Want to fire an L C Smith 1900

T

toggy

Inactive
I have a 1900 L C Smith sxs 12 gauge that does not have a damascus barrel. It has external hammers.

It licks up tight and it looks to have been taken care of pretty well. A friend who knows guns pretty well agreed it stands a good chance of shooting again.

From what I have read black powder is the only way to go. I have been considering making black powder shot shells using paper hulls and, to start with, light loads.

Anyone out there doing this with older shotguns?

Tom
 
I wouldn't be afraid to use AA trap loads, smokeless powder was in use in 1900, unless you already use FF black powder for something else.
 
Better check chamber length. Most of those old guns were 2 1/2 or 2 5/8 chambers. I cut off plastic shells behind the crimp and reload them with bp with just a nail, a block of wood, a wood dowel and a roll crimper. You can't reload them but once or twice before the inside of the shell is melted too much. Don't use a plastic wad or shot cup unless you just fancy cleaning melted plastic out of your bore. I have an Elsie hammerless made in 1899 and the guy I got it from was using 3 inch turkey loads in it.:eek: It didn't hurt it any but I do not recommend it.
 
I'd be looking at paper hulls and cardboard wads.

I don't want to mess with smokeless if that might damage the gun. I thought in 1900 black powder was still largely in use?
 
Black powder was still in use, but smokeless was available.
For all the Internet Concern about "black powder rated guns" I bet grandpa shot smokeless if he could afford it. Which was a concern, 12 ga 3 dr 1 1/8 oz shells were 35 cents a box in black, 45 cents with smokeless in the 1901 Sears catalog.

Sears did not list L.C. Smith hammer guns in 1901 but a hammer Remington was $20 and a hammer Ithaca was $21 at the time. Damascus barrels actually cost more than "armory steel."

I don't know the current Received Wisdom on shooting old steel barreled guns.
You would certainly be advised not to shoot Damascus.

I do not know what length shell Hunter Arms was chambering "Elsies" for at the time. It would be safest to stick with 2 1/2".
 
You can also use brass hulls. Magtech all brass hulls are not too expensive, and can be reloaded with black powder for almost ever. Another option is to use chamber adapters, stepping it down from 12 gauge to 20 or even .410 and using modern shot loads.
 
I have an Elsie hammerless made in 1899 and the guy I got it from was using 3 inch turkey loads in it. It didn't hurt it any but I do not recommend it.
Click to expand...

I'm going to have to eat some crow here. I went and checked the chamber length on mine and it is 3 inches. There is no doubt they were lengthened at a later date. I also rechecked the serial number and it was made in 1909 not 1899. It has armour steel barrels and both chokes are full. You can find a lot of info on your gun here. http://www.lcsmith.org/faq/faqhome.html
 
Yes I assumed mine was 2 1/2 and I would make sure before getting any shells in there. If I ever shoot anything in this gun I am going light.

Again my barrel is not damascus and I know it's a 1900. Good condition.

I really like the idea of loading paper shells and using cardboard wads. I want to shoot a rabbit in that manner.

Anyone in Minnesota doing this sort of thing? I would barter for training...
 
Sweet. and I found cardboard wads. But I have some learning to do to figure out what powder and load to use. And I need a press. Sounds like I am in for some fun.
 
i shoot a rem model 1900 made in 1906 with 32" F&F steel barrels 2-3/4 chamber with trap loads(maybe 300 rounds a year) and i have shot a 25-25 at trap with 1-1/8-#8 shot, once you get used to the drop in the stock its a good shooter. eastbank.
 
I shoot a lot of CAS with 5 different old hammer doubles using Winchester Xtra lite target loads... still enough power to put down the steel targets, but low enough pressures to save the shoulder on steel butt plate doubles...

I also have a few odd gauge shotguns that I load in the full length brass shells
 
I am talking black powder with wool wads and paper hulls!

FPAP121lg.jpg


33-lubed-wads.jpg
 
I'd stick with black powder with a shotgun that old. Much safer.
Click to expand...

I agree, black powder is very low pressure and even the pressure curve is mild compared with smokeless powder.

The steels of the era were just awful. Don't push them in any sort of way:

Rolling Block strenght
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?52526-Rolling-Block-strenght/page2

"The Remington catalog of 1875 is the first that lists barrels of decarbonized steel for rifle barrels. This is what we call mild steel today. This steel is soft like Damascus, but more ductile. You'll see a lot more repairable dents or gouges in these steels than in a more modern steel. The barrels were rolled from solid metal , without weld or seam. They were rolled to size bored out, then turned and ground proved with a heavy charge of powder and a solid slug of lead. "

"The April 1897 Remington Arms Co. catalogue introduced “Remington steel” barrels on the Remington Hammerless Doubles. Prior to that date shotguns were only offered with Damascus barrels of varying qualities by grade. Two types of steel barrels were introduced at that time: “Remington Steel” and “Ordnance Steel”"

"Remington Steel was the lower grade and was sold for the same price as the ordinary Damascus barrels on A-grade shotguns. It was made “in-house” at the Remington factory."

""Ordnance Steel" is a higher grade, and was especially recommended for heavy charges of nitro powder. The tensile strength of this steel is 110,000 lbs., and elastic limit 60,000 lbs., this being greatly in excess of any strain to which barrels are subjected with reasonable loads of nitro powders. It was available in some rifles and shotguns."

I did not know this until I looked as a response to your post. However, I have worked with Steel my entire professional career. I was the head of a Testing Lab in a steel manufacturing facility for 4+ years. During that time, I was provided a ferrule from a WW1 fighter airplane for testing. It was made from what was labeled "high strength steel" (the label was from WW1). I tested it and found that it was lower strength than the lowest strength steel that can be bought today. In addition, it had a lot more impurities than would be allowed today, particularly sulfer. (PS. "today" means from about 1975 to 1980). I know that steel has continued to increase since then in strength, ductility, and all the other desireable characteristics we use without thinking about it.
Click to expand...
 
A guy here who liked to shoot his old Remington hammer guns studied the situation. He found an old American Rifleman article with a graph showing a particular smokeless load that did not exceed black powder pressures at any time. So he loaded that powder with the "softest" unitary wad on the market.
He was not stressing his old mild steel and Damascus guns any more than with black powder. He had the capabilities to check them out for hidden flaws in the twist, too. I figure he was at least as well off as the toffs with their Nitro proof Damascus Purdeys.

A hammer double with Briley trap chokes and Graco adjustable stock hardware looks kind of odd, but it shoots well. The steel isn't as good, but the barrels are well bored, smooth and straight.

Somebody once took him to task for cutting up an old gun that way.
He pointed out that they were relatively common and inexpensive and that he was not making a measurable difference in their scarcity by modifying one to hit the birds. This from a guy who wheeled and dealt in real antiques, Carolina and Alabama muzzleloaders worth a good many kilobucks.
 
Hmmmm I would be interested in a "gentle" smokeless powder. I'll do some research.

I say keeping these old guns going is a beautiful thing. Once I take a hare or a grouse with the gun I'll feel pretty good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top