|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,467
Posts545,119
Members14,409
| |
Most Online1,258
Mar 29th, 2024
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,740 Likes: 97
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,740 Likes: 97 |
new black powder shells are available from a few sources...and at nine pounds, low pressure rst loads could be considered...
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,749 Likes: 743
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,749 Likes: 743 |
I would think a set of sub gauge, full length tubes would make a lot more sense for your FILs Parker. You would end up using factory 20 gauge ammunition in it.
Contact Brileys.
What became of the model 99? Very useful gun and cartridge.
Best,
Ted Thanks, that was my first thought, but for some reason this gun weighs a ton already, almost nine pounds. The barrels are marked 4-4, four pounds four oz, and its a #2 frame, regardless it feels super heavy as is. The 99 was in much better condition and I shoot a deer with it every few years or so in honor of Rusty. Its the old model with the bronze rotary magazine and Rusty had installed a Lyman peep sight which works perfect. If you dont care about originality, how about a different set of Parker barrels, either steel, or, Damascus? I guess I wouldnt be a a hurry to throw a bunch of money at it. Anything can be brought back to life, but, that doesnt mean everything should be. Best, Ted
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2019
Posts: 104 Likes: 7
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2019
Posts: 104 Likes: 7 |
I would think a set of sub gauge, full length tubes would make a lot more sense for your FILs Parker. You would end up using factory 20 gauge ammunition in it.
Contact Brileys.
What became of the model 99? Very useful gun and cartridge.
Best,
Ted Thanks, that was my first thought, but for some reason this gun weighs a ton already, almost nine pounds. The barrels are marked 4-4, four pounds four oz, and its a #2 frame, regardless it feels super heavy as is. The 99 was in much better condition and I shoot a deer with it every few years or so in honor of Rusty. Its the old model with the bronze rotary magazine and Rusty had installed a Lyman peep sight which works perfect. If you dont care about originality, how about a different set of Parker barrels, either steel, or, Damascus? I guess I wouldnt be a a hurry to throw a bunch of money at it. Anything can be brought back to life, but, that doesnt mean everything should be. Best, Ted Thats basically the same conclusion I arrived at. Even with working barrels it is way too heavy and the stock, though beautiful, has way too much drop. Its just been a pretty wall hanger since I got it 25 years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 972 Likes: 51
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 972 Likes: 51 |
Lots of knowledgable people on this forum. Lets see some pictures of sleeved blown barrels.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,124 Likes: 19
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,124 Likes: 19 |
I would think a set of sub gauge, full length tubes would make a lot more sense for your FILs Parker. You would end up using factory 20 gauge ammunition in it.
Contact Brileys.
What became of the model 99? Very useful gun and cartridge.
Best,
Ted Thanks, that was my first thought, but for some reason this gun weighs a ton already, almost nine pounds. The barrels are marked 4-4, four pounds four oz, and its a #2 frame, regardless it feels super heavy as is. The 99 was in much better condition and I shoot a deer with it every few years or so in honor of Rusty. Its the old model with the bronze rotary magazine and Rusty had installed a Lyman peep sight which works perfect. If you dont care about originality, how about a different set of Parker barrels, either steel, or, Damascus? I guess I wouldnt be a a hurry to throw a bunch of money at it. Anything can be brought back to life, but, that doesnt mean everything should be. Best, Ted Thats basically the same conclusion I arrived at. Even with working barrels it is way too heavy and the stock, though beautiful, has way too much drop. Its just been a pretty wall hanger since I got it 25 years ago. Dont give up, Ted is right another set of barrels can be found rather cheaply.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,417 Likes: 313
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,417 Likes: 313 |
Ghostrider: Please see https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=561090&page=1another image of the Parker  Unfortunately I have no details, but it sure looks like a thin lateral barrel wall blow-out. As said on the other thread, expertly done sleeving is great; inexpertly is not - aesthetically or regarding safety.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,417 Likes: 313
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,417 Likes: 313 |
Aaron Little was sleeving, but I believe he posted here that he was no longer offering the service? Possibly he could comment https://www.facebook.com/amlittlebespokegunmaker/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,703 Likes: 103
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,703 Likes: 103 |
Yes, Aaron Little did an Elsie Specialty 32" barrel for me that had blown out. He did a terrific job for a reasonable price. Like Drew said though, I think he has stopped offering the service and gone into straight commission gun building...Geo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 972 Likes: 51
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 972 Likes: 51 |
Aaron also did a gun for me. Looks perfect with no seam visible.
Thank you Drew I figured if anyone had some pictures you might. I appreciate the picture.
Wish we had more information. On this set it seems that that barrel separation does end at the seam. The question that begs to be answered is did the barrel fail due to the sleeving work that was performed or due to some other reason such as a thin barrel?
I find it difficult to believe that with the strict proofing laws in the UK that this would be an allowed procedure and that the barrels could be approved for proofing if there was not an absolute certainty that they were safe.
I am looking forward to seeing how many pictures we have posted of damaged sleeved barrels.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,417 Likes: 313
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,417 Likes: 313 |
Just a reminder Great Britain adopted the 1969 Commission Internationale Permanente pour l'Epreuve des Armes Feu Portatives standards March 1, 1980 but continued using Lead Crushers to measure pressure until 1989. The CIP transducer Maximal Statistical Individual Pressure is 850 BAR = 12,328 PSI for a Maximal Average (Service) Pressure of 740 BAR = 10,733 PSI, and Mean Proof Pressure of 930 BAR = 13,924 PSI. 900 BAR is for a Maximal Average (Service) Pressure of 780 BAR = 11,313 PSI and Proof pressure of 1020 BAR = 14,794 PSI. High Performance (Magnum) MSIP is 1200 BAR = 17,405 PSI for a Service Pressure of 1050 BAR = 15,229 PSI, and Mean Proof Pressure of 1320 BAR = 19,145 PSI. In 2006 the British Rules of Proof were modified http://www.gunproof.com/Proof_Memoranda/RULESOFP.PDFPart IV, The Proof Load, Number 27, Part A The standards call for a load of 30% over mean service pressure at a point 17mm or 25mm (about 1), and at a point 162mm (6.38) from the breech face a load of 30% over mean service pressure ( at that point as determined by the Proof House). It is possible that the pressure at the location of the seam is higher than with the former proof load? To my knowledge the Proof House uses a single proof load to generate those pressures, and has not revealed the powder (or combination of powders) used in the proof load.
|
|
|
|
|
