1/2 inch 20-gauge shells and the "standard" 2 9/16 inch 16-gauge shells carried slightly milder loads than the extra cost longer shells in 2 3/4, 2 7/8, and 3-inch lengths.

Many folks believe that the "modern" shotshells loaded with progressive burning smokeless powders, introduced in the early 1920s, Western Cartridge Company's Super-X loads leading the way, were higher pressure than the old bulk and dense smokeless powder loads. Reading period literature, this is not the case. With progressive burning smokeless powders they were able to move out equal shot loads at higher velocity or a heavier shot load at equal velocity, but at lower pressure than the old style bulk or dense smokeless powders.

[Paul Stafford III]

It's my belief the barrels can handle "reasonable" pressure. As I shoot low pressure loads I'm more worried about my 100+ year old wood stocks.

[Craig Larter]

We are fortunate that most considered damascus dangerous to shoot for 70 years otherwise few good examples would exist today.

[Steve McCarty]

Originally Posted by Paul Stafford

It's my belief the barrels can handle "reasonable" pressure. As I shoot low pressure loads I'm more worried about my 100+ year old wood stocks.

I just re-read some of Sherman Bell's work with damascus tubes in Double Gun. I'll dig it out so that I can quote from it. He says that it is just fine to shoot damascus guns and he should know. He has tested them extensively. He also writes that BP loads produce more pressure than most people think. I'm not going to go out on a limb and make any outlandish statements about the relative strength of damascus barrels. I quote from Double Gun later.

[Steve McCarty]

Originally Posted by Craig Larter

We are fortunate that most considered damascus dangerous to shoot for 70 years otherwise few good examples would exist today.

I agree. My Parker GH, one of only two Parkers that I own, is a fantastic shotgun. Fit, finish, wood, balance are wonderful. The more I shoot it the better I like it. It is heavy though, but that's okay.

[ed good]

maybe what we need here is a damascus barrel proofing service that would for a fee, proof damascus barrels with moderate smokeless loads, say one ounce of shot, developing 10,000 psi? trouble is, no one would do it due to the liability potential...

[Drew Hause]

H.P. White Laboratory, Inc. in Maryland will proof Twist or Damascus barrels for $420 per Shooting Sportsman March/April 08'
www.hpwhite.com 410-838-6550

I know of no one who has used that service.

[Bruce Day]

With respect to Ed's suggestion to "proof" at 10,000psi, be aware that Parker used about 10,000 psi as a service load ceiling for all types of 12ga barrels, so a "proof" of 10,000psi would be inconsequential. For 10,000 psi, just stick a Rem game load in that runs 1 1/4 at about 3 to 3 1/4 dre. TPS shows a proof load was about 13,500psi for early guns , then later at 15,000. TPS always contains answers to most Parker questions.

Drew, of course a person need not send the gun off to Maryland for testing , he can get all he needs right out here on the plains. Mitchell Cabelas carries these which they say a person needs for killing pheasant. Only 1 3/8oz at 1500fps, just what everybody needs, don't even have to lead the bird. Only $15 a box of 25, save your $420.