| Author |
Message |
| < 16ga. General Discussion ~ English guns |
|
 Posted:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 2:44 pm
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 1308
Location: Western WA
|
|
Dave,
What you relate is to me an example of a rabbit hole, involving multiple assumptions and uncertainties, with the outcome subject to individual judgments and opinions, and maybe some backtracking when new information emerges or old information proves stale.
The Brits, bless their thrifty souls, have a simple yardstick: The proof house. And bloody well they should, with all their barrel lapping and honing and sleeving and reaming, treating their guns like favorite old shoes, first replacing the heel, then the sole, then repairing the replacement sole with a half sole, then maybe the heel again, ad infinitum.
Trying to end run around their proof house after all that requires a fearless heart.
I'm not a gunmaker, or metallurgist, or gunsmith, so when it comes to barrels for me it's very straightforward: Lacking indisputable evidence of proof, if it's not mirror bright and guaranteed original, thanks and with all due respect I'll pass.
And I'm not averse to all rabbit holes, after all I shoot 16 ga., a very well established rabbit hole.
Cheers
B. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
| Posted:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 3:41 pm
|
|
|
Joined: 12 Sep 2010
Posts: 1973
Location: Maine
|
|
There are many guns which passed British proof only to fail, more or less catastrophically.
A good measurement of wall thickness is a good guide to whether the gun is sound or not, whether the bores have been messed with or not, and whether it's safe to shoot. The last is an inherently subjective decision. |
_________________
“A man’s rights rest in three boxes: the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box.”
Frederick Douglass, November 15, 1867, speech in Williamsport, Pa. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 4:08 pm
|
|
|
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Posts: 2798
Location: Endless Mountains of Pa
|
|
DaveinMaine,
Our family having owned both Boss and Churchill Guns we had no problem with the guns, and they were older early 1800's guns. Now with the 2 1/2" RST & Poly SpredR's I would not even be concerned about shooting them. I might not run any modern Nitro high grade Fiocchi or B&P shells thru them however. Having sold both these nice guns to pay for my daughters deaf college education, I now wish I had both guns back, to use in the Grouse woods. I did shoot some clays at Nemacolin every once in a while with them, mostly I Grouse hunted with them on a yearly basis.
Pine Creek/Dave
L.C. Smith Man |
_________________
"L.C. Smith America's Best" - John Houchins
Pine Creek Grouse Dog Trainers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 4:28 pm
|
|
|
Joined: 17 Jan 2014
Posts: 1377
Location: Denver, Colorado
|
|
| All sorts of guns fail for all sorts of reasons. Being in proof, British or otherwise, won't protect you from bad ammo or foolish behavior. |
_________________
'Tis better to burn out than it is to rust...... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted:
Sat Mar 28, 2020 12:26 pm
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 1308
Location: Western WA
|
|
| Quote: |
| A good measurement of wall thickness is a good guide to whether the gun is sound or not,
|
It seems the question boils down to this: If a Brit gun is out of proof, what is the minimum wall thickness that would indicate the gun is still sound?
I think the answer is "it depends".
And I think the answer is the same if the gun is still in proof, as it could be mirror bright new, or it could be original proof but pitted, bulged, ringed, etc., i.e., it depends.
B. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted:
Sat Mar 28, 2020 12:56 pm
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 12 Aug 2007
Posts: 1376
Location: Northern Illinois
|
|
| Brewster11 wrote: |
| Quote: |
| A good measurement of wall thickness is a good guide to whether the gun is sound or not,
|
It seems the question boils down to this: If a Brit gun is out of proof, what is the minimum wall thickness that would indicate the gun is still sound?
I think the answer is "it depends".
And I think the answer is the same if the gun is still in proof, as it could be mirror bright new, or it could be original proof but pitted, bulged, ringed, etc., i.e., it depends.
B.
|
There is debate on minimum wall thickness but it is over a rather narrow range (.020 to .025) for Brit guns. If your argument is that it is safer to purchase only relatively new guns then if they are from a reputable manufacture that is probably the safest you can be. But then you must also rule out American Classics and older Continental guns. Some of us are looking for better handling characteristics than most of those guns provide and the upcharge is not all that great to get there. At least with a Brit gun you know what diameter the gun left the factory at. A wall thickness gauge will tell the rest of the story. Most Brit guns left the factory at .030 to .033 for minimum wall thickness and Old Colonel gave you sound other measurements to look at.
If any gun, regardless of origin, is pitted, bulged, ringed etc most folks would not purchase it.
Good Hunting,
Mike |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted:
Sat Mar 28, 2020 1:21 pm
|
|
|
Joined: 16 Jul 2015
Posts: 2125
Location: Hudson,Wy
|
|
There is far more to it than .020"-.025". Those measurements are typically for the distal third of the barrels and not nearly sufficient in areas closer to the breech. I will at this point refer everyone to Drew Hause's website, "Damascus Knowledge", where charts are there for all to see. There is a chart for older fluid steels and one for damascus.
There is also mention of higher strength steels which would be more common in the modern era. The tensile strength charts are also there. Discussion of pitting and alterations is also there, along with a cornucopia of other topics specific to old guns, ammunition, and safety factors. Rather than say "I think", head on over there for some mighty valuable information. |
_________________
Only catch snowflakes on your tongue AFTER the birds fly south for the winter... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted:
Sat Mar 28, 2020 2:17 pm
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 1308
Location: Western WA
|
|
Mike,
Thank you for your very clear note.
I guess my concern is a bit deeper, allow me to explain. Yes, Brit guns can be ideal for our casual shooting needs, proof or lack thereof notwithstanding.
A similar case can be made for old Mercedes diesel cars, circa 1970-80 which with a modicum of care and skill could last for up to a million miles (a very close friend owned a fleet of them). M-B maintained documentation and limited supply of parts for them, and an aftermarket industry sprang up to support them with parts and rebuilds. However, M-B was actually quite cool to the notion of routinely driving them a million miles because that was not the design intent of those vehicles. Did those old cars cannibalize new sales? Not really. M-B simply didn't really think it was a good idea for many reasons.
The same might be the case with Brit guns. Would Purdey, H&H, Boss, Churchill, et al. applaud the repetitive honing, lapping, reaming, and other measures taken to extend the life of their guns a hundred years or more after their production? I suspect they might frown on it...as with M-B, they might say "you can, but that's really not what we intended for them". Or maybe not, who knows.
Are we doing anything wrong by shooting old Brit guns? Not necessarily, but continuing to stretch their life with proof-violating measures? That's what I'm wondering..does it reflect sound judgment? Why did they need honing in the first place? Why are they no longer in proof? Was there neglect? Was there misuse?
M-B diesels need new rings because of normal steel-on-steel wear. But why does a shotgun bore need honing or lapping? It shouldn't, ever, because shotgun bores don't pit or corrode or wear if they are properly used and maintained, talk to the USAMU about how many million rounds they shoot through their Perazzis.
And yet here we have all these old worn Brit guns showing up at our doorstep. Something in this picture doesn't quite ring true to me. Are these guns really a windfall bonanza for us, or are the Brits merely sending their discards here because they can't legally sell them there? Maybe someone can explain it because I don't quite get it. Ultimately it has to get down to economics I suppose.
With apologies for verbosity and obtuseness
V/R
B. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted:
Sat Mar 28, 2020 2:47 pm
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 12 Aug 2007
Posts: 1376
Location: Northern Illinois
|
|
| WyoChukar wrote: |
There is far more to it than .020"-.025". Those measurements are typically for the distal third of the barrels and not nearly sufficient in areas closer to the breech. I will at this point refer everyone to Drew Hause's website, "Damascus Knowledge", where charts are there for all to see. There is a chart for older fluid steels and one for damascus.
There is also mention of higher strength steels which would be more common in the modern era. The tensile strength charts are also there. Discussion of pitting and alterations is also there, along with a cornucopia of other topics specific to old guns, ammunition, and safety factors. Rather than say "I think", head on over there for some mighty valuable information.
|
I believe the question was minimum wall thickness and not the appropriate wall thickness at breech or a few inches forward of breech. As previously mentioned, Old Colonel covered the other dimensions much earlier in the thread. I had no clue you were looking at Damascus barrel guns and I know nothing about them.
I always have my guns vetted by a gunsmith after doing my due diligence and would recommend that to anyone. If you have the skill set and knowledge to vet the gun yourself then that works for you.
I think we have beat this wall thickness issue more than was ever intended. It started with Old Colonel asking me what my minimum was and how I arrived at it and sort of took on a life of it’s own. It certainly got a long way from your original question of does anyone know anything about lesser known English gunmakers.
Good Hunting,
Mike |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted:
Sat Mar 28, 2020 3:38 pm
|
|
|
Joined: 16 Jul 2015
Posts: 2125
Location: Hudson,Wy
|
|
| For the most part, I'm not looking at damascus barreled English shotguns. There is one Scott that is nitro proofed damascus, but the rest are fluid steel guns. Drew's site has more than just damascus info. |
_________________
Only catch snowflakes on your tongue AFTER the birds fly south for the winter... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted:
Sat Mar 28, 2020 4:40 pm
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 12 Aug 2007
Posts: 1376
Location: Northern Illinois
|
|
Wyoming,
As I have said before many of you folks have forgot more about shotguns than I know. I was just trying to let those uninformed about English guns know that they are not some kind of black hole, although they could be Brewster’s definition of a rabbit hole. The fun is in the investigation.
Drew is a bright guy and most certainly has forgot more about doubles than I know.
Good Hunting,
Mike |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted:
Sat Mar 28, 2020 5:53 pm
|
|
|
|
|
| Fun thread. Always good to learn something. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted:
Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:51 pm
|
|
|
Member
Joined: 06 Apr 2007
Posts: 3370
Location: The Great Northwet
|
|
Interesting thread. Like Dave E., I've been reluctant to go down the English gun rabbit hole, primarily because I'm already stretched too thin as it is. I do however, think they are beautiful, especially some of the early round body back action damascus hammer guns. Drool. Maybe one day, if I have an extra $3-4k lying around...
Regarding wall thickness, I have a wall thickness gauge and use it regularly. I shoot both steel and damascus guns, some with pitting, but only because mwt is good. I have an extra set of damascus Lefever barrels in excellent shape, no pits or dents, with mwt of .060. They might be the thickest barrels I've ever seen, on any gun. I wouldn't hesitate to shoot stout loads in them. |
_________________
Gun art: www.marklarsongunart.com
Gallery art: www.marklarsonart.com
The man's prayer from the Red Green Show: "I'm a man, but I can change, if I have to. I guess." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted:
Wed Apr 08, 2020 1:15 pm
|
|
|
Joined: 12 Mar 2012
Posts: 684
Location: Ontario
|
|
| Pine Creek/Dave wrote: |
WyoChukar,
The Brit guns are nice, however you can find Best side Lock German double guns at better prices. Fantastic guns with Krupp barrels and breech work. I happen to like the 16 gauge J.P Sauer guns very much and you can usually find the 16 gauge guns at decent prices.
I would also look at the high grade L.C. Smith double guns, unfortunately the graded guns like the Deluxe, with deep relief Kraus engraving have become very expensive. Doubt you will get a real good deal like on the German Best Guns.
If I was looking at Parker Guns it would be a Repro Combo set.
Pine Creek/Dave
L.C. Smith Man
L.C. Smith America's Best - John Houchins
|
I haven't been on the site for a month or two so seeing this thread for the first time. Having owned and shot vintage SxS from American, England, France, Belgium, Germany and Czech/Prague, I would echo Dave's comments about German guns and expand it to include most of the rest of the Continent.
Great guns were made in all of those places.....yes even Liege. You just have to know how to separate the wheat from the chaff with Belgian guns. For the rest, and this includes British guns, the age old advice that holds true is "buy the gun, not the name". And to do that successfully you need to know enough to first judge the original quality of the gun, then the current condition. For most, the second is easy...we do it all the time. The first takes a little bit more.
Here's the kind of interesting thing you find......on another site, someone posted a link to a new Sauer sidelock (which BTW is a $65,000). A long time member noted that his VL&D Knockabout from about 1900 appeared to be built on the same action. Which reminded me to pull out my Sauer from the same era, and it is the same as the other two. I mentioned this to a gunsmith friend of mine and he reminded me that his Husqvarna is the same as my Sauer. I'm pretty sure each of the three of us paid less than $500 for our guns. Now, here's the kicker.
I bought my Sauer from another gunsmith friend of mine who was repairing a 1930's Purdey for me. He had the locks off the Purdey and was showing me how perfectly they were fitted and finished on the inside. Then, he got the Sauer on the bench, pulled the locks off and showed me how the quality of finish on the inside of the Sauer was every bit as good as the Purdey. Quite an eye opener. Took me another few months to convince him to sell it to me.
Because as North Americans we are used to domestic production from really just six or 7 big names of vintage SxS.....Parker, Fox, Ithaca, Lefever, LC Smith, Remington and Winchester.....we are used to ranking them in terms of quality and desirability. The idea of trying to rank the 100's of makers from England and the continent is a natural instinct, a daunting task and utterly a waste of time.
edit to add: Without a doubt, the finest handling gun I own is a Lindner Daly. And my 12 gauge Sauer truly carries like a 16. It's well under 6 1/2 pounds and it is the most svelte action I have ever picked up. From a distance it looks like a 16 or 20 gauge. My Deforney is damn near the equal of the Purdey. So the adage that German/Continental guns are "clunky" or bulky compared to English just isn't necessarily true. There is a lot of post war crap and a ton of finely made, beautiful and great handling guns from the golden age of SxS production....1890 to 1939. You just have to look. |
_________________
1921 Pieper 29" 6 lbs 10 oz
2003 Citori White Lightning 26" 6 lbs 10 oz
1932 Husqvarna 310AS 29.5" 6 lbs 7 oz
1925 Ferlach 29" 6 lbs 7 oz
1923 Greifelt 29" 6 lbs 1 oz
1928 Simson 29.5" 6 lbs
1893 Lindner Daly FW 28” 5 lb 11oz |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted:
Wed Apr 08, 2020 1:45 pm
|
|
|
Joined: 12 Mar 2012
Posts: 684
Location: Ontario
|
|
| Brewster11 wrote: |
Mike,
Thank you for your very clear note.
I guess my concern is a bit deeper, allow me to explain. Yes, Brit guns can be ideal for our casual shooting needs, proof or lack thereof notwithstanding.
A similar case can be made for old Mercedes diesel cars, circa 1970-80 which with a modicum of care and skill could last for up to a million miles (a very close friend owned a fleet of them). M-B maintained documentation and limited supply of parts for them, and an aftermarket industry sprang up to support them with parts and rebuilds. However, M-B was actually quite cool to the notion of routinely driving them a million miles because that was not the design intent of those vehicles. Did those old cars cannibalize new sales? Not really. M-B simply didn't really think it was a good idea for many reasons.
The same might be the case with Brit guns. Would Purdey, H&H, Boss, Churchill, et al. applaud the repetitive honing, lapping, reaming, and other measures taken to extend the life of their guns a hundred years or more after their production? I suspect they might frown on it...as with M-B, they might say "you can, but that's really not what we intended for them". Or maybe not, who knows.
Are we doing anything wrong by shooting old Brit guns? Not necessarily, but continuing to stretch their life with proof-violating measures? That's what I'm wondering..does it reflect sound judgment? Why did they need honing in the first place? Why are they no longer in proof? Was there neglect? Was there misuse?
M-B diesels need new rings because of normal steel-on-steel wear. But why does a shotgun bore need honing or lapping? It shouldn't, ever, because shotgun bores don't pit or corrode or wear if they are properly used and maintained, talk to the USAMU about how many million rounds they shoot through their Perazzis.
And yet here we have all these old worn Brit guns showing up at our doorstep. Something in this picture doesn't quite ring true to me. Are these guns really a windfall bonanza for us, or are the Brits merely sending their discards here because they can't legally sell them there? Maybe someone can explain it because I don't quite get it. Ultimately it has to get down to economics I suppose.
With apologies for verbosity and obtuseness
V/R
B.
|
I'll take a shot. The English never bought and shot pump guns. SxS had a much longer run there than they did here. It was pretty much all SxS until just a few decades ago. Then the O/U gained ascendancy. O/U account for the vast majority of shotgun sales in the UK. And much like the falling demand for pumps to hunt with here as people switch to semis, demand for SxS in the UK has plummeted. But unlike here, just about their entire stock of old guns that people don't want are SxS.
A falling market and tons of inventory, while at the same time, in the last 30 years a resurging interest in vintage SxS on this side of the pond means enterprising individuals are taking advantage of one market to supply another and find some profit in the process. It is illegal for a Brit gun to be sold and exported if it is out of proof.
They aren't "dumping" anything on North America. They are just getting rid of their SxS as they "upgrade" into a nice new O/U. And they don't really care who buys them. Another Brit or someone over here. |
_________________
1921 Pieper 29" 6 lbs 10 oz
2003 Citori White Lightning 26" 6 lbs 10 oz
1932 Husqvarna 310AS 29.5" 6 lbs 7 oz
1925 Ferlach 29" 6 lbs 7 oz
1923 Greifelt 29" 6 lbs 1 oz
1928 Simson 29.5" 6 lbs
1893 Lindner Daly FW 28” 5 lb 11oz |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 7 Hours |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
