16 Gauge Vulcan, 1 Frame 28 inch barrels choked m,f

[Southpaw]

I need some advice. I have about two flats of field load's for the Ole Parker that are lead shot in #8 and #6. All loads are Winchester Super X field loads that are 1 ounce with plastic shot cups. I don't know velocity but they are 2.5 dram charged rounds. The gun is factory chambered at 2 3/4. These are modern shells so they are 2 3/4 loads. Gun is worn and used but not abused and taken care of and shot sparingly in last about 30 years our family has been a steward of the gun. Locks up tight and bores are shiny and clean on inside and there is some light pitting in one spot on outside about mid barrel but not really worried about it. I feel confident gun is safe to shoot and will be for many more years. The barrels around the chambers look solid.

Two Questions

1. That dang Vulcan fluid steel looks thin at the ends of the barrels. Since I believe it is choked modified and full would shooting the shells I mentioned above hurt the barrels or the chokes at the end of barrel where it looks like those barrels are so thin. Afraid of possibly damaging the barrels.


2. RST spreader loads how well do they work on these old guns that are choked to tight for up close game. Its fun to shoot the gun on clay targets in the back pasture at about 15 to 20 yards as this gun at that choke just powders the targets, if your on them. If not you not your almost better off trying to hit em with a handful of rocks.

Thanks in advance for any help or insight. Glad I found and joined site to talk about and learn more about these great guns.

[Reggie B]

I would recommend you stay with the low pressure loads. I would not consider shooting modern ammo on that gun!

[winplumber]

Have your barrels checked with the proper tools not just your eyes .

[OH Osthaus]

i have 1904 VH 16- re-barreled by Remington in the 1930's with 2 3/4 chambers

i shot off the shelf 16's in it for many years

the barrels are fine

the stock cracked

I keep saying -
pressure is for the barrels
recoil is for the wood

worry about both in an old gun

[B. Dudley]

Without actually measuring the walls on your barrels with proper equipment, you are doing nothing but speculating on the subject. And, the thickness at the muzzle means nothing in regards to safety of the barrels as a whole.

[Southpaw]

All sound advice. Yes gun was checked years ago and it is considered a safe shooter. Was told shoot with confidence and just take care of it. Can't find measurements but just recall barrel thicknesses at chamber, mid barrel and at muzzle checked out. Probably no more than a flat of shells has been fired through the gun in 20 years since I have owned it. But metal isnt getting any younger. I know that Vulcan fluid steel is tough stuff but those barrels just look thin compared to modern guns. But every Parker I look at has thin looking barrels. Have an acquaintance that has a Phd in metallurgy will ask his opinion on aging fluid steel. Heck gun is celebrating its 110th year in service.

What has me confused about these RST loads that are supposedly low pressure is that they have load offerings with velocity ranges of 1100 to 1200 fps in 1 ounce loads. Almost all shot shells they offer are for 2.5 chambered guns. My gun is factory stamped original at 2 3/4 chamber and was not modified. I did find on the loads that I have that they are 2.5 dram with 1165 fps velocity, which is less than some RST. Heck a 1 ounce load is a 1 ounce load, so what makes these RST's considered safer or lower pressure loads than the ones I have. Is it the powder or charge. I know some powders have different burn rates like a blue dot compared to a red dot powder.

My thought is to go to RST for the spreader loads anyway but, just wondering. Best I can tell is that they are suitable for guns to handle a 2.5 chambered barrel unless someone knows different. Maybe this has been discussed in other threads but I did a search and did not find anything.

[Researcher]

From 1923, when the high velocity, progressive burning powder, 3 dram equiv., 1 1/8 ounce 16-gauge Super-X load was introduced, any of these guns in use very likely digested lots of them and their Peters High-Velocity, Remington Nitro Express, etc. versions. Seems about the 1990s people started getting concerned about this stuff.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by Dave Noreen

From 1923, when the high velocity, progressive burning powder, 3 dram equiv., 1 1/8 ounce 16-gauge Super-X load was introduced, any of these guns in use very likely digested lots of them and their Peters High-Velocity, Remington Nitro Express, etc. versions. Seems about the 1990s people started getting concerned about this stuff.

Interesting point. I think maybe that was about the time when steel shot was being introduced. Steel just does not act like lead at all and these guns cannot handle it, I think. I would even think copper plated lead would be rough on a barrel and RST sells those in 2.5 inch rounds.

I am not sure there is a difference as long as your shooting something soft like lead or bismuth, shot size is not too large, and charge/velocity of round is not over the top.

Not really trying to advocate anything but seems the biggest difference I can see is just that RST makes 2.5 inch shells that seem to be the same as most of the so called modern shells that are 2 3/4. I mean is there that big a difference or did someone respected just say it without qualifying it and now its accepted as gospel and why the difference.

I know mind justifies the heart. Hence somebody says I only buy a Ralph Lauren Polo shirt because of quality of shirt and the logo, but there are plenty other polo shirts with different logos, but shirts are made about the same from same cloth but sized a bit different. Its just something you identify with. Shirts maybe a lousy parable. How about a Yeti cooler vs an Engel cooler. Is one really better than the other?

Maybe I am thinking to hard or not hard enough. What is considered a low pressure load for a 16 gauge Vulcan steel barrel for gun with modified or full chokes. Is it the amount of shot, size of charge, velocity, paper wad as opposed to a plastic wad. Its like someone says trust me shoot these low pressure shells. Okay. So what makes them low pressure? Its their marketing gimmick like calling food organic and charging a premium, trust me its better for you and your pipes. Does it all come out about the same.

BTW in my search for shotgun shell Nirvana I came across this article. BTW this guy loves sxs with double triggers.
http://www.sidebysideshotgun.com/art...s_article.html

[Researcher]

“But look at the target loads that all the major ammunition manufacturers produce. Winchester, Federal, Remington--they use their very best components and materials for their target loads. You’ll rarely see a 12-gauge load with more than 1 1/8 ounces of shot, and most of them are no heavier than a 3 ¼ dram equivalent of powder.

That has more to do with the ATA limiting trap loads to 1 1/8 ounce beginning April 1940. Before that there were plenty of 1 1/4 ounce trap loads. These were serious trap loads in the 1930s --

Super-Trap Load Lubaloy.jpg

Wester RECORD Super Trap Lubaloy 01.JPG

Western RECORD Super Trap Lubaloy 02.JPG

Western RECORD Super Trap.JPG

The heaviest trap/Pigeon load Western Cartridge Co. offered from 1929 to 1949 was a 12-gauge, 3-inch, Super-X, Lubaloy, handicap trap and Pigeon load with a maximum charge of progressive burning powder pushing 1 1/4 ounce of copper plated #7 or #7 1/2 shot. See the *

July 1, 1929, bottom of page 17.jpeg

[edgarspencer]

I'd love to hear what your Metallurgist friend has to say about how badly this 'fluid steel' has aged. I only have a masters in Applied Metallurgy, so all I know is it's only "Fluid", going from furnace to mold. After that, it's just steel.
Given your gun is a one frame 28", you're not going duck hunting, and any pheasant and upland load appropriate is going to be easily digested.
Copper plated shot shot reacts much the same as the un-plated lead, and has no deleterious effect on the barrels. The whole point of keeping loads reasonable, getting that lead moving no faster than it needs to be going, is to reduce recoil on the 100 year old wood. Anything you think you need 1 1/8 ozs for, will be equally well accomplished with 7/8 to 1oz. 1175-1200 fps loads are unlikely to damage your 'aged, fluid steel' barrels.