Shooting Sportsman Article
 

Is it just me or does this guy seem to be peddling old wives tales about vintage guns and Damascus barrels? Is he even aware of Sherman Bell, RST shells, the entire vintage shotgun community? I’m sure Tom Roster is a nice guy but everything I’ve read by him seems to be ill-informed nonsense. How does he have a regular piece in Shooting Sportsman?

https://shootingsportsman.com/pressure-vs-recoil/

Everyone’s got a right to their “opinion” and based on this fellows opinion I’d not be overly enthused if he knocked on my door .

No excuse however for repeating demonstrable erroneous statements
Parker Brothers 1893 Catalogue
“Our guns are bored on the latest improved system for shooting Nitros, or Smokeless Powder, and all our guns are tested with some one of the most approved makes, and a tag accompanies each gun, giving the results of such a (pattern) test.”

https://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/vie...p?f=2&t=505616

Do our modern propellants behave the same as smokeless powder from the late 19th century? Roster pays little attention to Sherman Bells work but is a believer in having individual guns proofed before shooting.

I honestly don't believe we need to have these composite-barreled Parkers 'proofed' per se.

Common sense wins out in most cases and when it fails.... it just proves Darwin's Theory of Evolution. I think is was something like "The stupid shall perish." or somethin' like that....





.

Then how do you explain Washington DC?

which powder when -

there were and are different powders - many have a pressure curve quite similar to black powder. that is the key point. the gun doesn't know or care if the same PSI at the same distance from the breach is created by black powder, smokeless powder or for that matter compressed air

I don't even try.... :biglaugh:





.

Ed: a pressure-distance curve for some new-fangled smokeless powders; 1 1/8 oz @ 1200 fps. Please note that Unique is the old Infallible Dense Smokeless slightly modified. The curves meet at about 2 1/2"

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL.../412289224.jpg

Pressure-time curve. The Green Dot and Unique curves are the same.

http://pic20.picturetrail.com:80/VOL.../410474897.jpg

From “Smokeless Shotgun Powders: Their Development, Composition and Ballistic Characteristics” by Wallace H Coxe; E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 1927, promoting DuPont Oval, p.20.
Charge was 3 Dr. Eq. and 1 1/4 oz.
Ballistite maximum pressure at 1” was 4.9 Long Tons = 10,976 psi
Schultze at 1 3/4” was 4.5 Long Tons = 10,080 psi
DuPont Bulk at 1 2/3” was 4.1 Long Tons = 9,184 psi
FFFg at 1 1/2” was 3.8 Long Tons = 8,512 psi
DuPont Oval at 2” was 3.5 Long Tons = 7,840 psi
+ 10-14% to reproduced modern transducer numbers so Ballistite was probably > 12,500 psi

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

Dense Ballistite was slightly slower than Red Dot and e3; the old Bulk Smokeless more so with a lower peak pressure; "progressive burning" Oval much more so.

Thank you Drew. Roster does not like damascus guns unless they’ve been to the proof house. Personally, I believe Sherman Bell made his point and we here have discussed over the years that if the gun/barrels are sound the greatest danger to the gun is recoil effects on the stock. I’ll continue to shoot my damascus guns regardless of Tom Rosters opinion