S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,616
Posts547,048
Members14,428
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 11
Boxlock
|
OP
Boxlock
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 11 |
Hello, new guy here, name is Dave Just picked this up and trying to research it a bit. Yeah, I know, backwards. For starters, what % would it grade at? So far I found it is 1920-21 manf, pics tell the rest of it. 28" bbls Drop at comb 1-3/8" Drop at Heel 2-1/4" LOP 13-5/8" EDITED TO ADD; Weight assembled is 5lb-15ozsTwo small chips missing from it, many small dings/scratches, lots of Case Color left, lever is a good bit right of center, chokes are 0.630/0.630 (Full and Full), action closes tight, buttstock/forearm appear original to the gun, Buttstock has flamegrain on both sides and good figure on bottom third on both sides, several screw slots appear slightly buggered but usable, small ding in trigger guard. Bores are mint and shiny with no pitting and bluing appears original with slight fading/wear nearest breech. Cannot seem to get the Case Color to come alive with my camera, pics seem flat comparing to what I am seeing in my hands.
Last edited by schnabel; 01/11/08 10:58 PM.
...the only path to true knowledge is through wasted money...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 831 Likes: 10
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 831 Likes: 10 |
Hello Steve and welcome to the board
Looks like you found yourself a nice Fox, that appears to be in good shape, as far as % it all depends on the condition of the bbls. Judging from the 4th picture something doesn't seem right, there is a visible gap between the tubes at the muzzle along with what looks like freshly filed metal and solder. you stated that the chokes are 0.63/0.63 both bbls,......that's a lot of choke! ... is this actual choke? or the dia. at the muzzles I'm guessing that the .63/.63 is the size of the hole at the end of the bbls and since nominal 16 bore dia. should be around .662, you have .32/.32 choke but ,...and I'm only guessing here,..so correct me if I'm wrong ( and only going from your picture ) the bbls could have been 30" and choked .40+/.40+ which is not uncommon for these guns! You can get better results by taking pictures outdoors preferably on an overcast day with some good reflective light
CJ
PS...hope I'm wrong
The taste of poor quality lingers long after the cheap price is forgotten.........
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 11
Boxlock
|
OP
Boxlock
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 11 |
Hey CJ, I guess only a Callahan letter could clear that up. I am not really familiar with the common chokings on 16ga guns. Fascinating you state 40/40 is not uncommon, wow is that tight. Like SuperFull or thereabouts. I am not sure what to state mine is choked at. 30-32 constriction is usually full in the 12ga world, just assumed it would be similar when applied to 16ga discussion. I do plan some better outdoor pics. I measured the muzzle diameters, 0.630"/0.630", used a dial caliper. I do not have a way to determine bore diameter. This chart uses 0.667 as 16ga nominal, they call a 0.032 constriction super Full http://www.colonialarms.com/chokespecs.htmlA poster on another board is quessing these are #4 weight bbls, lightweight, due to no weight stamping. Maybe that lighter profile would partially explain the solder/mizzle appearance. I do not know, simply a WAG. These things sure keep doubles interesting.
...the only path to true knowledge is through wasted money...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,553
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,553 |
What are those rough file marks on the 8th[I think] pic from bottom..the shot of left side of action..they are on the side of bbl flats where they meet up with action flats??? The other side seems smooth. Not being picky , but they do stand out. I'm not much of an American gun guy...just wondered looks nice though franc
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743 |
In the days of Card & felt/fiber wadding it was not at all uncommon for Full chioke 12ga's to have up to .040" constriction, 16ga up to .036" & 20ga up to about .032". Such guns were simply stamped "Full", if stamped at all, not Super or Extra or any of those other adjectives one sees so often these days. A few special built "Long Range" guns were built primarily in 12ga with constrictions of up to .050", but these also usually had extra long cones with a more gradual taper to avoid an over-choke condition.
Miller/TN I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,897 Likes: 110
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,897 Likes: 110 |
My 12-gauge Husqvarna 310AS, from about 1918, had .038" and .042". My tightest choked 16-gauge Fox has .034" left and .035" right. The tightest 20-gauge Fox choke I have is a 28-inch barrel 1927 A-grade that letters modified and full with chokes measuring .027" right and .032" left. Another 20-gauge that letters full & full is .031" in both. The most choke to come my way in a 20-gauge is a 1933-vintage 4E Ithaca with a whooping .038" right and .042" left!!! For some reason that NID doesn't have any choke marks.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,750 Likes: 502
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,750 Likes: 502 |
You do not see many B grades and very few in 16. Nice looking gun. A letter might confirm that the barrels are original but I suspect that they started out 2" longer. Most Fox guns were A or C it seems, mostly A's. Even if the barrels have been cut it is still a fine gun and I would not worry about original factory or altered barrels. JMO
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743 |
For the record, though many makers used their own ideas as to bore size, nominal size of the 16ga based upon the roundball size & listed by The Birmingham Rues of Proof is 0.662" in dia. I have no idea what Fox considered as "Their" std. "IF" they indeed have 0.032" constriction I would seriously doubt they have been shortened by 2.0". I may be wrong on this point, don't presently have a Fox to check, but was thinking Fox used the taper choke, with no paralell section at muzzle. 2.0" would amount to "At Least" half of the choke Actually I can't see 2.0" being cut off leaving this much constriction regardless of which type choke they used.
Miller/TN I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 11
Boxlock
|
OP
Boxlock
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 11 |
2-piper, right along the lines that I was thinking. If it was cut seems like there would be less choke left. Info about taper vs. parallel would be appreciated also.
I have today sent for a history letter.
Meanwhile, does anyone have a good closeup pic of a known original guns muzzle. Interested in seeing it while this one waits for Mr. Callahan's determination.
...the only path to true knowledge is through wasted money...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,246 Likes: 4
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,246 Likes: 4 |
16 gauge Foxes ususlly have somewhat tighter bores than the .662" diameter that's taken as nominal for 16 gauge. I have a 16 Fox handy here that measures .655" bore with .625" choke = .030" constriction. I've patterned that barrel at 40 yards with 5's and it produces 73% patterns = a good full choke.
Back to your gun. The barrels touching at the muzzle thing is typical but not always definitive. Your best bet is to get a barrel diameter gauge and check the choke tapers. Foxes use the taper choke concept and a full choke in any gauge will generally be 4" long or slightly longer. With chokes measuring .630" you have at least .025" of choke if your bores are .655", possibly more if your bores are larger. If the barrels were cut from 30" you'd have much less choke with any given bore size. Net, you're looking at something like a minimum of Improved Mod or tighter choke performance with your B grade gun. Silvers
I AM SILVERS, NOT SLIVER = two different members. I'm in the northeast, the other member is in MT.
|
|
|
|
|