|
05-17-2015, 05:11 PM | #23 | ||||||
|
OOPS! Got the serial# wrong in my serial # post. Thanks for catching that D Lab.
|
||||||
05-17-2015, 05:22 PM | #24 | |||||||
|
Quote:
So, good quality pictures of the barrel flats with the stamps clearly shown as well as pictures of the muzzle showing the keels or lack thereof... and a clear picture of the top rib at the muzzle immediately past the bead. Accurately Measuring the bores and choke constriction must also be done by someone who has the proper tools and know how. A PGCA research letter may not tell you anything about the Vulcan Steel barrels. |
|||||||
05-17-2015, 05:41 PM | #25 | ||||||
|
Dean,
If You would go to page 2 of this post you will see the pics you asked for. Dave |
||||||
The Following User Says Thank You to David Lampman For Your Post: |
05-17-2015, 09:09 PM | #26 | ||||||
|
Ok, does this sound probable?
I have a G grade 1907 hammerless, with a #2 receiver, with matching serial numbers (145858), that originally came with 32" damascus barrels that have been replaced. Because of the matching serial numbers it may have had a barrel change by Parker to Vulcan steel barrels. But at some time later the barrels were cut about an inch (if they were 26") leaving enough choke to measure .720 at the muzzle. Thoughts? |
||||||
The Following User Says Thank You to David Lampman For Your Post: |
05-17-2015, 10:19 PM | #27 | ||||||
|
That's plausible.
|
||||||
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|