Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums  

Go Back   Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums Parker Forums General Parker Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-09-2012, 06:36 PM   #1
Member
ed good
On Vacation

Member Info
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 787
Thanks: 205
Thanked 203 Times in 124 Posts

Default

wonder if one did a rockwell hardness test of harden lock plates and floor plates vs hardened receivers, would one find that the thinner metal lock plates and floor plates would be harder than the receiver...the theory being that thinner bar stock parts would in fact be harder than the thicker roll stock receivers? if so, perhaps harder metal retains case colors better and longer and than does less hard metal...all else being the same, of coarse.
ed good is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2012, 06:47 PM   #2
Member
Bill Murphy
PGCA Lifetime
Member Since
Second Grade

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,044
Thanks: 7,073
Thanked 10,528 Times in 5,532 Posts

Default

Ed,
Bill Murphy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2012, 06:58 PM   #3
Member
edgarspencer
PGCA Member
 
edgarspencer's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,793
Thanks: 3,466
Thanked 13,892 Times in 3,640 Posts

Default

In a roundabout way, you're getting towards the answer. The thinner section parts receive a cycle time sufficient to reach the center of the mass, while heavier sectioned materials likely receiving the same duration 'soak', so not likely to reach the mass center. This is why thinner parts, whose shapes are more uniform, have a more uniformly colored surface, unlike receivers, whose colors vary directly in relation to the section thickness.
A part whose shape was achieved by forging, has a tighter grain structure than a part whose shape was formed by machining a cold rolled material, but, and a big but, the two parts have a substantially similar grain structure when the cool down from the 'soak' temperature begins, which is when the part absorbs any carbon-rich propertiess from the packing material.
You keep mentioning shotguns whose frames were made by machining a cold rolled bar, as opposed to a forging, and for the life of me, I can't think of any American made shotgun whose frame was not machined from a forged part. There were lots of well known forging companies, such as Billings & Spencer, who supplied near-net-shape parts to manufacturers who didn't have their own drop forging facility. The very logical reason is simply that machining time is much more expensive than forging to near net shape, then final machining less material.
edgarspencer is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to edgarspencer For Your Post:
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:53 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1998 - 2026, Parkerguns.org
Copyright © 2004 Design par Megatekno
- 2008 style update 3.7 avec l'autorisation de son auteur par Stradfred.