Parker Barrels types and quality

[Fred Slyfield]

Folks .I'm trying to figure out the different barrel make ups of Parker’s , my new to me GH says Damascus the web site lists GH’s with Parker special steel ?

Am I missing something here, and is there really much difference in the different types of barrels that were put on different models and grades, was one type of barrel better or tougher than others.

Bottom line is I’m trying to see if hevishot classic doubles is safe to use in my GH with Damascus barrels, I have emailed the factory to see if they will tell me the chamber pressure of the 1-1/8 oz load, both sets of barrels are in great shape and ring like church bells.

Thanks Fred

[John Dallas]

IMHO whether the barrel ring has little or nothing to do with the advisability to shoot given shell. I would suggest that you have the barrel wall thicknesses checked out by someone knowledgeable

[Drew Hause]

This should help Fred
https://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=366087

Detailed information (mostly courtesy of Dave Suponski) regarding the named Parker steels is here; scroll down about 2/3
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dnRLZgcuHfx7uFOHvHCUGnGFiLiset-DTTEK8OtPYVA/edit

Please let us know if you get an answer from Hevi Shot folks. There is no pressure information here, and I have not seen any published
https://www.hevishot.com/catalog/classic-doubles/

[Todd Poer]

Ewh Whee Dr. Drew. Clicked on link you listed and went down a rabbit hole with the back and forth exchange between you and Bob the Chemical Engineer. Not trying to bring up painful topic but that was crazy. My brain started to hurt with some of the baffling and techno jargon material presented and not certain if anything definitive presented itself. It almost sounded like you were in violent agreement that old guns can be safe to shoot with modern load pressures if you take reasonable care and not overload them, probably more for the furniture than barrels.

The only reason I delved into is that there is an LC Smith hammer gun I am looking at. Seems priced right and I think it has fluid steel barrels. They said it was a Model 235 but I don't know what that means in Elsie jargon and can't find a reference to it in LC Smith site.

[Dean Romig]

The Parker GH was first introduced with Damascus barrels, most often of the “three iron crolle” grade but some were fitted with four iron crolle Damascus. Parker Special Steel was the fluid pressed steel fitted to grade 2 hammerless guns some twenty or so years later and Damascus barrels were quickly phased out.

There is nothing inherently unsafe about Damascus barrels but it is always wise to have them measured for wall thickness for the full length of each tube and in several locations around the circumference as well as the chamber length and wall thickness at the point where the chamber meets the forcing cone.






.

[John Dallas]

My sense is that the gun manufacturers, once it was figured out that fluid steel barrels were cheaper to manufacture, went on a concerted whispering campaign to cast doubt on damascus, where none had existed before. Is there any evidence of collusion among the manufacturers that would support my cynical conjecture?

[Rick Riddell]

As Dean and others have said wall thickness is key, I think those classic doubles have quite a wallop. I have a few boxes but have never shot them in damascus.

[Todd Poer]

My sense is that the gun manufacturers, once it was figured out that fluid steel barrels were cheaper to manufacture, went on a concerted whispering campaign to cast doubt on damascus, where none had existed before. Is there any evidence of collusion among the manufacturers that would support my cynical conjecture?

That is an interesting point. I know there was a transition period when damascus and twist steel were being phased out, mostly because of cost; which would back your point. I know there was some debate about the new fangled fluid steel at the turn of the century as gun buying public was adopting it as latest and greatest to handle nitro smokeless powder loads.

Mention nitro anything in that day and age everyone knew that was modern dynamite. Doubt you would find any direct evidence of one of them telling public that they were producing unsafe guns before but trust us now with this fluid steel. Probably did it with saying get latest and greatest guns with fluid steel that are lighter and can handle new smokeless non corrosive powder with barrels that are Nitro proof etc. etc.

They might have hired a few sport and gun writers to do a subtle marketing hit piece to manage the strategic narrative. As long as there has been a free press there has also been strategic narrative use to manipulate the public perception of things. I think Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson were some of the of the best at it.

Still there is a pervasive stigma with Damascus and twist steel. It would be interesting where it the rumor,myth or stigma started. Maybe its like the whisper game. Hey get the nitro proof barrels that are lighter. It starts one way then it becomes get fluid steel because damascus is unsafe. It starts just like the wave at a football stadium.

[Drew Hause]

Todd: Stevens made a Model 235 Hammer Double, not Hunter Arms

re: collusion

Jack O'Connor, Outdoor Life, 1942
A good many people resent being told that their much loved old guns were no longer safe. Just for the fun of it, Lou Smith (President of Ithaca Gun Co.) proofed (using 17,500 psi Proof Loads in 1942) a dozen or so damascus and twist beauties which were lying around the plant. Here's the dope: Most of the old timers busted loose with the first proof shell. The rest did with the second. Guns tried were cheap, medium priced and expensive: but all of them went. So if anyone wants to go ahead using modern smokeless stuff in a gun built for black powder, he can; but he can include me out.
Reviewing the findings Lou writes: "These birds who persist in using smokeless powder in twist and damascus barrels remind me of the guy who made a living by sticking his head in the lion's mouth at the circus. He got away with it for a long time; then one day he didn't!"

1897 "Bored for Black and Nitro Powder"

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1373/6511424/20991622/409322131.jpg

1899 "Guaranteed Not To Shoot Loose With Nitro Powder" (doesn't say anything about not blowing up ;) )

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1373/6511424/20991622/413505809.jpg

Seems odd that this 1909 Twist barrel Ithaca is clearly stamped "NITRO POWDER PROVED" :rolleyes:

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1373/6511424/20991622/411848393.jpg

[Todd Poer]

Definitely not a Stevens and you can still see LC. Smith worn heavily but engraved on receiver. But gun shop prominently displayed it as a Model 235. Not a big shop and they mostly have typical new O/Us, rifles, and their other sxs's are Stoeger coach guns.

Wow that is amazing Dr. Drew you finding that article. Talking about manipulating a strategic narrative. Free press and free enterprise all in one. Makes you think about some Jack O Connor with some of his influence peddling taken as gospel. I think it was him that put out the debate about 270 and 30-06 which is best caliber. Almost like shock jock talk or reporters interviewing reporters. Do you think OConnor and Lou told a bold face lie? BTW it is 1942 who would even challenge it. It was written in Outdoor Life it has to be true.

[Dave Noreen]

My Father and Uncles all believed the Damascus barrel warnings which they first began seeing on shotgun shell boxes in the early 1930s was a desperate attempt by the manufacturers to sell new guns during the Great Depression. They didn't buy it and my Grandfather's 1890 PH-Grade 12-gauge remained in use until my Uncle Howard quit hunting. My Father shot Damascus barrel Remington AE-Grades until he quit hunting at age 80 after the 1987-8 season. I still have the 1895 vintage 12-gauge but the 16-gauge, serial number P136036, was stolen out of his home and I'm still looking for it.

"Cactus" Jack and his 26-inch barrel Model 21s is a big cause of the whacked American doubles we see way too often.

[Chuck Bishop]

Fred, why don't you PM your S/N and if I have a record on it, I'll let you know the barrel steel. It could have been either depending when made.

[Todd Poer]

Saw a gun today on Gunbroker that had a letter that indicated it was Titanic steel gun and barrels were labeled that way, but in actuality it was a Damascus Gun. Factory mistake.

[Bill Holcombe]

My Father and Uncles all believed the Damascus barrel warnings which they first began seeing on shotgun shell boxes in the early 1930s was a desperate attempt by the manufacturers to sell new guns during the Great Depression. They didn't buy it and my Grandfather's 1890 PH-Grade 12-gauge remained in use until my Uncle Howard quit hunting. My Father shot Damascus barrel Remington AE-Grades until he quit hunting at age 80 after the 1987-8 season. I still have the 1895 vintage 12-gauge but the 16-gauge, serial number P136036, was stolen out of his home and I'm still looking for it.

"Cactus" Jack and his 26-inch barrel Model 21s is a big cause of the whacked American doubles we see way too often.

Which particular cactus jack are we referring to? There are many that come to mind.

[todd allen]

No one wants to be the one that gives the "go-ahead, it's safe" answer to whether or not to shoot any antique rifle or shotgun. My 2 cents: I trust good quality Damascus over ANY fluid steel of the same era. That said, any man made mechanical contraption can fail. You have to use common sense. If you're shooting a turn of the last century gun. Do a little homework, and find out what minimum barrel wall thicknesses are. Have your gun looked at, measure the bbl walls, make sure lock-up is good.
Then find a source for quality low pressure loads, or roll your own.

[Dean Romig]

Saw a gun today on Gunbroker that had a letter that indicated it was Titanic steel gun and barrels were labeled that way, but in actuality it was a Damascus Gun. Factory mistake.



I have a 28 gauge DHE where in the order book the barrels are 28" Titanic Steel and in the stock book the barrels are 24" Damascus.

The research letter confirms the 24” Damascus barrels.

The gun came to me with the documented twenty-eight gauge 24" Damascus Steel barrels.





.

[Todd Poer]

I know mistakes are made in the books but how prevalent are mislabeling barrels. One out of a hundred or a thousand or something more or less either way.

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/781432647

[Dean Romig]

It no longer surprises me to see these conflicts in recorded data.






.

[Bruce Day]

During the Damascus barrel era Ithaca had been marketing their guns as guaranteed against bursting , but Ithaca had been losing market share. A new president came in and promptly changed marketing to tout the new improved fluid steel barrels and that only fluid steel would not burst with so called modern shells. He authored the well known dangerous Damascus letter and appeared at gun events talking about dangerous Damascus and urging that owners buy new Ithaca guns.
The Ithaca president was personable and well liked and other makers followed his lead.
The change in marketing from Damascus was guaranteed against bursting to dangerous to use occurred within months.

[Dean Romig]

And in doing so did an unfathomable disservice to all owners and manufacturers of guns with “twist or Damascus” barrels.





.

[Kevin McCormack]

My 16 ga. 0 frame 26" Damascus AH was returned to Parker 3 times according to the PGCA letter; twice for restocking and finally for addition of a set of Titanic steel barrels. I've been trying to find them for years!

[Fred Slyfield]

Folks thanks for all the info, very interesting, I am in no way going to shoot anything in this gun except low pressure shells , not going to try and make a race horse out of a donkey!!

[Dave Noreen]

Jack O'Connor, Outdoor Life, 1942
A good many people resent being told that their much loved old guns were no longer safe. Just for the fun of it, Lou Smith (President of Ithaca Gun Co.) proofed (using 17,500 psi Proof Loads in 1942) a dozen or so damascus and twist beauties which were lying around the plant. Here's the dope: Most of the old timers busted loose with the first proof shell. The rest did with the second. Guns tried were cheap, medium priced and expensive: but all of them went. So if anyone wants to go ahead using modern smokeless stuff in a gun built for black powder, he can; but he can include me out.
Reviewing the findings Lou writes: "These birds who persist in using smokeless powder in twist and damascus barrels remind me of the guy who made a living by sticking his head in the lion's mouth at the circus. He got away with it for a long time; then one day he didn't!"


I guess those old Twist and Damascus barrels grew stronger with age. Certainly took Sherman Bell a lot more to blow them up!!

[Dean Romig]

I guess Lou Smith took a calculated risk and reported Ithaca's (faulty) "findings" or just made up the whole story...:whistle:





.

[Drew Hause]

A summary of Bell/Armbrust's attempt to blow up vintage pattern welded barrels using Remington Proof Loads of 18,560 psi is at the bottom here
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LFnSG34k3mBhLEjEgU267wAlIa215MNVQZhIiY62Hx4/edit
A total 28 vintage doubles/54 Twist and Damascus barrels + 2 Vulcan (Fluid) Steel were remarkably difficult to destroy.

[Todd Poer]

Lou Smith of Ithaca, "take it face value what I am saying, trust me. These guns blew up and are unsafe." If he lied that would have been a whopper. I think they blew up the guns or barrels. However is there any mention of how tests were conducted. It is pretty much stated that guns don't blow up unless there is an obstruction. Did they put obstructions in barrels with 18k psi loads and just fail to mention we plugged the up the barrels. Heck any gun could blow up if you plug the barrel.

Reading Dr. Drews stuff it appears even as late as 2016 NRA was saying don't shoot damascus or twist. It is hard to believe what it is true with so much conflicting information. But if mind justifies the heart to shoot welded barrels then the guidelines I guess have already been discussed. Measure barrels, use low pressure loads only and look for any subtle changes and nothing is to small. I think it is understood check barrels for obstructions but how often does one really do it.

[todd allen]

I guess those old Twist and Damascus barrels grew stronger with age. Certainly took Sherman Bell a lot more to blow them up!!

Fluid steel propaganda.

[Dean Romig]

It is a wise practice to check for barrel obstructions before dropping shells into the chambers of any shotgun - even fluid steel.






.

[Russell E. Cleary]

[QUOTE=Dean Romig;251310]It is a wise practice to check for barrel obstructions before dropping shells into the chambers of any shotgun - even fluid steel.

=============================

Dean: I agree it is wise, and when using a double or break-action single-barreled gun, it is reasonably convenient or at least feasible.

However, if the gun is a semi-auto or pump, would you not agree that checking for obstructions every time one reloads is beyond inconvenient to the point of being impractical?

Or, is there an easy way to check the barrel of such a gun (semi-auto or pump) every time one reloads that I am not aware of?

Seems to me this makes a case for there being greater safety, in this one respect anyway, for using these quaint, passe doubles that we have such an affinity for.

[Dean Romig]

You're right Russ - it is highly impractical... and to be honest I didn't even consider semi-autos or pumps as I own just two pumps.

I never even take the Stevens 20 from the safe anymore and I've yet to shoot my 42... that will happen this fall in VT.





.

[John Dallas]

My 42 is one of the last guns I would sell