How big is Ithaca NID 10 mag compared to a #3 frame Parker ?

[B. Dudley]

When it comes to Parkers. A 3 frame is a 3 frame. Regardless of chamber length. Same goes for other frame sizes. The only difference in a gun that had longer chambers is how the barrels are struck. Longer chambered barrels would not swamp in an much as a shorter chambered gun.

In regards to the Ithacas. The only difference between the super 10 frames and the mag 10 frames is the the bottom through lug on the mag.

[Milton C Starr]

Originally Posted by Brian Dudley

When it comes to Parkers. A 3 frame is a 3 frame. Regardless of chamber length. Same goes for other frame sizes. The only difference in a gun that had longer chambers is how the barrels are struck. Longer chambered barrels would not swamp in an much as a shorter chambered gun.

In regards to the Ithacas. The only difference between the super 10 frames and the mag 10 frames is the the bottom through lug on the mag.

Reminds me of friend who builds sxs rifles and shotguns . We was talking about barrel profile or contour . He said he thinks if you went too straight with the profile say a straight cylinder which has no contour you would end up with a awkward gun . So you would want to go with a larger frame at a certain point to go up in barrel weight or thickness .

I was looking at that FrankenParker that pugs has with the steel barrels . You can visually see they have alot more contour to them than a NID magnum

[Dean Romig]

Originally Posted by Milton C Starr

If you went too straight with the profile say a straight cylinder which has no contour you would end up with a awkward gun . So you would want to go with a larger frame at a certain point to go up in barrel weight or thickness .

That's why the 3-frame and larger frames were developed - so there would be sufficient wall thickness in the critical area of roughly the first ten inches from the breech... and the taper begins even well before the ten inches. After that point the pressure drops off significantly. Actually, the barrel wall thickness in front half of the barrels can be considerably thinner than you might expect. In fact, a ten-gauge Parker with 3.5" chambers designed to be used with the magnum loads of the day might easily pass muster with wall thicknesses in the front half of something like .035".





.




.

[Milton C Starr]

Originally Posted by Dean Romig

That's why the 3-frame and larger frames were developed - so there would be sufficient wall thickness in the critical area of roughly the first ten inches from the breech... and the taper begins even well before the ten inches. After that point the pressure drops off significantly.





.

Wasnt there 1 Parker 10 ga built on a #1 frame ? I thought I read that somewhere on this forum . I wonder if thats how it was built with minimal taper on the barrels . The 10" from the breech , on English made guns didnt that mark that on the proof mark ? I think they measured 9" from the breech though . The bore diameter that is , may be unrelated but I was looking at a Birmingham made 8 ga that the proof marks indicated it had a 10 ga bore 9" from the breech . At least that what I was told by a friend who has a book on proof marks . Maybe thats how that 10 ga on the #1 frame was built . Perhaps 10 ga chambers that squeezed down to a 12 ga bore . I have seen a few sxs guns built like that . I would think doing that would raise the pressures significantly. Theres a few 10 ga Parkers on #2 frames on gunbroker right now as well .

I put my 8 gauge barrels beside a set of 10 ga barrels . The breech diameters dont look that much difference but you can tell the 8 ga barrels dont start to taper as early as the 10 ga barrels .

Now I was looking at a 10 ga hammer gun on guns international . Its got some heafty barrels and weighs in 10 3/4lbs and the muzzles look pretty thick . But even so the gun has alot of taper to the barrels .

I like heavy barreled 10 gauges especially when shooting the RST 1 1/8 oz loads .

[Researcher]

Ithaca NID No. 2 Super-10 --

456295 01 32-inch Super 10.jpg

Ithaca NID No. 2E Magnum-10 --

500921 02.jpg

[Dean Romig]

Originally Posted by Milton C Starr

I was looking at that FrankenParker that Pugs has with the steel barrels . You can visually see they have a lot more contour to them than a NID magnum

Maybe Parker simply had more faith in the steel they were using for their barrels.....





.

[Researcher]

I no longer own a Magnum-10. Bought mine at a little shop in Brunswick, Maine. Fifteen years later, having never hunted with it, sold it to the Hartman Brothers at the Harrisburg, PA, Fairgrounds show, and the last time I saw it, Steve Lamboy had it in the ICD tent at Sandanona a couple of years later.

In the standard NID receiver the "box" portion of the frame is the same size from .410-bore to Super-10. Just the height and width of the standing breech and the firing pin spacing increases.

[Researcher]

The earliest listing I have for the 3 1/2 inch Magnum 10-gauge Super-X shell is in the April 1, 1932, Western Ammunition for Rifle, Revolver and Shotgun. It is not in July 1, 1931 or February 1932 Western paper. The Ithaca NID Magnum-10 first appears in the second 1932 Ithaca Gun Co. catalog. Remington didn't add a 10-gauge 3 1/2 inch Magnum shell to their offerings until their January 13, 1937, price lists. Peters didn't list a 3 1/2 inch Magnum 10-gauge load until their January 3, 1950, price lists.

[Phil C]

You could special order a 10 gauge very early on with 3 1/2” chambers as well as special order the brass shells for it. Do we know the earliest 10 gauge documented with 3 1/2” chambers?

[Milton C Starr]

Originally Posted by Phillip Carr

You could special order a 10 gauge very early on with 3 1/2” chambers as well as special order the brass shells for it. Do we know the earliest 10 gauge documented with 3 1/2” chambers?

I wonder if this is one of those guns ?
http://puglisiguns.cloudapp.net/inventory/Ant2141

I thought it was a #3 frame but its not actually listed . Its a little over 8lbs I imagine its pretty lively with a 10 ga 3.5" haha .