doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Score marks in barrel

Good Day Gentlemen:

I posted on ths site about an N.R. Davis gun that had work performed by a well known gunsmith. The thing that bothers me is that when I got the gun out yesterday, I noticed two deep score marks in the left barrel. These are about 1/2" long and are quite deep. They lie about 3" in front of the chamber and both line up in the same plane. These go around the inside of the barrel tangent to the bore.

In my experience wirth machine shop work, these score moarks could be formed by many ways. I can remember where a chip had been "caught"between the cutter and the stock and produced this type of damage. This is the gun in which the gunsmith lengtened the forcing cones without my knowledge. Would the proces of lengthening the forcing cones cause this?

I fired the both barrels once each, killing a pheasant. The gun was cleaned and stored. I never saw any bore damage before the gun had been altered. I never looked for damage after the gun had been returned to me. Why shold I?

I contacted the gunsmith and he suggested that I send him the barrels. My fear is that the barrels are not very heavy and any removal would insure that I now have a wall hanger!

Any suggestions?

Stay well my friends,

Franchi

Unfortunately, I believe you now have a wall hanger

Randy's much discussed Baker blow out with deep tool marks presumed to have occurred when lengthening the forcing cones



SAC 16g subjected to chamber lengthening. Hard to see but most obvious at 1:00; I think there are 4 linear marks, possibly from the pilot? Also pits and 4 circumferential small bulges.



As we discussed on your other thread, the wall thickness may no longer matter.

Sorry, but has the question been asked of the Gunsmith as to why he lengthened the forcing cones in the first place? Lagopus.....

Hello All:


Yes, those are indeed the marks as shown in the top picture! Mine are much deeper than what is shown in that photo!

I asked why he lengthened the forcing cones, I got no answer. That was one of those B.S. operations that only benefit the gunsmith. Doing this on a shot gun that is a century old, was more B.S. At least he could have consulted before he made the change!

I though that I could enjoy hunting with a family heirloom but now I have nothing! Right now, I am really upset!

Thanks for the replies,

Franchi

Those marks look typical of using a machine driven cutter possibly with a follower to keep it central and cutting swarf has worked its way in between the barrel walls and the follower or the cutter itself. Also it could be a case of insufficient coolant/lubricant flow to clear the cutting swarf, so it gets trapped. A blunt cutter though this should never be the case at all if the person is a careful craftsman or woman. Those marks are the best argument for using a reamer by hand with lots of cutting oil and above all taking your time.

Franchi-
Since I first stoked your anxiety, let me be the first to tell you the truth pertaining to your barrels.

You don't know their condition. Yet.

Drew- be careful posting pics of others failed barrels, as the pics can mislead the original poster, or prompt errant posts referring to someone else's actual barrels. Not those of the OP.

Franchi- get your barrels to someone than can measure them accurately and precisely, and then use that data to compare your barrels to another set from that period.

If you get that data, someone will provide comparison data here and then you can see what you actually have without guessing or anxiety.

I have seen terrible machining marks factory delivered on guns with more than 100 years of service.

All is not lost.
Just your vintage doubles alteration virginity.

CZ: how should the images be better labeled? The OPs is a Davis; the others clearly labeled a Baker and SAC.

Actual translation: "A Picture's Meaning Can Express Ten Thousand Words" or the words of newspaper editor Arthur Brisbane to the Syracuse Advertising Men's Club, in March 1911: "Use a picture. It's worth a thousand words."

Drew- Your posting of another person's blown out barrel was immediately interpreted by the OP as the same as his barrels.

Franchi should post an image of his barrels.

His barrels are not Randy's barrels.

The OP might have been better served to provide a link to follow.
I cannot tell if Damascus was interpreting what he saw within the image you posted, or was he postulating what might be an issue with the unseen Franchi barrels.
I think he was looking at your unrelated picture when he posted potential scoring causes.

Franchi,
Take your gun out and use it from time to time, and enjoy it.As long as you don't let an obstruction get into the gun or otherwise abuse it, you won't likely have a problem.
Mike

Original Poster's reply;
.
Underlinig added for emphysis. Doesn't appear to me the OP interpreted those pics as being "His", nor did I. In fact I see no evidence that anyone did. It was in fact quite plain to me that Drew was asking the OP if his marks were similar to these he was showing, & he did as he said state the guns they were on. I don't see how anyone could misunderstand that unless they were trying REAL HARD to do so.