Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 11-16-2024, 08:42 PM   #1
Member
Rick Roemer
PGCA Member
 
Rick Roemer's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 429
Thanks: 476
Thanked 644 Times in 210 Posts

Default

To Mr Murphy’s point, I purchased several boxes of 2 1/2” Shenk brand shells only to find they are way beyond safe in our vintage side by sides.
__________________
A Dog, A Gun, and Time enough!

George Bird Evans
Rick Roemer is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Rick Roemer For Your Post:
Unread 11-18-2024, 12:44 PM   #2
Member
Mike of the Mountain
PGCA Lifetime
Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 5,721
Thanks: 18,219
Thanked 11,263 Times in 3,326 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Roemer View Post
To Mr Murphy’s point, I purchased several boxes of 2 1/2” Shenk brand shells only to find they are way beyond safe in our vintage side by sides.
What exactly would cause them to be "way beyond safe"?
Mike Koneski is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Mike Koneski For Your Post:
Visit Mike Koneski's homepage!
Unread 11-18-2024, 12:55 PM   #3
Member
Mike of the Mountain
PGCA Lifetime
Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 5,721
Thanks: 18,219
Thanked 11,263 Times in 3,326 Posts

Default

Let's just use 12g 2 3/4" as an example. If your barrels are good, whether they are Damascus, twist or fluid steel, there is no reason why you can't shoot 1 oz at 1200 FPS out of the gun. No reason at all except for possibly the shooter being "recoil sensitive". Most problems arise when shot charges get bumped to 1 1/8-1 1/4 and your velocity increases above that 1220 mark. Then you may cause damage to the old wood long before you see any problems with your barrels or action. In my 40 years of shooting and 20 years in the industry, I have only seen two shotguns blow up. One was due to a flaw in the steel, the other was contributed to a bore obstruction while using known low-pressure shells. I have seen many handguns blow up though. Most from high pressure from low powder charges.
Mike Koneski is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mike Koneski For Your Post:
Visit Mike Koneski's homepage!
Unread 11-18-2024, 03:01 PM   #4
Member
6pt-Sika
PGCA Lifetime
Member
 
CraigThompson's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 9,517
Thanks: 6,427
Thanked 9,033 Times in 3,971 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Koneski View Post
Let's just use 12g 2 3/4" as an example. If your barrels are good, whether they are Damascus, twist or fluid steel, there is no reason why you can't shoot 1 oz at 1200 FPS out of the gun. No reason at all except for possibly the shooter being "recoil sensitive". Most problems arise when shot charges get bumped to 1 1/8-1 1/4 and your velocity increases above that 1220 mark. Then you may cause damage to the old wood long before you see any problems with your barrels or action. In my 40 years of shooting and 20 years in the industry, I have only seen two shotguns blow up. One was due to a flaw in the steel, the other was contributed to a bore obstruction while using known low-pressure shells. I have seen many handguns blow up though. Most from high pressure from low powder charges.
If my memory serves P.O.Ackley did an article in The American Rifleman back in the 50’s about Damascus vs Fluid Steel . He took four Parker’s two fluid steel and two Damascus . Started loading for them at what I assume would be RST level loads and worked his way up in velocity . All four made it past what would be considered a stout . And as he increased he split the fluid steel barrels and went further with the Damascus barrels I think if memory serves he stopped with the Damascus barrels because the frames had sprung or something like that . Now granted all four of the guns he used had mirror bores and a good many Damascus you run across now look rather rough in the bore . But it seems to me on an even playing field Damascus or twist oughtta hold their own against fluid steel . And by no means am I telling anyone to go out and shoot factory in their Damascus/twist barreled guns , but with a modicum of common sense you can most likely figure something out .
__________________
Parker’s , 6.5mm’s , Mannlicher Schoenauer’s and my family in the Philippines !
CraigThompson is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CraigThompson For Your Post:
Unread 11-19-2024, 09:15 AM   #5
Member
Mike of the Mountain
PGCA Lifetime
Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 5,721
Thanks: 18,219
Thanked 11,263 Times in 3,326 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigThompson View Post
If my memory serves P.O.Ackley did an article in The American Rifleman back in the 50’s about Damascus vs Fluid Steel . He took four Parker’s two fluid steel and two Damascus . Started loading for them at what I assume would be RST level loads and worked his way up in velocity . All four made it past what would be considered a stout . And as he increased he split the fluid steel barrels and went further with the Damascus barrels I think if memory serves he stopped with the Damascus barrels because the frames had sprung or something like that . Now granted all four of the guns he used had mirror bores and a good many Damascus you run across now look rather rough in the bore . But it seems to me on an even playing field Damascus or twist oughtta hold their own against fluid steel . And by no means am I telling anyone to go out and shoot factory in their Damascus/twist barreled guns , but with a modicum of common sense you can most likely figure something out .
Double Gun Journal published a whole series of tests done on Damascus, twist and fluid steel on vintage guns. The test results showed that the old Damascus and twist barreled guns were very strong and held up to proof loads. The plus was those guns were not closet queens and were definitely used over the years. Sherman Bell did a whole series and I think a few other guys did some of their own tests.
Mike Koneski is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Mike Koneski For Your Post:
Visit Mike Koneski's homepage!
Unread 11-18-2024, 01:34 PM   #6
Member
Steve Parker
PGCA Lifetime
Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 25
Thanks: 96
Thanked 36 Times in 7 Posts

Default

A few of us had purchased the Shenk Shells. The perceived recoil on both the target and hunting loads were significantly more than what we recalled from RST loads. I had the loads tested independently and the shenk shells measured at beyond 12,500 psi.
Steve Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Steve Parker For Your Post:
Unread 11-18-2024, 03:16 PM   #7
Member
Stan Hoover
PGCA Lifetime
Member
 
Stan Hoover's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 1,158
Thanks: 2,784
Thanked 3,145 Times in 838 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Parker View Post
A few of us had purchased the Shenk Shells. The perceived recoil on both the target and hunting loads were significantly more than what we recalled from RST loads. I had the loads tested independently and the shenk shells measured at beyond 12,500 psi.
That’s worrisome, in shells that were advertised as being low pressure?
Stan Hoover is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Stan Hoover For Your Post:
Unread 11-18-2024, 01:55 PM   #8
Member
Rick Roemer
PGCA Member
 
Rick Roemer's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 429
Thanks: 476
Thanked 644 Times in 210 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Koneski View Post
What exactly would cause them to be "way beyond safe"?
Please refer to Steven's post. These shells are way above the advertised numbers. The felt recoil was the first indicator for many of us. They were tested independently and produced very high numbers. In my opinion, too high for any vintage gun. Especially the stocks. Just my two cents of course.
__________________
A Dog, A Gun, and Time enough!

George Bird Evans
Rick Roemer is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Rick Roemer For Your Post:
Unread 11-19-2024, 09:09 AM   #9
Member
Mike of the Mountain
PGCA Lifetime
Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 5,721
Thanks: 18,219
Thanked 11,263 Times in 3,326 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Roemer View Post
Please refer to Steven's post. These shells are way above the advertised numbers. The felt recoil was the first indicator for many of us. They were tested independently and produced very high numbers. In my opinion, too high for any vintage gun. Especially the stocks. Just my two cents of course.
Steve replied to me after I asked about the pressures. 12,500 is definitely way to high. I wouldn't want to shoot them out of a modern gun let alone a vintage gun.
Mike Koneski is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Mike Koneski For Your Post:
Visit Mike Koneski's homepage!
Unread 11-19-2024, 09:25 AM   #10
Member
Rick Roemer
PGCA Member
 
Rick Roemer's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 429
Thanks: 476
Thanked 644 Times in 210 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Koneski View Post
Steve replied to me after I asked about the pressures. 12,500 is definitely way to high. I wouldn't want to shoot them out of a modern gun let alone a vintage gun.
Exactly my thoughts.
__________________
A Dog, A Gun, and Time enough!

George Bird Evans
Rick Roemer is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Rick Roemer For Your Post:
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 02:24 AM.

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.