In my day you had to squeal the tires to get their attention. Although I have to admit it never worked that well for me but then I didnt have a vette.

Brent, I too, was thinking along the lines of slower burning powder in order to reduce recoil but not sacrificing velocity. Not being a reloader I don't know but it seems logical to me.

yes based on my understanding of physics I think I will hunt with loads that maximize muzzel velocity and minimize pressure. I ve heard thats why the old guns had long barrels because the powders burned so slow they couldnt get adequate velocities with short barrels.

Not to pirate this thread, but I often wondered about how long after April, 1912, when the RMS TITANIC went to her watery grave, did Parker cease using the name "TITANIC STEEL"

Just Curious, George

Buy you a cheap mec reloader and build ya some huntin loads. Fed. paper , 800x powder, 1 1/8 payload 7.5 in the right and 5's in the left. They never knew what hitem.

Great minds maybe thinking alike here?
 

-- George, my good friend, I have often pondered that very same question- from a marketing standpoint, to have a grade of barrel steel with the name associated with probably the greatest Maritime fubar of all time--but I am NOT the "man in the gray flannel suit"

I think, from both a production and marketing point of view, the fine guns from AH Fox had a different and possibly more simplified approach. First Krupp "Flusstahl", comparable in process to the Sir Joseph Whitworth Fluid Compressed Steel from Britian- and Sterlingworth grade steel, after the US declared war on Germany following the Lusitania debacle, Fox developed Chromox steel- most likely a high nickel content with chromium and possibly vanadium alloys--

With a fairly solid background in TIG welding, I have a smattering of knowledge regarding metallurgy, both ferrous and non-ferrous metals. If this were feasible, I'd like to test the barrels on 12 gauge Parkers from Trojan through A-1-Special for analysis- my $ says --very little difference between Trojan and Peerless-- but marketing- "selling the sizzle with the steak" as the saying goes, prevailed!

I have read all the posts herein twice, most from folks I consider friends on our PGCA Forum, and I agree that spirited discussion is great, and much can be learned. What about those folks who may have inherited Uncle Gus's old shotgun- and it turns out to be a nice older GH he bought new in 1924, and shot everything including barnyard varmints and deer, plus scads of ducks and other game- They may not have a computer (my friend Buck Hamlin does not)and know of our group and the high % of very intelligent and serious students of "The Old Reliable"-- so they just buy their shells at Wally-Mart and shoot the Parker-- how do we reach them, and in a polite way, share the accumulated wisdom herein??

I have my ammo lockers set for: Express or 3" Mag Steel loads for water fowling, only used in the Model 12 12 gauges I own- a separate one for 20 gauge shells, and the main one with light 12 field loads- RST 2.5", Rem STS and Win AA- and 2 & 3/4 dram equiv- 1150 fps loads- Why? because I also own and shoot LC Smiths, most of which are pre-1913- and as Brother Lester so wisely pointed out- wood ages, moisture content changes, screws and through bolts can become loose (the last also a major detrimental factor to loss of accuracy in BA one pc. bedded stock rifles)--
So I am, by choice, a light load gunner- except for waterfowl steel loads anyway, as I won't stuff any LC Smith with a Rem Nitro Express 1 & 1/4 oz. load-or my GHE or PH Parkers--

As far as upland bird hunting, choice of loads for pheasants can depend (IMO anyway) of whether you hunt native or preserve birds, and over rock solid points or flushing breeds, and in early season or into the winter. Living in a bird rich area of the Sunflower State, I am sure Col. Day has shot a far greater number of birds than some of us have even seen. Where I live pheasants used to be fair in numbers, but that was 20 some years ago-strip farming, increase predator population or their existence in suburbs where it is unsafe to shoot them, may also be a cause.

Please allow me to close with a compliment, and I only reload for pistol and centerfire rifle varmint loads- not shotgun-- Bruce, if I didn't know that it was you who authored the posts in this fine thread on loads, I would have thought I was reading Tom Roster's books on same- You do know your stuff and do the research, no doubt about it..:bigbye::bigbye:

Totally stock, all good - 102-104 mph in the 1/4 mile 140 mph terminal tricked out a bit - 160 mph

source

George, in answer to your question regarding the duration of the use of "Titanic Steel" barrels - Parker Bros. and subsequently, Remington, continued to use that terminology until sometime in the 1930's when Remington chose not to mark the top rib at all... to the best of my knowledge. However, Remington continued to use up any remaining Parker parts stock right to the end and I would imagine if they had ribs marked with a specific barrel steel, if it applied to the grade, they would use it.

Or Ginger.

Dean,

In theory slower burning, progressive powders do lessen felt recoil. The difference is most often not detectable by shooters. The gunstock may however greatly benefit from using a slower burning powder.

Shooters can however very easily detect the difference in recoil between X drams of black powder and X dram equivilent of any smokeless powder. Of course black powder explodes upon ignition and smokeless burns. Any physicists care to comment on this?

Mark

Physicists well I don't if i'm one. But I do know that 4 drams of black and a oz. 1/4 of shot has a little recoil, may crack a stock that does not have proper grain through the wrist. One thing nice abought plain ol stright grain walnut it's tough. I use a load I got from Craig nice shootin load not heavy recoil. oz. 1/8 out of my ten. I haven't shot as many phesants as some but I have shot dove loads at phesants when I didn't have any thing else at the farm and killed birds seams to me people blaming shells on losing birds is kind of like blaming your horse win you miss a steer. Excuses are like -------- everybody got one. ch

I think folks here often say low pressure ( which relates to barrel hoop stress) when they mean low recoil ( which relates to the pounding the gun and your shoulder take). A low pressure load slows the powder burn and ignition rate so the hoop stress is spread over more distance of the barrel. TPS has the barrel pressure service and proof load pressures.

Low recoil means less whack on the gun and you. The recoil formula considers only the weight and velocity of what comes out the barrel end. You want less recoil, you select less shot or less speed. Perceived recoil takes the weight and configuration of the gun into effect. Heavy gun, straighter stock, recoil pad, make the gun kick less. The Parker catalog tables show what Parker recommended for loads and gun weight.

I'm no shotgun ballistics expert but I've read a bit and shot a bit and if I can grasp the essentials anyone can. It ain't rocket science.

Now Calvin, this isn't my first rodeo, and I know the horse has to get you there and keep you there for you to have a chance at the steer. I guess if maybe one shotshell load would do everything there would be no need for all the various loads the ammunition companies make. Maybe they have been mistaken for the last 100 years?

A curious observation: lots of gun guys are adamant about their personal freedoms, freedom of speech, gun rights, etc. They don't want anybody telling them what to do. Yet when somebody asks what they CAN shoot, they answer with what they SHOULD shoot. They seem to want to tell folks their personal preferences rather than what the manufacturer said, as if the manufacturer was wrong and they know better. And woe be to the fellow who disagrees with their personal preferences, because they are wrong , wrong, wrong, or stupid and should be banned from owning a Parker. Or they seem to want to assume the guy has a beat up cracked up thinned barrel gun when they don't even ask. Just seems to me, and I'm no expert at all, that maybe the guy deserves a complete answer?

Bruce (usually shoots low recoil loads but sometimes full loads) Day

Hey JD how about closing this thread... It's getting real old. Eric

Hey Eric, I know when I don't want to look at something any more, I don't look at it anymore. I do that instead of asking somebody else to prevent me or anybody else from looking at it anymore. But maybe that is a personal freedom matter that folks are not capable of handling.

There you go Bruce "flame me " if you want, I am just getting real tired of you trying to prove you are the only person that is "right". :bowdown: So now I will bow out of this thread.. Eric

This thread may or may not have 'run its course' but I think we are gathering some good information that will help us expand FAQ #32 which I'm sure even Ribin will agree is lacking a lot of very accurate and useful information that probably everybody can benefit from. But a lot of the information in the is there for the "newbies" especially so when useful information is added to FAQ #32 is will be fact and not opinion. A lot of very useful facts have been posted on this thread and more is likely to surface here so I don't think this thread should be closed.

If usefull facts are being found in this thread then I will take back my "close this thread". I'll just stay out of the fray. Eric

In a nutshell the way I see things it's a question; should the brand new owner of a Parker shotgun, one who is unfamiliar with classic doubles, treat it like an off the shelf Remington 870, Ruger O&U and the like WRT ammunition or should they recognize it is an antiquity and in some regards MAY be more fragile. I think the majority opinion here is to treat it more gently. One could say or reference that many members of this group have and do shoot modern heavy loads through many solid Parker's and have for many years without incident. In turn it can also be stated that many members here have enjoyed a great performance on clays and game using light loads. In all cases prior to shooting their new to them Parker it should be evaluated by a knowledgable and competent gunsmith. The advice to keep one's loads light remains good advice on the side of caution but the choice of ammunition for a sound gun is personal.

I agree- me too
 

Just one final thought, as I consider most all of the gents who have posted herein to be Parker friends--we don't want to see our PGCA Forum turn into the aparent nastiness if not downright rudeness we can see on other double gun oriented (but not paid membership) forums. No good can come of that.

I read with great interest Calvin's post and his comment about 'excuses" being a lot like noses, we all seem to have one. This can surface just as well in a bowling alley on league night, on a 18 hole golf course, as well as on a SC, skeet or trap field.

It's human nature to want to make every shot count, and especially on the game birds we hunt in season, we all want clean kills and no cripples to escape and feed the "Airborne Prize Patrols" either.

So if we miss clean or pull feathers from a hauling-bass Rooster in a heavy wind, and we are using a shotgun with which we are quite familiar, we wonder "Howcome"--and think perhaps about choke or shotload changes. No man hits 100% of what he shoots at with any shotgun, just as you don't sit all night at the poker table and hit full houses and four of a kind hands one after the other-

The other day I was out on a river after late season Geese- M12 3" and Federal steel BB's- four came banking around the bend, and flared, I shot about three neck lengths ahead of the lead bird (est 25 yard overhead shot, he never slowed down a hair- but the third bird in the formation shuddered in mid-flight and I hit him dead center with the second shot- a lesson to be learned every time we venture afield. My waterfowling mentor as a lad, besides my Grandfather, father and uncles- shot a 30" Full M1897 Pigeon Grade for everything, including box pigeons for dinero (but not Capt. Harold Money, alas) one told me that if you get one dead in hand duck for every three shells, you are way above average (including finishing crips) and one mallard for two shells- you are in the expert ranks.

If a FAQ answer could be put together along those lines, I'd be happy. And if the answer could reference Parker load tables, even happier.

Why not copy (with permission) the Parker Load Tables from The Parker Story and put on the facts page?

:dh:Ok, I'll chime in and ask what specifically is incorrect with FAQ 32?

When I wrote it, I wrote it speaking to a novice Parker owner who asks the question because he wants to be safe and not damage the gun. I also wrote it without endorsing any ammunition product because I do not think the FAQ area is a place for endorsements of one product over another.

And most importantly, I tried to write it in a manor that doesn't open the PGCA up to litigation. This forum is full of personal discussion and opinion but in my thinking the FAQ area is more of an official PGCA area and we need to be careful on what we recommend there.

Sure, I have pumped heavy loads through my Parker when hunting and I shot nothing else when I was younger; I didn't know I had other selections, I just went to the store and grabbed a box of shells and headed off to hunt. I still may push "factory express" loads while shooting at a bird or two but not when I shoot a hundred rounds on the clays field.

If we want to bring history into this FAQ and post old statistics, I would ask, does this possibly open the liability door? And if so, to what purpose do we strive that we accept the added risk that some novice makes a mistake based on that information?

Any changes to the FAQ will take these areas into consideration. As you focus in on what you want to add, please keep this in mind.

I welcome any changes that will improve the web site and will make them as needed.

Thanks for all your help!

Robin,

It seems as people want to know specifics such as maximum pressure that a Parker can withstand. As Bruce has often advised, Page 515 of The Parker Story provides a guide for working pressures. It is understandable why the PGCA would not want to advise shooters without first inspecting each and every gun! Obviously that would be impossible. I included this in a new thread since this one has wandered from it's initial point.

http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p...arkerLoads.jpg

--

If you want to read the words I retyped them in the new thread.

Mark

PS: Below is Fact #32:

Your Parker isn't new, it may look new but it isn't. It was made at best, decades ago, if not a century ago. Many advancements in metallurgy and gun powder have been made over all those years. It doesn't seem reasonable to expect a fine old Parker to withstand the same punishing standards that current manufactures expect from today's finest doubles.
Parker shotguns were made with several chamber lengths; have your Parker checked and shoot only the correct length, or shorter length, shot shells. In its day, articles were written that Parker shotguns actually patterned better shooting shot shells longer than the chamber size. The logic was that the "role crimp" would open into the barrel increasing pressure and improve shot patterns. That may or may not have been true but today's star crimp shells will certainly open further into the barrel and in conjunction with today's powders create much higher pressures.

Metal may fatigue as a result of age and oil soaked wood will be weakened. Shooting modern, heavy commercial hunting loads in these old guns have been the cause of many cracked or broken stock wrists.

There are several manufactures that have recognized a market for shooters of older shotguns; who's owners want to "take it easy" on the older gun but also want it to perform well both on the range and in the field. Search these manufacturers out; buy and shoot the correct length shells in your Parker.

Keep the pressures low and your Parker will last another century.

Robin, There is nothing "incorrect" in FAQ 32. I think what you have written there is very good but appears not to satisfy some readers.
And I can't speak to liability issues but there seems to be a general opinion that information such as that in Mark's post and original hang tag information without endorsement by the PGCA while we continue to caution the reader to have his gun inspected by a qualified Parker gunsmith or expert as to its condition and shootability... should satisfy most interested parties.

Dean

OK, how about FAQ #33?

Mark, does the table match what you could read. The fractions are very hard to read!

Robin,

Pete was able to double the size and repost the add with the table. I still can't tell if the fractions are 1/2 or 1/4 oz but it gets us in the ballpark.

http://parkerguns.org/forums/showthread.php?t=3266

Mark

http://www.webpak.net/~dslcslien/1BADH3.gif . http://www.webpak.net/~dslcslien/1BADH3.gif

They are shotgun shells, educate yourself, know your gun, and make the best choice for you.

A "357" under the hood of a mid-60's Vette?... That's a new one on me...:corn:

Best, CSL
_________________________________

CSL You are correct. I hit wrong number. It should be 327/250. Thanks
James

A 357? What's so odd about that? Keeping one under the hood however, isn't easily accessible.... why not keep it under the seat??

Probably should be on passenger seat, help keep the "Chicks" at bay. Cause if one got in, "she who must be obeyed" would have me OUT. My post was not in any way meant to misdirect this thread, just a sorta feeble attempt at a humorous response to the "vette" analogy.
James

______________________________

James,

Your response to the "vette" analogy was the Best part of this thread...http://www.webpak.net/~dslcslien/Zthumbsup.gif

Best, CSL
_________________________

You can say that again...

;)

John

Yup, me too James :)

Here's my 2 cents worth:whistle: More people are getting into not only Parkers but vintage doubles as a whole. Most of these folks I would imagine are used to shooting a more modern gun and with the accessability of the internet find themselves here on our forum. Obviously the question is asked "what is approiate to shoot in Grampas Parker"? We know the different schools of thought regarding the anser. My problem with the ansers is that they are given freely with no knowledge of the condition of the gun, it might be a wall hanger and an RST low pressure shell blows it up. IMHO the only anser is "I/we can't advise you on that as the condition of your gun isn't known". "You need to have it inspected by a competant gunsmith with knowledge about this type of firearm". In todays society where the victim get sued for being a victim we are opening ourselves up to liability.

I'm more of a Grouse hunter and a low pressure shell works fine. I can freely use them between fluid steel and damascuss barreled guns without worry. Some day I would love to hunt Pheasant, Huns ect on the Great Plains. If that would occur I'd match the gun to the game,I bought a DHE 12 just in case;). I would no more shoot 1 1/8 oz out of an 0 frame 16 than I'd hunt an Elk with a 270. Can it be done sure but to me late season Pheasants are a 12ga bird with suitable shot in #4,5,6 and I prefer my 338 for the Elk:bigbye:

Possibly, provided our goal is to educate the undeducated, either in an additional FAQ or added verbiage approriately in an existing FAQ, a definitive mention of the difference between low power and low pressure loads could be mentioned and described. Not being a student, or a reloader, I had no idea there was a difference until my interest went to the antique guns. Maybe this is too elementary but I can tell you for sure I would have thought they were one and the same.
Mike

Your thinking and mine are much aligned... Here is my reply in a different thread:

http://parkerguns.org/forums/showpos...8&postcount=11

It's in this thread:
http://parkerguns.org/forums/showthread.php?t=3266 - which was spawned from this thread...?

But - what do I know? I enjoy my Parkers without hurting them - or even hurting me. I'll always defer to folks who profess to know more than everyone else - or at least "me" - and post as much.

Is what it is, I guess?

John

Forces on Shotgun Components
 

Shooters generally rank loads on a shotgun by chamber pressures found in catalogs and loading guides. Pressure induces stress on barrel and breech, but the weight of shot produces the stress on other componenents. It is possible to compare stress from gauge to gauge by comparing the length of the shot column; an equal length shot column produces the same force on a gun of any gauge.
Some people talk about a "square" load, which is a shot column as long as the diameter of the bore. The attached table is based on sparse data from order books, hang tags and ammunition catalogs but it appears consistent. It appears that King preferred loads of less than .8 bore diameter length for Parkers. There are some exceptions but they are small; for example the 1 1/4 ounce 12 ga live bird competition load.
The loads of length less than .8 bore diameter are shown in red on the table.

Best, Austin

Thank you Sir.. I added emphasis to exactly my point - and apparently yours..

Thank you,

John

Austin, from what we've read and heard the "square load" and those of column length of .8 of the bore diameter produce the best patterns as well as less stress on the gun and the shooter's shoulder too. Thanks for the chart.

Bruce, If your horse don't give you a good shot whos fault is it? If your shotgun don't kill the bird is it the shells fault? Was my only point. And if you believe everything manufactures tell you you got a house full of stuff you don't need! Fransis thanks you got my point! everybody got a nose:) The other day I was down to one shell so I thought I needed to pratice left barrel first shooting so a fez gets up and right barrel goes click and I flinched so bad my pup was laughing and ol BoJack wouldn't make eye contact because he was embarresed for me. I'm far from perfect and I know it. I have fun hunting, birds or no birds and if we lose one one of my companions on the great plains will eat him they need an easy one once and a while. we don't have a preadetor problem out here plenty for everybody. and Eric I will bow out as well. best ch and somebody tells me they can tell the diff between 5 and 6 shot I'll wonder wonder wonder who, who wrote the........ and i thank you all because win I need something i can ask on of you guys what to do and i don't have to have to try to figure out thoes tables and mathmatical figures.