12 gauge 3" shell introduction.

[Brian Hornacek]

I was wondering if anyone can tell me when LC and Parker started producing 3 inch chambers in 12 gauge guns? I know LC had the waterfowl configuration from 1924, did they produce them sooner? Was it as simple as a special order and if so would it be noted on the gun or barrel flat? Another question is when did 3" 12 gauge shell 1st come on the market?

Thanks in advance.

[scott kittredge]

I was wondering if anyone can tell me when LC and Parker started producing 3 inch chambers in 12 gauge guns? I know LC had the waterfowl configuration from 1924, did they produce them sooner? Was it as simple as a special order and if so would it be noted on the gun or barrel flat? Another question is when did 3" 12 gauge shell 1st come on the market?

Thanks in advance.

I have a 12 ga. VHE 3 frame made in 1906 that was ordered with 3 inch chambers, scott

[Drew Hause]

1890s Live Bird shooters routinely used long shells (with appropriate chambers) for additional wadding

DuPont Trophy Oct 24 & 25 1895
http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/SportingLife/1895/VOL_26_NO_06/SL2606012.pdf
Capt. John L. Brewer was using a Greener gun of high grade. His shells were the U. M. C. Trap, 3 1/4 inches long, 4 drams of DuPont powder by measure, weighing 36 1/2 grains; one trap wad, two pink felts, 1/4 inch 11-gauge wad and one ordinary 12-gauge pink edge wad over the powder and 1 1/4 ounces of No. 7 chilled shot; the shell had a very hard square crimp.

The ‘machine loaded’ shells and components available in the 1895 Montgomery Ward & Co. catalog
http://books.google.com/books?id=zWel51IwQ2AC&pg=PA473&lpg#v=onepage&q&f=false
12g Winchester “Leader” and “Blue Rival” NPEs are offered in 3-inch length. UMC 12g Green “Trap” NPEs are offered in 2 7/8 and 3-inch lengths.

In 1922, Western Cartridge Co. introduced the 'Super-X' 12 gauge 3 inch shell with 1 3/8 ounces of shot, and the 2 3/4 inch 1 1/4 ounce 3 3/4 dram equiv. load. Peters Cartridge Company's 'High Velocity' and Remington's Kleanbore 'Nitro Express Extra Long Range' loads soon followed.

Interestingly, one Smith Long Range was produced in 1921 and an Eagle grade Long Range in 1922. Advertising started in earnest in 1923, the same year the Super Fox was introduced. Not all Smith Long Range guns had 3" chambers.

'Long Range' 3" guns were nothing new however. 1914 G.E. Lewis ad

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1373/6511424/17710152/402327480.jpg

[charlie cleveland]

i really like these old ad s..thanks charlie

[Jerry Harlow]

Effective range 80 to 100 yards! WOW!:rotf:

Guess yards were shorter back then.

[wayne goerres]

Can you emagine the turn around time if you sent your gun frome NY to Birmingham for repair in the late 1800s.

[Dave Noreen]

Paper Shotshell Lengths

In reviewing old Union Metallic Cartridge Co. catalogues and price lists, the first time I see mention of paper shotshell lengths is in 1895 where they offer 10-gauge shells in 2 5/8 and 2 7/8 inch lengths, 12-gauge shells in 2 5/8 or 2 3/4 inch lengths, while 16-gauge is just 2 9/16 inch and 20-gauge just 2 1/2 inch. In the September 1896 catalogue they offer 12-gauge paper "Smokeless" shell in lengths up to 3-inch. All brass 10- and 12-gauge NPEs were offered up to 3 1/4 inch length. By the April 1899 UMC Catalogue things are really taking off and they've added 2 3/4 and 2 7/8 inch lengths to both 16- and 20-gauge offerings, and the 3 1/4 inch 12-gauge length in their "Trap" shell. By the May 1900 UMC catalogue the 3-inch 16- and 20-gauge length is being offered in their salmon colored "Smokeless" shell and their green colored "Trap" shell.

That pretty much covers paper shotshell lengths and when they appeared. So, by 1900 we had paper 12-gauge shells in 2 5/8, 2 3/4, 2 7/8, 3 and 3 1/4 inch lengths; 16-gauge shells in 2 9/16, 2 3/4, 2 7/8 and 3-inch lengths; and 20-gauge shells in 2 1/2, 2 3/4, 2 7/8 and 3-inch lengths.

From the 1890s into the early 1920s, these longer shotshells didn't carry a heavier payload than one could get in a 2 3/4 inch 12-gauge shell, just more/better wadding, which many serious Pigeon shooters believed to be an advantage. The maximum smokeless powder loads offered in the 2 5/8 inch 12-gauge shell and the 2 1/2 inch 20-gauge shell were a bit lighter than those offered in 2 3/4 inch and longer shells.

Drew,

Actually the 12-gauge Western Cartridge Co. Super-X load of 1 3/8 ounce of shot in their 3-inch RECORD shell wasn't released to the public until 1924 or 5.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/Ansleyone/A%20H%20Fox%20Gun%20Co/ToOwnersofSuperFoxGunsnoticeslip.jpg

The 1 1/4 ounce 12-gauge and 1 ounce 20-gauge Super-X loads in the 2 3/4 inch FIELD shell were released to the public in 1922 and the 1 1/8 ounce 16-gauge Super-X load in a 2 9/16 inch FIELD shell was introduced in late 1922 or early 23.

Dave

[Drew Hause]

Thanks Dave.

Jerry: if we only had a Woolwich :whistle:

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1373/6511424/17710152/402307702.jpg

[wayne goerres]

150 yards. I want one. come to think of it make mine a double. No pun intended.

[charlie cleveland]

wayne they can put my name on a order for one of these guns too..boy what a turkey gun this is gonna be... charlie

[Rick Losey]

that belongs in the advertizing hall of fame (or is it shame) :rotf:

[Dave Noreen]

Drew,

Another question. How are you dating that G.E. Lewis ad to 1914? The testimonial letter in it is dated 14-12-22. I'd take that to mean 14 December 1922?!?

Dave

[Drew Hause]

Thanks Dave. You are correct.

[charlie cleveland]

i just put some of those 3 inch 12 ga loads thru the old 10 ga ph grade with damascus barrels useing gage-mates...it really patterns well at the 70 step mark it put 3 no 5 shot in the dr pepper can next shot it put 2 shot in can and the 3 rd shot put only one...woulda baged even a teal at this range.. this was the 1 7/8 ounce lead load used on the can... i stated the barrel steel wrong it is twist steel... charlie

[Jerry Harlow]

Drew,

That "Woolwich" that kills at 150 yards may have been the origin of the saying "pulling the wool over your eyes!":rotf:

[Bill Murphy]

I commented on the little Fox memo over on Fox forum, but never got a reply. My question was, "How does Fox clear that memo with the hundreds of HE owners who own 2 3/4" he guns?". The memo reads like all HE guns have 3" chambers.

[Dave Noreen]

Good question. Pretty sure no one left alive knows the answer.

[Pete Lester]

Paper Shotshell Lengths


From the 1890s into the early 1920s, these longer shotshells didn't carry a heavier payload than one could get in a 2 3/4 inch 12-gauge shell, just more/better wadding, which many serious Pigeon shooters believed to be an advantage. The maximum smokeless powder loads offered in the 2 5/8 inch 12-gauge shell and the 2 1/2 inch 20-gauge shell were a bit lighter than those offered in 2 3/4 inch and longer shells.



Just curious if there is any actual evidence the "more/better" wadding measureably improved patterns in the longer shells?

[Drew Hause]

Took some lookin' Pete. This is interesting "Mr Griffith on Shot-gun Patterns"

The Field March 7, 1891 Vol 77:325
http://books.google.com/books?id=inQCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA234

You can enter 'wadding' in the search box and find more hits

[Pete Lester]

Took some lookin' Pete. This is interesting "Mr Griffith on Shot-gun Patterns"

The Field March 7, 1891 Vol 77:325
http://books.google.com/books?id=inQCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA234

You can enter 'wadding' in the search box and find more hits

Not easy to read. Looking at page 239 it would seem a thin field card vs. a thick field wad produced a slightly better pattern. All things being equal I would expect the longer shells with equal payload had "thicker" wadding. Could the longer shells with thicker wadding have reduced pattern effectiveness? However there is more information to take in here. what's your take?

[Dave Noreen]

Thank you for finding this Drew.

This is a British take on things as of April 1897, and how the folks at the Schultze powder factory perceived things. Interesting, but mainly is dealing with 2 1/2 inch British shells and a wad column from 1/2 to 5/8 inch long, nothing near as long as the wad column would be in a North American 3-inch shell. When he discusses the shell actually fitting the chamber, he shows the shell openning into the forcing cone being a bad thing, but the diagram shows the shell protruding the full length of the forcing cone, not the 1/8 inch several American manufacturers came to favor. Also, quite a short forcing cone in all his diagrams.

Would be great if we could find something like this from a North American Company, DuPont, Laflin & Rand, etc. from maybe somewhere in the 1900 to 1910 vintage.

[Drew Hause]

1895 American made shotgun shells are reviewed in the April 13, 1895 Sporting Life, but it's all marketing. I've never seen comparison testing by any U.S. shell maker or sporting publication
http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/SportingLife/1895/VOL_25_NO_03/SL2503014.pdf

It would appear the Top Guns believed the hype, or just used what the manufacturers paid them to use

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1373/6511424/24488932/408351474.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1373/6511424/24488932/408351472.jpg

[paul stafford jr]

my 1905 DHE has 30 in barrels and is marked 3 in. chambers, that's why I purchased it, its the only one I have seen.

[Drew Hause]

Wm. Cashmore Pigeon gun

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1373/6511424/19974446/403893052.jpg

[Dave Noreen]

my 1905 DHE has 30 in barrels and is marked 3 in. chambers, that's why I purchased it, its the only one I have seen.

Parker Bros. generally didn't mark the chamber length on their guns. The later Remington built Parkers were marked as to chamber length. Unless there is information in a PGCA letter to indicate 3 in. chambers, I'd suspect that lengthening the chambers and marking the gun was something done after market.

[Rick Losey]

If Remington was marking them in the later days, could they be Remington replacements?

is there a repair code on the barrels?

[Dave Noreen]

It is rather "strange" that the ad from Winchester, gives the loads with DuPont Smokeless, New E.C. Improved and New Schultze in grains. They were all bulk smokeless powders and should have been given in drams. Fanning's load with Infallible, a dense smokeless powder, was correctly given in grains. It was actually a rather light load, as the loading companies offered up to 28-grains of Infallible pushing 1 1/4 ounces of shot from 2 3/4 inch and longer 12-gauge hulls.

[Drew Hause]

This is the best conversion I've come up with, but may not be exact :(

..............'E.C.'......DuPont…....Schultz…..... ..Ballistite....Infallible

3 dram....42...........36.5............42........... ...24.............21 grains
3 1/4…...45.5.........41...............45............. .26.............23
3 1/2…...49............43...............48............ ..28.............25

http://books.google.com/books?id=97dJAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA57&lpg
http://books.google.com/books?id=Wv0MAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA446&lpg

Note that the Winchester loads include "New E.C. Improved" and "New Schultz"

[Dave Noreen]

That Winchester ad looks to be from 1906 by the date code at the bottom, well after Capt. A.W. Money had the blow up at Oakland Park, NJ, and Schultze and E.C. went to become products of Laflin & Rand. By 1905 L & R were advertising "New Schultze" and "New E.C. Improved". By January 1907, Laflin & Rand's "New E.C. Improved" and "New Schultze" were being advertised as a product of E.I. du Pont de Nemours Powder Company. Can we say monopoly??

[charlie cleveland]

very interesting stuff here..seems to be the start of shooters useing heavier loads..i like the guns with the early 3 inch chambers.. almost got me a 3 inch 16 ga shell a while back.....charlie

[Dave Noreen]

Forget the chronology I started out with for shell lengths growing in the late 1890s. I was working in the beginnings of smokeless powder shotshells.

Check this out from the 1880 Union Metallic Cartridge Co. catalogue --

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/Ansleyone/Rem-UMC/1880UMCCatalogue_zpsf1b8b662.png

[Bob Brown]

I wonder if that Cashmore didn't have its chambers lengthened sometime after it was went through proof. The mark for longer than 3" chambers was a 12 in a diamond over LC. 3" or less was 12 over C.