doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Adding choke to cut barrels

I'd send it to Mike O and see if he can back bore one barrel and add a perm choke tube to the other. If he can back bore one side .004 to .005 that would give you a decent skeet range choke. If the barrels are thin he might be able to add perm choke tube to both side. I'd let him measure it and give you options.

As to chokes choices it all is personal choices. I've shot I/C to full only chokes for everything. You can change choke effect with different loads, shot, wars or spreaders. But take the easiest route. If you have to special load every shell this gun will not see much use if you have easier options.

I'd be really leery about adding thin-walls to any gun, let alone one going on 150 years old. There was just a lengthy thread over at Upland Journal about the downside: http://uplandjournal.ipbhost.com/index.p...comment-1023843

Remember: modern/new gun, lead shot factory ammo, no problem with the ammo, unobstructed barrel (killed the bird he was shooting at, with the shot that burst his barrel), blew the barrel on the 3rd round through the choke tube.

Briley finally stepped up to pay for his new set of barrels, but only after he filed suit (he could afford to - he's a lawyer): http://uplandjournal.ipbhost.com/index.p...-20-gauge/&

YMMV.

In the 50s, long before I started hand loading, the CIL ammunition rep in our region Dunc Morrison, whose son later headed up Ducks Unlimited, straightened me out on what you say of changes from charge, shot and wads.

The expensive blue Imperial shells were preferred at the time by serious duck hunters. The green Maxum came next, followed by the low-base red Canuck. Dunc said "You're a decoy guy, try these," handing me six boxes of Canucks.

I demurred, saying they're fine for partridge but not ducks. He said the lighter loads provided better patterns, fewer crushed flyers, an all-round good shell for anything over decoys. I never looked back.

I would go with the " jug choke ". I've done a couple for myself and it doesn't take much steel removal. Only .005 on a side gets you .010, or IC. 007 to .008 would give you LM, and that's plenty for just about anything with todays ammo.

Could jug choking cause issues if steel shot is used?

This is an 1875 Holland being spoken about here so steel shot is pretty well out anyway. Some one may be tempted to try it though because of the cyl, cyl choking, but there remains the pressure thing.
Steel shot in a jug choke is not a thing I would like to do to any gun. The way I see it, the shot would likely shift out into the jug & then try to recompress to original bore size. The thing with steel is that it does not compress. There would be a pressure spike & possible split muzzle or wicked rivelling at the least.
O.M

I think we need a bit more info to ascertain if theses barrels were indeed cut or not and if they had choke in the first place. Holland was certainly keeping detailed records in the late 1890's and the OP says that it was made decades earlier. if it was indeed made in the late 1870's, than why would we assume that it had choke in the first place? More than likely, it did not.
Just because it has barrels of an odd length does not mean that it was cut either. They are still almost 30" which begs the question - cut down from what? The chances of the barrels being more than 30" on an H&H of that period are slim.
Do the barrels touch at the end and have a small flat between them?
Is it possible to get a photo of the end of the tubes?
Did the original ledger entry have the date it was made?
If it did not have choke originally and you want to sell it, do not add choke as it will kill the collector value if it has any. I would suggest selling it and buying something with the chokes that you want. If you want to keep it forever as a shooter, then do as you please.

My gut feeling here is to try different loads. Hard shot
plastic wad modest velocity may give you all you need.
Lot less expensive without risky procedures!

I don't recall exactly when the mark started appearing, but I'm thinking if the barrels are not marked "Not For Ball" it likely started life as a cylinder bore. I believe this started pretty early after choking began to be common & truly meant that a ball if used had to be small enough to clear the choke. It did not actually prevent their use.

Do a cost benefit analysis, to put choke in this Holland will cost as much as buying a good used, possibly high end Spaniard or German or a good usable Brit boxlock. Hang the Holland up, she's just a little too old to change her now.