Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums  

Go Back   Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums Parker Forums General Parker Discussions

Notices

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 09-11-2010, 01:05 PM   #11
Member
Ed Blake
PGCA Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,258
Thanks: 734
Thanked 822 Times in 333 Posts

Default

I have seen these shells at the local Gander Mountain, and have used their equivalent from Remington in a heavy #2 frame GH damascus 12 gauge. I would say at 1145 fps the pressure would be on the low side. Minimum wall thickness on the GH is around 50 thou so I am confident the gun can handle these loads, but I would hesitate to shoot anything much more potent because the gun is circa 1892.
Ed Blake is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-11-2010, 02:04 PM   #12
Member
Mike Stahle
Forum Associate

Member Info
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 310
Thanks: 337
Thanked 144 Times in 53 Posts

Default

Think I will just stick to my BP brass shotshells.
Just seems to be way to much uncertainty for me.
(though gut feeling, these old guns were built like tanks:-)
But then there is RST's and a few others doing it with smokless.


http://shootersforum.com/showthread.htm?t=4385

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Shotsh...le)-a059281213

http://community.discovery.com/eve/f...8/m/3661910099

http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=3338
Mike Stahle is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-11-2010, 02:50 PM   #13
Member
10ga Hammer
PGCA Member
 
Robert Rambler's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 605
Thanks: 2,959
Thanked 816 Times in 266 Posts

Default

Mike, you'll find some helpful info here concerning Drams and velocity.

http://www.tbullock.com/bpsg.html
__________________
"Double guns are a sport and a pastime built into a beautiful package to which I attach myself when entering the great theater of autumn, those days now grow more precious because we are given so few".. Robin Lacy
Robert Rambler is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Robert Rambler For Your Post:
Unread 09-12-2010, 12:53 AM   #14
Member
Researcher
PGCA Lifetime
Member
 
Dave Noreen's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,597
Thanks: 1,617
Thanked 7,773 Times in 2,353 Posts

Default

The "Drams Equivalent" business came about as the various dense smokeless powders began coming into use in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Prior to that both black powder and bulk smokeless powder (E.C., Schultze, DuPont, etc.) were measured by dram (volume), as black powder had been in earlier times to pour down the mouth of your muzzle loader. Shooters of the day had a warm fuzzy feeling for how their favorite load of 3 1/4 drams of powder and 1 1/4 ounces of shot (or whatever) performed. Then along comes dense smokeless powders such as Laflin & Rand's Infallible, Nobel's Ballistite and Walsrode, which are loaded by grains (weight). Joe Nimrod goes to the gun store and sees boxes of UMC Nitro Clubs loaded with 24 grains of Infallible and 1 1/4 ounces of shot, and he doesn't have that warm fuzzy feeling of how that load performs. So, the manufacturers came up with Dram Equiv. to put on their shell box which means this shell is loaded with enough dense (or after the early 1920s progressive burning) smokeless powder to give the same velocity as a 3 1/4 Dram load of black or bulk smokeless powder and thereby to give Joe Nimrod his warm fuzzy feeling and product loyalty. This this Drams Equiv. business should have gone away with WW-I and the companies should have began just putting the velocity on the box, but shooters are a hidebound lot!!

Just because you pick up some low brass shells at Wally World and they are listed as 2 3/4 drams equiv. and 1 1/8 ounces of shot (or any other load), doesn't mean they are any lower pressure then a 1 7/8 ounce 3-inch Magnum load. To produce lower priced shells the manufacturers use a lesser amount of hotter powders to give the desired velocity at a cheaper price. All they have to do is stay below the SAAMI spec. which for 2 3/4 and 3-inch 12-gauge shells is 11500 psi.
Dave Noreen is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dave Noreen For Your Post:
Unread 09-12-2010, 03:02 AM   #15
Member
VH20
Forum Associate

Member Info
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 131
Thanks: 5
Thanked 49 Times in 26 Posts

Default

[QUOTE=Mike Stahle;23875]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Rambler View Post
These were sort of an anniversary edition "Red Sweater" box, similar to what Winchester did with the Super X box. Original box is on top. Those are modern shells, might want to use caution in a Damascus gun!

So what makes the pressure high?
Is it the drams of powder "and or" the brand of smokeless powder?
This pressure thing is very confusing to me to say the least.
They were using smokeless powder back in the day before my Damascus
barreled gun ever left the Parker factory.
It is a complex interaction of amount of powder, burn rate of the powder, amount of payload, and velocity (and a few other things, too). But for simplicity's sake, take a one ounce load that gives 1200 fps velocity. You can achieve that with a fast burning powder that gives the payload a swift kick in the rear, and a resulting high pressure peak. OR, you can achieve the same velocity with a slower powder that gives the payload a gentler shove that lasts much longer down the barrel, but results in a lower overall pressure. Once the shot clears the muzzle there's no difference - you've got one ounce moving at 1200 fps. The difference is in the rate of acceleration down the barrel.

Now, with any given load, anything you "increase" (payload, velocity, or powder charge) will also increase pressure.

Finally, you must remember that most modern shells (unless they are specialty shells made for vintage guns) are designed so they will work well in the ubiquitous gas autoloader that the Average Joe shoots. According to a Federal rep I talked to once, they feel they need around 8500 psi or more for the shells to operate smoothly in a wide variety of autoloaders (including the ones owned by the guys who don't clean them much). If their shells won't cylcle the average automatic, they will get a bad reputation among their largest customer base. Plus, fast burning powders with high pressures generally require less of a charge than slower burning ones to achieve the same velocity, therefore they are more economical for the cartridge manufacturer (less powder per shell). In any case, I would bet that even what we call "light loads" in modern shells are still generating 8500 psi or more. (I'm not including the so-called Ultra-Light loads that the manufacturers don't recommend for autoloaders - they could very well be lower than that).
Jim Williams is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jim Williams For Your Post:
Unread 09-12-2010, 09:05 AM   #16
Member
Mike Stahle
Forum Associate

Member Info
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 310
Thanks: 337
Thanked 144 Times in 53 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Noreen View Post
The "Drams Equivalent" business came about as the various dense smokeless powders began coming into use in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Prior to that both black powder and bulk smokeless powder (E.C., Schultze, DuPont, etc.) were measured by dram (volume), as black powder had been in earlier times to pour down the mouth of your muzzle loader. Shooters of the day had a warm fuzzy feeling for how their favorite load of 3 1/4 drams of powder and 1 1/4 ounces of shot (or whatever) performed. Then along comes dense smokeless powders such as Laflin & Rand's Infallible, Nobel's Ballistite and Walsrode, which are loaded by grains (weight). Joe Nimrod goes to the gun store and sees boxes of UMC Nitro Clubs loaded with 24 grains of Infallible and 1 1/4 ounces of shot, and he doesn't have that warm fuzzy feeling of how that load performs. So, the manufacturers came up with Dram Equiv. to put on their shell box which means this shell is loaded with enough dense (or after the early 1920s progressive burning) smokeless powder to give the same velocity as a 3 1/4 Dram load of black or bulk smokeless powder and thereby to give Joe Nimrod his warm fuzzy feeling and product loyalty. This this Drams Equiv. business should have gone away with WW-I and the companies should have began just putting the velocity on the box, but shooters are a hidebound lot!!

Just because you pick up some low brass shells at Wally World and they are listed as 2 3/4 drams equiv. and 1 1/8 ounces of shot (or any other load), doesn't mean they are any lower pressure then a 1 7/8 ounce 3-inch Magnum load. To produce lower priced shells the manufacturers use a lesser amount of hotter powders to give the desired velocity at a cheaper price. All they have to do is stay below the SAAMI spec. which for 2 3/4 and 3-inch 12-gauge shells is 11500 psi.
So is it possible to have a Damascus barreled gun made in the late 1800s to early 1900s to have never actually had a black powder shell fired through it? I have a gut feeling many of these old girls have lived there 100+ yrs. on a steady diet of smokless anything and everything, picked up at the local hardware store :-))
Mike Stahle is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-12-2010, 09:12 AM   #17
Member
Ed Blake
PGCA Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,258
Thanks: 734
Thanked 822 Times in 333 Posts

Default

Remington Gun Club 1 oz. 2 3/4 dreq load (1185 fps) has a disclaimer on the box that the load may not cycle all semi-automatic shotguns. Some years back I called Winchester and asked them about pressures in their Xtra-Lite 1 oz. and their Featherlite 26 gram (low noise low recoil) loadings. They responded saying the Xtra-Lite load generates 8,500 psi and the Featherlite has 6,500 psi. (Remington would never tell me what psi their loads generated.) I have shot quite a few flats of both of these loadings out of various damascus-barreled guns. Some have questioned the effectiveness of the 26 gram load and let me say it is plenty effective. Yesterday while shooting doves my son Edward plastered a barn pigeon at 30 yards with one of these "Feather-Lite" loads using his tight choked VH.
Ed Blake is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-12-2010, 09:19 AM   #18
Member
Bill Murphy
PGCA Lifetime
Member Since
Second Grade

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 15,524
Thanks: 6,119
Thanked 8,785 Times in 4,718 Posts

Default

Mike, many Damascus and Twist guns have never seen a black powder load. I have a little Damascus G 16 that was made in 1917. However, early smokeless loads probably have pressure readings lower than the modern promo loads. I don't use promo loads in Damascus guns or real thin steel guns.
Bill Murphy is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-12-2010, 11:09 AM   #19
Member
Drew Hause
Forum Associate
 
Drew Hause's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,084
Thanks: 323
Thanked 3,762 Times in 1,246 Posts

Default

What Ed said. Pressure testing by Armbrust for comparison:

3 Dr. Eq. 1 1/8 oz.
Winchester Trap Load
1,202 fps 9,600 psi

AA Xtra-Lite 1 oz WAAL12
1189 fps 8000 psi

AA 'Low noise Low recoil' 15/16 oz
980 fps 6,200 psi
Drew Hause is offline   Reply With Quote
Visit Drew Hause's homepage!
Unread 09-12-2010, 12:20 PM   #20
Member
Researcher
PGCA Lifetime
Member
 
Dave Noreen's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,597
Thanks: 1,617
Thanked 7,773 Times in 2,353 Posts

Default

Mike,

I'm sure that as you said, there were many Damascus barrel guns that never saw a black powder load. From family experience I know my Grandfather's 1890-vintage heavy 3-frame 12-gauge PH-Grade digested many many cases of Super-X and Federal Hi-Powers living on a farm in Minnesota with six growing boys. According to the family oral history Grandpa tried one of those new fangled Winchester Model 1897 pump guns but couldn't get use to it, so traded it off for this 1890-vintage Parker Bros. at Kennedy Bros. in the Twin Cities in 1901. My Father and Uncles would talk of Grandpa going by the Federal plant and getting buckets of slightly blemished shells, Federal "seconds" that they all shot in the old Parker. Similarly my Father shot nothing but factory smokeless loads in the three Damascus barrel Remington doubles he owned over the years. I doubt my Father, Grandfather and Uncles never gave a thought to pressures or chamber length. They were convinced that those Damascus barrel warnings on shell boxes were attempts by the manufacturers to sell new guns!

Drew has probably looked more closely at the old shoot reports, but I don't recall seeing a listing of a single shooter at the GAHs at live birds in the late 1890s and early 1900s using black powder. Capt. A.W. Money came to the U.S. in 1890 and began producing American E.C. and Schultze smokeless powders. I'm sure there were others before that. I seem to recall that Wood smokeless powder came out in the mid-1870s. It is all probably in one of Ed's books.

Dave
Dave Noreen is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dave Noreen 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 07:54 PM.

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.