Quick question on cut barrels yes or no?

[tom tutwiler]

Looking at a GH with 30" exact length damascus barrels. Barrels touch at the ends and right barrel is .715 and left barrel is .697. The glitch is the wavy rib matting goes all the way to the end. Serial number is not in the serial number book and the gun was made in 1919. Thoughts on whether it has been cut or not? Thanks folks. PS. If I can get a picture of the barrel ends I'll post it.

http://pic100.picturetrail.com/VOL599/2614949/23828662/400560977.jpg


http://pic100.picturetrail.com/VOL599/2614949/23828662/400561029.jpg

[Robin Lewis]

They look good to me. The matting going to the end is not a definitive test for cut barrels.

Read the FAQ http://parkerguns.org/pages/faq/CutBarrels.htm ,it may help you decide but to me they look correct.

[Eric Eis]

Agree with Robin.

[Dave Suponski]

They look fine to me also.

[Jack Cronkhite]

Tom: Check the article by Ron Granger on page 17 Parker Pages Summer - 2011 "CUT BARRELS - and Such Torment". You will see examples of known uncuts with rib matting continuing to the muzzles. Without the factory info, one never knows. They look good though.

Cheers,
Jack

[tom tutwiler]

Thanks folks. This is one case where the being in the serial number book would make me feel better. Rest of the gun is pretty decent (base on conversations and pictures. Dog head buttplate is intact and screws unturned. LOP is 14 3/8" and 1 1/2" x 2 5/8" DAC and DAH respectively. This is no closet queen, but it appears intact and in decent enough shape for what it is. They probably weren't turning out too many damascus barreled guns in 1919 I'm guessing.

[Jack Cronkhite]

Tom: Did you determine how far back from the muzzles that the choke constriction begins?

[Brian Dudley]

Yeah, the barrel matting, even though it is an indication, is not a final word on if they have been cut or not. The fact that the barrels are touching at the end tell me that they are most likely untouched.

[tom tutwiler]

I certainly agree and if I had my hot little hands on it I'd be checking out the length of chokes in a nano-second. Unfortunately the seller knows very very little. He is a tradesman and he did have the tools to measure the barrel inside diameter only. Based on the choke constriction I'm surmising they have too much choke to be cut. I'm also trying to think how many 32" barrel guns were out there at the time. Guess the big question is would you have and an inside diameter on the left barrel of .697 if they had been lopped off two inches. Be nice if someone knows the answer to that one. PS. This gun could probably be parted out for what I'd have in it when all is said and done if there was indeed an issue.

[Jack Cronkhite]

Even barrels touching is a "guideline". I had one inch removed from a barrel set with muzzle cracks. I know the 31" barrels used to be 32". The matting was re-terminated (is that a word?) and the bead re-installed. To the untrained eye, it looks just fine but it is a cut barrel set. When I get a chance, I'll post a pic. I think 4" or more of choke constriction is one of the better indicators. I think this is why Ron Granger writes of "Such Torment".

Just adding to the torment

Jack

[Pete Lester]

How long is the choke taper? If uncut should be 3 1/2 to 4 inches, shorter if cut.

[Dave Suponski]

One thing I look for also besides the usual things that have been discussed here is the very ends of the barrels themselves. If you notice in Tom's picture the muzzles are slightly rounded and worn. If the muzzles look too new compared to the rest of the guns condition I go right to choke length.

[tom tutwiler]

I've decided to pass on this gun. The fellow who owns it (outside of Richmond, Va) told me he had taken it to Greentop and had their smith look at it and they said it was cut. He told me the cut isn't flush and one side of the barrels is shorter then the other. He also said it had a ripple in the damascus on the left barrel about 5" from the end of the barrel. I think this is a bridge too far. Thanks for the replies. Tom

[Steve Huffman]

Will we ever get this right ?

[Bill Murphy]

Why not ask Mark Conrad what length the barrels are supposed to be? No fuss, no muss.

[tom tutwiler]

Why not ask Mark Conrad what length the barrels are supposed to be? No fuss, no muss.

Not sure how to get to Mark. Serial number is 184332. It is indeed spot on at 30".

[Dean Romig]

There is no information on 184332 upon which to base a research letter. Contacting Mark would only confirm this.

[tom tutwiler]

There is no information on 184332 upon which to base a research letter. Contacting Mark would only confirm this.

Knew there was nothing in the serial number book. Was hoping there might be another source of info beyond that.