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
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,500
Posts545,479
Members14,414
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,427 Likes: 314
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,427 Likes: 314 |
2" Arthur Howell & Co. per https://forums.pigeonwatch.co.uk/fo...ne-know-anything-about-arthur-howell-co/Nigel Browns, British Gunmakers: Arthur Howell was recorded at 28 Weaman St. Birmingham in 1909 and became Arthur Howell & Co. in 1917. He remained at Weaman Street until 1942 but may have removed to Whittall Street shortly thereafter. He is recorded as being there in Gun Trade membership at least until 1957. Similar to the J.W. Lewis 2" on the previous page SN 7,558 is reported to date to 1937. The SN is 7425, but I can't read the date code Double Gun Journal Vol. 16 Issue 4 Winter 2005 by Stephen Howell
|
1 member likes this:
Parabola |
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,427 Likes: 314
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,427 Likes: 314 |
On further review I think Brent's Jeffery's date code is a not fully struck 'O' for 1934-1935
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 925 Likes: 253
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 925 Likes: 253 |
I am a late reader of all these posts about 2 inch chamber 12 bore guns and it may be that my input here is irrelevant or of no interest. But it seemed to me as I have just briefly read all 13 pages of this post that there were questions in some readers/posters mind about the proof pressure differences (if any) between the proof of 2 1/2 inch chambered 12 bore guns and 2 inch chambered 12 bore guns via the two proof houses in the UK. I just pulled out my copy of the "RULES OF PROOF 1954" ---"Rules Regulations and Scales made in the month of October 1954" and turned to page 20 (of 45 pages) titled APPENDIX II---"for the proof of barrels and the arms of the first class". This appendix chart shows that for Provisional Proof the loading for both 2- 1/2 inch and 2 inch chambered 12 bore guns use the identical proof loads: 266 grains of Tower Proof (T.P.) powder and 1- 1/4 ounces of no. 6 shot. However the Definitive Proof loads for the 2- 1/2 chambered 12 bore guns and the 2 inch chambered guns are different; the Definitive Proof load for the 2-1/2 inch chambered 12 bore gun is 178 grains of Tower Special Proof (T.S.P.) powder and 1- 11/16 grains of no. 6 shot, while the Definitive Proof load for 2 inch chambered 12 bore gun is 170 grains of T.S.P. and 1-5/8 ounce of no. 6 shot.
This data above does not answer the question if both 2-1/2 inch chambered and 2 inch chambered 12 bore guns are proofed to the same proof pressure but it give reasonable expectations that the UK provisional proof pressures could the same or even more for the 2 inch chambered gun; and in the case of definitive proof the pressures are very similar.
I also noted from this appendix (as referenced above) that 2-3/4 inch, 2-1/2 inch and 2 inch chambered 12 bore guns all were proofed with the same Provisional Proof load as listed above; and I was more than a bit surprised at this.
Kindest Regard; Stephen Howell
Last edited by bushveld; 05/27/23 10:34 PM.
|
4 members like this:
Drew Hause, KDGJ, Stanton Hillis, BrentD, Prof |
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,081 Likes: 473
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,081 Likes: 473 |
Stephen, thanks for shining your analytical light on post 1954 Rules of proof. The input from Dr. Drew ,his connections (Vic), the source materials he found which are depicted are invaluable. Brent's conversation with Tom Armbrust was also noteworthy as to the difference in pressure readings depending on length of hull vs. chamber length of pressure testing barrel and the operation of Boyle's law. Borderbill's sharing of his test sheets are a great starting point for reloaders. The grey area for me remaining (more hand-wringing) are the recommended service pressures for the pre-1954 guns which in the 1930s went from 3/4 to 7/8 oz. service load recommendations. Gil
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,737 Likes: 96
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,737 Likes: 96 |
The Provisional Proof is just for the basic tube before any work is undertaken in order to show any flaws. This procedure is nor compulsory but advisable to save a lot of work being done to a faulty tube. Initially, when the 2" chamber guns started to make their appearance, the Proof House insisted in subjecting them to the same Definitive Proof as a 2 1/2" chamber gun and that is why some early 2" guns have the 1 1/8th. ounce mark on the barrel flats. Later a compromise was reached between the Gun Trade and the Proof Houses which resulted in a lower proof requirement for 2" guns.
I've been at the Proof House in Birmingham when Provisional Proof was taking place. If you have access to Greener's 'Gun & its Development' you will see the illustration and there is no change in how it is done other than the powder trail is ignited from an old car battery rather than a percussion gun lock and a piece of string running through a small hole in the wall. A series of bangs as the powder packed tubes go off in rapid succession and then the iron louvres are opened to let the smoke out. Once the 'all clear' goes all the barrel tubes are dug out of the sand beds. All very 'low tech' but it works! Lagopus.....
|
4 members like this:
Parabola, GLS, Drew Hause, BrentD, Prof |
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,719 Likes: 416
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,719 Likes: 416 |
I've been at the Proof House in Birmingham when Provisional Proof was taking place. If you have access to Greener's 'Gun & its Development' you will see the illustration and there is no change in how it is done other than the powder trail is ignited from an old car battery rather than a percussion gun lock and a piece of string running through a small hole in the wall. A series of bangs as the powder packed tubes go off in rapid succession and then the iron louvres are opened to let the smoke out. Once the 'all clear' goes all the barrel tubes are dug out of the sand beds. All very 'low tech' but it works! Lagopus..... This sounds pretty interesting and not at all what I would have expected. "Powder trail"? Buried in sand beds? Nope, not what I thought at all. Do you have any pictures of this? It sounds as if this provisional testing might be with black powder. I would love to hear more about it.
_________ BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan)
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 925 Likes: 253
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 925 Likes: 253 |
Lagopus;
Thank you for your insightful description that the old method of Provisional Proof is still in use at the two UK proof house. Please tell me this however, in these days how is the barrel plug secured into the breech end of the barrels during Provisional Proof?
Also do any of the London best gunmakers submit their barrels for Provisional Proof now?
Kindest Regards; Stephen Howell
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 144 Likes: 3
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 144 Likes: 3 |
Good work with primary sources, Bushveld.
Lagapus, I am under the impression, perhaps mistakingly, that provisional proof is rarely used with modern shotgun barrels. I suspect it varies from maker to maker.
Certainly when the modern era Greener (Tandy & Dryhurst) were busy making “new” Damascus- barreled guns (with ‘virgin’ vintage tubes) they submitted to provisional proof.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,427 Likes: 314
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,427 Likes: 314 |
Thank you Stephen In summary
1925 12g proof and service loads as published by Burrard No 2" listed (and as noted proved to the same as 2 1/2") 2 1/2" and 2 5/8" Definitive Proof 178 grains / 6 1/2 Drams T.S.P. with 1 11/16 oz. Service 3 Drams with 1 1/8 oz.
Burrard "The Modern Shotgun" Vol. III, 2nd Edition p. 217 "The 2-inch 12-bore...was originally introduced as an alternative to the 20-bore and fired the standard 2 1/2-inch 20-bore shot charge of 3/4 ounce. Experience proved that this shot charge was too light. So the shot charge was increased to the standard 2 1/2-inch 16-bore weight of 7/8 ounce."
c. 1935 the Proof House determined that 2" chambers would be proved the same as 2 1/2" (See back on p. 5 courtesy of Vic)
2" post-1954 Definitive Proof 170 grains T.S.P. and 1-5/8 oz.
Burrard published in 1955 12g 2 1/2” 1 1/16 oz. 3 Dr. Eq. Standard Service 7,952 psi; Max. Service 10,640 psi 12g 2” 7/8 oz. 2.36 Dr. Eq. Standard Service 6,440 psi; Max. Service 8,960 psi
We'll soon know, but it is likely, post-1954 2" were proved 2 3/4 TONS - Highest Mean Service Pressure 8,120 psi (by Burrard's conversion) = 560 BAR
John Brindle, author of Shotgun Shooting: Techniques & Technology published a review of Proof and Service pressures in Part 5 of his series in The Double Gun Journal, “Black Powder & Smokeless, Damascus & Steel”; Volume 5, Issue 3, 1994, “Some Modern Fallacies Part 5”, p. 11. His estimated post-1954 but pre-CIP standard pressures by LUP converted to piezo transducer PS 12g 2 1/2” Standard Service - 6,800 psi; Max. Service - 8,800 psi; Proof - 12,250 psi
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,111 Likes: 594
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,111 Likes: 594 |
|
|
|
|
|