doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Myth of unsafe Damascus still alive

There was one failure of a damascus barrel on a fairly high grade Lefever or Smith as I remember reported on this forum some time ago. The barrel failed just in front of the chamber. On careful investigation it was determined that the cause of the failure was due to a gross overload most probably caused by a double powder drop on a reload. You may be able to find the thread in the archives.

Randy McCune reported the Baker chamber blow out, and images are here
http://www.picturetrail.com/sfx/album/view/17546456

Notice how many of those blown up guns are STEEL! Dangerous stuff!

There are two things which are absolutely amazing to me. First is that the strong modern guns tend to blow up as often or more so than the old ones. This though is probably explainable by the much greater use (& Abuse) of the newer guns.
2nd is just how many of those old "Cheap" JABC or equivalent guns I have been aware of over my lifetime which habitually shot off the shelf shells of every description including the Express & Magnum loads & even though often pitted, loose & off face just kept right on going without Blowing Up. While these guns are not very desirable guns I really think that being "UnSafe" is actually the least of their faults.

The most recent accident at our gun club was with a Verona O/U that exploded at the front of the monoblock with catastrophic results. No reason has ever been determined but the shooter has undergone several years of surgery and recovery. He will never have any sense of feeling in his left hand again. When I examined the blown barrel I was amazed at how thin the barrel metal was that slid into the monoblock. Scary stuff indeed!

I really let most threads like this just pass into the bit bucket. However, there are so many myths....

No one "flooded" the American market place. Those guns were made at request of American companies and stamped with their house brand.

If you read the Congressional Records of the day, there were complaints of unfair business practices because the labor rate in Belgium was cheaper. The joke is the American companies complaining the loudest often times employed women and children in their factories. I have yet to read a complaint concerning buyer safety because of poor manufacturing.

Again, the companies complaining the loudest had sweetheart deals with off shore makers to provide them with damascus barrels. After WWI, the American steel industry needed a market for their increased production, hence the cry about damascus. Also, the metallurgy got better. We had learned how to keep sulfur and silicone out of the steel. Finally, the cost of labor increased. Small communities like Nessonvaux were turned from their centuries of gun making into auto production.

Regarding the proof house speculation. You do realize that those at the proof house were government employees! They risked imprisonment for taking a bribe. Before we get into, "Well it could have happened", simply show me 1 documented example.

I own 30 guns with damascus barrels. I shoot 29 of them. The one I do not shoot, is because I consider the barrel too thin at the chamber. If others choose not to shoot damascus, that is fine with me.

Pete

Ok PeteM. You are an expert on this subject. Since you are an expert how do you dispel the very common myth that there is rust 'between the welds' of the Damascus or twist steel that cannot be seen with the naked eye or measured with any sort of common instrument. This is an argument used by the nonbeliever who believes these welds rust over the years, often times more than 100 years, thus rendering the Damascus steel incompetent. How do you prove to people who are more ignorant than you in terms of Damascus that this rusting process in the welds of Damascus is a myth and nothing to be concerned with? Because in the not so distant past and before I was educated by experts such as you, I used to be an ignoramus who believed Damascus was dangerous and not to be fooled with.

buzz,

I find the internet next to useless for such endeavors. I only try to present information that can be documented. My interest lies in research more than proselytization.

I do take exception to this forum. As in general most of us are here to learn. Many of us have learned by listening to those here. I consider Miller, Daryl, Raimey, Marc and others to be much more knowledgeable.

Thanks for considering me an "expert". It is more than I think of myself. I am simply a student who is willing to learn and share.

Pete

Pete,
since I'm admittedly a bottom feeder in the doublegun world I've seen a lot of JABC's while looking for that "pony in the pile", and I mean clunkers! I can't imagine some of these guns being much better when they were new as they were when I saw them. As far as my speculation is concerned, it was simply that, pure speculation (based on my own cynical world view, which I stated as well) and reviewing my own words I don't see how anyone could take it for more than that. If someone agrees with me fine, if not that's fine too.
Steve

I think this is the gun you were speaking of, a Baker, and not pictured in the picture trail link posted above.

As I remember the considerations by the owner were either lengthened chambers poorly done as seen by all the excessive unpolished tool marks, or an overloaded powder charge as noted by the hull remnant showing signs of excessive pressure, which is obviously a 2.75" Remington Hull, or both.