Now that I have the W.C. Scot, I got to thinking that a new set of barrels that can handle modern 2 -3/4" shells would be just the thing for the old girl. I think the action could stand it.

Or am I just dreaming?

I think you're dreaming if you think it won't cost you more than the gun is worth. JMO.

Jim,
I know it would be probably cheaper to find another gun, but if I wanted to spend the money, who would I go to, to get the work done?

Forgive me for asking, but why do you want to beat the gun and your shoulder up shooting modern 2 3/4 shells in an old SxS?

There are low pressure ammunition makers such as RST that make shells for 2 1/2 inch chambered barrels. You'll never know the differnce performance-wise, but your gun will know the difference and be better off for it.

I was just quoted 12,000 USD to rebarrel a gun in the UK.

Champlin Arms says $3500+ to do it:

http://www.champlinarms.com/Default.aspx?tabid=28

That's a pretty fair price.

OWD

Dang fair price, thanks for pointing that out. I see JJ offers some very interesting stuff.

You can buy a lot of RST shells for $3500 and a lot more for 12,000.

I spent the afternoon yesterday shooting Sporting Clays with my W.W. Greener 1882 vintage Hammergun. It has those dangerous 2 1/2 inch chambers and it didn't mind those 2 3/4 low pressure loads at all. As tests have shown they only raise pressures about 100 psi. I reload with Pb or 7625 and they never go over 6500psi.

The reason I am asking is that the original barrels are Black Powder Proofed only. I don't consider 2 -1/2" chambers dangerous.

I am not sure I want to chance even a low power smokeless round in them, after all they are 132 years young.

I am currently shooting a light Black Powder load in them. (2 - 1/2 drams of 2F and 1oz #8 shot.

$3500 is reasonable, sure it is more than I paid for the gun.
A new set of barrels in 2 - 3/4 chamber, and I could shoot most modern loads, even RST 2 -1/2" loads
My only concern would be the soundness of the action in dealing with higher pressures.

With a set of modern barrels, plus the originals, I could have the best of both worlds.

Will have to contact Champlin Arms regarding this, and start saving money.

I shoot only smokeless in my black powder proofed guns. If you read some of the DGJ articles, most black powder loads are/were higher pressure than Black. Most of the black powder scare is nonsense started by lawyers and the unknowledgeable. Quality
English and Belgium guns left the makers with about a 13-15000 psi proof.

Stallones

You are probably right. With the weight and thickness of these barrels, it would probably be OK to shoot some of the lower power smokeless loads in this gun.

I need to look up the proof marks on this gun and see what loads it was proofed under.

Bob,

I shoot RST smokeless loads in all of my BP-only guns. I have a 140 year old G.W. Bales hammer gun in 12 that sees regular hunting use. I think the condition of the barrels is the only limiting factor. Hope that helps!

AB, you are much more likely to damage the action with a diet of modern high pressure loads than burst a barrel. Getting new 2 3/4" chambered barrels doesn't solve your issue at all.
BP loads are not necessarily safer to shoot nor are they necessarily easier on the gun. BP and "normal" nitro loads have very similar pressure-displacement curves. BP burns much hotter than modern nitro powders and is far harder to clean. There are plenty of 2 1/2" and 2 3/4" low pressure light shot loads from the factories and reloads.

Wouldn't it be more fun and cheaper to go spend about $300-500 on reloading equipment and learn how to reload properly for this gun as is?

I've had damascus guns I've been shooting smokeless loads out of for over 5 yrs. My pet load runs around 6500 psi with a 1 ounce payload at 1150 fps, uses a relatively moderate burning powder that burns clean and doesn't have any cold weather ignition problems. I've used it on wild roosters with #5 shot, wild quail with #7.5 shot, and clays with #7.5 shot. I've never felt handicapped with this load, compared to a "modern" gun.

ChuckH

Reloading equipment I have, interested in the load you are running.

Rocketman
I noticed that the gun warmed up some when shooting BP shells
Also I have come to the conclusion that the action would take a beating with modern loads in a new set of barrels.

So, the plan is to come up with some 2 -1/2" low pressure loads, and run the occasional BP loads through it for fun, and start saving for another nice double.

There are many loads to suit your needs/desires. Mine is a full length 2 3/4" star crimped Federal Gold Medal Paper hull. I shoot it in 2 9/16 - 2 5/8" chambers. You may not feel comfortable with doing this. My load was pressure tested in a short chamber.

Would it be worth while to look into having the gun reproofed, say in the UK, for your piece of mind? That said, I have no idea what the expense would be.

I noticed that the gun warmed up some when shooting BP shells BP heats a gun up in a hurry!Also I have come to the conclusion that the action would take a beating with modern loads in a new set of barrels.

So, the plan is to come up with some 2 -1/2" low pressure loads, and run the occasional BP loads through it for fun, and start saving for another nice double. Unless you are shooting 2 1/2" just because you like 2 1/2", I'd suggest you consider 7/8 oz - 1 oz shot loads at 1050 - 1200 fps with a powder giving 7500 psi or less pressure in a 2 3/4" hull (compression formed, preferably). For 7/8 oz loads, I use 700X and PB for 1 oz to 1 1/8 oz loads. There are plenty of loads in the various manuals. You are looking at 20 gauge performance and few now question that as adequate.

Kilibru
Reproofing the gun runs the risk of having no gun afterwards.

Rocketman
Some of RST Falcon Ultra Lite #8 7/8oz 2 -1/2" 12g sounds about right, if I want to buy some.

Will try and find some low power recipes.
Thanks

OK, my recipe from a reloading publication:
Federal Gold Medal Paper hull (full length 2 3/4")
Federal 12S3 wad (or 12S4 if crimp is incorrect)
Federal 209A primer
1 oz shot
17.8 gr Hodgden Clays powder
star crimp (factory style)
1150 fps
approx 6500 psi (tested in short chamber)

This is probably not a bad thing when compared to losing eyes or fingers from a burst barrel.

Still, I have imagined sending a nice gun to a proof house and not only getting back a blown-up gun, but having paid for it. Kind of like paying the surgeon even if Grandpa doesn't survive the operation... which is exactly what happens.

I think it would make for very interesting reading if someone were to do an article based upon interviews with long-time employees of proof houses. I wonder if they get a feel for which ones are going to let loose based upon make, barrel type, damage (i.e., pitting; external or internal, dents, wall thickness), or any other factors.

I think by the time they put a shell in a gun at the proof houses, they are pretty sure the gun is going to be fine. Someone posted the process here long ago. It involved detailed inspection for defects and dimensional inspections.

The proof house will reject any gun during initial viewing if they have any reason to believe it will not pass proof firing.

yes that is true, but some still fail.

That's what I thought Chuck, but it seems every time there is a discussion here about minimum safe barrel wall thickness, one or two guys chime in about a gun that has passed Nitro re-proof with very thin barrels. It kind of makes me wonder if the proof houses don't have at least one employee whose attitude is, "If you're stupid enough to send this POS in, I'm crazy enough to blow it up." I don't recall exact dimensions, but I do recall remarking on one that was out past the forearm that was only a few thou thicker than a matchbook cover, which is about .016".

Of course, I have also often wondered how how anyone knows if the obvious honing on a given barrel was done before or after the proof marks were put on.

That some fail is also true. This is why the proof process has three steps: pre-firing viewing, firing, and post firing viewing. Pre-firing viewing weeds out anything that can be seen/measured as not acceptable. Firing finds anything that inspection did not reveal. Post-firing viewing finds dimensional change failures (not all firing failures are dramatic and/or obvious).

I'm an American redneck and I don't believe anything I see in a proof mark. Yup, as Keith says, how do you know whether the gun was messed with after the marks go on. Use a wall thickness gauge and ignore all proof marks. I've never seen a proof mark that said "Look out for this one."

What would be interesting to know is, how many rounds do they use to proof it with?
Over here in the early days, most gun makers proofed guns their own way. L.C. Smith used twice the powder to proof theirs, and in the mid 20's I believe started to put the proof marks on the barrels. I'm sure most other American gun manufacturers did the same. But again, how many rounds did they use to proof?
I agree to what Bill said, who knows what was done to the gun since it left England, how many times was it re-blued/browned and how much was removed from in/out of barrels.
Like stated a wall thickness gage would make me feel better.

JWD: Recently it was rumoured that the London Proof House was double proof testing all guns but I never heard this as definitive and I believe that this has passed into history.
As regards lapping done after proof testing, this is why there is a 0.008-0.011" maximum proof range. However, if a barrel was proofed exactly on 0.728" it could be lapped out to 0.739 before being out of proof. Obviously in a barrel with MWT of perhaps 0.020" at 0.728" this would be a very thin wall at 0.739", 0.015"!
As regards pitting, the Proof House likes to see clean tubes but will Proof test a pitted barrel providing there are no substantial pits in the area between the ribs. Equally likely to cause a refusal at the initial view are rivelling, dents and bulges and these can be almost invisible. Rivelling and bulging caused by the proof test invariably cause the gun to be failed and a subsequent retest required after the barrel has been repaired.
On the matter of wall thickness, as we are specifically banned by law from exporting guns for any purpose (including wall hangers) that are out of proof, on the request of the owners I have successfully proofed guns down to the low teens. For obvious reasons, these barrels were not worked on after proof, all the lapping etc was done before.

Hello All
In addition to the above discussions, it is also possible to send the gun to Briley and have removable 20 gauge full length tubes installed for a fraction of the cost mentioned so far. Is this in the realm of interest?

http://www.briley.com/2009/fittedtubesets.html

$525 seems a proper price to enable one to shoot full up factory ammo or reloads.

Enjoy the day
Mike