Low pressure loads might be a good idea anyway, Larry, for a gun as old as that. I don't know if Sterlingworth's of that vintage came with 2 3/4" chambers, but, a low pressure 2 1/2" English CIP spec load would be easier on it.
I'm pretty sure I own the last gun Stan Baker ever worked on, he died while it was in transit back to me. It had odd forcing "steps" in the barrels, not a cone at all-I think the idea was your black powder loaded paper cartridge was supposed to open into the step, travel down the deliberately undersize 16 bore of the gun, and your fiber wad had a better chance of sealing up the load, so the guns extra full and extra full chokes would hopefully get some shot on target. I think that was the idea back in 1910 anyway, but, it left a lot to be desired when I was patterning it most of 100 years later.The maker, Frank Tobin, was once interviewed way back in the last century, and advised shooters to quit using such tight chokes, but, the buyer of this gun didn't get the memo, I guess. The gun now has proper forcing cones, a gorgerous proper size 16 gauge bore, IC and MOD chokes, and throws wonderful patterns, with either fiber wads or them new-fangled plastic thingys. The chambers are still the same length they left the factory at, 2 9/16ths, if memory serves. Loaded up with Eley VIP loads of 5,6 or 7, I have all I need for just about any bird I hunt.
Ammunition has changed. It is better, no matter what the luddites believe, and the internal barrel dimensions that gave good performance with state of the art ammunition, circa 1910, are different from those that give even better performance with today's ammunition.
Some people can grasp that. Others, can't. WIth that in mind, I suppose, it would be a complete waste of time to try to explain the difference between "grinding" and "reaming", when it come to the barrel of a shotgun.
Good luck with the Fox, Larry.
Best,
Ted
