March
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Who's Online Now
7 members (Ted Schefelbein, Kip, Sandlapper, old colonel, Jtplumb, 1 invisible), 777 guests, and 4 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums10
Topics38,374
Posts544,010
Members14,391
Most Online1,131
Jan 21st, 2024
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,398
Likes: 307
Sidelock
***
OP Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,398
Likes: 307
More than anyone wants to know here about 1/3 down
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dnRLZgcuHfx7uFOHvHCUGnGFiLiset-DTTEK8OtPYVA/edit

William Kelly is credited with developing what is now known as the Bessemer process in 1846 at his Eddyville Iron Works in Kentucky. Air was blown through molten pig iron to oxidize and remove impurities and carbon.

Remington was one of the first in the U.S. to manufacture Bessemer barrels, according to “Fire-Arms Manufacture” 1880, U.S. Dept. of Interior, Census Office:
“The earliest use of decarbonized steel for gun-barrels is generally credited to the Remingtons, [E. Remington & Sons] who made steel barrels for North & Savage, of Middletown, Connecticut, and for the Ames Manufacturing Company of Chicopee, Massachusetts as early as 1846.
About 1848 Thomas Warner, at the Whitneyville works, incurred so much loss in the skelp-welding of [Twist] barrels that he voluntarily substituted steel drilled barrels in his contract, making them of decarbonized steel...The use of soft cast-steel was begun at Harper's Ferry about 1849.
After 1873, all small-arms barrels turned out at the national armory at Springfield were made of decarbonized...Bessemer steel until 1878, and afterward Siemens-Martin steel.”

Apparently working independently of Kelly, Henry Bessemer had also been investigated an improved method for steel production and in 1855 obtained an English patent for what was essentially Keely’s process, and the following year obtained several U.S. patents. When Kelly heard of Bessemer’s patents, he filed a priority claim and in 1857 received a U.S. patent superseding Bessemer’s patents. Bessemer established his steel works in Sheffield, England.

Robert Mushet adapted the Bessemer Process in 1856 by adding manganese (speigeleisen) and established the Forest Steel Works in Darkhill, Gloucestershire, possibly producing the first Carbon Steel. He also experimented with tungsten, titanium, and other alloys and established the Titanic Steel Works in 1862 for production of his “Titanic Steel”.

In 1858 Göran Fredrik Göransson, a Swedish ironmaster, redesigned the Bessemer furnace, or converter, and steel could then be produced on a much larger scale, and at a much lower cost.

The Bessemer process was improved after 1876 when Sidney Gilchrist Thomas and his cousin Percy Gilchrist developed a burned limestone lining for the Bessemer converters that removed phosphorus with the slag, which made possible the use of higher phosphorus ores.

In the 1878 E. Remington & Sons catalog, the $45 hammer lifter double was listed with Decarbonized Steel; with Twist for $60, and Laminated Steel for $75.
“The barrels of this kind of gun are made from decarbonized steel containing only enough carbon to give great strength combined with toughness…This steel is now largely used in gun work, and is much stronger and reliable than the cheaper kinds of twist found in many of the imported guns. Indeed, some gunsmiths prefer it to any twist, and claim that it makes a better shooting barrel, owing to its being perfectly homogeneous. In the manufacture of these barrels, they are rolled from the solid metal, without welds…The steel for the manufacture of the plain steel barrels is used in the form of round bars…rolled out to the size required…”

Dr. Oscar Gaddy
“Prior to the late 19th century, steel meant only high carbon steel that could be hardened and tempered to make the many useful things such as springs and other items subject to high wear that only could be made with this material. Other ferrous metals were all lumped into the iron category. This included cast iron with a very high carbon content which was extremely brittle and wrought or malleable iron which was cast or pig iron that had essentially all of the carbon burned out of it and was very soft and easily worked. I believe that this was also called gun or gun-barrel iron because it was used to make many gun barrels and other gun parts. This is what we call today low or very low carbon steel.
I believe that decarbonized steel is simply this low carbon content wrought iron and the name was more of a marketing gimmick to give the impression of high strength rather than a realistic description of metallurgical properties.”

SO Bessemer Process Homogeneous Wrought Iron = Decarbonized Steel = Plain Steel

Industrial standards for Basic Bessemer in 1915. There is no modern AISI designation for Bessemer process steel.
Carbon .07-.09%
Manganese .04-.48%
Phosphorus .05-.08%
Sulfur .05-.07%
Tensile strength 55,000 – 63,000 psi
Yield strength 33,000 psi

Decarbonized barrel steel was routinely “cold rolled” for higher strength.
William Wellington Greener, The Gun, Third Edition, 1881
http://books.google.com/books?id=LAsAAAAAQAAJ
"The cold-drawn (“punched”) steel barrels made in 1865 and the few following years were far superior to the plain iron and decarbonised steel barrels generally used."
Both Winchester and Marlin advertised their steel as such.

Bessemer steel may have a carbon content as high as .55%, and a high nitrogen content (>.005% and usually .01 - .025%). High nitrogen or phosphorus make the steel more brittle ie. decreases impact resistance.
Low nitrogen Bessemer steel was produced by side blowing in an acid lined converter; low phosphorus Bessemer steel by bottom blowing in a basic lined (Thomas-Gilchrist) converter.

An incomplete list of shotgun barrels steels which can be assumed to be “Decarbonized Steel”, or which were stated to be as such by the maker:
Most U.S. maker’s pre-WWI non-pattern welded single barrel shotguns
Most U.S. maker’s pre-WWI lower price non-pattern welded double barrel shotguns; Stevens, Iver Johnson, Hopkins & Allen, Davenport, etc.

c. 1918 catalog listing for Harrington & Richardson with "American Decarbonized Steel"



"Remington Steel" used on the A Grade Hammerless Model of 1894 starting in 1897, K Grade (Model 1900) Hammerless, and Model of 1894 Hammerless Grade 'F.E.' Trap Gun. (The April 1897 Remington catalog stated “Remington blued steel barrels are manufactured in our own works” and the Sears catalog No. 112 c. 1902 states the K Grade has “fine Decarbonized steel barrels”.)
Marlin “Special Rolled Steel”
Winchester “Standard Ordnance Rolled Steel”
Parker Bros. “Parker Steel”. Grade 1 PH & NH received “Parker Steel” starting in 1917.
Meriden Firearms “Armory Steel”
Crescent Fire Arms “Genuine Armory Steel”
The Crescent “Empire Hammerless” listing in the 1925 Union Hardware & Metal Co. catalog still specified “Decarbonized Blued Steel Barrels”. The H. & D. Folsom Arms Co. Catalogue No. 35 (1930-31) listing for the New “Empire” (Crescent No. 9) states the barrels are “Fine Decarbonized ‘High Pressure’ Steel – Proof Testing with loads considerably heavier than standard loaded shells.”

Actual analysis
Post-WWI “Parker Steel” = Non-standard Bessemer resulphurized rephosphorized AISI 1109 Carbon Steel.
c. 1910 Meriden Fire Arms “Armory Steel” = Non-standard Bessemer rephosphorized Low Alloy Low Carbon Steel AISI 1211/1016
c. 1900 Crescent “Wilson’s Welded Steel” = Non-standard Bessemer (high phosphorus) Low Alloy Low Carbon Steel AISI 1017

It is therefore safe to assume there are lots of U.S. single and double barrel shotguns still in use with Decarbonized Steel barrels; making this all relevant to a DoubleGun forum.

Informed and helpful comments are most welcome.
"it is pretty unlikely that any of our American gunmakers utilized barrel steel from actual steel mills in England that were operated by Henry Bessemer" would be neither.

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
Originally Posted By: Drew Hause

Informed and helpful comments are most welcome.
"it is pretty unlikely that any of our American gunmakers utilized barrel steel from actual steel mills in England that were operated by Henry Bessemer" would be neither.


This looks like more butt-hurt Drew. I prescribe this product. Hopefully it will soon be sold in 55 gal. drums.



However, many of your incorrect comments in your series of non-double gun barrel threads refer to Bessemer steel, and you act as if that blanket description is accurate.

Originally Posted By: Drew Hause
It is therefore safe to assume there are lots of U.S. single and double barrel shotguns still in use with Decarbonized Steel barrels; making this all relevant to a DoubleGun forum.


And this looks like you need more butt-hurt salve too. But I believe this is an overly emotional response to my question about which Winchester DOUBLE GUNS had Stainless Steel barrels... which you have not answered.

I still haven't seen any evidence here that most American gunmakers used steel exclusively or predominately from Henry Bessemer's mill in Sheffield, England. I'm sure I would be wrong to say that none ever did. Sorry if you took it that way. I should have worded it differently. Bessemer licensed his process to a number of steel producers in the U.S. and Europe. These were known as Bessemer Process steels. The furnaces used were called Bessemer Converters. Early production tonnage was much lower, and mostly consumed domestically, just as steel from Bessemer's mill in Sheffield It is natural that U.S. manufacturers would buy steel that was produced domestically in Bessemer Process mills due to lower shipping costs, and even tariffs. There has been plenty of discussion here over the years naming many of the U.S. steel companies that sold steel to U.S. gun makers.

There is a wide range of both content and quality in Bessemer and Bessemer Process steels. All are decarbonized. Contrary to your incorrect statement in the Winchester thread, all are alloys. All steel is an alloy. There is no element called steel anywhere on the periodic chart. Decarbonization is the very heart of Bessemer's invention. Bessemer initially did a partial decarbonization, attempting to stop at the correct desired carbon content. And Mushet found it better to remove almost all of the carbon, and then add the correct amount back into the heat. But there was a fairly wide range of carbon content, and impurities as well. The range of carbon content was at first accidental. Later, it was mostly intentional, to produce different percentage carbon steels for different applications. These various mills used iron made from different ores, and different sources for coal or coke. As your copy-and-past research has noted, even different furnace linings affected the final analysis of the steel. The Bessemer process was too fast to do any real accurate testing and refinements or adjustments during a heat. In fact, before Robert Mushet's improvements on the Bessemer process, even Henry Bessemer's close friend William Clay described his steel as "rotten hot and rotten cold"

Before adopting Mushet's improvements, Bessemer was forced to buy back the rights of four makers to produce his steel for Ł32,500. This was after he had been paid Ł27,000 for those rights. In other words, it was so bad that he was forced to pay damages.

A couple samples of barrels will barely begin to tell the story of Bessemer Process steel, considering the literally thousands of heats that were produced during experimentation, development, and production runs. I can confidently say that a couple chunks of Winchester or other barrel steel, whether plain carbon steel, higher alloy steel, or stainless steel sent to your met lab isn't going to produce any Holy Grail for content in the barrel steels of our guns. An analysis of steel from a gun barrel will tell us what steel is in that one barrel. Attempting to apply that analysis to another gun produced at a different time is little more than conjecture.

But if self-loathing and the acid in your soul makes it too stressful... just make notice that comments from me are not ever welcome in your copy-and-paste research. I'll still comment, but you might feel a bit manly.


A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,398
Likes: 307
Sidelock
***
OP Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,398
Likes: 307
This thread, and link I provided, are well researched and factually correct William. There is no statement that U.S. makers sources their decarbonized tubes from England, and you know it.
And obviously the decarbonized tubes used by Remington in 1900 and Parker in 1917 were of different quality and composition than Henry's stuff in 1860 or 1880.
I also disagree that the documented barrel composition analysis and tensile testing is of no value; but it was my money to waste. Tubes were purchased in large batches, and the composition of a 1898 Hunter Arms Armor Steel barrel accurately reflects the other Armor Steel tubes used in that period.

re: "alloy steel" let me help you with some cut and paste
"The term "alloy steel" is the standard term referring to steels with other alloying elements added deliberately in addition to the carbon. Common alloyants include manganese, nickel, chromium, molybdenum, vanadium, silicon, and boron."
You are correct that carbon steel with manganese is a "low alloy steel". The AISI 4XXXs are "alloy steels" with nickel, chromium and molybdenum, or combinations thereof, with specific ranges of concentrations ie. 4140. The Parker Titanic steel specimen did not fit those criteria.

And you are projecting again William, which bothers me not a bit. Is there any self-respect left William?

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
I still have plenty of self respect Preacher, but unlike you, I am not afflicted with a fragile ego and inflated sense of self importance.

Maintaining that sense of self importance is obviously paramount, and perhaps the most important thing to be gained from spending your own money to have various chunks of barrels analyzed. I was glad to see that you admitted in the other thread that you are no expert. But it is disturbing that you get so sensitive or butt-hurt if Miller or I comment on any misconceptions or errors you post. If knowledge or adding to our knowledge is really your goal, that shouldn't be a problem. But it is a big problem to you.

Better we should all adore you, and compliment your inflated ego, than to ever question or correct you.

We already know that better and more expensive guns typically had barrels made from better and more expensive steels. That concept went back to the use of better Damascus on higher grade guns prior to the advent of fluid steel tubes. I don't expect your analysis will yield any shocking revelations such as Crescent Steel barrels were actually better or stronger than Kilby, Krupp, or Whitworth. They were better for making a gun that could be sold cheaply. We see how various barrels stand the test of time. Knowing the tensile strength of a particular Hunter Arms L.C. Smith OO Grade barrel isn't going to tell us much that we don't already know.

I merely corrected your assertions about Bessemer steel, and you have lost your shit again. Bessemer steel is from Henry Bessemer's mill in Sheffield, England while Bessemer Process steel is from various places and mills that were under license to use the Bessemer patent. And there are a wide range in Bessemer, and Bessemer Process steel qualities and contents. That's all.

I'd still be interested in hearing how many Winchester Double Shotguns had stainless steel barrels though. I'm hoping to learn at least that much from the copy-and-paste guru.

I've told you before that all steel is an alloy. I certainly don't need any of your copy-and-paste help with explanations of that simple concept, or of the various elements that are added to produce different alloys. You apparently do. Try a "liberal" dose of that butt-hurt salve Preacher. You need it badly.


A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,398
Likes: 307
Sidelock
***
OP Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,398
Likes: 307
"I don't expect your analysis will yield any shocking revelations such as Crescent Steel barrels were actually better or stronger than Kilby, Krupp, or Whitworth. They were better for making a gun that could be sold cheaply. We see how various barrels stand the test of time. Knowing the tensile strength of a particular Hunter Arms L.C. Smith OO Grade barrel isn't going to tell us much that we don't already know."

Interesting observation William.
It turns out that a specimen of 1898 Smith No. 00 Armor steel was non-standard (high phosphorus and sulfur) AISI 1045 with a measured tensile strength of 101,000 psi. Very good stuff for a farm implement grade gun!

And a c. 1925 Crescent Fire Arms “Genuine Armory Steel” barrel with the ‘LLH’ mark of Laurent Lochet-Habran was non-standard (high phosphorus) AISI 1040 Steel with a measured Tensile Strength of 104,000 psi. Crescent apparently moved on from decarbonized steel. Also good stuff.

I found a historical report of the composition of Krupp Fluss Stahl from the 1890s and it was similar to AISI 1045 which has an industrial standard tensile strength of 82,000-85,000 psi
https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=6130



Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
Interesting... very interesting that you should make your point by comparing apples to oranges... i.e., steel produced in 1925 versus steel produced in the 1890's with different furnaces and materials.... a higher alloy steel versus plain decarbonized steel. I'm not surprised to see you trying to get away with that sort of cherry-picking of data. So show us side by side analysis of the three stellar reputation gun barrel steels, Krupp, Kilby, and Whitworth, that were made in 1925, and compare that with the same 1925 LLH Crescent barrel.

And for a truly valid comparison... make certain that all of these samples are tested by the same Met Lab using the same equipment.

So then, by your inference, are you telling your enthralled audience that Crescent Steel is/was better than Kilby, Krupp, or Whitworth steel? If so, then why did you make such a fuss yesterday over the nickel steel that was documented by Researcher in the $750 1894 Remington double? Are you saying that a discerning and wealthy gun buyer who had big money to spend on a high grade Remington should have specified LLH Crescent barrels instead? Or are you saying that over the life of the gun, it really wouldn't have made much difference for killing ducks?

And if Crescent Steel is/was better than those highly revered other quality gun barrel steels, was it better in every way? Or are you trying to tell us that tensile strength is the one true measure of steel quality?

I also find it interesting and educational that you describe a sample of AISI 1045 L.C. Smith Armor steel as having a tensile strength of 101,000 psi. Then two short paragraphs later, you cite a Krupp Fluss Stahl tube from the 1890's that was "similar to AISI 1045 which has an industrial standard tensile strength of 82,000-85,000 psi."

It appears that you are saying or admitting that samples of AISI 1045 are all over the map when it comes to analysis... which is what I have been saying. That kinda shoots big holes in your silly notion that one or two samples of gun barrel steel tested by your local Metallurgy facility will tell us the story of all the barrels of that particular gun, produced over many years. Further evidence of this can be found in your own words from your post# 548227 concerning two Hunter Arms Armor Steel barrels--

Originally Posted By: Drew Hause
It could be relevant that 2 Hunter Arms Armor Steel barrels were shown to be Non-standard AISI 1045 Rephosphorized Resulfurized Carbon Steel and Non-standard AISI 1018 with high phosphorus and sulphur.


Do you even read the stuff that you copy-and paste here preacher? The more that you copy-and-paste, the more we learn that you don't actually understand the things you regurgitate. But I think you put that on full display last year when you went on for a couple days wildly asserting that lengthening the chambers of vintage double shotgun barrels could actually result in greater wall thickness at the end of the re-cut chamber.



A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,398
Likes: 307
Sidelock
***
OP Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,398
Likes: 307
AISI 1045 is AISI 1045, with specific criteria, which is not "all over the map"
https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=6130

"similar to 1045" and "non-standard 1045" means they don't fit the criteria for 1045...and are therefore not 1045. Not a hard concept William.

"Knowing the tensile strength of a particular Hunter Arms L.C. Smith OO Grade barrel isn't going to tell us much that we don't already know."
I believe establishing that the 1898 Armor specimen had a tensile strength of 101,000 psi is knowledge worth having, and reflects the large batch of tubes used in that time period.

The 1908 Armor specimen was a different (non-standard) 1018 steel. It is not unreasonable to assume that Hunter Arms, related to the Panic of 1907, after which they were forced to lower the prices of their guns significantly (the No. 00 went from $37 to $25), went with a lower quality ie cheaper barrel steel. Interesting to speculate, and again information with value.

Unfortunately, I don't have a 1920s Field grade Armor barrel study for comparison. Brophy's book has a 1929 engineering drawing specifying “Steel App. 40 Carbon” for the barrel; maybe the same non-standard AISI 1040 from Laurent Lochet-Habran also used by Crescent. Ithaca also used Cockerill steel tubes from LLH.

It is also of value knowing Crescent apparently stopped using the previously documented decarbonized steel barrels and went with higher quality Belgian sourced carbon steel tubes (like the other U.S. makers) in the better economic times of the 20s. That alone does not make a Crescent a quality double.

Interesting isn't it? To me anyway, and it's my money.

BTW: I'm having trouble following you William. You are having trouble stringing sentences together that communicate a clear thought. Maybe try to establish ONE point/idea per post? And without misrepresenting/ twisting/removing the context of something I have posted.
I never said "that one or two samples of gun barrel steel tested by your local Metallurgy facility will tell us the story of all the barrels of that particular gun, produced over many years." I said, and believe, that a Hunter Arms Armor barrel analysis from a 1898 specimen would reflect the composition of other Armor Steel barrels for that time period. As shown above, things change over time however. We still would not know the composition of a 1898 Hunter Arms Crown or Nitro steel barrel.
Thanks.

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
I have no doubt that you are having trouble following what I say preacher. That was evident in your first two sentences.

Let me explain it real slow for you...

I'll try to do it in a non-thinkin' way so that a non-thinker like you can grasp it.

Small bites at at time.

You have made the assertion that a metallurgical analysis of a sample of a barrel can tell us much about many other barrels from the same make and model of shotgun. I'll take the time to QUOTE what you said above so that I won't be dishonestly accused of twisting your words:

Originally Posted By: Drew Hause
I said, and believe, that a Hunter Arms Armor barrel analysis from a 1898 specimen would reflect the composition of other Armor Steel barrels for that time period.


Yet in the sentence I QUOTED from you in my previous post, you cited TWO Hunter Arms Armor Steel with dramatically different carbon contents, and unstated quantities of phosphorus and sulfur.

You made my point that one, or a few samples of barrels really aren't going to tell us much about anything except those particular barrels.

Is that simple enough for you?

You then made the point (pure conjecture and speculation) that the Panic of 1907 might have forced Hunter Arms to switch to a cheaper lower grade steel. And let's not forget that you never mentioned that the AISI 1016 tubes were from a 1908 gun until after I confronted you about the great difference in them and the 1045 barrels. But you failed to consider that the same Panic of 1907 would have also forced steel producers to lower their prices as well. Interesting to speculate... but the change confirms my belief that a single barrel analysis is valid only for the barrels that were produced from that one particular heat of steel. And there is no way of knowing what heat any particular barrel set came from... even if the guns were built in the same year or same month. We have no way of knowing how rough tube sets were pulled from inventory. We know that some guns were built out of serial number sequence. As you said, it's your money to waste. But stop trying to tell us that your precious samples have any validity for knowing the composition of any other barrel.


A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
I don't want to put too much into any one post since you have trouble following things preacher, so take a deep breath and pay attention to a separate observation.

Krupp Steel was made in Germany. The Krupp steel you referred to was made in the 1890's.

German Steel made in the 1890's would not have been given a 1045 designation for two reasons.

1) German steel of that time did not use AISI classifications.

2) The AISI(American Iron and Steel Institute) did not even exist until 1908.

Is this too much for you preacher, or can I go on with another complex and difficult to grasp thought? Nope, I better do it in a separate post...


A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
OK preacher, have you rested your brain long enough to take in another observation? Take a deep breath and think real hard.

Since we know that the 1890's Krupp barrel, which was "similar" to AISI 1045, would not have been given an AISI designation for the reasons I outlined in my last post, we must accept your description of it as "similar" to AISI 1045.

That is not a stretch, considering when it was made. If it was analyzed and found to be "similar" to AISI 1045, we can reasonably assume it was a decarbonized steel with a carbon content of around .45%

If Krupp had alloyed it with nickel, chromnium, molybdenum, etc., it likely would not be described as "similar to AISI 1045".

But then you go on to say that the tensile strength of that barrel was dramatically different than a sample of non-standard (high phosphorus and sulfur) AISI 1045. The numbers were 82,000-85,000 psi vs. 101,000 psi.

That isn't what "similar" means preacher. That is radically different. And it was cool to see how you skated away from my question about tensile strength being the only criteria for good gun barrel steel.

Now here's a second thought. Take a rest and come back to it later if this is too much to take in all at once.

You then go on to say this:

Originally Posted By: Drew Hause


"similar to 1045" and "non-standard 1045" means they don't fit the criteria for 1045...and are therefore not 1045. Not a hard concept William.


The problem is, you are now attempting to say that "non-standard 1045" is therefore not 1045 right after telling us that it is AISI 1045:

Originally Posted By: Drew Hause

Interesting observation William.
It turns out that a specimen of 1898 Smith No. 00 Armor steel was non-standard (high phosphorus and sulfur) AISI 1045 with a measured tensile strength of 101,000 psi. Very good stuff for a farm implement grade gun!


So preacher... right there is the part where we catch you being dishonest and deceptive again.

You think it's hard to have a discussion with someone who puts more than one thought in a post???... you should try debating someone like you who changes his own words and tries to twist meaning in order to discredit the other guy. But hey, being dishonest helped you skate away from several pertinent questions.

Do you think that being dishonest and twisting like this is going to make more people believe that you actually understand this subject? You need to take a good long look at yourself.


A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,966
Likes: 293
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,966
Likes: 293
I've spent an unhealthy part of my life in steel mills.

Yet, I find the processes by which they turn dirt (ore) into washer cabinets fascinating.

The crudeness, the scale of it all. Mind boggling.

The heat, the smoke, all of it.

It's a wonder anything homogeneous comes out of them at all, working such crude processes, at such mammoth scale.

And for much of what this discussion is about, without instrumentation or process controls.

When I first saw men working with cast iron, making it, pouring it, it was all visually controlled.


Out there doing it best I can.
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,398
Likes: 307
Sidelock
***
OP Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,398
Likes: 307
You are on the edge of the cliff William. Your rants are increasingly incoherent. Your OCD over this Forum is consuming your life. You are increasingly paranoid and your hate is destroying you. Your insults are juvenile and no longer clever. And BTW adult males who constantly express gay slurs, insults and implications frequently are filled with self-loathing over their own gender conflicts...and then project.
Get some help William. There are 2 Catholic retreat centers near Pittsburgh - St. Paul of the Cross and the Martina Spiritual Renewal Center. Take a break and spend some time there, and in God's word. Humble yourself and talk to a priest. By the power of the blood of the Jesus, with whom you claim to have a relationship, and from whom you are repelling anyone seeking to know Him, you can be freed from the your bondage.
You've spewed your filth on another thread, which I suspect Dave will delete.
And none of your attacks bother me in the least. I only feel pity for you William, and even more so your family. How terrible their lives must be. Get some help for them if not for yourself.
Rage on - it means nothing to me William.

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
I knew that you wouldn't answer my questions preacher. I knew you didn't have the guts to own up to the dishonest crap you were trying to pull.

You call me OCD, but I am not the one who is running multiple serial threads about a subject that I don't understand.

And I felt certain that you would escalate your personal attacks in order to deflect attention away from the dishonesty you have posted.

I felt sure we were getting close to the time when you would start invoking the Holy name of Jesus or use some Biblical passages as a shield to hide your creepy deceptive behavior.

This... this is about as sick as it gets here on DoubleGunShop forum... Now you make this sick and creepy accusation to hide from your own lies. Those QUOTES I posted were your dishonest words Preacher. Blasphemy like this isn't going to absolve you from your conniving and deception.

Originally Posted By: Drew Hause
By the power of the blood of the Jesus, with whom you claim to have a relationship, and from whom you are repelling anyone seeking to know Him, you can be freed from the your bondage.


All that's missing now is some pictures of the little girl from Guatemala, or pictures of your dead dog... to gin up some sympathy.

But none of it changes the fact that you don't comprehend the copy-and-paste information about steel that you post. You quite apparently don't even read a lot of it yourself. This is all about you Preacher Drew... a petty two-bit narcissist who thinks he can become another Dr. Gaddy... but without actual knowledge, intelligence, or experience.


A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.

Joined: Nov 2019
Posts: 104
Likes: 7
Sidelock
Offline
Sidelock

Joined: Nov 2019
Posts: 104
Likes: 7
I’m guessing there is some old history between the two of you that would explain the animosity that seems out of proportion to the subject.

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,981
Likes: 397
SKB Offline
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,981
Likes: 397
You will noticed one of the two is constantly full of animosity. I will let you figure out which one I am referring to.


http://www.bertramandco.com/
Booking African hunts, firearms import services

Here for the meltdowns
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
Originally Posted By: SKB
You will noticed one of the two is constantly full of animosity. I will let you figure out which one I am referring to.


You will notice that there was zero animosity on my part until the Preacher resorted to deception as a means to try to discredit me. The Preacher is not the most dishonest person here, although I have caught him in numerous lies and hypocrisy. His response here is very typical and predictable, and I call it his Standard Operating Procedure. I can give you links to a number of threads where he has lost his shit... provided his inane psychoanalysis of me... spoke about the acid eating my soul... resorted to Scripture, Jesus, and the Bible to run from his lies... tries to impose his latent homosexual tendencies on me... tells us how sorry he feels for my family... tells us how he doesn't care what I say or do... tells us he is done responding to me (never true)...etc. I'm disappointed he hasn't yet posted his photo of the little girl from Guatemala, or pics of his dead dog yet, in another bid for sympathy from the people he still has fooled. He hasn't shifted to his medical ministry lately... ever since he posted a personal attack thread framed around the impending doom of his upcoming deadly dangerous mission trip to Guatemala. During his absence, he was logging on here reading posts almost every day, when he should have been in remote jungles with no internet access. And his actual time away from here amounted to little more than a 4 1/2 day long weekend, of which a couple days would be consumed by travel. Of course, I was pronounced evil for noticing that sick, pathetic, and deceptive behavior. But I think a man who wraps himself in Jesus and the Bible ought to be held to a much higher standard of honesty and integrity. Just my personal opinion, as always, based solely upon what I see here.

If past history is any indicator of future performance, the Preacher will now leave us for a while. Woe unto all of us poor unwashed heathens! He will hang out over on the Trapshooters or L.C. Smith forum, but frequently check in here to see if anyone misses him and his great copy-and-paste research.

Good riddance.


A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 378
SKB Stevie and I have our own little history here. Stevie doesn't like it when anyone points out his Liberal bent, his disdain for our NRA and our pro-gun President Donald Trump, his posting of data from known anti-gunners such as Philip Alpers and GunPolicy.org in order to support his false claim that there was no gun registration in New Zealand at the time of the Christchurch shooting, or his standing by like a spineless sheep while ATF Agents illegally photographed his FFL Bound Ledger Books.

Stevie also really hates any mention of the continuous free advertising of his businesses that he does here in every post he makes. Ask him if he pays Dave Weber his cut for any money generated from his free advertising, and watch how fast he either attacks you or changes the subject.

Stevie is well known for being one of the Liberal turds who despises any gun rights topics, because they are unflattering to his favored anti-gun Democrats. If you go back through many of those discussions and debates, you will soon see that Stevie frequently attempts to disrupt them. There are many that you will never see because they got so contentious that Dave Weber deleted the entire threads... which is a shame because it has allowed Stevie to then deny his own words and actions.

Stevie's response, similar to the Preacher, has been his own feeble attempts to discredit me... as he is doing here. But Stevie is also one of the gutless cowards who, along with his pals Bob Cash and BrentD, resorted to internet doxxing in an attempt to intimidate jOe and I. Of course, we see how well that is working out for him. Stevie spends long hours on the internet searching for dirt on me to post here, along with a few other worms. He leaves tracks in cyberspace, but he will try to lie about that too.

Stevie and his sick pals take this very seriously. In addition to the internet doxxing and endless dirt digging, his Libtard pals have actually created second user names here to hide their actions. Preacher Drew calls me a coward for not posting under my full name (even though he knows it), but you will not hear a peep from him about Shortshells or nca225, or any other Liberal who uses a screen name. They have driven long distances to send anonymous threats and intimidation mail to my house, from a different city with a different postmark, thinking I wouldn't know. They obviously didn't consider my occupation. His fellow Liberal gunsmith pal Steven Dodd Hughes called me from (406) 222-9377 in Livingston, Montana and screamed extremely vulgar threats at me while in an obvious drunken stupor. My number is not listed in the phone book. They have engaged in several orchestrated attempts to attempt to get Dave Weber to ban jOe and me. There is quite a bit more that will come out later, at a time and place of my choosing. But you won't see the Preacher doing any psychoanalysis of any of that sick behavior.

As I have often said... you can learn a lot about double guns here. But if you can learn a lot more about people... if you really pay attention to details.


A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard

doublegunshop.com home | Welcome | Sponsors & Advertisers | DoubleGun Rack | Doublegun Book Rack

Order or request info | Other Useful Information

Updated every minute of everyday!


Copyright (c) 1993 - 2024 doublegunshop.com. All rights reserved. doublegunshop.com - Bloomfield, NY 14469. USA These materials are provided by doublegunshop.com as a service to its customers and may be used for informational purposes only. doublegunshop.com assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in these materials. THESE MATERIALS ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANT-ABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. doublegunshop.com further does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information, text, graphics, links or other items contained within these materials. doublegunshop.com shall not be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages, including without limitation, lost revenues or lost profits, which may result from the use of these materials. doublegunshop.com may make changes to these materials, or to the products described therein, at any time without notice. doublegunshop.com makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. This is a public un-moderated forum participate at your own risk.

Note: The posting of Copyrighted material on this forum is prohibited without prior written consent of the Copyright holder. For specifics on Copyright Law and restrictions refer to: http://www.copyright.gov/laws/ - doublegunshop.com will not monitor nor will they be held liable for copyright violations presented on the BBS which is an open and un-moderated public forum.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.0.33-0+deb9u11+hw1 Page Time: 0.119s Queries: 49 (0.096s) Memory: 0.9381 MB (Peak: 1.8988 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-03-29 01:39:15 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS