Larry: We can lead a horse to water, but it's hard to make him drink. And in this case, we might even be trying to beat a dead horse with all these very closed-minded folks!
I know I'm beating a dead horse, but.... Take a look at Larry's post. His 'evidence' is one informational article about what works well in Birmingham, England. Is that proof that there are problems elsewhere. Why ignore others concern that a proof law would have to apply to all guns.
Also note, punched out chambers are a favorite theme, but you might have noticed at least two other threads have appeared discussing original long chambers. Is it a good idea to have Larry decide that 3" 20 ga. chambers in a 20's Parker must be altered and require reproof. How about the 3 1/4" 12 ga. chambers. Should these guns be proofed for modern 3" loads just because you're protecting dummies from themselves.
Craig, that article concerns HOW proof works (which, quite obviously, a lot of people here don't understand). Reading it and understanding it does not necessarily result in the conclusion that doing it their way is best for us, in this country. That's something that remains open to opinion, pro and con--again, as evidenced by this thread.
And I wouldn't be the guy deciding anything. That'd be up to SAAMI, or whomever ended up responsible for doing the proofing. However, on the 3" chamber issue, you might note that the load for the 3" 20ga back when those early Parkers had long chambers was significantly lighter than the loads we shoot in 3" 20's today. Which might mean--just in case the guy with a vintage 3" Parker wants to shoot MODERN 3" shells--that he might want to have it proof tested with heavier proof loads than the ones used back then. Or else maybe he ought to stick to loads appropriate to the proof pressure to which the gun was originally subjected--which would likely mean something with somewhat lower pressures than today's 20ga service pressure standard of 12,000 psi. Which, by the way, applies to both 2 3/4" and 3" shells.
