Steel Shot in Parkers
 

A person who is open minded might want to look at the Tom Roster article about using steel shot that is in the latest issue of Shooting Sportsman.

Some time ago, I had cited Roster's determinations about steel shot being fully encapsulated by modern shot cups and prevented from barrel contact. To put it mildly, my statements about the Roster findings were not well received and were met with comments about mental competance and whether I should be institutionalized , but now we have Roster making the comments himself in public print rather than me saying what he had said privately.

My earlier comments were limited to the barrel wear/erosion issue, and not whether a person could or should shove the extreme heavy high speed sky buster anti aircraft cartridges in his precious Parker.

Food for thought.

I haven't read the article yet but does he address the issue, not of barrel scrubbing that most people seem to worry about, but of the fact that steel and other hard shot will not compress where it contacts other shot (as lead will) as well as the constriction of the choke and is only cushioned by the (maybe too thin) shot cup as the shot ball is forced into that constriction? It seems to me that this would be (over the short term) the matter for greatest concern and is the premise upon which the fear of bulging at the chokes (ring bulges) is founded upon? (was that a question?)

And here we go again......

Bruce you just don't know when to shut up.

To quote Mr. Tom Roster in context, one must understand there was much more to his statements. To quote the passage (and emphasis added where applicable to Parker and other vintage, fixed choked shotguns). Reference: Nienke Beintema, UNEP/AEWA Secretariat (2002)

Hope this helps...

John

Thanks John. My thoughts are that in an older gun such as our Parkers, Foxes, Smiths, Lefevers, etc., we would be wise to heed that highlighted caption. Some of the barrel wall thicknesses we've read of on the forum here might not fare very well under such steel shot loads in the conditions mentioned there. Just my take anyhow...

What all this really means is that anybody with good sense won't shoot steel in a vintage shotgun unless it's just some old beater piece of crap they don't care about. Notice I said, anybody with good sense......

Destry

Yup, We can move on now.

As quoted in an article authored by George Trulock and Jerrod Trulock (Trulock Choke)

And - he was referring to MODERN CHOKES IN MODERN GUNS - not vintage shotguns...

I'm guessing the Trulocks should know...

No, you need to read the whole article. I think Roster addresses many issues. As I said, my initial statements about steel were limited in scope to the barrel erosion and scratching issue. My point is to view the issue with an open and inquiring mind. Obviously, as indicated above, some people are not able to do that and they bring up issues beyond the narrow issue. Each of those can be addressed in my opinion if a person has an open mind.

The problem is discussing matters when people launch personal attacks. I've found that when people are unable intellectually to consider other views or matters outside their thinking, they react by personal attacks.

I have never met anyone who has witnessed the bulging of any gun barrel (old or new) with current steel shot size 5 or smaller, shot through a modified or looser choke. I continue to believe that the warnings put out by the gun companies were by the same lawyers who now insist on 10 pound trigger pulls on rifles

What Browning says about using Steel Shot in any of their older (Belgian) A5s, Superposed, Leige, and other Belgian Over/Under models, Double Automatic, American-made A-5 regardless of fixed choke:

I don't believe Tom Roster was a lawyer or a "gun company". I'm pretty certain Nienke Beintema is not either, either. I am fully certain that neither Mr. George Trulock and Mr. Jerrod Trulock are neither lawyers, either - but do manufacture chokes for multiple manufacturers firearms, so probably might know a "wee bit more"?

Hope this helps,

John

But the point is why run the risk? You might shoot 1000 rounds and not have any trouble, then one day....

I still think of the family LC Smith that a friend bulged behind the choke shooting #4 shot. And all the other old guns I saw absolutely ruined by shooting steel. Sure it was years ago, but if you'd seen some of them you still wouldn't do it even today.

There are too many other options, maybe a lot more expensive, but still workable. I probably shoot more shells at ducks in a season than any other regular on the BBS and I'm just a poor working stiff. Yet I still never have had to resort to shooting steel shot through any of my vintage guns and I've been shooting ONLY vintage guns at waterfowl for over 15 years now.

When I think of sliding my big #3 frame, 34 inch, DHE with those tight long range chokes out of the case and dumping a couple steel shells in it I just cringe. Not going to happen, at least while I'm still breathing and own the gun.

What really cracks me up is that this has become this huge bandwagon for Bruce to ride on. He's not even really a duck hunter, he's said on here that he probably doesn't shoot maybe a couple boxes of shells at ducks in a season. Last year I shot three cases at least, maybe more! And Bruce is a lawyer of some kind, so I'm sure he makes a lot more money than I do. Why is he so worried about spending a few more bucks on a couple boxes of shells anyway? It's not about getting information out there, it's about Bruce feeling like he was beaten in a conversation and wanting to continue to spread bad information out of spite.

All that being said, I don't care if anybody wants to shoot steel out of a vintage gun. If you want to do it, more power to you. But don't say it's perfectly fine on a public vintage gun forum where any novice might read it and think you actually knew what you were talking about.


Destry

It might be helpful for people to actually read the current Shooting Sportsman Roster article before saying what it says and doesn't say. I may be wrong , but it just seems to me that is a way to have a more enlightened discussion.

Folks can read what they want - and shoot whatever they want in their own Parkers... From my end - and I'm no lawyer nor gun manufacturer.. To John Dallas - I've seen a lot of barrel bulges in vintage firearms where they thought shooting steel was "OK"..

So - sure - shoot whatever you want, read whatever you want, believe whatever you want - it's fine by me and you sure don't need my permission to do so...

If you want enlightened discussion about the effect of steel on barrel erosion - well, then that's another thing.. I could add to that, but frankly - when folks brought in their wreaked vintage shotgun with a bulged barrel where the choke started constriction - I really didn't take the time to notice if steel had eroded that tube in addition to wreaking the gun...

Or - I could tell you about the time someone else walked in - who had a FULL choke in a MODERN gun - and shot a steel load out of it? Stripped the choke right out of the barrel - and bulged what was left of the barrel 1/2" from the muzzle... BUT - what the heck do I know..

Shoot what you want - they are your guns!

John

Bruce this is what I have said before: :banghead:

"All that being said, I don't care if anybody wants to shoot steel out of a vintage gun. If you want to do it, more power to you. But don't say it's perfectly fine on a public vintage gun forum where any novice might read it and think you actually knew what you were talking about."


Destry is right, saying this on a public forum where some novice goes to Walmart and buys the cheapest steel shot available (I know you wouldn't) who don't any know better and shoots it and possibly ruins a fine vintage gun. You want to shoot steel fine but don't go out and say it on a public forum

John D I do know of a very nice light framed Lefever 16 ga that got ring bulged shooting number 6's in a light Mod. barrel, it can happen, and yes they were cheap loads but he was told it would be ok .....

I just bought some nice shot its harder than I expected. I couldn't dent it with my teeth. How do the gamewardens check realoades for lead or no tox?

Calvin,

Really premium magnum lead shot is hard to dent with your teeth too. NiceShot is fine in old guns, been lots of testing on that account.

Wardens use an electronic tool that tests the density of the shot in the shells. They drop the shell in there and it tells them what type of shot it contains. NiceShot is almost exactly the same density as lead and will sometimes read lead with the device. I had a fairly tense discussion with a warden in Canada when I had some of the experimental NiceShot loads from RST out to test them. He was a reasonable man and everything ended up fine, I later ran into him again and he'd actually gone to the trouble to do a little online research. He'd read up on it in case he ran onto the problem again.


Destry

I understand that the possibility of ring bulges exists in any barrels , particularly thinner barrels, if large diameter hard shot is used with tight chokes , regardless of the composition of the shot. I've seen ring bulges from lead and I'm sure they can occur with steel also.

I would not be surprised to learn that many Parker ring bulges resulted from lead buckshot loads.

Bursts and bulges can occur for all sorts of reasons not attributable to the composition of the shot material. I witnessed a barrel burst from a light lead RST load and I have also witnessed barrels not burst or ring bulge even when grossly overpressure loads were used. The issue to look into the issues in a careful and rational manner. I thought the Roster article was interesting, but each to his own.

Pot - Kettle
 

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

This is about the time when Bruce indirectly starts referring to people who don't agree with his opinions as Pigs & Skunks and then he exits.... How that recent Bruce comment and personal insult/attack to several people on another thread was allowed to stand when others were removed is still a mystery to me...

CSL
______________________
.

That would be a mystery to me as well - as only two people on the forum can "remove" posts.

I would be "one of them".

Jeff would be the "other one".

Best to you,

John

Bruce is quick with the edit these days, particularly since Dunkle changed the edit function on here. *chuckles*

I've wished Bruce would actually exit for years now, but he seems to keep coming back. I remember the forum in it's pre-Day days when we actually had fun. Now everything is all Bruce all the time, every post every thread. Guess when you have hunting buddies in high places you get more latitude than others.


Destry

Did you read my post ?............ I did not refer to large diameter shot or buckshot, it was number 6 shot through a light Mod barrel, yes he was new to vintage guns but was told by a friend that he could shoot steel maybe it was a one in hundred chance, but why take the chance...? And to put it on a public forum....:crying: do what you want to your guns but don't be telling people it's ok and "no problem" and then they go out and buy some cheap steel shot loads the may damage thier gun.... what will you say to them then ? :cuss:

Man I am tired of this discussion !

Barrels ring bulge or burst from all sorts of reasons not connected with shot material . I found the Roster article interesting and thought provoking. If people don't want to be thought provoked, don't even look at it.

My own personal experience with shooting steel shot from vintage guns is limited, but it is intriging. I've shot some small shot steel, 7 shot , and about a box of No. 6 from an IC bored 12ga Parker with thick barrels and many boxes of all sizes from my old Mod 1912 12ga with Mod choke and nickle steel barrel. I never noticed any problem, no erosion, no streaking, nothing different. When I heard what Roster was saying about he developed the sturdy shot cups for Remington that fully protected the barrel bore, it became more interesting. That's my experience, others may have different experiences and people will make their own decisions.

If a person is tired of the discussion and their headbone is hurting, well, you know, maybe they don't need to read it? Just saying that there are alternatives.

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

Well John, You edited someone else's post calling it a personal attack, and then left Bruce's insulting Pigs & Skunks post to everyone reading the (Parker by Peter Johnson) thread to stand without edit... I guess you had your reasons....

Best To You, CSL
________________________
.

Roster also just said in an article that you couldn't shoot crows with lead shot anymore. Yeah, that's wrong too.....

Destry

Very true Bruce but if you had read my post, you may have read that it was #6 steel shot out of a light mod. choke, guess I can't spell it out any better then that.... Was it cheap shells probably with poor shot cup probably, but you come on here and state it is ok to shoot steel through any gun if the chokes are less then full choke and the gun is sound. Bad advice...!

Well, Chris,

Can you show me the post where Bruce mounted a personal attack on Destry? If I missed it - I'll fix it...

Best to you,

John

And oh...

Make no mistake, Chris...

You said I "removed" posts? If I "remove posts" - I tell people why...

If I "edit" posts - I do so in public - and state "why" for all to see...

Careful of your stating how this forum is "Administered", fair enough?

Best to you,

John

I've always enjoyed Destry's hunting posts. I think he has a real touch for waterfowling and its history and I appreciate his love for traditional waterfowling and fowling guns.

And Chris, I have always admired your historic photo collection and believe that you two provide positive contributions to the PGCA.

Let me know if there is any way I can help either of you. I don't do much waterfowling, but I get some interesting fowling opportunities. Chris, I'm not a collector of old photos, but if I run across something significant, I'll connect you.

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

No, --- I've already pointed out to you the personal attack/insult Bruce mounted on others with his parting shot when people did not agree with him... It's been obvious to most folks here for quite sometime how this works, it is what it is... Many folks still remember the John Browning thread...

Best, CSL
______________________

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

John, You have miss quoted me, I said you edited a post, and I said that you removed comments from a post... I never said you "removed posts"... Go back and read it...

It's your world John, Do as you like...

Best, CSL
____________________________________

Have a great night, Chris! If I took your last two posts in this thread with any credence, then there would be two of us.

Best to you,

John

As Chris knows, I am inclined to hit the print button when things get hot on the PGCA forum. I just compared my printed copy of the Peter Johnson thread to the computer version. In John's defense, I don't find any difference. If there was such an unacceptable post, Bruce probably edited or deleted it within the time period allowed. I am still apalled, as is Chris and Destry, that any of our members would send emails to Bruce comparing him to a pig or whatever. Bruce's work with Boy Scouts and the "March" is to be commended.

This thread is a perfect example of why Bruce ruins so much of what goes on here. As I said, I remember the old days and the fun we used to have. There's half a dozen former regulars, people who were actually interesting, that won't post anymore strictly because of what he says and does. Friends in high places.....

DLH

Thank you, Bill... I have to admit - I am not perfect - and yep - sometimes I miss something. But when I get "hot under the collar", I'm usually pretty sure I'm on "good footing" - or try to be. And by the way - folks really - really have no idea what it is like to try to Admin a Forum like this.... Someday, you can ask Bruce, Destry - and many more - what it is like to be on the receiving end of a PM, phone call or e-mail if I believe they have stepped "over the line" on this forum..

It's not pretty - but - it is to the point....

Bill - thank you...

John

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

Same to you John, concerning your posts as well... Have a great night...

Best, CSL
________________________________
.

HOLY COW!!!:shock::shock:


Want to start over?

Hey guys! Tom Roster has an interesting article about steel shot in the latest Shooting Sportsman that may have some relevance to use in vintage guns and may warrant thoughtful discussions. How's that?

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

As Bill knows, I am also an astute observer of what goes on here from time to time... Murph, you may have missed some things between your log-in's on that thread that were long gone by the time you printed a page and then used it for your comparison today... The only point I was trying to make with John today was to keep it a level playing field, and when someone like Bruce makes backhanded insults comparing the folks he's sparring with to Pigs and Skunks, then he's crossed the line as much as Destry talking about Bruce carrying Charlie Herzog's water, which was quickly edited/deleted... I know John Dunkle will do his best in the future to keep things here fair and on the up and up. As I've said to him many times in the past, both public and in private, Many thanks John for All your efforts here on the PGCA site...

Best, CSL
______________________

Chris , may I invite you to come to Louisville and we can get together in person. I've never met you, never talked to you, don't think I have ever corresponded with you but I sense you harbor some ill will and maybe we can resolve that.

If you come to Louisville, that might be a perfect opportunity for you to share your photography collection with PGCA members. I'd be interested in seeing it.