steel used in barrels

[George Bagley]

The last issue of Parker Pages listed the steel used for a PHE as Parker Steel. I recieved my research letter today and the barrels were listed as Parker Special Steel in stock book #69. This was usually for a GH not a PH. Am I correct in this and it was a higher grade steel used? The serial # is 197360 and the specifications are unchanged, thanks.

[Dean Romig]

You had better ask Chuck Bishop to double check the records. You are correct, PSS was used "only" on Grade 2 Parkers and PS was used "only" on Grade 1 .... but we 'never say never'.

[George Bagley]

Thanks. How do I ask Chuck?

[Chuck Bishop]

George, I'll check the records tomorrow. It's easy to get Parker Steel and Parker Special Steel mixed up.

I'll post what I find tomorrow and if wrong, send you a revised letter.

Chuck

[George Bagley]

Chuck, thanks for your help. My staff heard me scream when my research letter came at 4:00 today. They thought I had an mi or had won mega million. They just don't understand.In the immortal words of Judge George Peagler it is better to have a midlife crisis over birddogs, birds, and Parker shotguns than loose women, dope, and copious amounts of brown whiskey!

[Chuck Bishop]

Yup George, I made a mistake. Second time this year :cuss:

A revised letter is on the way to you.

Chuck

[George Bagley]

Thanks for your help. If it had Been PSS would it have said that on the barrel matt?

[Dean Romig]

Yes it would.

[Jim Thynne]

I have had a number of PH grade guns with Parker Steel Barrels.I recently sold a PHE 20 with Parker Steel Barrels. If you check the serial number book there is a number of these guns that were made.

[John Davis]

And I am one who falls into the camp that believes the difference between Vulcan steel, Parker steel, Parker Special steel, Titanic steel and Acme steel are in name only.

[Dean Romig]

That's my opinion too John, although we may never be able to prove our hypothesis.

[Bill Murphy]

John, you are out of here. Parker steels are better and stronger as the price goes up. Anyone who does not believe that is no longer an esteemed Life Member of our organization.

[Dean Romig]

:biglaugh:

:duck:

[John Davis]

I miss EDM. The idea is that grading Parker fluid steel was a carry over from the Damascus days. Purchasers were accustomed to various qualities of Damascus steel. And of course 3 blade was in fact finer than twist, 4 blade finer than 3 and so on. When fluid steel was introduced, sportsmen of the day expected the same, and gun makers gave it to them. Perception being more important than reality. But I think Charlie Price best set out the arguments of why the fluid steels were probably all basically the same, perhaps only differing somewhat as between suppliers. That was a great article by the way. And although I can't prove anything, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

[Bruce Day]

Acme and Titanic barrels finish finer than Vulcans.

[Dave Suponski]

My belief is that there are at least three different steelsused in Parker Bros. barrels. This may just be as simple as three different suppliers. Anyone in the steel business knows that no two manufacturers are exactly alike even though they may call the material the same name ie: c1018,or 4140 etc. I have not given up on getting samples and results. Some day this will come to fruition.

[Richard Flanders]

It would be simple enough to do Dave if you could get pieces of blown barrels or muzzle trimmings or whatever. How about the guns that Sherman blew up? I can get them analyzed and I could even do polished sections of the steel and photograph the crystalline structure. This is all basic microscopy. Bring it on! Where's Edgar on this? He knows more about this kind of thing than the rest of us do collectively.

[Dean Romig]

Acme and Titanic barrels finish finer than Vulcans.


Do you mean to say refinish?

As they came from the 'factory' in Meriden the Peerless and Whitworth barrels were more highly polished than Acme and Titanic. The Parker Special Steel, Parker Steel and Vulcan barrels were very nicely done but striking marks were plainly visible under the fine rust blue of new barrels.

Remington barrels, on the other hand, were nicely filed and polished and had virtually no striking marks at all but the rust bluing process was different than the Meriden process and produced a duller or coarser luster to the finished product.

[Bruce Day]

No.

Vulcan barrels and Titanic/Acme, carded the same with the same grit fineness, the Acme/Titanic will come out smoother and better finished.

As to the comment about Rem barrels, I am in SW Kansas, but in a few days, I will post photos of identically carded, blued and polished Titanic and Rem barrels side by side so a person can see the difference. That should leave no doubt in anybody's mind that some steels finish better than others.

[Dean Romig]

I'm in Dave's camp re that Parker Bros sourced their barrels from as many as four different suppliers. I simply can't ignore the fact that the circle stamped in the right barrel flat containing the letter code for the designated barrel steel were all of the same diameter and that the letter stamp is observed as being located virtually anywhere within that circle, rarely in exactly the same position. That coupled with the fact that we have seen unfinished barrels with the circle stamp and even the HT/A but without that final barrel steel letter designation stamp.

[charlie cleveland]

it would be nice to know the secrets of parker barrel steel.. i really like this discussion some good points made on both sides..me i m gonna have to set on the fence on this one.. charlie

[edgarspencer]

Edgar on this?
I'm here, just taking it all in.
As You and Dave have pointed out, absent actual records supplied to Parker from the mills, doing a chemical and photo-micrograph analysis are really the only definitive way to put the argument to bed. Most likely, collecting a range of samples and maintaining traceability would be difficult. It would be possible to analyze samples using x-ray florescent spectrometers, which are every bit as accurate as wet-lab analysis, and photo-micrograph analysis non-destructively, That said, what owner of a Peerless barreled gun is going to volunteer up his gun? Who can blame them for not wanting to take a risk of a small blemish where they polished it and etched it?
The technical ability of raw material suppliers to supply a low alloy steel goes back a long way, but what made one company stand out was their ability to certify it. That required in-house analytical labs that had the capacity and skill to analyze each heat of steel, and each heat-treat lot, as well as a physical testing department to machine and pull tensile specimens. While I made castings as large as 25,000 pounds for rather particular customers like Electric Boat, and GE Steam Turbine, I also made them down to a few pounds, and those little castings could barely be used for paper weights for the reams of documentation that ultimately drove up the price.
Every alloy is defined by it's range of individual elements, but also by it's heat treatment. A set of Vulcan steel barrels may have the same chemical analysis as a set of Acme or Peerless barrels, but those high end barrels may have a much finer grain structure, achieved from very precise times and temperatures. Does HTA stand for 'Heat Treated, Annealed"? I don't think so, simply because annealing essentially yields a nearly dead soft, stress free material. It's just my guess that it might stand for Heat Treated Alloy Steel. Those heat treat cycles for C, Cr,Ni,Mo steels are Normalizing, to achieve hardness and tensile strengths, and Tempering, to achieve ductility. It does no good to heat treat it to a high tensile strength, and have it shatter like glass.
If one supplier had orders for tubes, ultimately to be used in V and A grade guns, he may have made them all from the same heat of steel, and maybe even the same heat treat lots. He may have simply been asked to certify a certain number or quantity of rough tubes. In our own company, some castings may have gone out the door at $2.50 a pound, and others, of the same metallurgical history, at $50.00 / pound. It's how much paper with signatures that went with it that made the difference.

[Richard Flanders]

Thanks Edgar. I knew you were lurking out there somewhere and would chime in with good information at some point.

[Joe Clarke]

Sorry for posting on this older thread...I was reading the various posts about the different monikers for the Parker barrel steel and really enjoyed reading Mr. Spencer's posting as I also work for a Steel foundry...and wholeheartedly agree with his commentary. In particular the parts about the paperwork weighing more than the castings sometimes...especially when meant for the applications like the ones he referenced! I don't happen to have a Parker with "Titanic" or any of the other fluid steels...yet!

[Drew Hause]

Joe: please check out this thread
http://parkerguns.org/forums/showthread.php?t=12593

[Joe Clarke]

Joe: please check out this thread
http://parkerguns.org/forums/showthread.php?t=12593
This is awesome information Drew...including the leads to the doublegun journal thread and the Damascus website. Thank you!

After a short perusal of some of the information provided...WOW! and an even bigger thanks for all of the work you personally have done Dr.!