Edwardian, thank you for the advice. I wasn't contemplating the purchase of that particular gun as much as looking to it for inspiration.
I already am in possession of an 1879 WW Greener hammer gun. Although the gun was originally proofed as a 12 bore, the chambers and barrels have been enlarged to 10 bore dimensions. First, let me say the gun has ample wall thickness throughout the barrels as measured through the chambers and the breech. I have very little into this gun and it is shootable as is. I was just contemplating maybe having Merrington chamber sleeve it so that it can fire low pressure 12 gauge shells again. However, it seems unlikely I would recover any significant amount of money that I would put into this gun gauging by the reactions to that WC Scott, which seems to be viewed as a bit of an abomination.
eeb, thanks for your input as well. Versatility in something that has already lost its originality is what appeals to me about that WC Scott. However, it isn't something I would drop $7500 on, even if I had that to spend.
I guess I will keep trying to track down a set of used 10-12 gauge mates and see how I feel about their performance before considering any investment in permanent modifications in my Greener.
Also, I didn't realize the 10 hammer guns were considered to have sufficient wall thickness for modern loads. All I know is my heavily bored 12 still has a minimum wall thickness of 30-35 thousandths at the thinnest points and 130-150 thousandths through the chambers and down into the barrels. Furthermore, they are laminated steel, purportedly one of the stronger damascus barrels. In any event, it seems the hammer era Greeners and WC Scotts at least left the factory with very thick walls to begin with.
