Barrel weights

NO ITEMS MAY BE POSTED FOR SALE ON THIS FORUM or direct references to items for sale. This includes, but is not limited to, the following: A personal item that’s obviously for sale or would appear to be for sale; or if a link is posted to some other site where the item is for sale. Please note that references to items posted elsewhere are ok for discussion as long as a direct link is not included. Any "Wanted to Buy" posts are not allowed and will be removed. The moderators will delete any posts that are deemed offensive, abusive or slanderous in nature. 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
User avatar
spyder
Posts: 450
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 1:08 pm
Location: Middle Tennessee
Has thanked: 46 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Barrel weights

Post by spyder »

I'm fairly new to Foxes. I sometimes see barrel designations (#3, for example). Is there a list of all the variations and what they mean?
User avatar
Fin2Feather
Posts: 1062
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 10:15 am
Location: Kansas High Plains
Has thanked: 232 times
Been thanked: 236 times

Post by Fin2Feather »

Has to do with the weight of the barrels. There's a chart in MacIntosh's book; if you don't have the book PM me; I've got it somewhere.
Utica Fox Appreciation Society - Charter Member
Researcher
Posts: 5917
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 7:18 pm
Location: WA/AK
Has thanked: 353 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Post by Researcher »

IMHO there is something amiss in those barrel weight charts in McIntosh's book. Note that the 1 weight 16-gauge barrels weigh more then the 1 weight 12-gauge barrels, and the 0-weight (?!?) 20-gauge barrels weigh the same as the 12-gauge 1-weight barrels. Also, the 2-weights for 12- and 16-gauge are the same.
Share the knowledge
User avatar
Fin2Feather
Posts: 1062
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 10:15 am
Location: Kansas High Plains
Has thanked: 232 times
Been thanked: 236 times

Post by Fin2Feather »

Yeah, I've noticed that too. Maybe we could contact Mike and have him give us the scoop?!
Utica Fox Appreciation Society - Charter Member
User avatar
spyder
Posts: 450
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 1:08 pm
Location: Middle Tennessee
Has thanked: 46 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Post by spyder »

Just for example: Are 1's heavier or lighter than 2's?
birdawg
Posts: 1024
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 11:50 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Post by birdawg »

You should remember those are not finished weights they are just a guide to organize the rough stock barrel blanks.
"I have more than I need, but not as many as I want"
"The search continues on many fronts"
Life Member, A.H. Fox Collectors Association.
Researcher
Posts: 5917
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 7:18 pm
Location: WA/AK
Has thanked: 353 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Post by Researcher »

1-weight were the heaviest barrels down to 4-weight as the lightest. There were also 0-weight barrels for the 12-gauge Super-Fox, and for some reason the 20-gauge chart had 0-weight instead of 1-weight?!? Maybe these were weights for a pair of rough tubes, not even assembled into a set of barrels.
Share the knowledge
User avatar
Silvers
Posts: 4933
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 9:28 pm
Location: Between Phila and Utica
Has thanked: 966 times
Been thanked: 1397 times

Post by Silvers »

Interesting topic. I have 5 Foxes with weight stamped barrels in my records, and all 5 checked out within an ounce of the weights shown in Mac's Fox book. However all 5 were 12 gauge guns. From that admittedly limited database I've concluded the weights shown in the book for 12 gauge are for finished barrels, not for rough tubes. Silvers
Aan
birdawg
Posts: 1024
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 11:50 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Post by birdawg »

Interesting. I will have to check mine against the book weights. I don't have the book here but I thought it said that the weights were rough barrels.

Darn wrong again :oops:
"I have more than I need, but not as many as I want"
"The search continues on many fronts"
Life Member, A.H. Fox Collectors Association.
User avatar
Silvers
Posts: 4933
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 9:28 pm
Location: Between Phila and Utica
Has thanked: 966 times
Been thanked: 1397 times

Post by Silvers »

Here you go. 12 gauge graded gun, 3-weight barrels, 28 inch, 1927 mfr. The chart in MacIntosh's book lists 3 lbs, 8 ounces. My scale shows 3 lbs. 7 ounces. Sure, the scale isn't scientific quality but I've used it for postal weighing and it compares well with the digital one at the post office.

As I said earlier, I don't have enough data on smallbore Fox barrels but the 12 gauge ones I've checked seem to align, within +/- one ounce, with the chart weights in Mac's book. I've concluded the chart for 12 gauge at least, shows the weight of finished barrels.

Think about it, what good would the chart/weights be for rough barrels? Used in manufacturing to be sure the correct barrel blanks were taken from the bin? Maybe. But IMO a chart with weights would be more likely used by salesmen and customers wanting to order their finished gun ready for the field. Silvers

Image

Image
FRBRIT
Posts: 206
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 9:12 pm
Location: Wheatridge, Co.

Post by FRBRIT »

Silvers,
Just a little food for thought.

The weight's listed may still be for rough blanks. After striking the ejector rod would be fitted, the cocking shoe it's spring and screw would be added and possibly the beads and forearm loop added to bring the weight back to that before they were struck.

Just thinking out loud!
Life Member A.H. Fox Collectors Association Inc.
birdawg
Posts: 1024
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 11:50 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Post by birdawg »

After checking, my 12 ga #4 30" barrels are right on, per the chart.
My 16 ga 28" #3 are 5 ounces lighter than the chart. My 16ga 30" #2's are 4 ounces lighter than the chart.
These are all Philly un cut guns.

Possibly it does have something to do with how much metal was removed in finishing. The 16's do have a relief area ground out near the water table for frame clearance.



Another barrel note is it seems that the orientation of the numbers to the plane of the barrels is not consistent.
Some guns have the numbers in line with the barrels and some are perpendicular to the length.
"I have more than I need, but not as many as I want"
"The search continues on many fronts"
Life Member, A.H. Fox Collectors Association.
Researcher
Posts: 5917
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 7:18 pm
Location: WA/AK
Has thanked: 353 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Post by Researcher »

Headrick and I weighed about 40 barrels, when Mike was working on the book, and the only conclusion we could make was that it was for pairs of rough tubes.
Share the knowledge
Researcher
Posts: 5917
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 7:18 pm
Location: WA/AK
Has thanked: 353 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Post by Researcher »

The workers at the Fox factory when selecting the pieces to make a gun of a given finished weight.
Share the knowledge
Researcher
Posts: 5917
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 7:18 pm
Location: WA/AK
Has thanked: 353 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Post by Researcher »

On drawing number D-204 dated August 26, 1912, that these weight charts were copied from was the following --

note: Allowance for finish is included in given dimensions
Barrels must be marked on under side at point indicated by "A" with our weight number 1,2,3, or 4.
Share the knowledge
Post Reply