shooting damascus

Status
Not open for further replies.
Damascus barrels can be "sleeved" after being cut off ahead of the lumps. Steel barrels are inserted into the "monobloc", that is the sleeves are inserted into what's left of the original barrels and lumps. Kirk Merrington is one of the very few 'smiths here in the U.S. who does a first class job of this. Pressure limitations will, however, remain. The strength of the action of fine shotguns is, and has been generally "balanced" to the requirements of the gun.

The procedure isn't cheap, running something over $1000. It may not be something that you'd want to consider for a high grade U.S. made gun (due to collector value), but, as european guns are often evaluated very differently in the market, the procedure may actually increase the value of some guns.

By the way, the joint is often so good when done by a careful craftsman that a very powerful magnifying glass is needed to find it.

Bob
 
Last edited:
Wow...

...indeed Hawg.

I read every post and found it very educational. I enjoyed it very much!

All the best gentleman,

Birch
 
Ok well ill chime in before it gets locked .
For the most part the majority of folks don’t know the difference between forged barrels , Damascus , stub , twist or laminated barrels. They are not all the same . if your going to shoot one of these older guns , its best to know the differences.
Also when it comes to proof . What that means is the gun was in proof “AT” the time it was tested and that it met a given standard “AT” time of submission . That doesn’t mean just because it has proof markings that its forever in proof .

I have many different SXS with pattern type barrels and most all of them I have or do often shoot . I however do that with BP loads even when they carry NITRO or smokeless proofs . The reason for that is that from what I have read , studied and been taught is that what these guns were proofed with what was called wood powder which was an early smokless powder, not modern smokeless..

I also have seen a few original SXS barrels fail with BP loads . But in all fairness those barrels were suspect to begin with .
I also have seen very nice , nitro marked barrels fail while useing a low base load and with BP when over sized shells were used .
In all cases but for those that had suspect barrels , the barrel material in the area of the failure looked as if it had crystallized .
I also have seen stub barrels that had become so soft they would not hold a pattern when subject to etching . That set of so called good Birmingham I made the butt plate , side plate , TG and thimbles for my Hudson valley fowler .
So ya it would appear that some of these barrels can rot

If your wanting to shoot smokeless , then what I would do is send the gun off and have it re proofed if it passes , then you have a gun you can shoot . If it fails , well ,,,, you don’t .
If that worries you the have the barrels lined .
Here are some links for you . this first one should keep you busy for reading for some time .

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y52UbLaVsDAYd3BJLNTzTnqa7CzuhnbgonQzuYRuLvs/preview?pli=1

http://www.damascus-barrels.com/Finish_Restore.html

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1__gn3XKjLX_4V0LguzoVGBwJRFS6SxsWGzUwHq93neo/edit?pli=1
 
Last edited:
One last thing . If you go down a ways on the first link , you will find documentation on what caused the demise of the pattern barrels .
Its not what most think . It might just surprise folks

OH and you can still buy Damascus type barrels today that is proofed to holed pressures of some of the heavies smokeless rifle cartridges. It is however very expensive. List time I checked it was around 40.00 US , a inch
 
I am delighted to admit that Rob Norton has proven me wrong and that Damascus barrels never fail. I will convey that information to the fellow with three fingers missing.

Jim (call me "Hillbilly")
 
I might be OK with a Damascus that was "reproofed" today, but to say something was proofed 100 years ago, is safe to shoot today, without knowing its "current" condition is simply foolish...

to put it in an extreme... if you took the finest Damascus shotgun you could purchase 100 years ago, & only shot black powder through it, & never cleaned or oiled the gun, it would be foolish to expect it to be safe to shoot even with black powder today... just because something was proofed in the past, is no guarantee that it is safe to shoot today... the person doing the proofing has no way of knowing what the gun was subjected to, & or how it was taken care of, after it left the proof house... I'm sure there are some Damascus barrels that have been meticulously cleaned & all the corrosive fouling removed every time the gun was shot, that could be reproofed successfully... but more than likely most would not pass a reproofing for reasons stated years & years ago ( earlier in this thread )

BTW... I own 3 antique fluid steel hammer doubles that I greatly enjoy shooting, so you can still play with those guns, & they are much fun... but I leave great grandpas Damascus barreled guns in the display case...;)
 
Last edited:
"lively topics and conversation"

Well I for one, think this thread meets the requirements of the subforum header......:D

Very informative too! Thanks for the links Captchee.
 
Thank you ,Rob!
We definitely needed someone of your stature and imminent knowledge to step in a give us ignorant hillbillys a sound drubbing! You Sir, are a magnificent asset to the gun world. To come down from that lofty perch just to give us our come-uppance must have been extremely painful for you. Can I bring an extension ladder over to help you get back up there?:D
 
Quite simply, I have a bonehill of Birmingham 30" damascass gun dated 1887, it has both black powder and later nitro proofed marks at the Birmingham proof house to the full spec of 3 tons 1 1/8th ounce aka 32grms. And has been using such loads for 25 yrs!!
After speaking to the senior proofmaster directly he informs me that if it has passed nitro proof it is safe to fire modern nitro shells of 2.5" regardless of what some bunch of know all hillbilliys on this forum think. This comes from a senior position of authority on the matter, not what someone has been told from another.
Click to expand...

The more ignorant the idiot, the more confident the idiot.

I have studied the history of metallurgy and I know what they did not know in 1887. I have a very good idea of the technology of the day, and it was a pre vacuum tube technology era. The metals of the era were highly inconsistent in quality, process controls were human eyeballs, taste, touch and smell.

A proof test is an historical test, originally created to give the customer some assurance that the firearm was correctly built. Some proof tests are more rigorous, the Proof House checks all sorts of dimensions and wear patterns. The proof load is usually a 30% over load, and that only proves the mechanism can take that load once. Does not prove that the mechanism can take that load again and again. And when you are dealing with a mechanism that old, I would not bet that it will survive an infinite number of load cycles, be they standard or reduced. Given the soft metals used in twist barrels, and the Damascus weld seams that weaken those barrels, you are very fortunate that yours has not burst yet. Just keep on firing the thing and keep a shot count. It will be interesting to read just how many rounds it takes for the barrels/locking mechanism to fail through metal fatigue.

Let us know.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Remember the fiberglass barrels? They did not last too long, but I would trust them over a barrel that was hot welded with a hammer.
 
Assuming the links that have been provided by myself and others have been read to some existent and some knowledge has been gained , here is my opinion on shooting original firearms .
Again this is just my opinion and others are welcome to theirs.
Myself , I consider all firearms be they antique or modern, that have been used to any real existent , to be out of proof . As such proof markings especially on antiques mean little to nothing past a way to help research an original piece or discern its quality at time of manufacturing.
No gunsmith , especially the vast number of modern smiths are going to be willing to say ; Yep go shoot it . To do so would open themselves up to a large liability.
Without an in-depth evaluation of a specific piece there simply is no way of knowing . Even then its all to often a case of the gun being within tolerances .Thus assuming that if used as originally intended that the gun safe .
Never , ever take someone’s opinion over the internet or after some conversation over the phone , or in a letter ,as to if a gun is safe or not to shoot . If that person is truly knowledgeable they will tell you the gun must be inspected first hand regardless of what markings are on it .
When it comes to shooting original guns , I believe a person needs to have some base of knowledge past cosmetic evaluation, to be able to discern if the complete gun is safe to shoot . Holding a belief that modern technology somehow makes one safe is IMO miss guided . Frankly the best that can be said is that your safer . It no way means that there cant or wont be a failure . It just means its less likely . Failures happen all the time . If they did not then there would be very little need for gunsmiths .
Thankfully the majority of those failures are not catastrophic and cause injury .
In the end the best that can be said after inspecting an aged gun is an opinion as to the likelihood of something bad happening . No one can say it wont .
 
Lets try again

Thanks guys for responding to my post, My info came from a proof master at the Birmingham proof House August 2015!
If you read it correctly and something tells me you didn't then you would have realised that the British proof House has some of the most if not the the most stringent test in the world, The barrels are subject to a remote fired pressure far greater than any cartridge produced even today is capable of producing in a gun chamber.
Clearly your friend with (3 fingers) as you put it has a gun that was below par or poorly maintained albeit by the previous owner.
If you feel strongly about my post simply speak to the Proof house yourself!
In future read the post as it says clearly ( wanabee hillbilly gunsmiths) clearly don't know.
Enough said.
 
Rob-You have stated and restated your belief in the credentials of your proof house and master. Enough said. Us Yanks are invariably less impressed with British things than Brits are. It's good that the opinion he rendered was recent. It's fine to give some detail on the pressures of the test. We have been chastised for not really reading what you were attempting to tell us.

The point that I see most of us Yanks making was, and you should have understood this because it is repeatedly emphasized...........was this testing actually DONE in August this year, or did you just get an opinion through correspondence or telephone about a test long in the past?

Perhaps I did not read carefully, but I don't see where you say WHEN this testing was done. It almost seems that you avoid that aspect, by endlessly regurgitating how impressive the proof house and testing are. And that, I believe, is the crux of the matter.

An old test is not still valid no matter WHO did it, whereas a recent test would at least give hope that maiming would not occur. It would be foolish to risk one's safety based on an outdated test.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top