10 ga remington

[Researcher]

How did you identify the "late action", by pin placement in side of frame?

Yes. Seems like the new style action with the seperate firing pins appeared along with the FE-Grade Trap Gun in 1906.

New style cut-away and parts diagram --





Older style cut-away and parts diagram --





I had barely posted my comment about not seeing 10-gauges on the new style action that one of my interlocutors sent me pictures of his 1907 vintage CEO-Grade 10-gauge!!!

[J.B. Books]

Thanks Dave, I think my AE 10ga is the new style you describe the pins seem to be in the same some spots, but maybe there is a subtle difference. According to Semmer's book mine is from 1905. The flash seems to have distorted the pins, they look normal in person.

[Researcher]

To me that looks like the wider spacing between the hammer pin and sear pin of the early-style action --



later-style action --

[J.B. Books]

Now I see the difference, thanks.

[charlie cleveland]

i too see the differance in the early and late models..i shot the remington 10 yesterday but did not get to pattern it...i shot a can at about 60 steps use ing little skeetersreducers from 10 to 12 ga..it really moved that old can i did not even walk out and see how many holes because i had already shot the can several times...the gun shoots good..the right barrel is marked with53 and the left is marked with 40..i know that remington marked the barrels as to how many shotit put in the target but this dont seem right does it..and pete measured the choke and the left barrel has more choke than the right but the numbers says differant.whats ya lls theory on this...charlie

[Mills]

Very nice find Charlie

[J.B. Books]

Originally Posted by charlie cleveland

i too see the differance in the early and late models..i shot the remington 10 yesterday but did not get to pattern it...i shot a can at about 60 steps use ing little skeetersreducers from 10 to 12 ga..it really moved that old can i did not even walk out and see how many holes because i had already shot the can several times...the gun shoots good..the right barrel is marked with53 and the left is marked with 40..i know that remington marked the barrels as to how many shotit put in the target but this dont seem right does it..and pete measured the choke and the left barrel has more choke than the right but the numbers says differant.whats ya lls theory on this...charlie

Charlie as you know the last two digits of the pattern count is stamped on the barrel lug rather than the barrels. If you look at the attached picture of both my 1894 AE 10ga and my Mod. 1900 12ga you will see Remington was inconsistent in where serial numbers are stamped and which direction they can be read, same for the pellet count. I assume the lower number no matter how stamped is the right barrel. My 10ga is choked, .046 right and .045 left. Patterns were 92.5% to 93+ %. The last two digits of you gun would make it seem it patterned tighter than mine at the factory if that is possible as my stampings 26 and 45. Charles Semmers book says there are no surviving hang tags known for a Remington 1894 10ga or 16ga so they do not know the shot size and weight they were patterned with. 12 ga Remingtons used 1 1/4 ounce of 8 but Semmer said he thinks 10ga were patterned with a different load.

[Researcher]

When the pellet count is only two digits, a leading 3 is implied. In that the heaviest 10-gauge shells UMC was producing at the time Model 1894s were being built, were 1 1/4 ounce, I feel pretty safe in concluding the 10-gauges were patterned with the same 1 1/4 ounce of #8c as the 12-gauges. And, I'm equally convinced the 16-gauges were patterned with one ounce of #8c.

[J.B. Books]

Originally Posted by Dave Noreen

When the pellet count is only two digits, a leading 3 is implied. In that the heaviest 10-gauge shells UMC was producing at the time Model 1894s were being built, were 1 1/4 ounce, I feel pretty safe in concluding the 10-gauges were patterned with the same 1 1/4 ounce of #8c as the 12-gauges. And, I'm equally convinced the 16-gauges were patterned with one ounce of #8c.

Dave you are a wealth of information and I would seldom ever disagree with you but in the case of what load was used by Remington to pattern model 1894 10 gauges I do. If you look on page 258 of Semmer's book he discussed the 1 1/4 ounce of 8's being used to pattern 12ga guns but he goes on to say 10 and 16 gauge guns were different and that he thinks larger shot was used in the 10 gauge.

I agree with him because if the same load was used then each 10 gauge 1894 I have seen threw a more open pattern than the average 12ga 1894 and 1900. Look at my picture, do you think that 10ga threw a more open pattern with .045 and .046 of choke and .792 bores than that 12ga with .024 of choke? Looking at the stamps on those lugs that is what a leading 3 would imply for the same load being used and there is no way that would happen then or will happen today.

If they used 1 1/4 ounce of 7 1/2's in a 10 gauge and a leading 3 is implied, my 10 ga in that picture would have patterned 326 out of 423 (77%) and 345 our of 423 (81.5%). It patterned 92.5% and 93% with a modern load of #6 so I think the numbers are realistic.

[Researcher]

Until we find a 10-gauge hang tag or two it is all conjecture, and we can each conjecture any way we want!! There are some interesting inconsistancies in the hang tags, like this one pictured in Charles' book --



It gives loads for all three gauges on the back, but doesn't mention the amount of shot in the loads, just powder charges?!? On the front of the tag it says the gun was targetted with load X8, 24 grains of Infallible pushing 1 1/4 ounce of No. 8 chilled shot, in a 2 5/8 inch Nitro Club shell. However, in all my UMC catalogues from 1903 on, load X8 is only offered in a 2 3/4 inch or longer shell?!?