doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com OT: Gun writing gone bad?

Wondering if the Belgian bargain basement barrel which Pete mentions was imported in volume as raw tubes or finished guns. If so, what marques are we talking? Is the cut-rate damascus barrel chronologically coincident with the transition from bp thru bulk smokeless to the modern nitro powders. And to refresh my non-memory, a proof load delivers max pressure around 150% of service, right?--not the 200% of a double charge?

Bell couldn't construct a double blind experiment. Guns have no expectations. He could have fired a blue pill hull with primer only to see if the barrel blew out of anticipation.

jack

Tim,

If you are asking about the picture I posted, it is from the St. Etienne proof house. It was taken some time in the late 1950's to early 1960's if I recall correctly.

Jack,

I wish I knew which makers were involved in producing the low end barrels. So far, that document is the only thing I have surfaced from Belgian sources. I think it accounts for at least some of the bad press that was seen at the time, circa 1894, about "cheap Belgian" guns.

There were so many makers. What we are talking about is skipping steps of the process and using second rate material. I would hazard that those involved never stamped their work. Why admit to it? Likely the major players would not have been involved. They had too much business at stake. Heuse-Lemoine goes so far as to offer a guarrantee for his barrels against such defects.

Pete

The G Damascus Parker which Bell blew up with loads of about 30K psi blew in the chamber, specifically between the chamber & extractor rod hole, not down by the forward hand. I do not recall the article stating him adding any obstruction, he simply kept loading to higher pressures till he blew it up. On the afore mention bbl I spoke of with the crack, it was 14" from the breech.
Take it for what you feel it worth & yes I am just a Libery Overall wearing hillbilly, but if you burst a shotgun bbl, any bbl from one built yesterday of modern alloy steel back to one built well over 100 years ago of forge welded horsheshoe stubs & chopped buggy springs & it doesn't burst in the chamber area, look for a cause other than "Too High" pressure.
Jim I would "Bet the Farm" that gun you had was fired with an obstruction if a full investigation had been carried out to determine cause.
I have a German drilling, 16ga, bbl'd with "Prima Kruppscher Fluss Stahl" on which a 3" long section of the entire right side (top rib to side rib) beginning at 10" from breech is "Gone". A WWII veteran had brought it home from Germany & I acquired it from another who he had sold it to. The story I had was the owner at the time had carried it hunting on a day having heavy snow & it burst when he fired it at a rabbit. He assumed he had gotten some snow down the bbl. I assume he was probably right.
Yes a steel bbl can be blown, but compare that with the twist bbl, which I could not even open an existing crack in an area only slightly farther down the bbl.
An obstruction is the most efficient method known to man, to destroy a fine gun bbl, be it steel or damascus.

Jim I would "Bet the Farm" that gun you had was fired with an obstruction if a full investigation had been carried out to determine cause

2-piper:
Unfortunately we'll never know what caused it to let go as I didn't think it was of any real importance at the time which was over 20 years ago. I however can tell you this: The undamaged right barrel was in pristine condition and didn't even exhibit any minor pitting. I can only relate what the owner told me. He had personally cleaned the gun before use and it was his practice to always look down the barrels during assenbly to make sure they were clear. As I stated above; He told me the barrel burst on the first shot the next time is was used. I did ask about 20 gauge shells and he stated he didn't even own a 20 gauge.
Jim

The only damascus gun I have personally seen with a blown barrel is a Chas. Boswell that belongs to a friend. He decided to reload for it and, after much pleading on my part not to, said he was going to use up a lot of relatively fast burning powder from his earlier reloading days. I pleaded with him to let me give him some 7625 or PB, or even Clays to use but he said, No. After about 15 loads, which were probably generating exorbitant pressures, the right chamber let go. A flap of metal peeled away, but stayed with the barrel. No one was hurt, but a very fine gun was ruined because of his hardheadedness. He maintains to this day that, since he was using new style AA's, a base wad came loose and lodged in the bore.

Jim, I'm an Iowa hunter safety instructor. One of the "training aids" we have is what's left of a fluid steel double after a burst. I don't know what caused the burst. Miller's certainly right that most are the result of an obstruction, and that might well be the case on our "training aid". But it's certainly a blown steel barrel. And I recall a Remington recall of barrels (1100's I think, but I could be wrong) after some failures. Also, I believe there have been either Krieghoff or Perazzi barrel failures reported. The latter on target guns, which should be less likely to fail because they're built to withstand a lot more shooting.

So even modern steel barrels fail. Greater failure rate in Damascus barrels? Statistically, that would be hard to compare. And you're also comparing 100 year old barrels to new stuff.

L. Brown:
Again; I've seen several bulged fluid steel barrels, which I agree are usually caused by an obstruction, and I've seen the muzzle end of some fluid steel ones peeled back like a banana from mud or snow but I don't ever recall seeing a barrel burst like the damascus ones in the forearm area. What I'm talking about here is a actual hole blown thru the barrel with missing metal.
I would expect that a 20 ga. dropped into a 12 ga gun could cause a burst and I've heard of this happening but have never seen one. As far as other obstructions go and having shot trap and skeet for years a squibb load was always apparent to everyone including shooting and the shooter would immediately stop and clear the barrel if necessary. These loads could definitely leave a wad in the barrel causing an obstruction.
I've always made it a practice to look down the barrels of my doubles after each shot.
My whole point here is I would never want to experience the catastrophic failure of a burst barrel and I remain convinced that this can occur in damascus guns. As I've stated previously; If you or anyone else wants to shoot them it's your business.
Jim

Absolutely! Locally couple of years ago there were a couple of incidents involving new doubles of a very well known Italian brand. Engineers from the centuries old factory came down to look into the matter. One of the shooters, a surgeon, had serious injuries on his left hand. It was established that the bursts were caused by obstruction from faulty ammo.

I have a copy of a Mythbusters episode where they test the cartoon finger-in-the barrel myth. They used a 1877 vintage 10 bore damascus hammer gun loaded with 3" magnum slugs. The right barrel was plugged with a ballistics gel/bone finger and only about 2" of the muzzle blew and the lower rib coming loose. The left barrel was plugged with a "finger" carved out of a steel rod and soldered in place, again just 3" of the muzzle blew together with the top rib coming loose. This test is as random as it gets and damascus proved its strength without a doubt.

Couldn't find the episode on youtube but it is worth watching.

BTW, Mr. Bell did not obstruct the damascus barrel; it burst only because of highly increased pressure from "overloaded" loads.

JC

A few points. The Bell test was with two Parker doubles of about the same era, the same frame size, one with pitted Damascus barrels and one with fluid steel barrels. At no time was an obstruction used. The ammo was loaded in 2000 psia increments and fired in each barrel. The testing started at about 10,000 psia which was already over the average hunting pressure loads of the early 20th century. These loads increased at 2000 psia increments until failure. That is a LOT of pill loads for old guns. There was no damage until each chamber burst at about 30,000 psia. One barrel went at about 29,500 psia as I remember and the other three in each gun went at by 30,500 psia. The fluid steel failed at the same pressure as the Damascus in each case. This would be as expected as both barrels were designed and proofed for the same loads. Both guns were #2 frames. Both guns also had pressure testing devices on the barrels to back up the precalibrated pill cartridges.

Another test of note. This is a m"me & Joe test" but interesting. A cheap Damascus barreled belgium import shotgun showing its age with extreme use (as most of them had) and very loose was used to show some kids how dangerous it was to carry two different sizes of ammo at one time. A 20 ga shell was slipped down the barrel and a 12 Ga shell loaded in the chamber. the gun was then shot with a string behind a tree. The gun survived two such tests. Hard to believe, but perhaps the extreme looseness had something to do with it.

Modern failures. I know of 6 high grade Italian clay shotguns (of the same manufacturer) which have blown barrels and half with factory loads. There was no evidence of barrel obstruction. An engraver friend has shed some possible light on this. These guns have parts which greatly vary in hardness. The harder they are, the more difficult they are to engrave. It is difficult for him to give an engraving cost estimation as the very hard parts are much harder to engrave and sometimes need air powered engraving like 300,000-500,000 rpm dental tools. These are not meant for working in hardened steel and often require new bearings which is about $300 per. He believes the parts are probably sourced out and the final part only tested for minimum strength by a hardness test. Some materials and hardness tempering causes greater brittleness than others. He believes this may be a reason for the failures. Naturally, the manufacturer wants to blame the ammo.

Miller,
I took your level of concern as you stated. I was interested in what information you had on the issue.

I did think you were referring to vintage fluid steel barrels. I thought you might have a specific reference book citing data that quantified that the problem.

Yes, I have cut into flaws in modern materials. But, the statistical probability of encountering one in modern American made steels intended for the aircraft/aerospace industry (mostly what I've worked with) is extremely low today. Of course, for higher criticality parts, vacuum arc remelt steels are usually specified today, and this reduces the probability of inclusions and flaws further.

For the record, I spent a total 15 yrs actually cutting metal as a production machinist, experimental machinist, toolmaker, etc., including having owned a small machine shop, plus a 10 yr stint in quality assurance at varying levels from actual inspection of machined parts to quality manager, quality engineering and failure analysis. My current job has me looking into results of lab testing and failure analysis on occasion when it pertains to regulatory issues on airplanes under my responsibility in my airworthiness function.