A different question on loads

Post your questions or seek advise regarding gunsmithing, restoration, repairs, ballistics, etc, etc.
Commercial operations or businesses may not advertise nor appear to advertise their products or services, either directly, or indirectly by a second party, except for simple reference as a source for such products or services

A different question on loads

Postby EricB » Fri Apr 16, 2021 11:08 am

Once my Sterlingworth gets here and I can get it checked out, I plan to use light loads. The question of which shells to use has been rehashed plenty of times already. I want to preserve the gun so I’ll baby it. What I’m wondering, is whether anything changed in the manufacturing of guns when loadings were standardized. Were any changes made in the types of steel used or barrel thickness? Obviously I’m not talking about damascus barrels.

I passed on an early Ithaca once because there wasn’t an RST or Polywad at the time, so I feared the gun couldn’t safely be used. Call me over-cautious.
EricB
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2021 6:14 pm

Re: A different question on loads

Postby vaturkey » Sun Apr 25, 2021 6:55 am

I think as long as the minimum barrel wall thickness is ok, any RST type 2.5" low pressure load is fine. The question is what is the minimum barrel wall thickness.

I have passed on guns (Foxes) that had the mythical number 4 weight barrels because the minimum barrel wall thickness was in the .020 range because I was always told that's just too thin. Guess its all depends on where that MBWT is located. Falling into the FWIW category, I sold a Parker CH years and years ago that had MBWT of .018 and .020 and that was located about about 8" from the barrel ends. The new owner was well aware of the MBWT and had no issues with it using appropriate light loads (RST's). It however troubled me when they were that thin. Also falling into the FWIW category, there are couple of Foxes currently coming up at auction that also have MBWT in the .020 range and I'm not bidding on those either. I once had Dan Rossiter measure as set an A grade 16 gauge with 4 weight barrels and they came in a .025 and about 10" from the end of the barrels and he said he would have no problem shooting that gun with RST ammo. That gun weight 5 lb 10 oz.
User avatar
vaturkey
 
Posts: 2346
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:33 pm
Location: Hamilton, VA

Re: A different question on loads

Postby 3birddogs » Wed May 05, 2021 1:09 pm

Interesting, wonder what the MWT would be on my 4 Wt pin gun. Ususally shoot 7/8 oz thru it anyway.
May every spring from now until eternity throb with the drum roll of your wings(RogerLatham)
3birddogs
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:57 pm
Location: wheeling, wv

Re: A different question on loads

Postby eightbore » Wed May 05, 2021 4:44 pm

You "estimate" barrel wall thickness by measuring it. Manson gauge, $100 plus. You want to play the game, buy the tools.
eightbore
 
Posts: 2626
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:12 pm

Re: A different question on loads

Postby Foxnut » Sat May 08, 2021 10:26 pm

Interesting thread on MBWT as I had a discussion today at the OGCA on what is appropriate on 20 & 16 ga. guns. I have also utilized .022 - .025 as the MBWT.
Regards - Foxnut
Foxnut
 
Posts: 793
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:53 am
Location: Western, MI

Re: A different question on loads

Postby vaturkey » Sun May 09, 2021 8:02 am

Foxnut wrote:Interesting thread on MBWT as I had a discussion today at the OGCA on what is appropriate on 20 & 16 ga. guns. I have also utilized .022 - .025 as the MBWT.


It would be interesting to know what the Fox factory felt was safe in 4 weight barrels in small bores back in the day. FWIW, I had a Parker CH 16 gauge with Damascus barrels that had .018 and .022 MBWT measured by a pro. They had not been honed, they left that factory that thin. The location for the thin spot was about 8" from the barrels ends in both tubes. Number 1 frame.
User avatar
vaturkey
 
Posts: 2346
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:33 pm
Location: Hamilton, VA

Re: A different question on loads

Postby eightbore » Sun May 09, 2021 12:49 pm

Tom, your 16 was thin at a point where there was little pressure. Further back, there may have been a problem.
eightbore
 
Posts: 2626
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:12 pm

Re: A different question on loads

Postby fox-admin » Sun May 09, 2021 5:20 pm

There are a ton of Parker small bores with .020 min walls. Many of the Fox 20's I have measured are .025. I would not turn down a .020 20ga Fox if there was a small spot 8 or 9 inches from the muzzle.
User avatar
fox-admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3056
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 5:46 pm


Return to "Technicana" and Restoration Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest