Thank you Dean. Here's a "before picture" off the site where I bought it. She's SN 48237. As you can see, my description of "basket case" is apt. The other shots including the broken stock would add to that descriptor....but
For the sake of brevity, what I wrote makes me sound less experienced or capable while also avoiding mention that spending just about what a beat up Stevens 311 goes for was a budget stretch. The impression of just another opinionated "expert" was a label I wanted to avoid too. Nope, no expert, just an experienced hobbiest with an extensive past in doubles. Besides more rehabilitation/restorations I can recall; I have owned and used damascus (evidently "composite" is the newer term) in 1/2 dozen or so vintage classics, the last being a 10 bore lifter that I shot quail, chukars, pheasants and even sporting clays with it. But that was decades ago.
Back then, it was radical to shoot those old guns. It just wasn't done by anyone wanting to keep all his barrel hand fingers and eyes. Those of us who were young enough to believe we were bullet proof figured if the bores were passable and the gun was still on it's face, and the barrels rang, stuff an equal amount 2F and shot by volume into a cut off hull plus some way to hold the shot in, and fire away without worry. Always worked for me, but I also admit I always opted for 12 or 16 loads no more than an ounce but had to go heavier just to get a 10 load that worked well.
With that background, I felt qualified to judge this gun, now looking way better, as a shooter. So perhaps there was a touch of paranoia in my post, as what I was reading had the general thread of how to know if a "composite" gun will be ok with lower pressure smokeless? There wasn't much on "if ok with black substitutes".
I have outlived anyone I might have turned to in times past. Given the above and that I have no one with knowledge to show the gun to or $$ for an opinion, is there a way I can get confident again?
|