Barrel composition of pre 1900 Parkers

[Harryreed]

I have seen various grades of Parkers with different composition barrels. For example, my Parker has Bernard barrels. There are some with Acme steel or Titanic steel. For Parkers made before 1900's is there a better barrel composition? Do all pre 1900's mfg Parkers require load considerations? Is there any info on barrel composition and load limits? Is one barrel composition stronger then another?

[Dean Romig]

The Parker Story, a two-volume set published in the 1990's has all of the information you seek except for load limits. Your questions would require several paragraphs to reply to each of them. I can think of three different fluid pressed barrel steel names and more than six different composite barrel steels used by Parker Bros. before 1900.

[Bruce Day]

TPS in the chapter on barrels includes generalized load limits by gauge including service load and proof psi. The Parker Small Bore Shot Gun pamphlet includes recommended loads. I have previously posted photos here of those tables for those interested, the last time several days ago for recommended shot shell loads. Hang tags included with each gun state the loads that Parker used for pattern testing that gun. Many users conclude that such pattern loads are correct for their gun.

In answer to Mr. Reed, 1900 has no special meaning for Parkers. All Parker barrels met proof standards at the time, first at 13,500, then 15,500. Parkers met SAAMI standards. Proof loads do not define rupture limits. There is no evidence that any given Parker barrel composition is superior in rupture resistance than any other. Parker built guns intended to handle stout loads. The Small Bore pamphlet on pp. 6,7 provides recommended 20ga loading matched to gun weight.

Persons interested in Parker shot guns are advised to study The Parker Story; most Parker questions are answered in it, besides it's a great read. Persons interested in Bernard barrels may be interested in Leopold Bernard and the history of French canon making; the Bernard canon used by Napoleon's light infantry enabled his armies to move faster and over greater distances and out-maneuver opponents. Bernard shot gun and rifle barrels were the prized French designer barrels of their day and used in best guns.

Parkers made with Bernard barrels are known in D, C and B grades and in 10, 12 and 16 gauges. I am still looking for any of the few 20's made.

[Harryreed]

Thanks, I will take a look at The Parker Story.

[John Campbell]

Your barrel questions seem to include a subtle concern for relative safety. As BD has well explained, the composition or name on the barrels (rib) is of more marketing value than insurance against bursting with stout loads.

In all older doubles, the primary concern with barrels should be pits and wall thickness after honing. With barrels that still have relatively safe walls, there is little worry no matter what the name of the steel used may be.

[Bruce Day]

I agree with John's comments, except I don't know about marketing. Some people simply prefer the look of Bernard, or American Bunting, 3 blade Croille, etc over other composites. And Acme and Peerless are better finished than Vulcans. There are finish and appearance differences which fill preferences. But, again, no evidence is known that any Parker barrel is more rupture resistant than any other, particularly at SAAMI proof load pressures. So no, in answer to the common question, no evidence has been presented that Parker iron/steel composite barrels rupture at any less pressure than fluid steel.

[David Holes]

An 1880's Parker catalog states this. If an iron barrel, no matter how thick and strong is defective and does not pass test it will splinter into small pieces, While the Damascus, Bernard, and laminated will tear like woven fabric. Our experience is that if there be the same percentage, iron and steel placed in each there is no material difference in there durability. As the hardness and strength will be the same in each. The only preference being the choice in the figure. It then states that Damascus barrels are recommended.

[Bruce Day]

Yes, David, that is true for early 1880's iron barrels; that Damascus was better than the iron barrels of the day. It was not until the advent of the Whitworth process for fluid compressed steel that fluid steel barrels equaled Damascus for strength and the Whitworth process was a closely guarded secret for many years, and costly until Krupp figured it out and began competing and prices fell. Of course all the Vulcan, Titanic, etc. Parker fluid steels were compressed and void free.

Bernards are Damascus and there are several Bernard Damascus patterns, but Parker used only one of them.

For general interest, I'll post again the Damascus Parker barrels with Terrell made into the croille.

[Dean Romig]

The composition or name on the barrels (rib) is of more marketing value than insurance against bursting with stout loads.




I think this statement may be the case for the majority of fluid pressed steels in the Meriden days... with the exception of Whitworth Steel imported from England to be used only on the finest of Parkers.

Refer to Charlie Price's article in the 2013 Autumn Issue of Parker Pages.

[David Holes]

Mosiac laminated Parker barrels, has an uncommon look.

[Mills Morrison]

I seem to understand that the early, early Parkers may not be safe to shoot even with RST or other low pressure shells, even though it seems generally accepted on here that later composite steel barrels are safe to shoot, assuming no issues and with low pressure shells. Obviously, all old barrels should be shot with care, but what time period or barrel types should one pay closer attention to? Do any of the experts on here care to shed some light on the subject?

[Drew Hause]

Please see
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CGAF5f-J0-Foww572KvNYb0xSS1nBasWgHYvzD18i3c/edit

and
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LFnSG34k3mBhLEjEgU267wAlIa215MNVQZhIiY62Hx4/edit

and
http://www.picturetrail.com/sfx/album/view/17227428
http://www.picturetrail.com/sfx/album/view/19406549
http://www.picturetrail.com/sfx/album/view/19025099

Bruce is aware that Parker Bernard barrels were sourced from Belgium
Leopold died in 1870 and his business ceased operation in 1890
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fMs-Mn60ei9QsRcHT5Urm_eHobzJnaDKZiP3FP0fXb0/edit

[Bruce Day]

There are non Parker cheap barrels made of rolled steel edge welded and printed with a fake Damascus pattern. Don't shoot those. All the early lifter action Parker barrels I have seen look pretty stout and have ample wall thickness, and well they should because a common practice was to cram as much black powder in the hull as possible and blast away. I don't know about the back action lifters and hinge lock early Meriden Mfg guns.

People commonly say " low pressure " without defining low pressure. To me , assuming unaltered barrels, appropriate pressure remains Parker service loads as made. Some throw out 6000 psi for a 12 ga based upon British loads, but those are for thin walled 2" guns which are a long way from Parker stout. Others throw out 8500psi ( 12ga) without any apparent documentary justification . So I don't know what folks mean when they say low pressure. To me, I am more concerned with low recoil for target loads than low pressure, so that means 1 oz or less and maybe 1100 fps for a 12. Lots of confusion between low recoil and low pressure.

[Mills Morrison]

Santa is bringing me a back action lifter in the 1,000 serial number range. It has decarbonized steel barrels. Earlier this Fall, I bought what appears to be an early Grade 2 front action lifter in the 1,100 serial number range. It has Damascus barrels. Right now, I don't plan on shooting the back action at all, but keeping it as a collector piece. The front action, I want to get checked out and shoot if ok. I am not far enough along in my knowledge to define "low pressure" other than using RST shells.

Thanks Bruce and Drew for the info.

[Drew Hause]

Mills: I share your apprehension regarding pre-c. 1870 Decarbonized Steel barrels

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1373/6511424/19406549/325553101.jpg

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1373/6511424/19406549/295122617.jpg

"Bessemer process homogenous wrought iron" was sourced from Remington Arms. Pages 503 & 504 of The Parker Story state that Parker changed the name to "Plain Steel" as Remington was using the name "Decarbonized" on their newly introduced Model 1873 & 1875/1876 Hammer Lifter doubles.

I am of the opinion that pattern welded barrel quality is assessed based on the over-all quality of the gun; with no intrinsic difference in strength between Twist, Damascus or Laminated Steel based on the 1891 Birmingham Proof House Trial
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YJxP1k3PzmtmrG1HEGxd8X6g0-1GL0KNY8WMIMkdKr0/edit

[Harryreed]

:bowdown::clap:Thanks again Drew and Bruce for the links. Very interesting!!!

[Bruce Day]

As for me, I'll take Damascus, Bernard or other fine croille. My search guns are a 20ga Bernard ( the Holy Grail) or a 20 or 16 Fine Damascus AH . Those barrels are much more interesting than fluid steel and just as capable.

Here are first a 12 then a 16.

[Mills Morrison]

Agree that fluid steel barrels are boring.

[Rick Losey]

All the early lifter action Parker barrels I have seen look pretty stout and have ample wall thickness, and well they should because a common practice was to cram as much black powder in the hull as possible and blast away.

as long as no one has been to aggressive in "cleaning" them up, they look like pipes, I don't think these have been honed at all

http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg195/setterw/IMGP4728_zpscfe33cec.jpg


i do stick with lower pressure/lowwer recoil loads for the sake of the wood.

but, my 1904 VH was rebarrelled by Remington with modern chambers, I shot modern 2 3/4 in it (not all that many a year) and this year noticed a fine crack in the wrist of that old wood - i can't prove it- but my guess is stiffer loads didn't help

[Mills Morrison]

Rick, I am getting hooked on 7/8 oz loads for much the reason you give. Easy on the gun and easy on the shoulder and still deadly for whatever you shoot

[Dave Suponski]

For me I don't shoot decarbonized barrelled guns. These very early guns were made from musket barrels left over from the war of Northern Aggression. Any of the later composite barrelled guns once the wall thickness and integrity are given the green light I wouldn't hesitate to shoot.

[Drew Hause]

Dave: Parker Brothers "Gun Iron" barrels were made from surplus musket barrels used on "Charles Parker Makers" guns. This is an 1866 Price List

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1373/6511424/19406549/325553103.jpg

Decarbonized steel by Remington was new fangled stuff at the time :cool:

From Fire-Arms Manufacture 1880 U.S. Department of Interior, Census Office
"The earliest use of decarbonized steel or gun-barrels is generally credited to the Remingtons, who made steel barrels for North & Savage, of Middletown, Connecticut, and for the Ames Manufacturing company, of Chicopee, Massachusetts, as early as 1846. It is also stated that some time about 1848 Thomas Warner, a the Whitneyville works, incurred so much loss in the skelp-welding of iron barrels that he voluntarily substituted steel drilled barrels in his contract, making them of decarbonized steel, which was believed by him to be a a novel expedient. The use of soft cast-steel was begun at Harper's Ferry about 1849. After 1873, all small-arms barrels turned out at the national armory at Springfield were made of decarbonized steel(a barrel of which will endure twice as heavy a charge as a wrought-iron barrel), Bessemer steel being used until 1878, and afterward Siemens-Martin steel."

[Dave Suponski]

Thank's for straightening me out Drew. ButI am still hesitant about shooting Decarbonized Steel barrels. Just my own opinion.

[JAMES HALL]

TPS in the chapter on barrels includes generalized load limits by gauge including service load and proof psi. The Parker Small Bore Shot Gun pamphlet includes recommended loads. I have previously posted photos here of those tables for those interested, the last time several days ago for recommended shot shell loads. Hang tags included with each gun state the loads that Parker used for pattern testing that gun. Many users conclude that such pattern loads are correct for their gun.

In answer to Mr. Reed, 1900 has no special meaning for Parkers. All Parker barrels met proof standards at the time, first at 13,500, then 15,500. Parkers met SAAMI standards. Proof loads do not define rupture limits. There is no evidence that any given Parker barrel composition is superior in rupture resistance than any other. Parker built guns intended to handle stout loads. The Small Bore pamphlet on pp. 6,7 provides recommended 20ga loading matched to gun weight.

Persons interested in Parker shot guns are advised to study The Parker Story; most Parker questions are answered in it, besides it's a great read. Persons interested in Bernard barrels may be interested in Leopold Bernard and the history of French canon making; the Bernard canon used by Napoleon's light infantry enabled his armies to move faster and over greater distances and out-maneuver opponents. Bernard shot gun and rifle barrels were the prized French designer barrels of their day and used in best guns.

Parkers made with Bernard barrels are known in D, C and B grades and in 10, 12 and 16 gauges. I am still looking for any of the few 20's made.

I'll add another grade to this one. Check out 200608 in the serial numbers book. It is not a misprint. B2 only one made.

[David Holes]

That is interesting, does anyone here have that gun?

[Dave Noreen]

"America's Oldest Gunmaker", Remington, was really in the gun barrel and parts business for most of the years from their 1816 birth date up until just before the Northern War of Aggression. One of the earliest pieces of Remington paper that the Remington Society has come up with is an E. Remington & Sons 1854 broadsheet listing their cash prices for barrels. They offer --

MATCHED BARRELS for DOUBLE GUNS, plain iron------------$4.50
MATCHED BARRELS for DOUBLE GUNS, stubs twisted plain---$8.00
MATCHED BARRELS for DOUBLE GUNS, stubs twisted fine---$10.00
MATCHED BARRELS for DOUBLE GUNS, cast steel------------$8.00
BARRELS for DOUBLE GUNS, cast steel, solid or drilled from single bar-----$15.00
BARRELS for DUCK GUNS, from 20 pounds upwards -- 75 cents per lb.

[Dave Suponski]

Very interesting Dave. Thanks for posting it up.

[charlie cleveland]

boy that must have been some duck gun with them at 20 plus pounds and at .75 cents per pound ...this was a great post...thanks charlie

[charlie cleveland]

so would any of ya ll shoot a plain steel marked parker brothers gun or would you be hesitant to shoot them..and the barrels are real good no pitts... charlie

[edgarspencer]

Perhaps Tom Armbrust and Sherman Bell could be talked into doing the same test they performed on Damascus barrels, but using a Parker marked 'Decarbonized Steel'. Given that they had to take the loads all the way to the mid 20,000 psi range to burst a set of Damascus barrels, I wouldn't hesitate to shoot a 7000 psi load out of an otherwise good set. I have yet to see any published information that emphatically states that decarbonized steel barrels are unsafe, and suspect there's some urban legend involved, much like the old legends of damascus barrels.

[ed good]

the urban legend is that parker decarbonized barrels were made from civil war surplus musket barrels of unknown origin and quality...better safe than sorry.

[Mills Morrison]

I have a Parker with decarbonized barrels that I enjoy having in my collection and enjoy getting out of the safe and looking at occasionally. I have others that I shoot, mostly with twist and Damascus barrels

[Thomas L. Benson Sr.]

I still would like to see a set of blown decarbonated barrels and who had them when they failed and what they were shooting in them at that time. Thanks Thomas

[edgarspencer]

the urban legend is that parker decarbonized barrels were made from civil war surplus musket barrels of unknown origin and quality...better safe than sorry.

I'm not sure "unknown origin" is correct. They were using up old inventory of the Meriden Manufacturing Co contract to make 1863 Springfield rifled muskets.