Research letter & Barrel inspection clarification

[Rick Riddell]

On my research letter for a Damascus barreled gun it has the gun returned to the factory to have barrel work done, dents removed, cleaned and a reblue, as well as tightening the locks and action. I’m wondering what cleaned would indicate? Would this be removal of any Pitts? Perhaps in the process lengthening the chambers, as it now has 2 3/4. There are a few things that have me curious bit more perplexed 🤔 . I sent the barrels to Bachelder’s in 2017 to be checked for safety, it was reported as “ Brad states that these BBL's appear untouched and in original configuration. They will be safe to shoot with modern loads” through email correspondence and the invoice also stated safe to shoot with modern loads. So in 2019 in my infinite wisdom had the left choke opened and decided to get formal documentation on the barrels and to my dismay, although in acceptable range for safe barrel thickness they couldn’t give me any documentation on the safety of the barrels due to the lengthening of the forcing cones one at 7” and the other cone at 10”, and the tubes not at the nominal .729 left barrel at .736 and the right at .742 but in email correspondence I was told they were safe just no formal documentation due to the stated fact above. Now could I speculate that these “issues” could have been done at the factory when the gun was sent it for the documented work? Would Brad be able to determine these things were done through experience and the barrels would be acceptable or are there different ways of checking barrels for safety, loaded question I know. Any thoughts or speculation?

[Bill Murphy]

None of your questions can be answered without the use of a bore micrometer and a wall thickness gauge. Brad is not with us any more so you are on your own.

[Rick Riddell]

Originally Posted by Bill Murphy

None of your questions can be answered without the use of a bore micrometer and a wall thickness gauge. Brad is not with us any more so you are on your own.

Not sure what you are getting at and not surprised by your reply, if you think I’m bad mouthing, insinuating or making accusations you are dead wrong, I know these barrels are safe and I have faith and confidence in the Bachelder shop, they are above reproach and have been very helpful over the years. If you chose to read the post incorrectly, we’ll that’s on you.

[Dean Romig]

I found nothing at all objectionable about Bill’s reply to your questions.





.

[edgarspencer]

Originally Posted by Rick Riddell

So in 2019 in my infinite wisdom had the left choke opened and decided to get formal documentation on the barrels and to my dismay, although in acceptable range for safe barrel thickness they couldn’t give me any documentation on the safety of the barrels due to the lengthening of the forcing cones one at 7” and the other cone at 10”, and the tubes not at the nominal .729 left barrel at .736 and the right at .742 but in email correspondence I was told they were safe just no formal documentation due to the stated fact above. Now could I speculate that these “issues” could have been done at the factory when the gun was sent it for the documented work? Would Brad be able to determine these things were done through experience and the barrels would be acceptable or are there different ways of checking barrels for safety, loaded question I know. Any thoughts or speculation?

What ' "issues" '?

It is not uncommon, at all, to find older guns with untouched barrels measuring well above .729" I had a custome'rs gun here which measured .751".

"couldn’t give me any documentation on the safety of the barrels due to the lengthening of the forcing cones one at 7” and the other cone at 10”
This does not make sense to me. what was at 7" and 10".
I think bore diameter is a number which people put way to much importance on. It's BARREL WALL THICKNESS that is what I'm after. Only thing I use my Chubbs for is determining chokes.

Bill Murphy's statement, however you interpreted it, is correct. I don't see where he was making any other statement but what it says.

There has been a lot of past posting, indicating that Brad didn't own a wall thickness gauge. Whatever else people think of the shop today, or compared to 'before', I understand now they do own a wall thickness gauge.

I had a hell of a time trying to figure out what you were saying. Maybe I still don't know.

[Rick Riddell]

Let me straighten it out a bit, the barrels have been measured for wall thickness and they are well into safe range, just stating that as they have been measured twice so far. So originally the gun has records that the gun was sent in for repairs, the following was requested: Barrels to have dents taken out, clean and reblue. The action and locks tightened. I was curious about what cleaning meant since it was listed with the barrel work. Would that be Pitts removed from the barrel? Could it be speculated the current measurements are a result of being sent back for repairs. Would it be possible for a Parker experienced gunsmith to see the changes and know based on condition and patterns of examining literally hundreds of Parker barrels. I think that sums it up. My reply was in defense as it appeared to me that it was interpreted to bash the Bachelders, which it wasn’t and wanted to put a stop to something before it starts. So I do apologize for any conflict, but do want to make it clear there is no beef �� what so ever! Bachelder’s has been more than accommodating and very helpful over the years!

[Dean Romig]

My guess is that the 7" forcing cone and the 10" forcing cone didn't get that long from Parker Bros. factory work.
Yes, most corrosion pitting usually happens in the first third of barrel length from the breech and I have seen such 'forcing cone lengthening' but never even suspected it to have been done by PB factory.





.

[Rick Riddell]

cool! Thank you Dean! I know it's all speculation and the only info I have is two prior owners before me, so who knows what could have been done! I know it has 2 3/4 chambers now but wasn't sure at what extent Parker would have done during the barrel repairs and how that would affect our modern day way of measuring for safe tolerances.

[Drew Hause]

I distinctly recall a previous thread regarding a gun that had been to Bachelder with 7" & 10" "forcing cones" and over-size bore. I believe the consensus was that the barrels had simply been honed. Can anyone else confirm?
Please share the wall thicknesses of the right .742" barrel from the end of the chamber out to 10".

[Rick Riddell]

Yes this is the same gun. I was going through some things in the research letter anded up with more questions I wanted to pose to the board. I would love to send them to you to check out if willing.