doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com 2 3/4" in a 2 1/2" Chamber

"Dude, bizmuth(sic) was designed for older guns that can not handle STEEL shot"

From the 16 ga Reloaders Group

"Okay, I'm going to step in here. I used to use a 1918 Field Grade L.C. Smith 12ga. to shoot trap with. I shot several thousand handload and factory load target shells AA's, STS's, etc. and never had a problem. Then I used the gun for goose with factory loaded 2 3/4 in. bismuth loads. I learned a lesson the hard way. Just because a shell fits the gun does not mean it is safe to use." Take it from Nine Fingered Mark.
This is from the gentleman who posted a picture of the gun with the blown barrel.

Again this is a gun that isn't proofed from Hunter Arms in 1918, proof didn't start until around 20's.

So what you are saying Mike is that it is ok to shoot bizmuth in "old guns not made for steel". You better define "OLD" dude!

Cobbhead,

In the one case where I did use 70 mm hulled, American-loaded shotshells in old gun with 65 mm chambers and cm-long forcing cones (I was lied to by person I bought gun from, and did not check chamber lenght) I got frayed ends of hulls and worse patterns and much greater recoil. I then cut hulls to 65 mm and used hartin crimps, which resulted in much tighter patterns and much less recoil.

In contrast, I have gotten slightly better (tighter, more even distribution) patterns when the tappered end of plastic hull extended about one half way into short (cm-length) forcing cones. Probably same effect as found by USA ammo companies in 1920-1940s with card and fiber wads. The ends of these hulls did not fray, like the ends of 70 mm hulls in 65 mm chambers. Would presume that the 50% protrusion of hull into short forcing cone simply reduces the extent of the discontinuity that shot and wads must traverse.

Niklas

JDW,

Given its softness, Bismuth shot is DESIGNED as a safe, non-toxic lead alternative for older guns. I regulalry shoot LOW-PRESSUE bismuth loads in many "older" guns (1875 - 1915).


PRESSURE is what blew this gun up. He should not have been shooting modern high-pressure loads in an old gun period - with lead or bismuth.

Ken

Ken, you are correct, and when I originally posted said statement, and being a reloader myself, I was refering to that gentleman who had shot thousands of reloads and factory rounds out of an old gun before proof. It is like he stated "just because a shell fits a gun does not mean it is safe to use" That has been my whole point right along, I just referred readers to that one particular case to make a point.
So when someone comes on the board saying that bizmuth was made for older guns that cannot handle steel and not being specific, then I have a problem with that.
Like I said I won't be shooting shells not designed for my old guns and definetly not longer shells in a shorter chamber.

I've heard a lot of opinions in this thread. Some opinions, by proponents of 2 3/4" shells in shorter chambers, are based on Bell's work and extrapolated to their reloads. While Bell provided some informative data, unless I were using the exact loads he tested, I'd be uncomfortable.

I think Bell simply cracked the door open for a promising outcome of those wishing to further pursue testing of their selected long shell/short chamber load.

I realize that there is a vast diversity of knowledge/education/experience here on this bbs, but have yet to hear that anyone has pressure data that indicates the subject practice is unsafe. I work with hundreds of engineers and often represent many of them in front of our regulatory agencies. They are all educated and knowledgeable people...in their respective fields and within their education and experience. I challenge them all the time, because they can't know everything, they are people and put on their trouser's one leg at a time like everyone else...they can err.

Sure, cramming a WallyWorld modern 2 3/4 load into a shortchambered 100 yr old gun is potentially unsafe and without a doubt foolish.

I have explained my approach to obtain direct data on this in my first post on page 1 of this thread. I think those that are pursueing the loading of long shells for short chambers should obtain pressure data of their particular load in the chamber dimensions they will be using. It's not a huge investment.

So, I'll say it another way; If someone has direct knowledge that this is an unsafe practice to shoot 2 3/4" shells in a 2 1/2 -2 9/16" chamber, please share. To me, this means actual pressure data. If any of our membership out there has real pressure data to share, I think it would truly be a service to our community.

JDW,

I am not picking a fight. I have been a member of the 16ga group since its inception and saw the pictures. Someday I'll actually own one.

I didn't type in a pressure reference to the bismuth because as you might notice, I had addressed pressure immediately above.



In fact in my posts I have been typing PRESSURE in all caps to reinforce that point.

Old is well old. Since I gave my 11-87 to my son my newest shotgun was made in 1933. My regular waterfowling guns are damascus barreled W&C Scott hammerguns. 10ga made 1875ish and a 12ga made 1880ish. Both used with nitro and blackpowder loads shooting bismuth.

I followed the load in the published manual using Clays, 1 oz. and windjammers for a 5500 psi load cutting down my Rem hulls to 2 1/2". I shot about 500 of them but somethng was telling me it wasn't right. I had Tom Armbrust test them and they came in at around 7500 psi. They were also a pain to make. The Harten crimp requires an overshot card which halves the output from either my RCBS Grand or MEC9000. I therefore used a load that is much more popular and well know using PB which comes in around 5200 psi and further made the decision to eliminate the harten crimp and use 2 3/4" Rem hulls figuring the loads would come in at 6000 psi. I have no proof that my assumptions are correct though. I also decided to go with gun club hulls instead of STS since they were more flexible and thinner.

It was fun to watch the confetti come out of the barrels when shooting with the overshot cards. For some unknown reason, I also found that the cut down 2 1/2" hulls took a bit of a beating and were covered in black- much like a 28gauge Rem reload after several uses.

I shoot with a lot of guys from the Vintagers and although I don't think it is wise (and I don't do it) many shoot 2 3/4 dram Rem STS loads in their Parkers and other stout guns, both steel and damascus barrels, and so far there does not seem to be any problems. A lot of these guys are serious shooters and we are talking a lot of rounds per year. I guess they are looking at the thickness of the chambers and barrels and deciding nothing will hurt them.

I, on the other hand, am a chicken and hate hospitals so I will stick with my low pressure loads. I should have Tom test the ones I make and extrapolate the increase of pressure from the short chambers. I do feel comfortable with the info in the finding out for myself article. I will let you all know if I have a problem.

Best,
Ten finger Milt(so far)

Are the factory Bismuth 'Sporting Game' loads considered low pressure? The Cabela's site quotes "Safe for use in standard lead chokes and nitro-proofed barrels." but I take this as a attribute of the softness of the shot, not pressure.. Am I wrong?

thanks,
jmc

I think there have been some posts on this BBS concerning this. Many historic American makers 'short chambered' their guns to get a better seal as the crimp openend into the 'short chamber/forcing cone' area. This was intended as I remember for paper hulls and fiber wads but you might be getting some 'blowback' if your shorter hulls are not getting a complete seal at the junction of the chamber and forcing cone.

From the Parker Gun Collectors Forum:
http://www.parkergun.org/forums/forum1/2164.html

Parker "borrowed" English chamber measurements (for paper shells) and manufactured 12ga and 16 ga 2 1/2" chambers until about 1895...then the 12 ga went to and continued with 2 5/8"chambers (16ga went mostly to 2 9/16" ) for a long period...possibly until near the end of regular Parker production...about 1934. By 1930 most (but not all) shotshell and gun manufacturers agreed to 2 3/4" chambers for field and target guns. As far as I can determine, 2 5/8" shells were manufactured at least until 1940. The 1945 Stoegers Shooters Bible lists Xpert and Xpert Super Skeet loads, Ranger Field loads, and Leader Staynless loads as being available in 2 5/8" 1 1/8oz. By that time all Super-X, Super Speed, Leader Super Speed, Ranger Brush Loads, etc were 2 3/4" 1 1/4oz. Original chamber length is a strong clue as to the correct MAXIMUM shot load.

I don't know what to make of the 1920 "2 1/2" Standard Shotgun Chambers drawing" (p519 TPS). Some information is obviously missing. In original 12ga chambered guns (frame size #2 and smaller), a 12ga .798 chamber gauge will stop most commonly at either 2 5/8" or 2 3/4". Why does a .798 gauge not stop at 2 1/2" as depicted in the drawing? The difference due to chamber taper is of course, negligible, but why would Parker make a "shop drawing" and not use it? Why was this 2 1/2 inch "standard" adopted in 1920 when Trap Guns were standardized at 2 3/4 inch chambers much earlier? Is there documented evidence to validate the "better gas seal" claim? Is there "short chamber" patent?

In the recently published book "The Parker Story" the Remington vintage specification sheets on pages 164 to 169 call for a chamber 1/8-inch shorter than the shell for which it is intended. I have a 1930-vintage VH-grade 0-frame 20-gauge and its chambers are 2 3/8 inches intended for the old 2 1/2 inch shells, eight years after the 20-gauge Super-X shell was introduced in a 2 3/4 inch case!!

New subject: Why would manufacturers continue to make 2 5/8" shells 15 years after they had adopted a 2 3/4" standard?

Presumably because 2 5/8" shells were designed to work in 2 5/8" chambers with a maximum 1 1/8oz shot load AND those shells worked equally well in 2 3/4" chambers. If there was gas leakage around the overpowder wad or in the forcing cone, no one was the wiser...or complained apparently. We shoot 2 3/4" shells in 3" chambers today (ex Ruger Gold Label) and no one raises an eyebrow. Conversely, 2 3/4" 1 1/4oz loads were NOT DESIGNED to work in light guns with 2 5/8" Chambers.