Monte Carlo Le Tir au Pigeons
http://www.picturetrail.com/sfx/album/view/24800261

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL.../413784022.jpg

Interesting collection of Live Action Pigeon and Target shooting
http://www.trapshooters.com/threads/...ooting.514889/

And some big money Pigeon Shoots
http://www.trapshooters.com/threads/...shoots.641985/

David, does your CHE have the full Trap Comb that was available by special order at that time?
If yes, then we can presume it was likely ordered as a competition gun rather than a combination game/clays gun or a game gun.

Even without the Trap Comb it may still be a dedicated pigeon or clays gun. Does it have a single trigger or a double?





.

No Dean , it does not

Another Live Bird gun

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL.../411274921.jpg

Elliott used a Greener in the 1895 GAH, then shot for Winchester with an 1893 Repeater using "Leader" shells loaded with "E.C." powder, then Hazard "Blue Ribbon" when he defeated Fred Gilbert to take back the Kansas City "Star" Cup April, 1898. He then retained the cup first beating R. O. Heikes by the score of 94 to 93/100, then C. W. Budd, J.E. Riley, and Fred Gilbert in Kansas City.
In March 1899, he had the High Average at the Sportsmen's Association Championship Tournament held on the roof of the Madison Square Garden breaking 1223 out of 1300 targets and held the following trophies in 1899: DuPont Trophy, St. Louis Republic Cup, & Cast Iron Medal (all at Live Birds) and the "E.C." Target Championship Cup & "Republic" Inanimate Target Cup.
He finished 1900 holding the Cast Iron Medal, Sportsmen's Review Cup, and the St. Louis Republic Cup, then in January 1901 won back the DuPont Trophy.
He later used a Model 97 Pigeon Grade.

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL.../382579738.jpg

Good job, Drew. I'd bet that you and I have traveled down some of the same roads.

Wish I owned this box of 3-inch LEADERS --

Attachment 63585

to go with my "Pigeon Gun" with 3-inch chambers --

Attachment 63586

that box of shells would be a fine addition to your gun...charlie

Pigeon Guns
 

Sorry I am late to this party.

I came across an interesting notation in a 1898 Hartley & Graham Catalogue.

Notice the bottom of the right page. It states "Straight Grip (Pigeon) stocks to order, no extra charge".

This would lead me to believe that by the turn of the century Pigeon was synonymous for a Straight Gripped Gun.

Will

Interesting ads for second hand guns in 1906; several "Pigeon" listed along with grips and the dimensions, which appear very "modern"
https://books.google.com/books?id=r0...J&pg=PA888&lpg

It seems the straight grip for competition guns was popular back then, maybe because of double triggers. Although, I have never had any difficulty with straight versus pistol grips on my guns. I guess it was as just preference. The straight gripped guns look more lively and fast to me.

E.D. Fulford, winner of the 1898 GAH at Live Birds with a Remington had a different opinion ;)

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL.../389691556.jpg

"TRAP FACTS FROM FULFORD"
Sporting Life, Utica, N. Y., March 14, 1898
http://library.la84.org/SportsLibrar.../SL3026025.pdf
A gun with two sets of barrels, both the same length and weight, is to be recommended. Have trap set bored to shoot 70 per cent, of load in a 30-inch circle, at 40 yards. Have field set with right barrel cylinder and left barrel modified choke. Get a gun with drop and cast-off that fits you, and one that you can hit the objects with. The average man needs about 2 3/4 inches drop at butt, 1 1/2 inches drop at comb, 14 1/4 inches long, full pistol grip, weight 7 1/2 to 8 pounds. The Remington Arms Company without doubt or question produce the best and strongest gun for the money made in the world to-day.

Apparently that is what Hunter Arms thought; from the 1910 catalog and fairly late since the last GAH at Live Birds was 1902
"The straight grip admits of the most rapid work possible and supplies a want long felt by sportsmen."

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL.../395505034.jpg

1895 and only one straight grip. The DuPont Cup was at Live Birds

The World Record squad: Harmon Dando- 20, Smith; (a glowering) E.D. Fulford– 20, Greener; Ferd. Van Dyke– 20, Winchester; John Connor– 20, Daly; Sim Glover– 20, Greener; Charles Young– 19, Young Repeater

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL.../410685383.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Srebro (Post 246296) Here's a cut taken from the American Field newspaper of the 22 gents who shot straight (25/25) to qualify for the miss-and-out shootoff at the 1901 Live Bird GAH. Some time ago I bought an original silver albumen picture of this scene with the photographer's logo and names of the shooters by row and place inscribed on its matting. In case someone wonders, I won't post copies of this original picture or of the individual shooters/places as it would be so easy for gents to copy, and next I know I'll see them for sale on E Bay etc. :nono: This may the only original picture of Ansley H Fox that's been found. Some day I'll figure out what to do to keep it honest for posterity.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Frank, The 1901 GAH Live Bird shoot photo you posted with Ansley Fox, F Parmalee, and others is a great image. If you have an original photo of this event, your concerns about copies and modern day ebay profiteers is very well founded.

Not long ago there was a well known photo Re-Print seller who was actually caught selling images on ebay that he had copied from the cover of the Parker Pages publication. It would have been a better scam had he removed all remnants of the "Parker Pages" title letters from the image before attempting to pass the photo off as his own. The interesting thing, he was advertising his wares on the PGCA web-site at the same time he was copying Parker Pages images and selling them on ebay - WoW!...

Nowadays, anything the ebay opportunists think they can copy and make a buck on is fair game. If you have an original old photo with unique subject matter that falls into the wrong hands, they can destroy the integrity and value of that image overnight with a stack of washed out low resolution $4.99 cheap copies... It's good you are taking care of your original 1901 GAH Live Bird shoot photo, and do be careful who you give copies to...

This is a great thread with some outstanding old Live Bird Shoot information, sorry I arrived late... As always, thanks to all who contributed.

Below are early images showing A.H. Fox at the Peters Cartridge Co sponsored Atlanta Gun Club event in October 1900. Reports mention Fox only lost 1 bird on the final day live bird shoot. Ansley is seen in a dark sweater at top holding up a box of shells and resting a pump-gun against his leg, his unique face and mustache always easy to find in a crowd.

Best, Chris ~ CSL
___________________________________


http://doubleguns.net/cslphotos/1AH_Fox1900A.jpg
___________________________________


http://doubleguns.net/cslphotos/1AH_Fox1900C.jpg
___________________________________


.

Check out the gal holding a Model 97 Winchester trap gun. I wonder if she's Ansley's backup shooter.

1 1/4 oz. with 3 1/2 Dr. Eq. was the standard Live Bird load in the U.S. 1895 - about 1900; and although Krupp, Siemens-Martin and Whitworth fluid steel barrels were available, certainly most guns were Damascus

Sporting Guns and Gunpowders, “Tests Of Strain On Breech Actions”, in Field, 1892
1 1/4 oz. 3 1/2 Dram Bulk Smokeless Pressures in 2 3/4” case
https://books.google.com/books?id=inQCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA86
Long Tons/ sq. inch converted to PSI by Burrard’s formula

(Proof) with 6 1/4 Drams “Tower Proof” Black Powder and 1 2/3 oz. shot – 4.51 Tons = 14,034 psi
3 1/2 Drams Curtis & Harvey’s No. 4 T.S. Black Powder – 4.2 Tons = 12,992 psi
“Schultze” – 4.28 Tons = 13,260 psi
(In a 3” case, with additional wadding the pressure for “Schultze” was 4.93 = 15,445 psi )
“E.C.” – 4.92 Tons = 15,411 psi

Note the SAAMI 2 3/4" 12g Max. is 11,500 psi

and BTW 1 1/4 oz. 3 1/2 Dr. Eq. (1275 fps) in an 8# gun = 27 ft/lbs free recoil :shock:
1 1/8 oz. at 1200 fps in today's 10# trap guns = 16.2 ft/lbs

Drew, not to get anything started here again but I read that you're using "Burrard's conversion" factor to come up with those psi numbers. Can you please elaborate how that conversion relates/applies to period American lead crusher pressures, and from there to modern transducer measurement? Thank you.

Interesting that Askins wrote extensively in 1929 about American shotshell loading and pressure testing and although I read his volume many times I don't remember seeing any reference to Burrard nor anything other than lead crusher pressure in tons per sq inch. Let's take just one number from his chart for maximum loads of DuPont's Bulk smokeless as provided by its Brandywine Lab, i.e., 12-gauge 1-1/4 ounce and 3-1/2 drams shows an average of 4.70 tons. Now, correlating with the data here in the quote that would be about 14,750 psi. That doesn't make sense to me

Yes, those numbers are Burrard's conversion.

The long explanation starts just past 1/2 way down here Frank
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...UOZEFU/preview

Here's the short version for us non-deep thinkin' types :)
Burrard's conversion formula for Tons/sq. inch as measured by LUP is probably close to modern piezo transducer measured Pounds/sq. inch (PSI).
Since we cannot KNOW the conversion for PSI as measured by LUP to PSI as measured by transducers, adding 10 - 14% to the load pressures reported as PSI by LUP seems reasonable.

In a 1927 Western Cartridge Co. flyer “Super-X The Long Range Load” by Capt. Chas. Askins the 12g “Duck Load” (not specified but presumed to be 1 1/4 oz. Super-X “Field”) is described as 3 1/2 dram (38.5 gr. Powder; also not specified but no doubt DuPont Oval) at 1400 fps (at the muzzle rather than 3 feet) and 1000 fps at 40 yards, with a breech pressure of 3 3/4 tons or about 11,480 psi by Burrard’s conversion.
All of Coxe's pressure curves are in the doc also.

Thank you Drew, and how about Burrard's conversion of the average 4.70 tons/sq inch on the DuPont's load provided by its Brandylwine Lab? Wouldn't that be about 14,750 psi per Burrard? If so …. isn't that well above the average 12-gauge service max of yesteryear and today?

This is the pressure curve from “Smokeless Shotgun Powders: Their Development, Composition and Ballistic Characteristics” by Wallace H Coxe; E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 1927, a DuPont Oval Pamphlet, p.20.
Dram Eq. is listed in the text as 3 but is more likely 3 3/4 compared to the 1928 data.
Charge was 1 1/4 oz. Pressure is expressed in Long Tons.
“All Powders Loaded To Develop The Same Energy” was added to a similar chart in 1931.

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL.../410772139.jpg

Using Burrard’s estimated Tons Lead Crusher Pressure (Cp) conversion to PSI (pound force per square inch): (Cp x 1.5) - .5 = TSI; TSI X 2240 = PSI
Ballistite maximum pressure at 1” was 4.9 Long Tons = 15,344 psi
Schultze at 1 3/4” was 4.5 Long Tons = 14,000 psi
DuPont Bulk at 1 2/3” was 4.1 Long Tons = 12,656 psi
FFFg (likely proof load) at 1 1/2” was 3.8 Long Tons = 11,648 psi
DuPont Oval at 2” was 3.5 Long Tons = 10,640 psi

Could you please scan and post the chart to which Askins was referring in 1929?

This is the 1933 chart; now expressed as PSI measured by LUP.

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL.../314583132.jpg

The pressure curves are for a 3 Dr. Eq. 1 1/4 oz. load.
Pressure by modern piezo transducers would be 10-14% higher.
DuPont Bulk = 9,600 psi
FFFg = 9,000 psi
DuPont Oval = 8,700 psi
DuPont MX = 9,800 psi

Drew, I don't have access to a scanner where I'm at right bow. Here's a cell phone pic of that DuPont's Brandywine Lab data cited by Askins. See the 12-gauge/3-1/2 dram/1-1/4 ounce loads of its Bulk smokeless I referred to earlier.

frank

Thanks Frank and I can't reconcile those numbers with Coxe's pressure curves or the 1927 SuperX flyer; 1000 fps at 40 yards, with a breech pressure of 3 3/4 tons or about 11,480 psi by Burrard’s conversion.
Coxe was the Ballistic Engineer at Brandywine

And Drew thank you too.

I have been and still am very dubious that Burrard's conversion has any meaningful application to period American shotgun lead crusher pressure numbers.

Consider this on the DuPont Lab data cited by Askins and shown in my cell phone inset:

4.70 tons/sq inch X 2240 long ton pounds X 1.10 rough conversion from lead crusher tons to transducer psi = ~ 11,580 psi which is on par with industry standard average max pressure for 2-3/4" 12-gauge.

And to confuse thing further :(

1933 lawsuit against Remington Arms related to the burst barrel of a Baltimore Arms Co. shotgun after using a Nitro Club marked Proof Load.
https://books.google.com/books?id=7p...C&pg=PA120&lpg
https://books.google.com/books?id=7p...C&pg=PA127&lpg
The “maximum commercial load” was described at “11,200 psi and 5 long tons” = 15,680 psi by Burrard’s conversion.
The proof load was “7 1/2 long tons or 17,800 psi”; 7.5 tons is 24,080 psi by Burrard’s conversion.
The simple formula conversion for 7.5 long tons is 16,800 pounds, which we understand doesn't work for LUP to PSI, but I wonder if the 7 1/2 to psi was miscalculated?

A Parker Service and Proof Load table was published in the 1930s and reproduced in the The Parker Story p. 515. 12g 2 3/4” shell Service Pressure is 10,500 psi. Definitive proof used 7.53 Drams Black Powder and 2 oz. shot with a pressure of 15,900 psi. The pressure was no doubt measured using LUP and modern transducer values would be 10-14% higher, or more than 17,500 psi.

LTC Calvin Goddard reported the same numbers in “Army Ordnance”, 1934. He wrote that Parker followed the SAAMI standards of that period: 13,700 psi proof, 9500 psi service for 2 5/8” chamber; 15,900 psi proof, 10,500 psi service for 2 3/4” chamber (by LUP) + 10-14% for modern transducer measurement.

Here's the 1927 flyer; by Askins

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL.../384733220.jpg

3 1/2 Dram Bulk Powder = "3 3/4 tons" = 11,480 psi by Burrard's conversion

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL.../384733222.jpg

No clue as to how 3 1/2 Dr. Eq. Bulk became 4.7 tons/sq. inch in 1933

love reading these comments by atkins and others...charlie

I'm familiar with that Super-X brochure and have a few of them with different color covers. As I read the text, the breech pressure of the Super-X progressive powder load is 3-3/4 tons. Also reading, that progressive load is safe in guns made for the old 3-1/2 dram load of bulk powder - but no pressure is cited for that old load in the text shown here. It's likely that old 3-1/2 dram Bulk load is similar to the one I referenced earlier that gave 4.70 tons/sq inch with 1-1/4 ounce of shot according to DuPont's Ballistics Lab.

(COPIED) 4.70 tons/sq inch X 2240 long ton pounds X 1.10 rough conversion from lead crusher tons to transducer psi = ~ 11,580 psi which is on par with industry standard average max pressure for 2-3/4" 12-gauge.

Burrard's conversion was not used in the snippet I copied.

Askins also wrote that progressive powder loads would generally produce higher velocity at standard service pressure, or (with a reduced powder charge) regular velocity with lower pressure. That was due to what he called the "barrel burning time" of progressive powders which in one test of DuPont's Oval was nearly twice as long as that of the dense powder to which it was compared. It should also be noted that several of Dupont's progressive burning powders were utilized by Western in its earliest Super-X shells before the company switched to its own powders, and one of DuPont's in particular was remarkable in producing high velocity with relatively low pressure but it was very expensive to produce.

Again, I am very doubtful that Burrard's conversion has any real application to period American shotshell lead crusher pressures as expressed in tons/sq inch. On that line I strongly suggest that Drew (who I respect greatly for his work with composite barrels) include a note on future postings that his use of Burrard's calculation may not be universally accepted. Thank you Drew for your consideration. :)

frank

Double post

These are the earliest pressure numbers I've found reported as psi (measured by LUP) rather than tons

1892. Service charge 1 1/4 oz. 3 1/4 Dr. Eq.
https://books.google.com/books?id=in...AJ&pg=PA296&dq

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL.../411162589.jpg


The Overland Monthly, Oct. 1895 “Smokeless Powder For Shotguns” with higher numbers
http://books.google.com/books?id=Wv0...J&pg=PA446&lpg
p. 453
3 1/4 Dram Eq./40 grains DuPont Bulk Smokeless 1 1/8 oz. (1255 fps) = 7440 psi
3 1/4 Dram Eq./44 grains “E.C.” Bulk Smokeless 1 1/8 oz. = 7584 psi


For comparison, a DuPont loading manual from the 1960s listed DuPont Bulk:
3 1/2 Dr. Eq. with 1 1/8 oz. shot at 10,000 psi
3 1/5 (3.20) Dr. Eq. with 1 1/4 oz. shot at 9,900 psi
(Probably measured by LUP)

From the 1928 edition of “Smokeless Shotgun Powders” by Wallace Coxe
"DuPont Oval can be loaded with 1 3/8 ounces of shot in a 12-gauge shotgun to develop the same velocity and pressure as obtained with a load of 3 1/2 drams of DuPont Bulk Smokeless Powder or 28 grains of Ballistite and 1 1/4 ounces of shot."

Coxe reported 3 1/2 Dram Eq. 1 1/4 oz. load (1275 fps) pressures, measured by crushers (LUP) and expressed as psi:
DuPont Bulk smokeless powder - 11,700 psi
Schultze Bulk smokeless powder - 11,800 psi
28 grains of Ballistite Dense smokeless powder - 12,600 psi
40 grains of DuPont Oval Progressive Burning powder - 9,400 psi

I think these are the best period numbers available, recognizing that modern piezo numbers would be 10-14% higher.

If we divide 11,700 by 2240 we get 5.2 tons which would fit the 1933 lawsuit numbers:
The “maximum commercial load” was described at “11,200 psi (divided by 2240) = 5 long tons”.

“Highest Mean Service Pressure” equivalent PSI transducer values as converted from LUP by Burrard’s formula (Cp x 1.5) - .5 = TSI, TSI X 2240 = PSI:
2 tons/sq. inch (NOT 2 X 2240) = 5,600 psi (pounds/sq. inch) = 386 BAR
2 1/2 tons = 7,280 psi = 502 BAR
3 tons = 8,960 psi = 618 BAR
3 1/4 tons = 9,800 psi = 676 BAR
3 1/2 tons = 10,640 psi = 734 BAR
3 3/4 tons = 11,480 psi = 792 BAR
4 tons = 12,320 psi = 850 BAR

Tons to psi by piezo transducers conversion provided by the Birmingham Proof House 11-2001 (courtesy of Larry Brown) are very close to Burrard's
2 1/2” / 3 tons = 8,938 psi
2 3/4” / 3 1/4 tons = 9,682 psi
3” / 3 1/2 tons = 10,427 psi
3” / 4 tons = 11,917 psi

I think Coxe was simply doing a formula conversion long tons/sq. inch to PSI using 2240. They were not using piezo transducers to measure psi in the 30s.

This will be my last post on the subject. I'll bet a lot of readers are baffled by all the numbers shown in many posts on this thread.

An analogy that comes to mind here would be: for someone to take automobile engine horsepower ratings from the 1920-30's or so, and try to compare with modern engine horsepower ratings. Yep horsepower is horsepower. But that person has no idea if the dynamometers (if any) used back then were all calibrated from auto maker to auto maker and if the results obtained with that relatively primitive equipment and converted from torque to horsepower are all dead nuts accurate - as compared with current horsepower ratings made using modern technology.

Why does this analogy at least partially fit? Because many of us are using vintage SxS shotguns and are relying on period lead crusher ton or even period psi pressure numbers to cipher what we can shoot in them relative to modern transducer psi ratings. But when using those period pressures no allowance is being made for the relatively simple gunpowder manufacturing technology back then and even small differences in % of nitrogen (money number) in various lots of the powders, addition/deletion of powder additives, and advances in shotshells such as roll crimps morphing to star crimps, different wadding materials over the years. etc. On that line it's no different than looking at a modern shotshell loading manual for a specific powder charge weight and hull, and seeing the differences in pressures by substitution of alternate primers and wads.

Sorry for my rambling here, but I come back again that a good approximation of vintage lead crusher numbers to modern psi, may be made by taking the tons/sq inch X 2240 X 1.10. This will yield a number that hasn't been enhanced by the addition of yet another conversion factor that, in sum, might make gents think that certain vintage shotguns and barrel materials were designed for higher pressures than they may have been.

FINIS

frank

No apologies necessary Frank. I think most of us here, especially those of us that reload, pay attention to this type of data. We may not all comprehend the technical aspects of these formulas but I for one find it interesting and useful and your analogy to horsepower ratings was quite appropriate.

Thanks also to Drew for the reams of info he distributes over this forum.

As a victim of a public education in the great State of Missouri K - post-graduate ;) I'm not so good with numbers. I think we are all just trying to understand, despite we and the British speaking a different language :)

A not unreasonable summary, which Bro. Bruce has been telling us for years, is that there is no reason to believe turn-of-the-century Bulk (and esp. Dense) Smokeless Shotshell pressures were much different than today's loads.

The fluid steel and pattern welded barrels were not 4140 however, many are now 100 years old, and some were neglected or abused. I think we also understand our margin for error is less.

It does appear that Coxe was simply converting tons X 2240 to derive psi.

From “Smokeless Shotgun Powders: Their Development, Composition and Ballistic Characteristics”, 1927, a DuPont Oval Pamphlet, p.20.
Dram Eq. is listed on the graph as 3; charge was 1 1/4 oz. Pressure is expressed in Long Tons.

Using Burrard’s estimated Tons Lead Crusher Pressure (Cp) conversion to PSI (pound force per square inch): (Cp x 1.5) - .5 = TSI; TSI X 2240 = PSI in BLACK
IF Coxe was simply converting Tons X 2240 to estimate the PSI in BLUE and is compatible with other 3 Dr. Eq. published measurements (+ 10-14% for modern transducer numbers)

Ballistite maximum pressure at 1” was 4.9 Long Tons = 15,344 psi (by Burrard) or 10,976 psi
Schultze at 1 3/4” was 4.5 Long Tons = 14,000 psi or 10,080
DuPont Bulk at 1 2/3” was 4.1 Long Tons = 12,656 psi or 9,184
FFFg at 1 1/2” was 3.8 Long Tons = 11,648 psi or 8,512
DuPont Oval at 2” was 3.5 Long Tons = 10,640 psi or 7,840

I wish he'd just used the Tarage table for psi instead :(
Or maybe he did, and for some unfortunate reason chose to express the numbers as Long Tons??

The BLUE psi numbers are similar to “Smokeless Shotgun Powders: Their Development, Composition and Ballistic Characteristics”, 1933. The pressure curves (PSI by LUP) are also for a 3 Dr. Eq. 1 1/4 oz. load (+ 10-14%)
DuPont MX = 9,800 psi
DuPont Bulk = 9,600 psi
FFFg = 9,000 psi
DuPont Oval = 8,700 psi

Interesting that a statement was made that live bird shooting was dead by 1900. Later in the thread a 1910 shoot was described. Also interesting that my grandfather did not close his bird ring in Hazleton until 1927, two years before his death. I am still shooting the barrels from Captain Money's 1897 CH grade pigeon gun. However, they are now mounted on a later DH grade gun, but still active.

The last Interstate Association GAH at Live Birds was in KC at Elliott's Blue River Park in 1902
http://www.trapshooters.com/threads/...-birds.208505/
https://www.trapshooters.com/threads...c-1900.824043/

Live Bird competitions continued long thereafter
https://www.trapshooters.com/threads...gramme.825695/

Pigeon guns
 

Here are two Pigeon guns that are consecutive serial numbered, both with 32" Whitworth barrels marked pigeon gun. What is neat is one is a AA Hammer gun and the other is a AAHE. PGCA letter confirms both as pigeon guns, will have this pair in Sanford for display

Now that is one beautiful set! WOW.

Gary, i am so glad to see that AAHE again, where it is now. Looks great, thank you.

That pair of AA Parkers is probably the only ones in existence, consecutively numbered, one being a hammer gun the other a hammerless and both being Grade-7. It’s good to see that AAHE where it belongs.





.

Thanks all, Dean had a lot to do with me acquiring that AAHE picked it up for me, took several months to make the deal but persistence pays off, Gary