Thank you Mr. Romig, appreciate that input.

"Composite" instead of Damascus for a "Twist" description eh? Ok, I also have an early Best Laminated Steel LC Smith gun, is that considered a "composite" variety as well?

Also, in earlier discussions here I see the subject of hunting with the hammers cocked but with the gun being open. I have tried that and found it to be somewhat awkward and even slow. It may be a blasphemous admission here, but if I'm alone (and on mostly clear and level ground), my tubes are "hot" (i.e., gun closed, at port arms, hammers cocked). Hunting ruffed grouse with a hammergun almost demands this approach.

Mind you, this is only when things are feeling "birdy". If I'm hunting with a partner, my hammers are down until either a point or a flush are detected (or I've reverted to using a hammerless weapon).

Edit to add: as my footing inevitably becomes less-sure as I age, then I'll further revise this practice (or abandon it altogether).

IMO any gun barrels manufactured with alternating blades or wires of iron and steel rather than “fluid steel” are by definition composite.





.

Fair enough, but where does the use of the term "Damascus" then become appropriate? Only for 2-bar, 3-bar, or Crolle?

So...you're a Setter man?

http://i.imgur.com/ylJ3ttkh.jpg

IMO the term Damascus describes alternating bundles of blades or wires of iron and steel twisted together and wound in groups of two, three, four, five or six around (hammer welded) a mandrel to form some kind of crolle pattern (“pattern-welded”). Bernard Steel barrels fall into this category as the same method is used in making them. Twist and Laminated are not…

Drew Hause may come on and give us his opinion on this. I always welcome and respect his contributions on this subject, as it is his forte.



.

Yup, I’m definitely a setter man but I lost my sweet Gracie in January of ‘24 to cancer at age 9 1/2 and chose not to take her grandson when he was offered to us. I’m 77 and wouldn’t do a young setter justice in the field…



.

I have always looked at this as Dean posted earlier. Damascus is a type of composite barrel...

Mr. Romig: Never easy to lose a good dog (& a longtime family member), my condolences.

I'm not disagreeing with your assessment (as technically they are all "composites"), I'm just trying to understand the distinctions.

I already knew that laminated steel was a different creative process then more-standard Damascus forms (& clearly, different visually as well). Twist, however, is/was (at least as I presently understand it) technically the same as the other Damascus types, but it somehow doesn't/didn't include the added effort up-front (more-complex stacking before forging and then twisting) to get those more-intricate and complex patterns, and because of that it was always less-expensive (less human effort involved equals less cost to manufacture) and was accordingly, usually deployed on the more entry-level guns. To your point, however, "Twist" is clearly visually different from the others as well...so you might be onto something here.

http://i.imgur.com/3PgDgOYh.jpg
3-Bar Damascus
http://i.imgur.com/rkUVGNah.png
Twist
http://i.imgur.com/T5sFlbKh.jpg
Laminated Steel

The odd thing here however, is that while "Twist" was always considered to be the least "strong" of the Damascus variants, Laminated Steel is/was considered to be the "strongest" of them all, with upwards of 70% steel in its composition. The Proof House tests in England in the early 1890s also bore that out.

It'll be interesting to hear what Dr. Drew has to say on the subject.

I believe you’re probably right concerning the process of manufacturing Twist tubes.






.

It's interesting to me to see that even here, folks are still frightful about using "composite" shotgun barrels (as you call them). I've owned, shot, and hunted going-on a dozen of these Damascus guns since those Sherman Bell articles were published in the mid-1990s and I've never had an issue with any of them. Fear is a funny thing, isn't it, even in the face of solid scientific (& even British) proof.

So-many guns had their beautiful Damascus barrels butchered or replaced just so they could be sold here....it's just a shame. Oh well, it made for exceptionally good buys on those guns for me for many years (I suppose I should be greatful for the whorish "sporting press" [doing the bidding of the big gunmakers during the Great Depression] for publishing those baseless articles in the 1930s and 40s ).

Cynic that I am, I keep imagining that somewhere there was a letter circulated to all the gun/barrel manufacturers that said "Now that we know how to make cheaper one-piece barrels, let's all send out warnings about how unsafe composite barrels are, and we'll all make more money"

Big D: you're so right, they couldn't get rid of Damascus barrels fast enough after fluid-compressed steel became cheaply available.

I'm drawn to them because they're artistically beautiful, they function for me flawlessly, and they can't be replaced anymore.

When you talk about "lost arts" they're a great example of that. Old timers used to say that they were quieter than fluid steel to shoot in that they didn't "ring" as loudly...well, maybe. I suspect that was from the charges of powder being used in them and not so-much the barrels themselves, but...maybe.

http://i.imgur.com/L8UVZsGh.jpg

The 3-bar Damascus tubes on my Syracuse-styled Elsie here couldn't be prettier to me and I have several English guns where the Damascus is absolutely gorgeous.

http://i.imgur.com/iufhJ4fh.jpg

Such as this very early boxlock from George Newnham (my boys gun, it weighs 6lbs2!) I wish he'd leave the poor Sprucies alone...

http://i.imgur.com/Y43YhFyh.jpg?2

I believe it is because the transmission of shock waves along composite barrel tubes is somewhat ‘deadened’ by the dissimilar metals.





.

Mr. Romig: Excellent theory!

You, Sir, must have a science background, engineering maybe?

Nope… just a bit of rational common sense.





.

Lloyd, that third gun you pictured must be one of those swamp-ribbed English guns. Can we see a pic of the muzzles and rib?





.

That's the best looking swamped rib I have ever seen.

Let me see what I can do...

http://i.imgur.com/1Lg4J12h.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/GS7N3uKh.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/tk05ftlh.jpg

It's been through proof 4 times...

I don't have a muzzle shot handy I'm afraid. IIRC it looks quite standard at the front end.

FWIW: that recoil pad is covered in elephant hide.

http://i.imgur.com/r7wzsJgh.jpg

ok, here we go...

http://i.imgur.com/ZtUjA58h.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/mwYJ7jZh.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/Nj43Zj8h.jpg

30-inch 3-Bar Damascus but only 6lbs2. The action is very petite (almost like a Skimin & Woods gun) with a very thin "diamond" shaped wrist and tapering action-bars under the tubes. As I mentioned earlier, it has been thru proof 4 times since 1882 (in both houses in England) and it's been honed mercilessly. The tubes are at 17 thou at one spot about a foot from the muzzles, so it needs careful (& prudent) use. But on a bluebird day in the grouse woods up north...it's almost magic.

http://i.imgur.com/ABTNOf2h.jpg

I'm interested that pretty much everyone carries their hammer guns open and cocked because, of course, a hammerless gun is cocked when opened and will still be cocked when closed.

General question: do you also carry your hammerless guns open? I'm not making a case for changing your habits, but more interested in the reasoning if you carry your hammerless gun closed during a hunt but carry your hammer guns open during a hunt.

BEAUTIFUL example of a British swamped rib gun!!





.

Thankyou Mr. Romig.

Seth: I discoursed on this subject earlier here. I mainly carry my hammers cocked and locked. There are modifiers to all that and I discussed them back on page 5 here.

Lloyd: thanks, yes, I had read that but per my question I was more looking for discussion on the reasoning behind hunting with a hammer gun broken if you hunt with a hammerless gun closed.

What I read from you was more a discussion of hunting grouse with a hammer gun cocked and closed, correct?

Carrying a hammer gun cocked and open is safer than carrying a hammerless gun closed with the safety “on”(?).





.

The better English sidelocks (& their clones) might be the safest (with their intercepting safeties) but Mr. Romig is correct, if the hammer cannot reach the shell, it can't go off.

If you can safely bridge the hammers and cock them upon mounting the gun then that would be the superior way to do it but...most cannot do it safely or effectively. All I can muster is one hammer quickly, which is usually sufficient (if I'm hunting with a partner or partners w/dogs). Safety is paramount here and no bird is worth an accident.

I can see I haven't been clear; sorry. (Or maybe the question flew by as people read it lol)

My question arose because I saw several responses explicitly saying that they hunt with hammer guns cocked and open, while I just haven't run across much of anyone noting that they hunt with their hammerless guns open - which amounts to the same thing as having a hammer gun cocked and open.

What I specifically asked was for a response from people who hunt with their hammerless guns closed, but their hammer guns open. Haven't seen any replies addressing my question in the short time since I've asked, but maybe no one falls into that category.

Seth, I hunt with hammer guns and hammerless guns closed. Hammer guns get cocked over points when ready to flush. I always tell any companions the status of my hammers, especially careful to let them know when I uncock them (and encourage them to ask me if I forget to say something). Hammerless guns are carried with the safety on until I mount the gun for a shot. It’s a natural movement to slide off the safety as the gun comes up.

I don’t generally use hammer guns for grouse, but I’m sure that if I did so in the tangles we hunt, I would forever be dropping shells and doing extra gyrations to maneuver a broken gun through brush. :banghead:

I’ve had a couple hammerless no safety guns and I’ve used them at tower shoots . Standing at the peg typically I have the muzzles resting on the toe of my boot with the gun cracked open . And typically if the gun has a safety I wait with the gun closed not on my boot toe and the safety on .

OK, here it is. Some of us hunt with hammer guns cocked because they are slow to cock on the rise. They are open because hammer guns do not have a safety. Kind of end of the story. However, a hammer gun (closed) is pretty fast to get into action on the rise if the shooter cocks the left hammer on the flush and cocks the right hammer once the gun is at the shoulder. This is the system I choose to use.

Nice range of responses here. Thanks, gents. Appreciate the insights.

As far as Parkers go, I only own one hammer gun but I will never own a gun that I'm unwilling to take in the field, so it's useful to understand why these are discussed differently. Also useful to have different methods ready if they're required for different quarry, as discussed here re grouse.

I now hunt with all of my double shotguns SXS and OU’s open. I did not always do this but it’s a habit I have gotten into. Most of my hunting partners also hunt this way.
The main reason is almost all of my hunting is done over dogs and generally when one of our dogs goes on point we will work our way to them as quickly as we can.
Many of the points, are over a hundred yards out and require moving swiftly to the dogs. In the difficult terrane we hunt, this results in a higher chance for a slip or fall.
When we get to a point where the birds will flush we close our guns.
We also train the way we hunt.
There is a lot going on when you are training young dogs or tuning up old ones.
I really can’t think of a time off hand where I missed an opportunity for a shot due to struggling to get my gun closed unless it’s after firing both barrels and a late flush comes up while I am struggling to reload.
When closing our guns and it may seem so obvious, make sure the barrels are pointed in a safe direction and barrels are then pointed up when approaching the dogs.
I always go over this with guys I take out that are not familiar with bird hunting over dogs.
Many have been taught to keep your gun barrel pointed safely down. Unfortunately walking up on the dogs on point with the barrels down especially with other hunters results in a person raising the barrel through the dog's position on the flush. Increasing the chance for a dog to be shot should an accidental discharge happen.

Missed birds just add to the great memories of the hunt. An accident with a dog or a hunting partner is a scaring memory none of us want to experience.
Different types of hunts may require different safety measures but this is the way I do it.

Yes. The number of times I've gotten an unexpected adrenaline rush from hunting with guys who "know guns", be they cops or just longtime hunters, I couldn't count. I really like seeing what other folks do to keep safe, as it helps show that is not about how much you've shot - it's about respecting the situation and those you hunt with.

I have hunted with people who didn't know how to handle guns, I have shot skeet with people who didn't know how to handle guns, I have shot competitive box birds and Columbaire with people who didn't know how to handle guns. If any of those people look like they are going to harm someone, it is up to me to handle the situation, and I always have. I know people who have shot dogs, and if I had been on the same hunt, they never would have shot a dog. The fellow who shot a dog was a friend, a friend who didn't know how to handle a gun, even though he owned hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of shotguns. I can't imagine what a Columbaire thinks of the gun handling that sometimes goes on when he is throwing birds.

I ended up buying a W.C. Scott hammer gun made in 188five. Sent the money off, but have not received the gun yet. I hope everything turns out okay. I'm a bit nervous. But the gun looks, from the pictures, like a nice gun. C hammers, damascus barrels, of course. I have never shot a hammer gun, but I like thinking about how I will.

Mr. Hanson: has the seller provided you with a tracking number for your for shipment or a least a confirmation that the gun is in transit?

Steve McCarty - you’re going to really enjoy that gun!





.

Hammerguns are arguably the most artistic version of a fine double. The British really evolved the form on these types of guns and their examples can be pretty spectacular (go look on Vintage Doubles sometime, Kirby's got some great examples there). Domestic hammers were not commonly produced to that level here, but we came close with several makers (Parker seems to be the most prominent, followed by Smith). When my larder is full-enough and the weather supports it, I put away my "modern" weapons and drag my hammer guns afield to add another component of interest to the hunt.

Everything has to be nearly perfect to succeed (the aforementioned weather, field conditions, & you), but when it works it is very satisfying...

http://i.imgur.com/foYi5heh.jpg

This very early Lang started life as a pinfire.

Hammerguns can also be alot of fun on a sporting clays range. They do need to be fairly substantial (to handle the shot volume and to sop-up all of that recoil) but when a proper version is found, they will really stand out amongst the guns of your fellow shooters.

http://i.imgur.com/z3MYun1h.jpg

This big & heavy Ithaca NIG has a 32-inch tubeset that weighs 5-lbs all by itself.

http://i.imgur.com/iXhzv6zh.jpg

This gun closely mimics the weight and dimensions of my far-more conventional stackbarrel target gun.

I love those Sherman Bell articles in DGJ that detail his testing of damascus barrels. He did his best to blow them up. He honed an L.C. Smith barrel to "paper thin" and loaded it with proof shells and it still would not let go. I shoot several damascus barreled guns and like them. BTW: I was reading my copy of "Parker Guns" today. I read a story saying that Americans in the 19th Century liked heavy guns overloaded when compared to English guns, saying that the Brits preferred light loads and light guns. My antique American double guns are HEAVY.

Stepmac: There's a place for a wide range of weights in my battery of hammer guns.

Upland bird guns need to be light enough to carry all day and still be able to respond to a flush quickly. My Lang sidelever hammer is 6 1/4lbs and that's where it mostly gets used. This recent #1 framed Parker hammer should serve well on prairie birds at 7 1/4lbs, and my almost 9lb Ithaca NIG is nearly perfect for sporting clays.

American guns usually had to do it all for their mostly 1-gun owners (upland, waterfowl, & target) and "heavy" was the default position for so many of those makers.

when I lived in Italy 53 years ago, I purchased a hammered 20 gauge Bernadelli Brescia. I shot several flats of shells a week at skeet. I wanted to improve my field hunting. At every station that presented doubles I would cock the right barrel coming to my shoulder and drop the gun a bit to cock the left barrel for the second shot. I never broke 100, but I got pretty handy with the little gun. I took my first double ever on Pheasant in the mountains of Italy. It's one hell of a lot of fun. You can't go wrong.

I just received my new very old Hammer Gun. It is a W.C. Scott made in 18eighty-five (My five key is broken). Wood is very nice. The damascus is a little hard to make out, but not too bad. "C" hammers that rebound. Mint bores a little ding on the outside of one barrel 8inches from the bore. Think I'll ignore it. 28 inch barrels, not too heavy. Not too much fine engraving, but what is there is nice. Gun mounts well, should be fun to shoot and easy to carry. Im 80 for goodness sakes! It's F&F. I'm going to try it at trap for grins.