doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Can You Use High Brass Shells in Ithaca NID 1927 ?

Actually TB, they weren't all receiving their barrels from Belgium. Krupp, of course, was German. I think Chromox was British. But even if they were, the blanks were bored in this country. That could make a significant difference, from one maker to the next. And it explains why, for example, that Fox offered 4 different barrel weights for each gauge gun they made. So obviously, they weren't all the same--even from the same manufacturer.

SAAMI did not come along until the mid-1920's either. But once they did, the pressure standards they established were different for guns with short chambers vs long.

Joe, you must not have read the famous story about John Olin having something like a couple thousand proof loads fed to a Win 21 without harm. American manufacturers went through essentially the same proof procedures as the Europeans. The only difference was, the standards were overseen by SAAMI which was an industry organization, rather than a govt entity running the proofhouses like in Europe. You'll find a VP on 21's, standing for "violent proof"; an HP on Elsies, standing for "Hunter Proof", etc.

And your nonsense about the NID being a "cheap made gun" . . . have you been into the controlled substances again, Joe? The NID and Elsie Field Grades and the Fox Sterlingworth all cost virtually the same. Plenty of NID's still shooting, 80 years later. And guess what company John Olin went to with a request to build a double for his 3 1/2" 10ga shell? He didn't do it with his own Model 21, but rather asked Lou Smith at Ithaca to do it with the NID.

Thanks for the post, Larry. I didn't know any of that stuff.

Even after we correct jOe, he's still usually confused.
Best,
Ted

Larry you will be hard pressed to find a US made gun made between the big wars that have Krupp or English made barrels. Both countries lost most of their skilled workers in combat. Chromox was a Fox marketing name to highlight the fact that the barrels had a high chromium content, kind of like Winchesters "Nickle Steel". You really need to read McIntosh again on Fox barrel weights and why the were segregated in weight groups 1 through 4.

Not the the 21 wouldn't stand up to the big 10. Ithaca already had a 10 gauge size frame to work with, so it was easier to use it than to make another Model 21 frame size.

Well, there were plenty of Krupp smallbore tubes floating around after WWI in the coffers of Ithaca and Fox. Ithaca had different frame sizes, prior to the the NID, even a lightweight 10.
The thickness of their side walls(any Flues) tells the story.
Good luck with the NID.

Dad, brought an old hammer's, on the side double back from WWII, just a nice old 16ga, we shot regular shells, at pheasant, squirrels, rabits. It was made in Beligum, had an engraveing of a night, on his horse. They use, to go into a town over there, they hit the bank first, they went to everybody's homes, took all their guns. Built a big fire, in the middle of the street, burned, duelling pistols, in velvet cases, high powered rifles, real high price stuff. At the war's end, they found out, they could box, those guns up and send them home. The 16ga, was one of the few items, he had left.

[quote=TwiceBarrel

You really need to read McIntosh again on Fox barrel weights and why the were segregated in weight groups 1 through 4. [/quote]

TB, given your previous argument about all dimensions on American barrels being the same, the "why" is not the key question. Rather, it is the fact that there was a very significant weight difference between a set of Fox #1 vs #4 barrels . . . which, in turn, means that the dimensions are also significantly different.

To get back to the original question, most American doubles were somewhat overbuilt compared to British or European "game guns". Most of them--if we exclude the Flues, and even there the problem is mainly with very light smallbores--can withstand a diet of current American factory loads. However, if they were made with short chambers, then they were made to be used with short shells, which remained readily available in this country, at least up through the start of WWII. And which (at least after SAAMI standards were established) produced lower pressures--by about 1,000 psi--than did 2 3/4" shells of that same era. It's obviously an individual decision as to whether you use current American factory ammo in those guns. I cannot recall ever hearing of a catastrophic failure in an NID as a result of modern ammo, as have been reported with some Flues guns here. So while you'd probably be safe, if the gun is (or originally was) short-chambered, you are likely exceeding the service pressure for which the gun was originally proofed.

You got the floor...Tell us how it was " originally proofed" ?

The 2 3/4 inch 12-gauge Super-X, Nitro Express, etc. boxes were marked as 3 3/4 drams equiv. 1 1/4 ounce of shot. Prior to the introduction of the Super-X loaded with progressive burning powders such as DuPont Oval or DuPont 93, the heaviest loads with bulk or dense smokeless powders the manufacturers regularly offered was 3 1/2 drams equiv. and 1 1/4 ounces of shot. However, it seems from my reading of the sporting press of the day, the 3 1/4 - 1 1/4 was considered a more "balanced" load.

Barrel names like Sterlingworth Fluid Compressed Steel, Chromox Fluid Compressed Steel, Nitro, Pigeon Nitro, Crown, Homo-Tensile, Flui-Tempered, Trojan, Vulcan, Parker, Parker Special, Titanic, Acme, Peerless, etc. were pretty much fanciful names made up by the shotgun manufacturers. I've examined Fox barrels marked Chromox on top with four different tube suppliers marks on the bottom -- LLH, SB&Co., a D with a three-lobed crown over it, and a couple from the early 1920s with vestiges of the Fluid Steel Krupp Essen marking!