About 2 years ago, I posted some photos and description of the work I did on a cheap Belgian shotgun from the late 19th century (twelve bore, double barrel, 28 inch barrels, percussion). The restoration produced an aesthetically pleasing shotgun. Early in the thread, I reported that I was happy to view it as a conversation piece. But then, as the work continued, not uncovering anything that I (in my admitted ignorance) thought was a show-stopper, I mused about shooting it.
I am getting closer but I am not a fool (I think). Just as a I would not drop a cherry bomb in a can full of marbles and hold it up to my cheek, I would not shoot this thing without I had some idea that it is safe. I can't test the integrity of the breach nor the barrels apart from what I can see (and, of course by shooting it). Bore is clear. Barrels not bulged. Nothing obvious about breach plugs accept that one appears to have been replaced a long time ago. I have a bore scope and after extensive cleaning, everything back to the holes for the nipples appears to be fine. Nipples replaced with properly fitting new nipples.
As I am not a trained gunsmith, part of the thought process was having a gunsmith check it. At least that was my plan.
Gunsmiths are not available on every corner in Naples, FL. Not easy to find. (You can get the oil changed in your Rolls, Injectors re-programmed in your Ferrari, even have an Easy Rider Rifle Rack installed in your Bentley. But just try to find Starline Brass!!). I have spoken to two via phone and they told me that they would not be able to opine on the safety of the shotgun even if they were able to examine it. It appears, in those two cases, to be a reflection on their desire to avoid legal exposure, as much as anything, since they were not interested in looking at it. One guy in VA examined it when I first got it, and declared it would never be a shooter citing numerous factors, all of which were addressed in the restoration. Another gave me a list of things to correct and advised light loads using a string fire set up.
I am not asking anyone, here, to postulate without seeing, examining, testing the piece. I am not even asking for advice on a light test load. This is primarily a philosophical commentary.
Because of my lack of training, education, and experience, I am compelled to rely upon someone else to examine the shotgun. But it is darned hard to find someone who will commit to even look at it. I completely understand this reluctance given the litigiousness of our society. I am familiar with the stipulations placed upon businessmen by insurance companies in other industries and I assume that anything associated with firearms is even more strict.
What is my point?
I just wanted to relate my experience (and minor disappointment). I have always enjoyed and respected the reaction that my curmudgeonly side engenders in this forum.
Actually, I do not have a curmudgeonly side. I am a curmudgeon with occasional flashes of normalcy.
I am getting closer but I am not a fool (I think). Just as a I would not drop a cherry bomb in a can full of marbles and hold it up to my cheek, I would not shoot this thing without I had some idea that it is safe. I can't test the integrity of the breach nor the barrels apart from what I can see (and, of course by shooting it). Bore is clear. Barrels not bulged. Nothing obvious about breach plugs accept that one appears to have been replaced a long time ago. I have a bore scope and after extensive cleaning, everything back to the holes for the nipples appears to be fine. Nipples replaced with properly fitting new nipples.
As I am not a trained gunsmith, part of the thought process was having a gunsmith check it. At least that was my plan.
Gunsmiths are not available on every corner in Naples, FL. Not easy to find. (You can get the oil changed in your Rolls, Injectors re-programmed in your Ferrari, even have an Easy Rider Rifle Rack installed in your Bentley. But just try to find Starline Brass!!). I have spoken to two via phone and they told me that they would not be able to opine on the safety of the shotgun even if they were able to examine it. It appears, in those two cases, to be a reflection on their desire to avoid legal exposure, as much as anything, since they were not interested in looking at it. One guy in VA examined it when I first got it, and declared it would never be a shooter citing numerous factors, all of which were addressed in the restoration. Another gave me a list of things to correct and advised light loads using a string fire set up.
I am not asking anyone, here, to postulate without seeing, examining, testing the piece. I am not even asking for advice on a light test load. This is primarily a philosophical commentary.
Because of my lack of training, education, and experience, I am compelled to rely upon someone else to examine the shotgun. But it is darned hard to find someone who will commit to even look at it. I completely understand this reluctance given the litigiousness of our society. I am familiar with the stipulations placed upon businessmen by insurance companies in other industries and I assume that anything associated with firearms is even more strict.
What is my point?
I just wanted to relate my experience (and minor disappointment). I have always enjoyed and respected the reaction that my curmudgeonly side engenders in this forum.
Actually, I do not have a curmudgeonly side. I am a curmudgeon with occasional flashes of normalcy.