| Author | Post |
|---|
Dean Romig
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Fri Jan 7th, 2005 |
| Location: | Andover, Ma |
| Posts: | 4887 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 15th, 2005 08:39 pm |
|
Ahem...
Roger?
|
Pete Hiatt
BBS Member
| Joined: | Sun Jan 23rd, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 33 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 24th, 2005 04:23 am |
|
It appears that there is virtually no difference in strength between Damascus and steel of the same frame size and age and condition and make. This is logical since there was no word by the manufacturers to the contrary prior to Damascus becoming scarce after the war. It would be wise to apply similar tests to any barrels of this age INCLUDING steel. The most important test would be barrel thickness. You never know when a heavy handed gunsmith with a hone might have attacked the barrels.
Of course, I would not mind if the info did not become general knowledge as the prices would then continue to reflect this. That AE Damascus in mint condition I saw last year was the most beautiful I have ever seen. The engraving was light years better than the AE seen in the latest DGJ and the mint B&W Damascus is simply beyond words to describe. The mint Damascus should be priced higher than steel. Anone would have been nuts to order steel when Damascus was available.
Last edited on Thu Jul 28th, 2005 01:27 am by Pete Hiatt
|
Austin Hogan
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 15th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1600 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 25th, 2005 02:12 am |
|
Gentlemen: I am quite surprised that none of you have seen a burst damascus barrel. Two currently hang in gunshops near me; we had several examples for display when I was a hunter training instructor at Pine Tree Rifle Club. The photos I show are not a Belgian junker; this gun was once a mid grade Ithaca 20 ga.
Note that the barrel is not split or ruptured ; about an inch is missing. This was probably due to a barrel obstruction; rain drops, snow, part of a patch, a stuck wad from a blooper? but it shows the classic damascus failure.
Best, Austin
Attached Image (viewed 877 times):
|
Austin Hogan
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 15th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1600 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 25th, 2005 02:14 am |
|
The second picture is a closeup; note the graininess in the break, and the shattered appearance.
Best, Austin
Attached Image (viewed 1283 times):
|
Austin Hogan
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 15th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1600 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 25th, 2005 02:21 am |
|
| Try again to get the proper frame. Attached Image (viewed 510 times):
|
Austin Hogan
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 15th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1600 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 25th, 2005 02:23 am |
|
| More like broken glass than torn steel Attached Image (viewed 520 times):
|
Jeff Mulliken
PGCA Member
|
Posted: Mon Jul 25th, 2005 02:46 am |
|
Austin,
Great photo's as usual. Can you get to this gun? It think there would be a fair amount of interest in the wall thickness.
If it was an obstruction a fluid steel barrel may have failed as well. But this seems to have shattered into pieces, not just a simple split split like the burst steel barrels I have seen.
Jeff
|
Austin Hogan
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 15th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1600 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 25th, 2005 02:57 am |
|
Jeff: I miked the the thickness at the break at .045 min, .050 max, and about .048 mean. The break is about one foot from the breech. Most of the burst damascus barrels I have seen failed 8 - 12 inches ahead of the breech.
Best, Austin
|
Dean Romig
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Fri Jan 7th, 2005 |
| Location: | Andover, Ma |
| Posts: | 4887 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 25th, 2005 03:18 am |
|
I don't want to appear either casual or cavalier about burst barrels because they can be a serious health hazard as well as quite probably putting a very nice set of barrels on the trash heap.
Fact is, it can happen to just about any shotgun barrel or barrels and often the reason for the burst is never known. More often than not, barrels which have burst were thought to have been perfectly healthy with no flaws or defects but then, one day... 
A very good friend with whom I shoot skeet regularly had a very nice Parker Reproduction in 28ga. with perfect 28 inch barrels. One day while on station two he went to take the high house shot of his double and it happened... the right barrel blew about fourteen inches from the breech for no apparant reason. Witnesses say he broke his target but that is small compensation for the damage to his gun. He still has no idea why it happened.
The point is, it doesn't have to be an old gun with Damascus barrels (which may stand up nicely to something just under 29,000 p.s.i.) it can even happen to modern alloy steel.
Dean
|
Pete Hiatt
BBS Member
| Joined: | Sun Jan 23rd, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 33 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 25th, 2005 03:30 am |
|
20 Ga Ithacas usually crack their frames. The weak ones are the pre-400,000 serial numbers. This corresponds to Flues and earlier types. They varied in frame thickness, but according to some who are investigating them about 10% have cracked frames. They are OK with original loads of the day, but the thinner framed ones are too weak for present loads.
Now the huge majority of Damascus barrels which fail (or any others) are from obstructions. The grainy edges are to be expected as steel/iron are made up of crystals. One sometimes sees something like an axle with smooth concentric failures along the outside edges. Then the center shows grainy structure. The novice then says the piece failed by "crystalization". It failed by gradual fatigue with the smooth areas being burnished by the already failed areas. The very last failure was by excessive stress and the "crystalized" area was good structure.
The bottom line is that whatever we may be shooting, we must always be careful about obstructions.
|
John Davis
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Vienna, Georgia USA |
| Posts: | 733 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 25th, 2005 11:09 am |
|
| Austin, in your list of obstructions you included "rain drops"? That's one I was unaware of. John D.
|
Greg Connors
Banned
| Joined: | Sun Oct 2nd, 2005 |
| Location: | Houston, TX |
| Posts: | 820 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 5th, 2005 01:59 am |
|
I guess I'm the only one who thinks it was foolish of him to blow up a Parker?
1) He probably doesn't know this, but they don't make Parkers any more. Some may be worth more $$$ than others, but they're all sacred.
2) His 'test' proved very little. It's anecdotal evidence at best.
3) Couldn't he have used some other make of shotgun?
Thumbs down for this guy.
|
Bill Murphy
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 5872 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 5th, 2005 10:39 am |
|
| Sherman Bell is a well respected experimenter and writer and we kind of accept what he has done. He has revolutionized and renewed the shooting of Damascus guns in this country. I will excuse his trashing of two Parkers for his research.
|
Don Kaas
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 11th, 2005 |
| Location: | Palm,PA |
| Posts: | 2720 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 5th, 2005 11:40 am |
|
1) Parkers are not "sacred". They are just old guns. Nice, interesting and sometimes beautiful old guns but just things. A pleasant diverison from modern life at best. There is no indication of "intelligent design" in the creation of Parker guns gun other than the intelligence of the human beings who made them.
2) Mr. Bells's tests were not "anecdotal". They were controlled,documented experiments. Not comphrehensive or sophisticated to be sure but indicative of predicted other outcomes when taken in the context of the years of historical data and the experience of the British Proof House (where old Damascus barrels pass modern standards tests every day.)
3) See 1) above. You like Parkers. Other people would cringe at a destructive test of a pitted Purdey barrel. Some poor confused souls might even object to L.C. Smiths being blown up. They are all just guns.
My only "critique" of Bell's work is his failure to use commercial ammuntion for his various tests as well as his reloads and not publishing a comprehensive set of dimensions and condition description for the barrels he tested. It's great someone has the time and inclination to separate the BS from the facts on such arcane subjects.
Last edited on Wed Oct 5th, 2005 12:54 pm by Don Kaas
|
King Brown
BBS Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 6th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 268 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 5th, 2005 12:11 pm |
|
| Mr. Bell's contributions deserve recognition from the fraternity while he's alive.
|
Dean Romig
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Fri Jan 7th, 2005 |
| Location: | Andover, Ma |
| Posts: | 4887 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 5th, 2005 12:31 pm |
|
My own decisions to shoot Damascus have been very heavily weighted by the publication of experiments done by Mr. Bell. Prior to that I relied only on Oscar Gaddy's report of the barrels I sent him for inspection as "probably safe to shoot with loads under 7,000 p.s.i."
It is my personal belief that Damascus-barreled Parkers are more than a thing of beauty, more than pretty wall-hangers -they are to be used and enjoyed. Shooting Damascus enhances my pleasure while hunting grouse and woodcock... I don't know why, it just does.
Thanks, Sherman and thanks, Oscar. We owe you that at least.
Dean
|
Bill Murphy
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 5872 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 5th, 2005 01:42 pm |
|
| When DGJ articles for the last 15 years were rated by popularity level on a double gun site, Oscar and Sherman came in first and second as I remember. Sherman was praised very highly against a very talented list of contributors. I will not bitch when he blows up a used up smallbore in his next level of Damascus versus fluid steel experimentation. My preference would be for an extensive test of a well worn Damascus 20 with factory short magnums (1 1/8 ounce high velocity) before progressing to the "blowup" phase. This was Don's suggestion, and a good one. Last edited on Wed Oct 5th, 2005 01:46 pm by Bill Murphy
|
Austin Hogan
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 15th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1600 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 5th, 2005 02:17 pm |
|
I agree Bill; I think the thing needed at the next phase is the presence of a minor obstruction in the barrel.
Coincidentally, no test verifies behaviour in the presence of a bad round. I stopped at my club for a little skeet on the way home from the Jim Parker preview. I had a promo 20ga shell stick in the chamber on station 5 of my second round . I pushed it out with a cleaning rod, to find a split case. I put a factory skeet shell in for the next shot, and it also stuck. When I pushed it out, the Briley tube came with it, with a split running along the extractor cut.
If you drive up tonight, The Hampton Falls Inn is across the road from the auction. EdM stayed there Sunday night, and said it was quite nice. Look forward to seeing you tomorrow.
Best, Austin
|
Don Kaas
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 11th, 2005 |
| Location: | Palm,PA |
| Posts: | 2720 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 5th, 2005 02:26 pm |
|
| Murphy,you take liberties. My suggestion for sacrifice in the next test was the 3" 16g Fox HE Magnum prototype that never patterned over 75% hence was deemed "unsuccessful" by Col Askins. I've got to dig it out of the safe for when Sherman calls. The other suggestion was a Parker AA vs. Purdey Pigeon Sir Joseph Whitworth First Memorial "shoot-out" test to destruction. The objective being to ascertain once and for all whether Armstrong pawned off inferior barrels on the Yanks and sent the good tubes to Audley House. I think I can get ESPN to sponsor that one...it will be on the Deuce at 0600 some summer Sunday morning after the Romanian soccer recap...
|
Greg Connors
Banned
| Joined: | Sun Oct 2nd, 2005 |
| Location: | Houston, TX |
| Posts: | 820 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 5th, 2005 02:41 pm |
|
So because this guy is popular it's OK?
Don, I think you are confusing my use of the term 'sacred'. I hardly mean they have religious significance. That VH was made by a company which represented the best America had to offer. The hands that made those barrels were Parker employee hands - you can't find those any more either. The company, the people, the times are all gone. All that's left are the guns. Maybe I just have more respect for the guns than most - I don't know.
No one suggested he blow up a Purdey. A Winchester 24 or one of the countless 'no name' guns made during those years would have been fine.
As anyone who has an engineering degree or has worked in a lab knows, his test is next to meaningless. All he determined is how one specific gun held up. That's anecdotal. Who's to say the next fluid VH he blows up won't fail at half the levels? Or the next Damascus will fail at 1/4 the levels?
Since we're after scientific data, what we need is to have each person on this list who support this business contribute one Parker. We need at least one gauge and in every grade. That's right, we should know if the Whitworth barrels used on a 28 ga. A1 Special are really better than Vulcan barrels. After Sherman has blown up more Parkers, then we can feel better. They're just sticks of wood and metal, after all.
Next, we crash test Duesenbergs.
|
Current time is 07:03 pm | Page:   1 2 3 4   |
|
