doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com question on a WH Baker Batavia Damascus SXS

Picked up a WH Baker Batavia Damascus a while back and dug it out to clean it up and look it over. After cleaning the barrels and do some measuring I found the barrels didn't appear to be messed with as they were both Full Choke and 30" in length. There was very minor pitting at the breach end for about 4 inches. So far so good as the gun locked up tight. Then I checked the muzzles and much to my surprise the barrels "appear" t be straight rifled which exntends a few inches down from the muzzles toward the breach. I stuck a finger in the muzzle but I cannot "feel" any rifling yet is appears to be there and is pretty consistent in both barrels. I tried to take pics of it but was unsuccessful. Even cleaned it a second time with patches, lead remover and a bronze brush just to make sure it wasn't just a weird pattern in the fouling. But is didn't make a difference, there was no change.

This gun was built sometime between 1906 and about 1916 I believe and has Damascus barrels..

Has anyone seen this on a Batavia before, is it possible or is it just an optical illusion from over 100 years of shooting? I have handed the gun to others and asked them to look down the muzzles and tell me what they see and all said the same thing "it looks like it has very shallow straight rifling". But like me when they try to feel it they can't.

Would be interested if folks thoughts....

Thanks,
WBLDon

I have no experience with Baker Batavias, but I have seen barrels that had that, too. I always assumed it was the result of many years of shells fired without a plastic shotcup. Human fingers are pretty sensitive to indentions and bumps. If you can't feel anything when you try, I'd be inclined to think they were not cut, but rather the result of years of use. I'll bet it would polish out pretty easily.

SRH

Interesting. The French did some experimenting with straight rifling in 1892
https://books.google.com/books?id=inQCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA288

It was believed that long term use would "burnish" the bores and actually improve patterns over time; no mention of worn grooves

30,000 rounds with improved full choke pattern
https://books.google.com/books?id=inQCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA227

W.W. Greener in 1907 edition of The Gun; a gun used by "Schultze" for many years in which the pattern % improved
https://books.google.com/books?id=3HMCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA353

Sad reviewing old threads with learned contributions by those no longer with us

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=61447

https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/index.php?threads/straight-groove-rifling.108723/

1885 Fosbery patent
https://patents.google.com/patent/US329303A/en

Briley's best grade of skeet tubes have straight rifleing, users report that it tightens the pattern 1 point. That is .004 shoots like .005. My patterns are very goos with the Ultimate Ultralights.

bill

Thanks so much to all, especially Drew, I have some reading to do this evening...

Again thank you, this site is a wealth of information and a wonderful group of people willing to offer help...

WBLDon

bill, do you really believe they can tell a pattern shot with a .004" tube from one shot with a .005 ?

I know serious skeet and trap shooters are a different breed, but that's stretching it pretty thin.

SRH

Stan, I wondered about that also. If the statement had been it increased the pattern by one choke, ie from I/17C to � or � to � that would have made more sense. But a difference of 001" is utterly ridiculous. I think this may well be a misinterpretation of what they are saying.

This is not what Briley says, it is what a AAA shooter says. At 77 I am much better at judging a pattern than I am putting it in the right place. I can report that I shoot .002 choke in all gauges and the patterns are very uniform and free of holes with these tubes. If they would get them to aim themselves I would be back to where I was 30 years ago.

bill

Thanks Bill. I wasn't trying to be argumentative, just a bit skeptical.

Best, SRH