Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums  

Go Back   Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums Non-Parker Specific & General Discussions General Discussions about Other Fine Doubles

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 11-25-2017, 12:06 AM   #1
Member
Researcher
PGCA Lifetime
Member
 
Dave Noreen's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,960
Thanks: 1,918
Thanked 9,124 Times in 2,657 Posts

Default

According to the dating feature on our home page, 193435 would be a 1921 vintage gun. I'm surprised that the label states it was targeted with a load of 1 ounce of shot and 2 1/2 drams of smokeless powder. Remington had just introduced a 2 1/2 dram smokeless powder, 1 ounce, load that year for its new Model 17 pump gun. But, the Model 17 was chambered for 2 3/4 inch shells and Remington's 1 ounce 20-gauge load came in a 2 3/4 inch shell. There is no mention on the label that this gun is chambered for a shell longer then the then "standard" 2 1/2 inch 20-gauge shell. The "normal" heaviest 20-gauge loads in 1921 vintage North American ammunition catalogs were 2 1/4 drams of smokeless powder pushing 7/8 ounce of shot in the "standard" 2 1/2 inch shell and 2 1/2 drams of smokeless powder pushing that same 7/8 ounce of shot from the longer 2 3/4, 2 7/8 and 3-inch shells. The Western Cartridge Co. high velocity, progressive powder, load (Super-X) of 1 ounce of shot from their 2 3/4 inch FIELD 20-gauge shell came out in 1922.
Dave Noreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2017, 06:31 PM   #2
Member
TxHuntermn
Forum Associate
 
Mark Ray's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,623
Thanks: 4,800
Thanked 2,319 Times in 755 Posts

Default

I must also say this.....a “Vulvan” 20 might indeed be special!!!
__________________
" I love the look Hobbs, my Vizsla, gives me after my second miss in a row."
Mark Ray is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2017, 07:30 PM   #3
Member
J. A. EARLY
PGCA Member
 
Jerry Harlow's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,139
Thanks: 4,695
Thanked 3,065 Times in 991 Posts

Default

The gun has some strange dimensions for a 20: drop of stock 1 1/2 x 3, length of stock 13 3/4, so could it make sense that in addition to the special dimensions it was also requested that the gun be patterned with the newer one ounce of shot shells. That would make sense to me.
Jerry Harlow is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2017, 07:35 PM   #4
Member
Ed Blake
PGCA Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,334
Thanks: 850
Thanked 913 Times in 370 Posts

Default

So Turnbull is now restoring the boxes as well? Genius.
Ed Blake is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-26-2017, 12:38 PM   #5
Member
Mike Poindexter
PGCA Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 582
Thanks: 663
Thanked 720 Times in 283 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Noreen View Post
According to the dating feature on our home page, 193435 would be a 1921 vintage gun. I'm surprised that the label states it was targeted with a load of 1 ounce of shot and 2 1/2 drams of smokeless powder. Remington had just introduced a 2 1/2 dram smokeless powder, 1 ounce, load that year for its new Model 17 pump gun. But, the Model 17 was chambered for 2 3/4 inch shells and Remington's 1 ounce 20-gauge load came in a 2 3/4 inch shell. There is no mention on the label that this gun is chambered for a shell longer then the then "standard" 2 1/2 inch 20-gauge shell. The "normal" heaviest 20-gauge loads in 1921 vintage North American ammunition catalogs were 2 1/4 drams of smokeless powder pushing 7/8 ounce of shot in the "standard" 2 1/2 inch shell and 2 1/2 drams of smokeless powder pushing that same 7/8 ounce of shot from the longer 2 3/4, 2 7/8 and 3-inch shells. The Western Cartridge Co. high velocity, progressive powder, load (Super-X) of 1 ounce of shot from their 2 3/4 inch FIELD 20-gauge shell came out in 1922.


The shot size on the label appears obscured by a tear. I'm not sure what the shot tested would have been in 1921. According to a 1900 table of shot manufacturer's products, Tatham No. 7's go 291 to the ounce, while 8's go 399. According to current SAAMI specs, no. 7.5's go 350 while 8's go 410. Assuming Tatham 7's for the pattern test, 127/291=44% and 168/291=56%--a very useful IC and weak MOD. If 8's are assumed, we're looking at 32% and 42%--or CYL and IC. Still a useful pattern, albeit for close cover or pointing dogs. Wonder what the buyer had in mind? A letter would be interesting.
Mike Poindexter is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-26-2017, 01:20 PM   #6
Member
Ed Blake
PGCA Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,334
Thanks: 850
Thanked 913 Times in 370 Posts

Default

Mike - my comment about the box was strictly a smartass remark and I do not doubt the authenticity of the gun, however, I have seen a number of Turnbull restorations that look awfully “original”. Caveat emptor as always.
Ed Blake is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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 02:54 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1998 - 2025, Parkerguns.org
Copyright © 2004 Design par Megatekno
- 2008 style update 3.7 avec l'autorisation de son auteur par Stradfred.