Shotshell Pressure Question?

[Mike Stahle]

Any idea as to what the pressure level would be on these Federal 12’s?

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l308/mountaincreekphotos/Guns/Federal12gashotshells001.jpg

[E Robert Fabian]

My guess from the speed and Dram equ. lite to moderate depending the gun your using. I would save them neet box are they paper?

[Mike Stahle]

My guess from the speed and Dram equ. lite to moderate depending the gun your using. I would save them neet box are they paper?

I actually bought a few boxes, just for the boxes. Thought they would be great to store my BP brass shotshells in. The shells that came in the boxes are unfortunately plastic. I was just wondering if they would be safe to use up in my Damascus barreled Parker shooting clays.

[Mark Landskov]

Wow! That box isn't even scuffed. It appears as if it was just removed from the original case. Too bad the original cartridges are missing. As I am sure others will tell you, 'low brass' does not always equate to 'low pressure'. Most folks here load their own. I, and many others, do not load shotshells, but purchase RSTs or Polywad Vintagers. The latter two are loaded to lower pressures to save wear and tear and keep older guns 'on face'. Cheers!

[Mark Landskov]

This may be a stretch, but.....I am puzzled by the reference to velocity. Only in the past 10(?) years or so have I seen velocities on shotshell boxes. Plus, the cartridge illustrated on the box matches the contents. Also, the shooter is dressed in a fashion that, to me, pre-dates plastic shells. Is that Federal box some sort of a 'retro' product designed to coincide with an anniversary of some sorts?

[Mike Stahle]

I am puzzled by the reference to velocity. Only in the past 10(?) years or so have I seen velocities on shotshell boxes. Is that Federal box some sort of a 'retro' product designed to coincide with an anniversary of some sorts?

I have no idea, but they had ten box cases of them for $79.90 a case.
The boxes I got, I picked right out of one of the open cases in the store.

[Mark Landskov]

Interesting! I have lotsa reference material for Winchester and Remington products, but nothing for Federal.

[Robert Rambler]

These were sort of an anniversary edition "Red Sweater" box, similar to what Winchester did with the Super X box. Original box is on top. Those are modern shells, might want to use caution in a Damascus gun!

4942

[Mark Landskov]

Cool! Thanks, Robert. I 'Googled' for awhile, but came up empty-handed.

[Mike Stahle]

[QUOTE=Robert Rambler;23871]These were sort of an anniversary edition "Red Sweater" box, similar to what Winchester did with the Super X box. Original box is on top. Those are modern shells, might want to use caution in a Damascus gun!

So what makes the pressure high?
Is it the drams of powder "and or" the brand of smokeless powder?
This pressure thing is very confusing to me to say the least.
They were using smokeless powder back in the day before my Damascus
barreled gun ever left the Parker factory.

[Ed Blake]

I have seen these shells at the local Gander Mountain, and have used their equivalent from Remington in a heavy #2 frame GH damascus 12 gauge. I would say at 1145 fps the pressure would be on the low side. Minimum wall thickness on the GH is around 50 thou so I am confident the gun can handle these loads, but I would hesitate to shoot anything much more potent because the gun is circa 1892.

[Mike Stahle]

Think I will just stick to my BP brass shotshells.
Just seems to be way to much uncertainty for me.
(though gut feeling, these old guns were built like tanks:-)
But then there is RST's and a few others doing it with smokless.


http://shootersforum.com/showthread.htm?t=4385

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Shotshells%3a+Black+Powder+vs.+Smokeless.(Brief+Ar ticle)-a059281213

http://community.discovery.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9741919888/m/3661910099

http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=3338

[Robert Rambler]

Mike, you'll find some helpful info here concerning Drams and velocity.

http://www.tbullock.com/bpsg.html

[Dave Noreen]

The "Drams Equivalent" business came about as the various dense smokeless powders began coming into use in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Prior to that both black powder and bulk smokeless powder (E.C., Schultze, DuPont, etc.) were measured by dram (volume), as black powder had been in earlier times to pour down the mouth of your muzzle loader. Shooters of the day had a warm fuzzy feeling for how their favorite load of 3 1/4 drams of powder and 1 1/4 ounces of shot (or whatever) performed. Then along comes dense smokeless powders such as Laflin & Rand's Infallible, Nobel's Ballistite and Walsrode, which are loaded by grains (weight). Joe Nimrod goes to the gun store and sees boxes of UMC Nitro Clubs loaded with 24 grains of Infallible and 1 1/4 ounces of shot, and he doesn't have that warm fuzzy feeling of how that load performs. So, the manufacturers came up with Dram Equiv. to put on their shell box which means this shell is loaded with enough dense (or after the early 1920s progressive burning) smokeless powder to give the same velocity as a 3 1/4 Dram load of black or bulk smokeless powder and thereby to give Joe Nimrod his warm fuzzy feeling and product loyalty. This this Drams Equiv. business should have gone away with WW-I and the companies should have began just putting the velocity on the box, but shooters are a hidebound lot!!

Just because you pick up some low brass shells at Wally World and they are listed as 2 3/4 drams equiv. and 1 1/8 ounces of shot (or any other load), doesn't mean they are any lower pressure then a 1 7/8 ounce 3-inch Magnum load. To produce lower priced shells the manufacturers use a lesser amount of hotter powders to give the desired velocity at a cheaper price. All they have to do is stay below the SAAMI spec. which for 2 3/4 and 3-inch 12-gauge shells is 11500 psi.

[Jim Williams]

[QUOTE=Robert Rambler;23871]These were sort of an anniversary edition "Red Sweater" box, similar to what Winchester did with the Super X box. Original box is on top. Those are modern shells, might want to use caution in a Damascus gun!

So what makes the pressure high?
Is it the drams of powder "and or" the brand of smokeless powder?
This pressure thing is very confusing to me to say the least.
They were using smokeless powder back in the day before my Damascus
barreled gun ever left the Parker factory.

It is a complex interaction of amount of powder, burn rate of the powder, amount of payload, and velocity (and a few other things, too). But for simplicity's sake, take a one ounce load that gives 1200 fps velocity. You can achieve that with a fast burning powder that gives the payload a swift kick in the rear, and a resulting high pressure peak. OR, you can achieve the same velocity with a slower powder that gives the payload a gentler shove that lasts much longer down the barrel, but results in a lower overall pressure. Once the shot clears the muzzle there's no difference - you've got one ounce moving at 1200 fps. The difference is in the rate of acceleration down the barrel.

Now, with any given load, anything you "increase" (payload, velocity, or powder charge) will also increase pressure.

Finally, you must remember that most modern shells (unless they are specialty shells made for vintage guns) are designed so they will work well in the ubiquitous gas autoloader that the Average Joe shoots. According to a Federal rep I talked to once, they feel they need around 8500 psi or more for the shells to operate smoothly in a wide variety of autoloaders (including the ones owned by the guys who don't clean them much). If their shells won't cylcle the average automatic, they will get a bad reputation among their largest customer base. Plus, fast burning powders with high pressures generally require less of a charge than slower burning ones to achieve the same velocity, therefore they are more economical for the cartridge manufacturer (less powder per shell). In any case, I would bet that even what we call "light loads" in modern shells are still generating 8500 psi or more. (I'm not including the so-called Ultra-Light loads that the manufacturers don't recommend for autoloaders - they could very well be lower than that).

[Mike Stahle]

The "Drams Equivalent" business came about as the various dense smokeless powders began coming into use in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Prior to that both black powder and bulk smokeless powder (E.C., Schultze, DuPont, etc.) were measured by dram (volume), as black powder had been in earlier times to pour down the mouth of your muzzle loader. Shooters of the day had a warm fuzzy feeling for how their favorite load of 3 1/4 drams of powder and 1 1/4 ounces of shot (or whatever) performed. Then along comes dense smokeless powders such as Laflin & Rand's Infallible, Nobel's Ballistite and Walsrode, which are loaded by grains (weight). Joe Nimrod goes to the gun store and sees boxes of UMC Nitro Clubs loaded with 24 grains of Infallible and 1 1/4 ounces of shot, and he doesn't have that warm fuzzy feeling of how that load performs. So, the manufacturers came up with Dram Equiv. to put on their shell box which means this shell is loaded with enough dense (or after the early 1920s progressive burning) smokeless powder to give the same velocity as a 3 1/4 Dram load of black or bulk smokeless powder and thereby to give Joe Nimrod his warm fuzzy feeling and product loyalty. This this Drams Equiv. business should have gone away with WW-I and the companies should have began just putting the velocity on the box, but shooters are a hidebound lot!!

Just because you pick up some low brass shells at Wally World and they are listed as 2 3/4 drams equiv. and 1 1/8 ounces of shot (or any other load), doesn't mean they are any lower pressure then a 1 7/8 ounce 3-inch Magnum load. To produce lower priced shells the manufacturers use a lesser amount of hotter powders to give the desired velocity at a cheaper price. All they have to do is stay below the SAAMI spec. which for 2 3/4 and 3-inch 12-gauge shells is 11500 psi.

So is it possible to have a Damascus barreled gun made in the late 1800s to early 1900s to have never actually had a black powder shell fired through it? I have a gut feeling many of these old girls have lived there 100+ yrs. on a steady diet of smokless anything and everything, picked up at the local hardware store :-))

[Ed Blake]

Remington Gun Club 1 oz. 2 3/4 dreq load (1185 fps) has a disclaimer on the box that the load may not cycle all semi-automatic shotguns. Some years back I called Winchester and asked them about pressures in their Xtra-Lite 1 oz. and their Featherlite 26 gram (low noise low recoil) loadings. They responded saying the Xtra-Lite load generates 8,500 psi and the Featherlite has 6,500 psi. (Remington would never tell me what psi their loads generated.) I have shot quite a few flats of both of these loadings out of various damascus-barreled guns. Some have questioned the effectiveness of the 26 gram load and let me say it is plenty effective. Yesterday while shooting doves my son Edward plastered a barn pigeon at 30 yards with one of these "Feather-Lite" loads using his tight choked VH.

[Bill Murphy]

Mike, many Damascus and Twist guns have never seen a black powder load. I have a little Damascus G 16 that was made in 1917. However, early smokeless loads probably have pressure readings lower than the modern promo loads. I don't use promo loads in Damascus guns or real thin steel guns.

[Drew Hause]

What Ed said. Pressure testing by Armbrust for comparison:

3 Dr. Eq. 1 1/8 oz.
Winchester Trap Load
1,202 fps 9,600 psi

AA Xtra-Lite 1 oz WAAL12
1189 fps 8000 psi

AA 'Low noise Low recoil' 15/16 oz
980 fps 6,200 psi

[Dave Noreen]

Mike,

I'm sure that as you said, there were many Damascus barrel guns that never saw a black powder load. From family experience I know my Grandfather's 1890-vintage heavy 3-frame 12-gauge PH-Grade digested many many cases of Super-X and Federal Hi-Powers living on a farm in Minnesota with six growing boys. According to the family oral history Grandpa tried one of those new fangled Winchester Model 1897 pump guns but couldn't get use to it, so traded it off for this 1890-vintage Parker Bros. at Kennedy Bros. in the Twin Cities in 1901. My Father and Uncles would talk of Grandpa going by the Federal plant and getting buckets of slightly blemished shells, Federal "seconds" that they all shot in the old Parker. Similarly my Father shot nothing but factory smokeless loads in the three Damascus barrel Remington doubles he owned over the years. I doubt my Father, Grandfather and Uncles never gave a thought to pressures or chamber length. They were convinced that those Damascus barrel warnings on shell boxes were attempts by the manufacturers to sell new guns!

Drew has probably looked more closely at the old shoot reports, but I don't recall seeing a listing of a single shooter at the GAHs at live birds in the late 1890s and early 1900s using black powder. Capt. A.W. Money came to the U.S. in 1890 and began producing American E.C. and Schultze smokeless powders. I'm sure there were others before that. I seem to recall that Wood smokeless powder came out in the mid-1870s. It is all probably in one of Ed's books.

Dave

[Mike Stahle]

Any of you guys ever try this brand of low pressure shells?

http://neweraammunition.com/

[Leighton Stallones]

I bought some of these also, in the commerative box and e mailed Federal as to the pressure. I received a semi generic answer back telling me to assume that all of their ammo was 10,000psi or more

[Eric Eis]

Mike, I shoot alot of New Era ammo, matter of fact I think I have about five or six flats that need to be shot..... Nice low pressure ammo and if you need something custom load Brian will do it for you. Great company

[Mark Landskov]

Brad Bachelder is listed as a New Era retailer. I have tried Polywad Vintagers and like them. I noticed that RST seems to be the cartridge of choice with most of the forum members. Is there something about Polywad that I don't know?

[Leighton Stallones]

Although Federal sent me the reply about 10,000 psi assumptions, I do not believe they are over 8500 psi and maybe less from shooting them. I don't shoot them in my damascus simply because of the recoil of 1 1/8, but millions of this nature have been shot in Damascus and laminated for over 100 years.

[Mike Stahle]

Is there an actual hard number used as a standard breaking point for high and low pressure determination?

[Mike Stahle]

I bought some of these also, in the commerative box and e mailed Federal as to the pressure. I received a semi generic answer back telling me to assume that all of their ammo was 10,000psi or more

I did the same this morning, anxious to see what reply I get back.

[Ed Blake]

"High" and "Low" pressure designations are relative terms in regards to vintage shotguns. I use a rule of thumb of anything over 8,500 psi is considered high, and if you think your gun can't handle 8,500 psi (for one reason or another) the gun should not be shot. Period. Go read Sherman Bell's series in the DGJ.

[Dave Suponski]

Mark, I have shot Poly-Wad shells for year's before RST came out. Jay Menefee run's a great company,is very free with info and deserves at least some of our business. But I must confess that when I have to buy shell's and not shoot my reloads RST is my shell of choice.

[John R. Richards]

I received an e-mail sales flyer from Gander Mountain last week and they showed those boxes on sale for $39.99 per 5 boxes (125 shells). The flyer also showed they were sold out. Just guessing, but Federal probably had a sales promotion.

[Bruce Day]

Then there's always the proof and service load table in the barrels chapter of TPS. People seem to want avoid that pressure information and invent their own pressure limits.

Guess its foolhardy to drive the old SL above 60 mph also.

[Mike Stahle]

Well guys I did the unthinkable with a Damascus barreled
parker and shot 5 rounds of these smokeless shells through each barrel today. :nono:
http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l308/mountaincreekphotos/Guns/Federal12gashotshells001.jpg
The old girl didn’t even flinch for a second. She said just bring it. :corn:
For what it’s worth, the recoil was noticeable less than the same load in
MagTech with BP. Wow! this old girl shoots a very tight pattern. :shock:
I repeatedly flipped an old 5 gal. Kerosene oil can over at 40 paces with this load of #8 shot. All the shot cups were found within 10 to 15 feet of the can. And for what it’s worth the barrel didn’t blow up or split, and I still have all my fingers. :)

[Bruce Day]

Be careful in saying anything. You'll have the low pressure police after you.

I've shot thousands of rounds of moderate pressure factory shells through my damascus guns, as have other major collectors I know. One of the most significant collectors buys shells from Wal-Mart and blasts away with high grade guns, yet he won't say anything here because of adverse comments it would raise. Others buy Win AA Lights and Ultra Lights by the multi case lot, one even buys a pallet every year and fires away through a damascus AH.

But, over the years, I have seen several guns rupture. All have been fluid steel barreled. Proof positive that you need to be careful in shooting fluid steel guns.

[Austin W Hogan]

Gentlemen: I was cleaning up the disks today, and came across this figure which appeared in Parker Pages a few years ago. It shows that regardless what the guys in the grey flannel suits say, chamber pressure is simply a function of the length of the shot column.
Parkers are strong, they will take a lot of heavy loads without saying uncle. Along the way to uncle , chips will appear behind the tang, and the stock will begin to show some space along side the tang.
Remember that 80% of Parkers were made when 3/4 ounce was a twenty gauge load, 7/8 ounce a 16 ga load, 1 or 1 1/8 in a twelve, amd 1 1/4 ounce in a ten.

Best, Austin

[Mike Stahle]

Be careful in saying anything. You'll have the low pressure police after you.
I've shot thousands of rounds of moderate pressure factory shells through my damascus guns, as have other major collectors I know. One of the most significant collectors buys shells from Wal-Mart and blasts away with high grade guns, yet he won't say anything here because of adverse comments it would raise. Others buy Win AA Lights and Ultra Lights by the multi case lot, one even buys a pallet every year and fires away through a damascus AH.

But, over the years, I have seen several guns rupture. All have been fluid steel barreled. Proof positive that you need to be careful in shooting fluid steel guns.

Hummm… have we lost our “you know what’s” that bad? ;)

An is it true question: I remember being either told or reading that a shotshell
will not rupture or blowup if it went off and or was set off outside of a gun barrel.
(NO this one I am not going to try no how) :nono:

[Bruce Day]

I've urged folks to familiarize themselves with the proof and service loads table in TPS and to follow the shot loads for the gauge provided by Parker and reproduced in TPS, and as just restated by Austin. If a person keeps the shot charge down to what Parker recommended for the gauge and pushes that charge at moderate velocities, say 1050 to 1200fps, then most all the time, they will be below the service limits. And as has been noted by Dave Noreen, dram equivalents correlate to speed.

Some of the most extreme examples of low pressure police we have had here have been when they have told people who have heavy duck 2 frame 8lb 12's with .040-.050" wall thickness that they must shoot low pressure loads. That said, I'm not a fan of these 1 1/4oz or even more 12ga loads pushed at 1300-1450 fps that the manufacturers are making and touting as premium ( and costly) pheasant loads.

And Mike, I remember when I was a kid throwing a shotshell in the fire and running the other direction. Common sense prevailed and the expected result occurred.

[Mark Ouellette]

Bruce,

Well stated! While Parker barrels in good condition should withstand high pressure loads the stock will be damaged. I think the action will certainly also loosen after a diet of 8500-11000 PSI loads! The steel grades of 1890 were not what we have today.

From personal experiance, this early season I took 5 geese using 1 & 1/8 oz of Nice Shot #2 at 1200 FPS and 7000 PSI. I dropped two of those geese at 50 yards. I think that I need to load some 1 & 1/4 oz Nice Shot for my Parker 10 gauges! One never knows when a 60 yard shot will be needed.. :)

Good shooting to all! Keep the pressure down and you'll be able to pass on your Parkers to the next generation!

Respectfully,
Mark

[Bruce Day]

80,000 rounds later and the only part that loosened on my old ( 1921) PHE 16ga was the forend lug, which had to be resoldered. The hinge is still tight. Oh, and the hammer springs had to be replaced, and the ejector springs, and the top lever spring, the bolt plate replaced, the checkering recut, the barrels reblued, the stock refinished, and the trigger sears recut, and the ejector sears recut.....but other than that the action is tight, and most of those have been factory shells, and for the last 40 years 1 oz Rem and Win loads. More recently I've gone to 7/8oz loads for clays. Might help make the old girl last.

Here's the decrepit, well used 16ga, on the bottom...the top one is Charlie's usual bird gun, a VHE 12ga.

[Austin W Hogan]

Here is another old figure from the disc cleanup. It shows serial numbers and Parker events vs calendar year from Charlie's Serialization, TSP and other sources. The reason supporting 80% of Parkers being made for loads much lighter than the modern day is that s/n 200000 appears in the early 1920's at least 5 years prior to Super X and Remington Express.
By 1930 factory 16 and 20 ga loads exceeded the 10 gauge loads, and 12 gauge loads exceeded the ten gauge and approached the 8 gauge of 1900. The production graph shoes 50% of Parkers were made before 1900. The only steady plodder was the 2 3/4 or 3 dram 1 1/8 ounce twelve ga load.
Incidentally dram equivalent is not a complex concept; it is a load that produces the same speed as that amount of black powder behind the same shot charge.

Best, Austin

[Bill Bates]

This thead has been interesting and a bit confusing. I've yet to shoot my 1920s vintage GH damascus barreled 12 gauge. I've been worried about the pressure question and other than a few manufacture getting pressure data for a given factory load is tough.

I'm beginning to thikn I've been worrying to much. The barrels measure like they have never been touched and the bores are in great shape. I guess pretty much any 1 1/8 oz. 2 3/4 dram load should be fine.

One quick question, the Bownell chamber guages stops at 2 5/8" so will plastic 2 3/4" shells be okay or should I go with 2 1/2" shells?

[Bruce Day]

Or maybe just buy some Win AA 2 5/8" shells. The 1 oz AA ExtraLights are a delight to shoot.

You might have to call your local sporting goods store and have them order in several flats. Sometimes they don't stock them because they don't have enough recoil to cycle through autos very well , but the O/U shooters love them. But I've shot the 1 1/8 AA's at 2 3/4dre's also , little more kick.

The first time I shot a damascus barreled gun I approached it with trepidation....all the club house experts talking about how damascus would unravel like a spring, how the barrels would heat up and the solder melt, how black powder was so much slower burning than smokeless, how shells in a box marked 2 3/4 would cause drastic overpressures and this gun would blow up on me and shower shrapnel all over. So the picture is this: I put on an old military helmet, a pair of motorcycle goggles, a heavy jacket, boots, long heavy leather gloves, jeans with heavy Filson chaps....and its in the 90's, I'm sweating like a pig, holding the GH 12 at arms length with my head down. I pull the trigger and there is a pop, the gun jumps a little but and absolutely nothing unusual happens. It shoots with less recoil than the tank like Mod 21. So I shoot a few more times, then take off all the clothes that make me look like Ralphie in A Christmas Story, and shoot a round of trap with the other guys standing back. And this old gun just smokes em and its a lot of fun.

So, if you want to send me the 1920's GH, I can break it in for you , but it might take several years just to be sure.

[Bill Murphy]

2 5/8" chambers are made for 2 3/4" and shorter shells. By the way, mid 20's 12 gauge Parkers were commonly patterned at Parker Brothers with 1 1/4 ounce shells.

[Harry Collins]

Bruce just mentioned the WW Xtra Lite 1oz. I have shot this load through an 1881 lifter with Twist barrels at the Southern. I reload this hull with WW 209 primers, Claybusters equivilent of WAA12SL wad, and 19.5 grains of WST (Winchester Super Target), 1 oz of shot for 7400 psi at 1180 fps. I shoot it through all my Damascus and Twist Parkers. The pressure is about 2000 psi higher than a 1 oz load with IMR 7625 powder, but WST is cheeper to reload.

Harry

[Mike Stahle]

Or maybe just buy some Win AA 2 5/8" shells. The 1 oz AA ExtraLights are a delight to shoot.

You might have to call your local sporting goods store and have them order in several flats. Sometimes they don't stock them because they don't have enough recoil to cycle through autos very well , but the O/U shooters love them. But I've shot the 1 1/8 AA's at 2 3/4dre's also , little more kick.

The first time I shot a damascus barreled gun I approached it with trepidation....all the experts talking about how damascus would unravel like a spring, how the barrels would heat up and the solder melt, how black powder was so much slower burning than smokeless, how shells in a box marked 2 3/4 would cause drastic overpressures and this gun would blow up on me and shower shrapnel all over. So the picture is this: I put on an old military helmet, a pair of motorcycle goggles, a heavy jacket, boots, long heavy leather gloves, jeans with heavy Filson chaps....and its in the 90's, I'm sweating like a pig, holding the GH 12 at arms length with my head down. I pull the trigger and there is a pop, the gun jumps a little but and absolutely nothing unusual happens. It shoots with less recoil than the tank like Mod 21. So I shoot a few more times, then take off all the clothes that make me look like Ralphie in A Christmas Story, and shoot a round of trap with the other guys standing back. And this old gun just smokes em and its a lot of fun.

So, if you want to send me the 1920's GH, I can break it in for you , but it might take several years just to be sure.

:rotf: Bruce, That was exactly me last evening. :)

[Bill Bates]

Okay I guess I'll don some proctective gear like, gloves, oil cloth faced pants and an old hat and see if I can knock some leaves off the aspens this weekend with the GH.

[Mike Stahle]

Okay I guess I'll don some proctective gear like, gloves, oil cloth faced pants and an old hat and see if I can knock some leaves off the aspens this weekend with the GH.

Bill, did you ever have the barrels refinished on your GH?

[Mark Landskov]

Bill, I was a bit apprehensive when test firing my Damascus LeFevers! I even took some external measurements to see if the barrels expanded. No worries! Even the reamed/honed 'G' Grade held up! Buck Hamlin chuckled when he told me that my LeFever barrels would 'take anything I stuck in 'em'. I don't recall if this statement was made before, or after, he endorsed my choices of cartridges, RST and Polywad. I plan on using my RBL most of the time when chasing the grouse. I have 2 lifters and a LeFever to rotate amongst when I get bored with the RBL. I don't anticipate firing thousands of rounds through my antique shotguns, so I think they will last a few more generations. Even though the barrels, Damascus, Twist, and Laminated, are stout, I like to lean toward the mild side with my ammo. If I ever decide to hunt bigger birds than Ruffed Grouse, I know that my guns will handle some stiffer loads (from the vast menu at RST!) Cheers!

[Bill Bates]

Bill, did you ever have the barrels refinished on your GH?

The barrels I was thinking about refinishing were on a LC Smith but the gun just had to many other minor issues that in total added up to more work than it was going to be worth.

The GH, after lots of time with 0000 steel wool and oil to remove the fine layer of rust that covered it, cleaned up great. The GH was one a youngman inhereited from his grandfather along with several other nice guns. The youngman left in the plastic slip case and stored them for five or six years in his garage. All the guns looked like they were in high conditon when they went into the case and got stuck in the corner. When I saw them they all were covered in anice fine red/brown layer. It just about brought tears to my eyes. The bores on the GH when I opened looked like they had been honed yesterday. The wood look good and the gun was tight as a tic.

Here is a pic of the barrels after some work to remove the rust and some Formbys Tung Oil to coat them.

http://www.pbase.com/slowpokebill/image/124852771/original.jpg

I think they look great with the age on the rest of the GH.

So this weekend I'll give it try. Hopefully I won't be typing with my elbows next week.

[Mike Stahle]

WOW :D they look great Bill, ya done real good. ;)
Maybe after you proof test her, and you still have a
shutter finger left, you can get pretty Ms. Wanda to model
that little GH :cool:

[Paul Harm]

Mike, recoil is the weight of the powder,wad, and shot X the FPS- not pressure. Pressure has nothing to do with it. Just because you felt less recoil with the modern shell doesn't mean there wasn't a lot of pressure. BP loads always have more recoil because there's a lot more powder weight in the shell, hence more recoil. Paul

[Mike Stahle]

Interesting read by Randy Wakeman :)

SAAMI Shotgun Pressure Specifications


Shotshell Maximum Average Pressure (MAP) in PSI


10 gauge 11,000
12 gauge 11,500 (except 3-1/2 in.)
12 gauge 3 1/2 in.14,000
16 gauge 11,500
20 Gauge 12,000
28 gauge 12,500
.410 Bore 2 1/2 in. 12,500
.410 Bore 3 in. 13,500

Pressure is discussed a great deal in a casual sense, but like most things unseen and unmeasured by most . . . little valuable information is normally imparted.

Lab data does not measure or indicate pressure in your gun. In the case of many factory shotshells, specific pressure is not discussed. In some cases, it cannot be reliably mentioned, as shotshells are marketed on the basis of performance, not SAAMI pressures. Shotshell manufacturing is a very competitive business; some shotshell makers (like rifle cartridge makers) have multiple approved recipies for the same shell-- the "why" is so they can buy and use whatever powder, many of them bulk or proprietary powders, that is found to be the most economical at the time. It could be St. Marks Powder one day, Nexplo the next, and ADI for the next run.

With shotshell chambers varying in length and diameter, exact pressure cannot be predicted. A simple primer change can change pressures by 3000 PSI. My friends at Accurate Powders / Western Powders inform me they have seen 5000 PSI changes just by a primer swap through their test barrels as recorded by radial tranducer.

Peak Pressure has no relationship to shotgun recoil, and so is not part of any free recoil formula. As published by Lyman and other sources: E = 1/2 (Wr / 32) (Wb x MV + 4700 x Wp / 7000 x Wr)squared.

Where E = recoil Energy in ft. lbs., Wr = Weight of rifle in pounds, Wb = Weight of bullet in grains, MV = Muzzle Velocity of bullet in feet-per-second, Wp = Weight of powder in grains.


Pressure, peak or otherwise, does not exist as part of free recoil. It likely won't stop those who think a tiny peak pressure node level equates to recoil, or enjoy speculating that that there is a relationship-- but there is no basis for it, unless we have a brand new branch of physics that attempts to now address it..

Peak Pressure, that always happens inside the shotshell, also has no relationship to pattern quality. Peak Pressure must always follow the base of the wad. When "pressure" is discussed, it invariably means only the peak pressure node that exists for mere fractions of a thousandth of one second. As its existence is so very fleeting, it cannot and does not illustrate the entire pressure curve-- nor even a substantial portion of it. Oberfell, E. D. Lowry, Zutz, Brister, Brindle ... no one familiar with exterior shotshell ballistics has postulated, much less shown, that peak pressure does anything to patterns one way or the other. If you follow the logical continuation of the discussion, a reduction of 3000 PSI must equate to something in pattern percentage. It doesn't, not one percent, and so the entire discussion moots itself in one big hurry. There is also nothing to show that higher peak pressure means more "open" patterns: if it did, every skeet load made would be at the highest MAP pressure possible-- quite obviously. Naturally, they are not. The peak pressure always happens inside the shell, before shot touches the first forcing cone, or the second forcing cone we like to call the "choke."

The bump up in pressure in the "newest" popular chambering, the SAAMI 3-1/2 inch 12 gauge, allows the 3-1/2 in. 12 gauge to effectively obsolete the 10 gauge when used with steel or other no-tox shot not subject to deformation. It allows a payload (or velocity) increase for the gauge beyond what can be had with the old 12 ga. 11,500 PSI MAP limit.

We all like to think of "pass / go" and "good / bad." We also have difficulty accepting that a "pressure number" is a vague one, contingent on our gun, our ambient conditions, and tolerance stack-up. Wad material variances affect pressure, crimp depth affects pressure, hull basewad variances affect pressure, lot-to-lot powder variances affect pressure, lot-to-lot primer variances affect pressure as well. It is a very vague if interesting number, unknown by most shooters in their guns with any precision, and has no effect on recoil, patterns, and assorted other attributes attempted to be associated to the tiny, fleeting little peak pressure node.

[Mike Stahle]

IT JUST NEVER ENDS :corn:

http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=209636


http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=184155

[Bill Bates]

Wow, early this morning I risked life and limb. I shot the GH and survived. It seemed to handle the 2 3/4" Winchester Targets 2 3/4 dram, 1 1/8 oz. 1145 fps loads with out a hitch.

[Mike Stahle]

Wow, early this morning I risked life and limb. I shot the GH and survived. It seemed to handle the 2 3/4" Winchester Targets 2 3/4 dram, 1 1/8 oz. 1145 fps loads with out a hitch.

Bill, that isn’t a sissy load as I found out last evening. I was using that same load with #8 shot (ones I have pictured) I sent a big old groundhog into the promised land from about 20 to 25 paces away. That hog reacted as if hit by a 45-70. I was very impressed to say the least. Those old 30” full and full choke barrels hold a tight reach out there and get’m pattern. :)

[Bruce Day]

Mike, pardon me for being stupid, but what is a maximum average? I wonder if I fell asleep in college math classes.

Bill, I'm surprised you are here to tell the tale. No unraveling of the damascus barrel, no shrapnel, all fingers still? I suspect that a 1 1/8oz 2 3/4 dre load with larger shot could actually kill a pheasant. I know, all the Golden Pheasant and Black Swarm and $15 a box manufacturers don't think so, but maybe I'll try it again this season.

Did I mention the Benelli auto that blew the barrel midsection? Yep, a buddy sent me the photo. His brother slipped a 20ga shell into a 12ga barrel by accident. Proof positive that Benelli barrels should not be shot.

[Bruce Day]

2 5/8" chambers are made for 2 3/4" and shorter shells. By the way, mid 20's 12 gauge Parkers were commonly patterned at Parker Brothers with 1 1/4 ounce shells.

Yes, 1 1/4oz at 3 1/4 dre, which is a stouter load than I care to shoot. Now that is a heavy load, and Parker made damascus 12ga's up until, what's the last one found, 1927? Parker marked them Overload Proved.

[Mike Stahle]

Mike, pardon me for being stupid, but what is a maximum average? I wonder if I fell asleep in college math classes.
Bill, I'm surprised you are here to tell the tale. No unraveling of the damascus barrel, no shrapnel, all fingers still? I suspect that a 1 1/8oz 2 3/4 dre load with larger shot could actually kill a pheasant. I know, all the Golden Pheasant and Black Swarm and $15 a box manufacturers don't think so, but maybe I'll try it again this season.

Did I mention the Benelli auto that blew the barrel midsection? Yep, a buddy sent me the photo. His brother slipped a 20ga shell into a 12ga barrel by accident. Proof positive that Benelli barrels should not be shot.


LOL Bruce, you got me brother, I have no idea. :)
The more I look into this Damascus barrel and pressure thing,
the more confused I’m getting. :coffee: My eyeballs are starting to bleed
and I have started on the second roll of duck tape around my head. :rotf:
I’m beginning to truly think this whole thing was indeed invented
by the big gun and ammo. manufactures to sell new guns and super
duper 4” magnum hit the moon shotshells. :rolleyes:

[Paul Harm]

I think Mr. Bell showed that damascus barrels are pretty safe. That known, why does everyone say shoot low pressure loads ? Because we don't want to shoot the action loose and to show some respect to 100+ year old guns. It's better to be safe than sorry. I keep my loads under 7000 psi. One thing not discussed was low pressure means less deformation of shot = better patterns. Paul

[Bruce Day]

Randy Wakefield's recommendation to have damascus barrels x-rayed or other NDI ( non destructive testing) procedure to find cracks was particularly strange. These are composite barrels, not homogenous, and all an x-ray shows is thousands of little lines from the iron and steel ribands that will look like cracks. So I suspect he is recommending something that he has never done or read the reports of being done on damascus barrels.

In response to Paul's comment, I don't know who everyone is, but I use the Parker shot and dram loads for the gauge, gun weight and period of manufacture as my guideline for shooting factory hunting loads in fluid or composite barrels and then back off at least in shot load for clays shooting. When I reload for clays shooting, I use moderate burn rate powders because I don't want the gun or my shoulder to get whacked. I don't specifically pursue low pressure loads, nor do many other people I know.

I suppose its also best for preservation of my vintage sports car to never drive it above 60 mph, but I like to know that I can, and every once in a while, I like to drive it to its capabilities, which in truth are greater than my personal comfort zone.

[Bill Bates]

I've been pondering the safe to shoot Damascus question for some time. It seemed almost a silly question after awhile. Many English guns show current nitro proof stamps. Many people still are shooting guns without those proof stamps.

The people that seem to be in they are bombs waiting to go off crowd mostly are working from a friend of a friend point of view.

My GH Damascus was manufactured in 1924. I have feeling that Parker after 50 plus years would know by then if there was some inherent problem with Damascus and twist barrels. I doubt the first owner of my Parker spent a lot of time searching out "low pressure" loads. Likely he or she wandered down to the local hardware store and bought whatever 2 3/4" shell they could find with the preferred shot size.

When I bought my GH I bought it to shoot. The bores were excellent and untouched by a hone. The wall thickness was as it should be. There are no dents dings or pits. The barrels are on face. There are no cracks in the stock. I would have considered all of those things when deciding if a gun was safe to shoot no matter fluid steel or Damascus. My GH is a good sound gun. I'll shoot as God and Parker Bros. intended. I’ll keep it in proper working order and pay attention for possible barrel obstructions just like I would any other firearm.

In my job i do get to see plenty of shotguns with split, damaged barrels. We had a new 870 with a pretty good split and no more more choke tube brought back just the other day. A little mud will do that as the youngman learned.

Okay that was my ramble for the day. Now it is time to get ready and go to work. I have guns to photograph.

[Mike Stahle]

"Okay that was my ramble for the day. Now it is time to get ready and go to work. I have guns to photograph."

"Work"? Bill, you have one very sweet job. :cool:

[Drew Hause]

Mike: you'll note the 'revdocdrew' fella did a little jousting with Randy on that first ShotgunWorld thread http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=209636

This is Randy's authoritative source:
Clark Towle http://yarchive.net/gun/barrel/damascus_barrels.html
"I know of no true damascus barreled shotguns that were ever proofed for smokeless powder."

Nitro Proof 1 1/2 oz.

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1373/6511424/20432700/375022549.jpg

"No hay peor ciego que el que no quiere ver."
The worst blindness is refusing to see.

[Mark Ouellette]

Drew,

I have a Parker GH Damascus 10 GA that is proofed to 3 & 1/2 tons or 10,500 PSI.

I'll try to post a photo soon...

Mark

[Bill Bates]

"Okay that was my ramble for the day. Now it is time to get ready and go to work. I have guns to photograph."

"Work"? Bill, you have one very sweet job. :cool:

You haven't seen my pay checks, they barely covered what I was spending at work. It is like being a user and dealer at the same time. It keeps you broke but you keep going back for a fresh fix.

[Bruce Day]

Drew, I've seen those two fellows pronouncements about all matters of gun things before, and their lack of documentation and absence of any proofs beyond third party hearsay and indefinite anecdotes. That's why Sherman Bell and his Finding Out For Myself series in the DGJ is a breath of fresh air in the gun expert game.

[Drew Hause]

"...the gun expert game"

I do believe Bro. Bruce has identified the problem :(

[Bruce Day]

Sherman punctured the balloon and let all the hot air escape.

[Mike Stahle]

Sherman punctured the balloon and let all the hot air escape.


:rotf: Good one :)

[Bill Murphy]

My Damascus Greener is Nitro Proofed for 2 1/2 ounces of shot in 3 3/4" cases. I guess I had better hang her on the wall.

[Mark Landskov]

I have subscribed to the DGJ for a few years. Mr. Bell's articles were the icing on the cake for me. My first Damascus gun is a 114 year old LeFever 'G' Grade 12 gauge. I satisfied my curiosity with books, the DGJ, LeFever website, and this website before I bought the gun, and had no problem pulling the triggers for the first time. It was a hoot, actually! I quit frequenting 'Shotgun World' for many reasons.

[ED J, MORGAN]

The 2010 raffle gun has nitro proofs.

[Jack Cronkhite]

Drew,

I have a Parker GH Damascus 10 GA that is proofed to 3 & 1/2 tons or 10,500 PSI. Mark

I recently acquired a GHE in 12GA from a gentleman who grew tired of some of his hunting buddies concerns over his use of a damascus barreled gun. He sent it to Birmingham for proofing and a clean up of the damascus. (Came back brown, not black) BNP 3 1/4 Ton. His buddies got over their concerns. He shot many migratory and upland birds with that gun. Unfortunately, health no longer lets him enjoy the hunt and thus the passing on of some of his guns. I intend to use that GHE for opening day pheasants and hope to post some pictures of a successful day (that might mean some nice scenery shots and a sunset but a rooster or two with the GHE would be a bonus:))

Tomorrow, my wife, the dogs and I drive to Montana to pick up the plain twist under lever. While roosters don't open here until October 1, I will force myself to take a hike on our return trip looking for huns and sharptails with the .410 (not a Parker). I want to have a good look at the lifter before pressing into service.

Cheers,
Jack

[calvin humburg]

Bruce, 1st what's an SL. When you tossed the shell in the fire was the expected result your pappy found out and had a talkin with you :) ch



Jack, I used to take a lot of pictures years back slr under stood it film speed f stop yahda yahda, then they made them into computers I kept shooting the slr (I don't need 1 of thoes goofy cameras) well here I am I want to put pictures on here so I go to wally world to get me one or use my daugthers what are the guidelines to get a good picture the pixles or what ever. Thanks ch

[Bill Bates]

Bruce,

Jack, I used to take a lot of pictures years back slr under stood it film speed f stop yahda yahda, then they made them into computers I kept shooting the slr (I don't need 1 of thoes goofy cameras) well here I am I want to put pictures on here so I go to wally world to get me one or use my daugthers what are the guidelines to get a good picture the pixles or what ever. Thanks ch

this is a bit of a wander from the OT.

The rules haven't changed when it comes to photography iso (film speed and grain), f/stop, shutter speed and such, it is still the same. If you have a good film SLR with decent lenses you may want to see if there is a digital body that will use them. Don't get to hung up on mega pixels when it comes to posting pics on the web. There isn't a current digital camera that doesn't have way more than needed when it comes to pixels. If you want to make wall size prints maybe more pixels matter and maybe not. Once we passed 3 mega pixels it just became a number for the marketing boys. The quality of pixels maybe another thing but that is a discussion for a good digital camera techno geek forum like DPReview.

Go with a digital SLR with a few decent lenses. Point and shot digitals most older film photgraphers find slow and frustrating.

[Austin W Hogan]

Jack, Mark, Drew; I think Jack's recent post frames my concerns rather precisely. Jack and Mark cite British proof of 3 1/4 and 3 1/2 Tons. If those are tons made of English pounds, and expressed as the force on English square inches, they are pressures of 6500 psi and 7000 psi. Metric tons and English square inches raise those numbers 10%. If they are metric tons and metric centimeters squared, they are about 15000 psi, comparable to SAAMI proof loads.
Measuring transient pressure, especially when the total event occurs in milliseconds, is not a precise experiment; the numbers quoted always have to be referenced to the time that the pressure is averaged and the measuring instrument.
That is the reason I prefer to choose a gentle load from a simple shot column length and shot speed. I know that a shot column 1 inch long leaving the gun at 1300 ft/sec is pretty hot irrespective of gauge; a shot column 3/4 inch long leaving at less than 1200 ft /sec is pretty mild.
I think RST tables back me up on this; 10 ga 1 1/8 ounce (.686 inch), 12 ga 7/8 ounce (.603 inch ) and 3/4 ounce (.520 inch), 16 ga 7/8 ounce (. 732 inch) and 3/4 ounce (.626 inch), 20 ga 3/4 ounce (.672 inch)and 28 gauge 5/8 ounce (.756 inch) all at less than 1200 ft/sec are without a doubt very gentle loads, and it is not necessary to quote pressure to verify this.
Incidentally, Parker, prior to the formation of the interindustry for runner of SAAMI in the 1920's, proofed by lengthening the shot column (adding more shot weight, not powder weight) according to TPS.

Best, Austin

[Bruce Day]

TPS, Fig 12.16 , p. 515. Jack's gun, assuming 2 5/8" chambers, would have been proofed by Parker using charges that generated an average of 6.1 long tons and 13, 700 pounds and a maximum of 6.7 long tons and 15,000 pounds. Actual and theoretical service limits for ammunition intended for use in the gun are also provided. So if Jack goes down to the local gun shop and buys a flat of Winchester AA Xtra Lights ( 8500psi ) for example, he is 1000 pounds under the average factory load pressures (9500) for which the gun was built.

As another example, say that I want some 16ga shells to go pheasant hunting. I can handload, buy RST's ( which are great shells) or I can get Federal 1 oz Game Shoc loads at my local hardware store. These are 1oz, 2 1/2 dram, 1165fps loads and develop 7, 400psi. From the Fig 12.16 table, I know that my 16ga with 2 9/16" chambers was intended to shoot ammunition that averaged 10,100psi, so they are 2,700psi under the service working limit average. But these Federals are marked 2 3/4" on the box, yet only 2 11/16" when I measure the expended shell. So these shells are 1/8" over the gun chamber length, and precisely as Parker intended for good sealing.

[Mark Ouellette]

Austin,
I've been studying this subject but for a while. I don't know enough to teach but for what it's worth:
- During the period when the British proofed in Tons (Long Tons) it was by the Lead Crusher Method. That was by a Government approved proof house. One would imagine that if for the British Gov't it would err on the side of caution.
- SAAMI uses the piezo-electric method which can be measured and recorded in micro-seconds if one has the equipment.

So... Shooting a higher pressure load than 8000 PSI in Parker Damascus (or LC Smith) is a personal choice. My daily shooting is with 6000 PSI in 12 and 10 ga which break targets just fine. I know the barrels will however withstand modern loads but I still reserve those for when I can't load a low pressure to do the job.

A good friend and member of this board made the classic mistake of loading shells with PB instead of the black powder which he thought was in the MEC powder bottle. PB looks like black powder. His barrel blew on the 4th shot. He later had the remainder of those shells tested. They were all far above 20,000 PSI and one was somewhere around 34,000 PSI. After that my friend now keeps all black powder loading equipment in a seperate room from his smokeless loaders and supplies. In life things happen... Then the rumors start which are always much, much worse than the actual event. Oh, my friend's blown gun is pictured in "Shooting Flying" by Murdelack (SP?).

I believe in moderation to preserve and only push to the limit when necessary!

[Drew Hause]

Jack: could you please post an ultra close up of the barrel flats of your BNP GHE and thanks!

Bruce: in 2002 Tom Armbrust tested and the 16ga reloading group reported two batches of the old 16g Federal Game Load 1 oz 1165 fps at 9160 and 9633 psi. All I could get Federal to tell me on inquiry was "about 10,000" in order to assure funtion in autoloaders. It's called Game-Shok Game Load now http://www.federalpremium.com/products/shotshell.aspx

LTC Calvin Goddard writing in Army Ordnance in 1934, stated that Hunter Arms proof tested 12ga 2 3/4" chamber barrels at 14,300 psi.

[Bruce Day]

Drew, I suppose that's possible. I got "about 7500" when I talked to the Federal people in person at Pheasant Fest and matching fps with the published drams. But the Fed hull is a straight hull noted for low pressure, they use Fed primers, and even with fast burning powder like Hodgdon Universal at 1165 fps the pressure is only 7500 and less with well known slow burning powders like SR 4756. So what powder Federal would use to push faster than a fast powder like Universal is unknown to me. Universal has the fastest burning rate of any powder made by Hodgdon that is suitable for 16ga.

I got a list of pressures from Federal years ago, I'll see if I can retrieve it, but I don't think their "above 10,000" is correct and may have been only to placate the autoloader bunch. I remember they told me that their 12ga 1 oz Gold Medal papers are at 8300 psi, also a long way from 10,000.

[Bill Murphy]

Maybe someone would send a Damascus Parker ten to Birmingham to have it proofed for 3 1/2" shells at 4 tons. I can't remember the shot weight of that proof, but I have seen more than one Damascus Brit gun marked with that particular proof. I think the shot weight may have been 1 3/4 ounces. Phil Futrel once had a hammer Purdey ten with that proof stamped on its Damascus barrels.

[Bruce Day]

Austin,


A good friend and member of this board made the classic mistake of loading shells with PB instead of the black powder which he thought was in the MEC powder bottle. PB looks like black powder. His barrel blew on the 4th shot. He later had the remainder of those shells tested. They were all far above 20,000 PSI and one was somewhere around 34,000 PSI. After that my friend now keeps all black powder loading equipment in a seperate room from his smokeless loaders and supplies. In life things happen... Then the rumors start which are always much, much worse than the actual event. Oh, my friend's blown gun is pictured in "Shooting Flying" by Murdelack (SP?).

I believe in moderation to preserve and only push to the limit when necessary!


Paul Harm's ruptured Remington is in Ed's book at p. 119 and is accurately reported as the result of a substitution of smokeless for black. Other authors may not be so constrained and may have reported it only as what happens when you put a smokeless powder load in a damascus gun.

Maybe the point I have been trying to make, maybe somewhat inartfully, is that Parker damascus barrels are stout and if a person wants to know what he can shoot in one, detailed information is available and goes far beyond " you have to use low pressure shells and you get them from RST." You don't have to use low pressure loads, and you can buy shells from local sources that meet the Parker load requirements for the gun, if he wants to find out for himself. But I shoot moderate to low pressure loads at clays because I like to be easy on my shoulder and the gun. If a person hears that he can only use low pressure loads, seems to me that he may think that the gun is somehow weak, or inferior, or not as good as others and maybe I'm trying to put that notion to rest.

[Bill Murphy]

I think the "low pressure" caveat is in order for those who don't actually measure the wall thickness of their barrels. Some fluid steel barrels come from the factories with wall thickness that would seem to indicate the use of low pressure ammo.

[Jack Cronkhite]

Jack: could you please post an ultra close up of the barrel flats of your BNP GHE and thanks!

Drew: Long day on the road to Montana and back. The only issue with the lifter acquired is some pitting in the bores. The rest of the gun looks pretty nice for 1881. The wood is very good. Action is very tight. The first surprise is it sits on a 1 frame, with those 32" barrels Cyl and Imp Cyl. Should be a sweet pheasant gun. The side plates, under the right light, are still holding some irridescent colors. I'm pretty pleased so far.

Back to the GHE BNP. Here are a couple quick shots. If you need better let me know and I will spend some time with it after getting some sleep.

Cheers,
Jack

[Jack Cronkhite]

Jack, I used to take a lot of pictures years back slr under stood it film speed f stop yahda yahda, then they made them into computers I kept shooting the slr (I don't need 1 of thoes goofy cameras) well here I am I want to put pictures on here so I go to wally world to get me one or use my daugthers what are the guidelines to get a good picture the pixles or what ever. Thanks ch

Calvin: Bill pretty much says it all. I agree for computer purposes anything beyond the 3MP is more than needed and everthing out there is way beyond 3MP now anyway. If you mastered the SLR, all the concepts remain the same for a DSLR but you can do a bit more with the camera that might have been done later in the film processing, like enhanced color saturation. I agree fully with Bill, if you have good lenses with your film camera, try to see what you can find that will accept those lenses or see if there is an adapter that could make them fit. If you want control (f stop/shutter/iso/white balance/dof/manual focus etc), you won't want a point and shoot, although there is plenty you can do with them and they are convenient for their ease of carrying anywhere. Looking forward to seeing some pics.
Cheers,
Jack

[calvin humburg]

Don't see what the big deal is. If you are worried about your barrel shoot rst or roll your own. Most of the time when you miss it aint because you didn't have enough power its because the shot string went by the target. killed phesants with dove loads when thats all i had and missed with them as well. I'm sorry I get off subject at times. good day ch oh i shot a lot of black at doves works dandy but clean up sure gets old.

[Mike Stahle]

Don't see what the big deal is. If you are worried about your barrel shoot rst or roll your own. Most of the time when you miss it aint because you didn't have enough power its because the shot string went by the target. killed phesants with dove loads when thats all i had and missed with them as well. I'm sorry I get off subject at times. good day ch oh i shot a lot of black at doves works dandy but clean up sure gets old.

I don't either "anymore" :)

[Bruce Day]

My main concern in shooting damascus guns is to keep my head down and follow through.

16ga

[Mike Stahle]

I did the same this morning, anxious to see what reply I get back.

Hey Federal, still waiting for a reply. :rolleyes:

[Mike Stahle]

Any idea as to pressures of any of these old rounds?

https://docs.google.com/View?id=dfg2hmx7_333g89dwqg8

[Mark Landskov]

I have quite a few catalogs from WRA Co., Eley and Kynoch. They date from 1881 to 1928. No pressures are given in any of them. I wonder how they came up with velocities. It would be interesting to see what was used as a 'chronograph' 100+ years ago. Testing pressure was probably done with lead or copper slugs in a special chamber. Even so, where did they come up with the standards. In other words, .xxx" squish equates to x,xxx LUP or CUP. Mike and Calvin, I agree with you. I don't handload shotshells (yet), but use Polywads in my non-fluid steel barrels. It does not take but 4 or 5 pounds of energy per pellet for taking a Ruffed Grouse. Cheers!

[Drew Hause]

Mike: Tom Armbrust tried to pressure test some vintage loads a few years ago. The results (probably more primer deterioration than powder) were so inconsistent as to be meaningless. He did find a trend toward increased pressure, felt to be from hardening of the old fiber wads and paper cases.

In a 1927 Western Cartridge Co. flyer "Super-X The Long Range Load" by Capt. Chas. Askins, the 12 gauge duck load is described as 38 1/2 grains or 3 1/2 dram with a muzzle velocity of 1400 fps (modern numbers are measured 3 feet from the muzzle) and a breech pressure of 3 3/4 tons or just below the current SAAMI 12g maximum of 11,500 psi.

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1373/6511424/17318961/384733222.jpg

[Austin W Hogan]

Speeds were measured with what is known as a ballistic pendulum. The shot was fired into a bullet trap on the bottom of a pendulum. The speed was deduced from the amount the pendulum rose.
I wish I had my old freshman physics textbook; it had a picture of a ballistic pendulum, and the math outline. It was a really good excercise to convert the potential energy of the pendulum back the the kinetic energy of the projectile, and then the speed of the projectile.

Best, Austin

[Mike Stahle]

Thanks Austin,

Very cool info. I learned something today :)

[Dave Suponski]

Check this out....guy's

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&sqi=2&ved=0CB4QtwIwAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dl87 Dr2lJEOk&ei=tP-XTLqbOoP7lweq2K3SBQ&usg=AFQjCNEulR_DgEhRMrpTp5BgO6SGhyH_mA

[Mike Stahle]

Check this out....guy's

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&sqi=2&ved=0CB4QtwIwAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dl87 Dr2lJEOk&ei=tP-XTLqbOoP7lweq2K3SBQ&usg=AFQjCNEulR_DgEhRMrpTp5BgO6SGhyH_mA

Thanks Dave, very interesting :)

[Mike Stahle]

This will be my next pressure test load. This will be my tree-rat load if my baby and I survive. :cool:
BTW: I never did hear back from Federal, so much for the "we will reply within two to three days" :whistle:

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l308/mountaincreekphotos/Guns/FedShotshells1LR.jpg

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l308/mountaincreekphotos/Guns/ParkerRefinishedBarrels9.jpg

[calvin humburg]

Nice gun Mike!!!!Like the color of the wood. I'm askin santa 4 a GH 16 with trunips and a 1 frame. ch that was interesting Dave I wood of got a good grade in that class same as spelling. :-)

[Bruce Day]

This will be my next pressure test load. This will be my tree-rat load if my baby and I survive.


1. Write if you survive.

2. There is no turning back once you start living life on the edge.

3. Join the PGCA.

4. By the way, I've shoot cases of those in Damascus and fluid steel guns for hunting. In 12ga 1 1/8oz, in 6's that is my standard pheasant and prairie grouse load except for 16ga and then I buy the Fed 1oz for that.

[Mike Stahle]

“1. Write if you survive.”

I survived Bruce. :)

Still have 10 fingers, no lumps or bumps in the barrels.
No Damascus fragments imbedded in my head.
4 shots, 4 very dead tree-rats this afternoon.
This is my favorite load to date.
Recoil is very tolerable with this load in the #1 frame GH.


http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l308/mountaincreekphotos/Guns/ParkerGH12ga1LR.jpg

[Bruce Day]

Truly a miracle. Next thing you'll be trying the Fed Game Shoc 1 1/8oz loads.

Don't let anybody know. You'll have the low pressure police after you.

[Mike Stahle]

Truly a miracle. Next thing you'll be trying the Fed Game Shoc 1 1/8oz loads.

Don't let anybody know. You'll have the low pressure police after you.


Bruce,

In all honesty, those MagTec BP shells I was loading and using
in the same dram of powder and shot load are much more violent in recoil
than these Federal rounds by a noticeable long shot.
I guess there’s always going to be the seen and unseen reality with
damascus and shotshells like many other things in life.

So glade I danced to dare the tide. :cool:

[Mark Landskov]

Mike, speaking from experience, I can say that achieving a given velocity produced much more recoil with black! I have an interesting chart showing actual recoil in foot pounds for various Winchester rifles, compiled by WRA Co themselves. The black powder loads always had more recoil. I loaded for 5 different 45-70s and can attest to WRA Co's study. Cheers!

[Bruce Day]

That's because of the difference between black powder drams and smokeless powder dram equivalents. It takes more BP to achieve a given velocity than smokeless, dre is based upon velocity, and the recoil formula is based upon the ejecta, which is greater for BP.

[Mike Stahle]

So bottom line, going BP is not necessarily the best way to go? :corn:
Using black powder indeed keeps the chamber pressures way down.
BUT, at the cost of beating the gun and operator with recoil.

[Bruce Day]

Depending on the year made, most of these damascus Parkers were probably never shot with black powder.
Some people like the smoke and the clean up. They enjoy the nostalgia of it. I've never had the inclination to try it through any of mine, but different strokes......

Dupont bulk smokeless first came in 1885 and at least turn of the century Parker flyers mention recommended loads with Dupont smokeless.

[Mike Stahle]

Depending on the year made, most of these damascus Parkers were probably never shot with black powder.
Some people like the smoke and the clean up. They enjoy the nostalgia of it. I've never had the inclination to try it through any of mine, but different strokes......

Dupont bulk smokeless first came in 1885 and at least turn of the century Parker flyers mention recommended loads with Dupont smokeless.

Interesting!! Is that same powder used today?

[Bruce Day]

Not the same powder, but close to it. Austin Hogan did some analysis and I'm thinking that Dupont ( now IMR) PB had much the same slow burning characteristics as bulk smokeless. Note the name similarity PB to the original smokeless from France, Poudre B.

Austin?

Beyond that, I am old enough to remember an expression of old time shooters from when I was a kid " the greatest thing since smokeless powder". Black powder is much more dangerous and requires tedious clean up, but some folks like the nostalgia of it. I think many of our old Parker hammer guns have barrel pitting because of the use of black powder, which is hydroscopic. Smokeless powder was invented in France in 1884 and quickly caught on. It started being used in the US in 1885 and within a few years new rifles and handguns were being designed for it, such as the 1888 Mausers. The Parker hammerless guns came out in 1889 and its likely that many of them never saw the use of black powder , whether they were fluid steel or damascus barreled. Smokeless powder also reduced the market for the big bore shotguns because now you could get the same performance from much smaller cartridge cases.

[Eric Eis]

Bruce most pitting around the chamber area was due to corrosive primers not BP

[Bruce Day]

Eric, correct, and pitting on the standing breech face around the hammer nose hole. Further down the barrel, its due to powder residue attracting moisture, the sulphur compounds in black powder mixing with humidity to create acids, so acid and rusting. Smokeless powder residue also can cause it but not as bad. We get people writing in about loose chambers, e.g., a 12 ga shell fits loosely and they think they have an 11 ga. I suspect its because the chamber got reamed out to clean out pits and chamber pits are a primer issue.

[Mark Landskov]

The 'bulk smokeless' was supposed to be the greatest thing for handloading. You could use your blackpowder scoop to throw the same volume of 'bulk' for a given load. When powders like Infallible and Ballistite came onto the scene, charges had to be carefully measured/weighed. I have a few specimens in my collection with topwads citing grains of powder, rather than drams or drams equivalent. If you used the same scoop for Infallible as you did for bulk, a serious overload was made. I believe Infallible is the predecessor to Unique. I have WRA Co. catalogs that include lots of charts for the non-bulk powders. Cheers!

[Austin W Hogan]

We found an old Dupont loading manual and extracted some material from it in Parker Pages earlier this year. DuPont bulk became available around 1895, and is last mentioned in the early 1950's loading pamphlets. Shotgun handloaders were essentially extinct following WW2 until revived by Alcan in the early 1960's.

DuPont Bulk Smokeless was a convenience. It looked like soap bubbles under a magnifying glass. It was loaded by volume rather than weight as was black powder and it occupied the same space in the shell, allowing it to be used with the same wads. It produced about twice the pressure as black to achieve the dram equivalent load. I don't think pressures were noted for bulk in the DuPont manual, but Phil Sharpe's book indicates bulk burned cleanly at about 9000 psi.

This issue of Parker Pages will contain some information contributed by Ken Waite Jr on Parker's changeover from Black to Bulk smokeless for patterning. Parker continued to pattern with bulk smokeless throughout Meriden production.

PB stands for porous base. It was also bulky relative to IMR and SR DuPont powders, and occupied more shell volume. The early DuPont loading manuals specifically note that PB can not be substituted for black.

Best, Austin

[Bruce Day]

Austin, sounds like another great issue coming up. I know we have the Parker-Hawes Rod articles and now this bulk smokeless matter. As always, I am grateful to learn from others.
One matter I have questioned and not had answered is what presently available powder is closest to the original Dupont bulk smokeless that Parker used for patterning. I've heard Dupont ( IMR) PB but never with a clear explanation.
As for PB being named from "porous base", aren't they all? What makes PB different? Just the bulkiness?

[Mike Stahle]

Austin, sounds like another great issue coming up. I know we have the Parker-Hawes Rod articles and now this bulk smokeless matter. As always, I am grateful to learn from others.
One matter I have questioned and not had answered is what presently available powder is closest to the original Dupont bulk smokeless that Parker used for patterning. I've heard Dupont ( IMR) PB but never with a clear explanation.
As for PB being named from "porous base", aren't they all? What makes PB different? Just the bulkiness?


And to add, is there a big name shotshell manufacturer out their still loading
a clone or close to a clone loading today as in the late 1890’s ?

Were the first smokeless shotshells in the late 1890’s all paper roll
crimp? Or were they brass shells?

[Mark Landskov]

In the 1899 WRA Co. catalog, empty brass shells are specifically for black powder. No loaded brass shells are listed. The different paper empties are labeled for specific powders, black or smokeless. Loaded paper shot shells, black or smokeless, are topped with a single card and roll crimped. The 'Leader' paper shell was their latest and greatest for smokeless. The 'Rival' paper shell was well established as their black powder shell, empty or loaded. The 1899 catalog did not specify smokeless powders actually used in factory loads, as later catalogs did. As nitro loaded shells were not kept in stock, any of the popular smokeless powders were available by customer request. It was not mentioned as to why smokeless shells were not kept on hand.

[Mike Stahle]

In the 1899 WRA Co. catalog, empty brass shells are specifically for black powder. No loaded brass shells are listed. The different paper empties are labeled for specific powders, black or smokeless. Loaded paper shot shells, black or smokeless, are topped with a single card and roll crimped. The 'Leader' paper shell was their latest and greatest for smokeless. The 'Rival' paper shell was well established as their black powder shell, empty or loaded. The 1899 catalog did not specify smokeless powders actually used in factory loads, as later catalogs did. As nitro loaded shells were not kept in stock, any of the popular smokeless powders were available by customer request. It was not mentioned as to why smokeless shells were not kept on hand.

This could be do to the “New Kid On The Block Syndrome”
I’m sure as today; Joe average hunter was well stocked in shells
and played the wait and see how those new smokeless shells
worked out for other's before purchased.

[Austin W Hogan]

I don't have the 1899 catalog, but have the Winchester 1890 and 1910. More varieties of loaded shells and cases were available in 1910, but brass cases were still available. Winchester offered the choice of propellant and shell length in 500 shell orders.
Remington continued to produce loaded black powder shells through the 1930's, but did not resume production after WW 2.

Best, Austin

[Mark Landskov]

In 1920, WRA Co. said their 'First Quality' empty brass shells were for black and smokeless powders. The 'New Rival' and 'Nublack' paper shells were specifically for black powder. The 'Leader' in 8 gauge and the 'Repeater' in 24 and 28 gauge were the only other black powder offerings. The 'Leader' and 'Repeater' shells, made predominantly for smokeless, were available with DuPont, Schultze, Dead Shot, E.C, Infallible, and Ballistite smokeless loads.

[charlie cleveland]

i sure am learning a lot from this discusion....im lead to believe that most folks went to smokless powder earlier than i thought...relearned that black powder is rougher on gun and shoulder than smokless.. charlie

[Mike Stahle]

You and me both Charlie.
I have also learned that there’s some unwarranted fear’s,
misconceptions and "silence".

On the positive side it did create the small low pressure
shot shell industry, as well as the low pressure gun rag
police force over the years.

[calvin humburg]

but black hits harder than smokless and its a hit with the people u r hunting with and bruce i'm impressed with your vast knoweledge of the english language but could you use words this dumb farm boy don't have 2 look up in the dictionary. ch

[Bruce Day]

Interesting, Austin. So if Dupont bulk smokeless burned cleanly at about 9000 psi, is it reasonable to assume that cartridge constructions using it generated at least 9000 psi?

Just my limited observations, and I don't have any historic ammunition industry materials, but I've seen and shot a few of the smokeless loads from 1920's shotshells, and some of them are quite stout. Then as now, manufacturers seem to want to produce the bigger, faster loads that are not good for the gun and in my opinon, not necessary. The desire to see how heavy and fast a load could be shot from a gun or rifle undoubtedly caused more than a few ruptured barrels.

[Bruce Day]

..... this dumb farm boy ..... ch


Now Calvin, I wasn't born yesterday. I went to high school with a bunch of "dumb farm boys" who are multi millionaires today and spend their winters in Florida, Arizona or Hawaii. Others who are on this forum spend time buying new $300,000 combines or $250,000 tractors and manipulate their grain sales through savvy trading. We hunt on land west of Dodge whose owner spends his winters in Naples, Florida and sometime we plan on hunting Arizona with a farm boy who lives in Scottsdale Arizona part of the year.

My uncle used to pull the "dumb farm boy " expression on me when he was chairman of the chemistry department at the University of Arkansas and farming 160 acres outside town. As for me, I'm just an old retired heavy equipment operator and now talk to some people and write a few letters.

[Richard Flanders]

Bruce: Did any of that "heavy equipment" happen to have 4 engines and a 54ft cargo deck??

[Bruce Day]

It would, Richard.

Here's several of us ol country boys hangin around the pick up truck.
L to R:
James Van Blaricum, Pratt Kansas, a retired driller.
Bill Bolyard, Mich, a retired timber cutter
Me, a retired equipment operator
Charlie Herzog, Ste Genevieve , MO a retired construction worker and small farmer
Don Hornung, a Dodge City farmer

[Carl Brandt]

I think Bruce's "heavy equipment" had 8 P&W J57's

[Bruce Day]

That also. With blasting charges for surface mining operations.