Pressure and vintage guns...
 

Hello:

I am very fortunate to have acquired a vintage Purdey. This gun was originally completed in 1901, and now I am the second owner. It is solid, tight, with no dents or pitting. It was proofed for 1 1/8 ounce loads, with 2.5" chambers. It retains excellent wall thickness. It is unaltered from the Purdey stock-book dimensions.

Realizing it is 115 years old, and I have no clue what the previous owner may have fired in it, which low pressure RST loads should I use? I purchased some 2.5" Bismuth loads from RST with 1 ounce of shot at 1200. Or, should I look for something lighter? I also have some of the original English loaded run of 2.5" Bismuth No-Tox 1 oz loads.

Thanks in advance for any advice/input.

Alfred,

Is there a reason you need to use non-tox loads? I normally shoot the RST lites (2 1/2", 1oz, 1175 fps) loads for hunting in a Dickson RA. The recoil is very light and I think they are around 5700psi.

Ken

Mr. Houde:
Regardless of its proof, please keep in mind that the wood of your gun is at least 115 years old. That means it's dry. And not as strong as it was in 1901. Thus, it may be wise to defer to the gun's age and use 3/4 to 7/8 oz loads for target and no more than 1 oz for game. All at no more than 1200 fps, preferably below. And unless you are required by law to use Bismuth, I'd stick with lead loads.

This philosophy has worked well for my two Purdeys.

Thanks for the input and advice. I mentioned Bismuth as I would like to use it on ducks a couple of times a season.

I plan on taking it up to G&H to get a complete inspection.

You are a wise man indeed. Please take their advice to heart.

I use 12 gauge RST Falcon Ultra Lites on Ruffed Grouse. It is a light, 3/4 ounce load, but is easy on the gun, and deadly on the birds! I have a Purdey single barrel 16 bore at Dewey Vicknair's shop for some work. It will probably end up being my go-to grouse gun. Good Luck.

I keep reading this old dry wood stuff and methinks that's been written so often it's almost treated as fact, period. I fully understand that oil soaked wood becomes softer, and also that old wood is drier and thus is easier to split (as in another American gun maker's design that creates a wedging force when under recoil). But will someone PLEASE explain the scientific basis for old wood not being as strong under compression, as in a boxlock like a Parker, Fox or other similar design? That would go a long way toward confirming the caution - or dispelling the myth.

Old , dried weak wood is an often repeated phrase. Some wood may be dried , others may be oil soaked. Others that are kept in an environment of moderate humidity will not be dried out.

I've seen many gunstocks over a hundred years old that are just as sound as when new.

I have reused some walnut planks taken from old buildings. They are harder to saw and drive nails through than new lumber. Maple is another wood than gets tougher with age.

Congratulations on your caretaker duties with the Purdy. I shoot a Stephan Grant hammer gun quite a lot at targets using the RST equivalent of 7/8th at 1150 FPS. It's hard on targets and easy on the gun and the shooter. My gun dates to the late 1800's.

RST ammo is the way to go
 

I shoot the same ammo in my 1926 Purdey 12 ga when shooting skeet. Never had a problem.