Quick question on cut barrels yes or no?

[tom tutwiler]

Looking at a GH with 30" exact length damascus barrels. Barrels touch at the ends and right barrel is .715 and left barrel is .697. The glitch is the wavy rib matting goes all the way to the end. Serial number is not in the serial number book and the gun was made in 1919. Thoughts on whether it has been cut or not? Thanks folks. PS. If I can get a picture of the barrel ends I'll post it.

[Bindlestiff]

They look good to me. The matting going to the end is not a definitive test for cut barrels.

Read the FAQ http://parkerguns.org/pages/faq/CutBarrels.htm ,it may help you decide but to me they look correct.

[Opening Day]

Agree with Robin.

[Autumn Daze]

They look fine to me also.

[TARNATION !!!]

Tom: Check the article by Ron Granger on page 17 Parker Pages Summer - 2011 "CUT BARRELS - and Such Torment". You will see examples of known uncuts with rib matting continuing to the muzzles. Without the factory info, one never knows. They look good though.

Cheers,
Jack

[tom tutwiler]

Thanks folks. This is one case where the being in the serial number book would make me feel better. Rest of the gun is pretty decent (base on conversations and pictures. Dog head buttplate is intact and screws unturned. LOP is 14 3/8" and 1 1/2" x 2 5/8" DAC and DAH respectively. This is no closet queen, but it appears intact and in decent enough shape for what it is. They probably weren't turning out too many damascus barreled guns in 1919 I'm guessing.

[TARNATION !!!]

Tom: Did you determine how far back from the muzzles that the choke constriction begins?

[B. Dudley]

Yeah, the barrel matting, even though it is an indication, is not a final word on if they have been cut or not. The fact that the barrels are touching at the end tell me that they are most likely untouched.

[tom tutwiler]

I certainly agree and if I had my hot little hands on it I'd be checking out the length of chokes in a nano-second. Unfortunately the seller knows very very little. He is a tradesman and he did have the tools to measure the barrel inside diameter only. Based on the choke constriction I'm surmising they have too much choke to be cut. I'm also trying to think how many 32" barrel guns were out there at the time. Guess the big question is would you have and an inside diameter on the left barrel of .697 if they had been lopped off two inches. Be nice if someone knows the answer to that one. PS. This gun could probably be parted out for what I'd have in it when all is said and done if there was indeed an issue.

[TARNATION !!!]

Even barrels touching is a "guideline". I had one inch removed from a barrel set with muzzle cracks. I know the 31" barrels used to be 32". The matting was re-terminated (is that a word?) and the bead re-installed. To the untrained eye, it looks just fine but it is a cut barrel set. When I get a chance, I'll post a pic. I think 4" or more of choke constriction is one of the better indicators. I think this is why Ron Granger writes of "Such Torment".

Just adding to the torment

Jack