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
Topics38,444
Posts544,807
Members14,406
|
Most Online1,258 Mar 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 98 Likes: 12
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 98 Likes: 12 |
Played with rolling a few trimmed shells. I need to reduce my column height to make a more consistent looking roll.....or buy some new hulls.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,703 Likes: 405
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,703 Likes: 405 |
It's hard to roll fired shells perfectly. I don't trim them, I adjust them up to fit in 2.75" hull.
_________ BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 98 Likes: 12
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 98 Likes: 12 |
I was thinking I needed to cut the overall fired length of the hull to 2.5” to shoot in these old doubles. For a fox from 1912 I figured the chamber was shorted than 2-3/4”.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,703 Likes: 405
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,703 Likes: 405 |
Yes, many are 2.5". All of my current guns are 2.75", I should have said so. Some people cut 2.75" shells even if they will be shot in 2.75" chamber, when they roll crimp.
I should have added, that I don't know when 2.75" became common in America, but I have English and other guns from turn of the century that have 2.75" original chambers.
Last edited by BrentD; 11/27/20 09:54 PM.
_________ BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,962 Likes: 89
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,962 Likes: 89 |
I think you’re going to find that the chamber, if unaltered, is 2 5/8”, not 2 1/2”. And Parker, along with LC Smith, and I’m sure others continued to cut this length chamber long after 2 3/4” hulls became standard. They wanted the hull to open part way inside the forcing cone, believing that a hull mouth inside the cone provided a better gas seal. Makes sense. I do know that Parker’s hang tag that came with a new gun said, “chamber 2 5/8”, use 2 3/4” ammunition”. Most of my guns have short chambers and I never cut the hulls, they’re all 2 3/4” and I’ve never had a problem.
I see from the photo of your reloading room you’re a rifle reloader and that does require a high degree of precision in case length, etc. but shotguns are totally different animals. Such precision is not necessary. But the combination of primer, powder, and shot charge are critical. Not hull length.
Enjoy your new gun, sounds nice!
When an old man dies a library burns to the ground. (Old African proverb)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,080 Likes: 466
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,080 Likes: 466 |
Harbor Freight makes a mini-chop saw which in combination with a jig made by an Ebay seller is perfect for trimming hulls quickly, neatly and with precision. The jig clamps into the saw's adjustable jaws. I use one to trim 12 ga. hulls into 2" length. The Ebay seller will make the plastic jig to any length desired. Here's the jig for .45 ACP, but if he is contacted, he'll make the jig for shotgun shells at the same price. https://www.ebay.com/itm/New-45-Shot-Shell-Trimming-Jig-2-Chop-Saw-Safe-Scratchless-308-243-260-Brass/264391246256?hash=item3d8ef241b0:g:x~YAAOSwWHBdIo-H
Gil
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 98 Likes: 12
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 98 Likes: 12 |
Thanks for that info guys, I’n my research thus far my interpretation was that a shell unrolling or unfolding into the forcing cone would result in higher pressures. And for a vintage Fox with the fluid steel barrels I don’t know what is still considered safe. If shooting conventional 3/4” fold crimp 1oz load combinations that Lyman says are 7800 psi is ok I would much prefer a few less steps.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,410 Likes: 313
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,410 Likes: 313 |
The A.H. Fox Co., as did the other turn-of-the-century double gun makers told us exactly the loads recommended for their guns; this is from the 1914 Fox catalog courtesy of Researcher Note the Fox 12g 2 5/8" chamber was intended for 2 3/4" roll-crimped shells. The pressure of period 1 1/8 oz. 3 Dr.Eq. (1200 fps) loads with Bulk Smokeless (DuPont, "E.C.", and "Schultze") was 7000 - 8000 psi; with Dense Smokeless ("Ballistite" and "Infallible") 8500 - 10,000 psi (similar to today's loads) Use of loads with similar ballistics of course assumes the absence of barrel defects (requiring a bore scope) and adequate wall thickness (requiring a wall thickness gauge and the ability to accurately use it). That is not to say the head of the stock wood might not benefit from lower recoil loads. And BTW from the 1884 hammer gun and 1886 hammerless, the L.C. Smith 12g chambers were cut 2 3/4".
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,190 Likes: 15
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,190 Likes: 15 |
"And BTW from the 1884 hammer gun and 1886 hammerless, the L.C. Smith 12g chambers were cut 2 3/4".
As did other makers. Some of which were 12-bores by the Syracuse Arms Co, Baltimore Arms Co, and the Hollenbeck Gun Co to include the Three Barrel Gun and Royal Gun Co versions, unless special ordered otherwise of course.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 98 Likes: 12
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2020
Posts: 98 Likes: 12 |
Thanks Drew. While possible, it seems unlikely to me that anyone would have ordered a Fox with a special "short chamber". Assuming the deal goes thru I may breakout the cerrosafe and do a chamber cast of both to compare. I may go ahead and do my Remington model 10 also.
|
|
|
|
|