|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 members (Jtplumb, gunman, Argo44, 2 invisible),
590
guests, and
5
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics40,138
Posts571,061
Members14,674
| |
Most Online19,682
Mar 28th, 2026
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 714 Likes: 9
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 714 Likes: 9 |
I just got a 20 gauge LC Smith, circa 1946. It appears to have been refinished at some point (it had blued lockplates!! polishing them off is the first thing I did). It looks to me like the head of the stock has been glasses, at least at the contact points. Everything seems tight and on face, maybe the slightest wiggle with the forend off, but just barely.
Should I be afraid to fire an occasional 1 ounce heavy game load? I frequently load a heavier shell in the left barrel whenever I hunt. I want to use the gun, and pheasants are on the menu right now so I would like the heavier shell as a back up.
Thanks,
CHAZ
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,862 Likes: 124
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,862 Likes: 124 |
Chaz, by this time in 1946, your gun should be chambered for 2 3/4" shells and should have a stamp on the barrels water table stating so.
If the stock has been glass bedded, I would say a 1 ounce load would be ok.
David
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 714 Likes: 9
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 714 Likes: 9 |
I had just assumed by that time it would have 2 3/4" chambers. It isn't marked as such on the water table, but I just checked and it is 2 3/4".
CHAZ
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,292
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,292 |
I had just assumed by that time it would have 2 3/4" chambers. It isn't marked as such on the water table, but I just checked and it is 2 3/4".
CHAZ
Chaz, I would suggest you stick with 3/4 or 7/8 oz loads for that 20 L.C., the extra few shot won't make much of a difference anyway, only add stress to old wood IMHO. The barrel flats 'will not' be marked on your gun with chamber length, I'll let the experts tell you why. Best Regards,
Doug
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,862 Likes: 124
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,862 Likes: 124 |
Well Doug, you seem to be very knowledgeable, please tell us why.
Last edited by JDW; 11/18/13 04:44 PM.
David
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114 |
Assuming this is a double triggered Smith, and of course, a Featherweight series (FW or FWE)- here's what I would do- get a set of 20 gauge snap caps, put a 1 ounce load in the right barrel and a snap cap with a peice of masking tape over the primer in the left barrel, and test fire it- then do the reverse, firing only the left barrel with the one ouncer and the "dummy" taped snap cap in the right barrel- to check against possible doubling from the extra recoil "jar" of the King Konger loads in a light 20--
"The field is the touchstone of the man"..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,575 Likes: 182
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,575 Likes: 182 |
I would expect the gun to be marked 2 3/4" on the barrels themselves, not the flats. Recently traded for a late 16ga Sterlingworth (39-40 vintage by SN) and that's where it was marked. On the other hand, my 1927 vintage Ithaca NID (with 2 3/4" chambers) has no marks at all on the barrels, where I would expect to find the 2 3/4". Probably because the barrels have been reblued. Hoof, anything at all marked on the barrels of your Elsie? If not, especially given the other modifications it's undergone, I'd suggest that a reblue probably lost your original markings as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,862 Likes: 124
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,862 Likes: 124 |
Larry, all the L.C. Smiths I have seen with marking as to chamber length have been on the barrels water flats below the serial number. This one is from 1949  On earlier 20 gauge and 16's that have no markings on the flats and are 2 3/4" chambers, were done outside the factory and so not stamped as so. Earlier guns had no stampings as to chamber length except some very early Fulton 10 gauges with Chambers 3 Inches in an oval and 12 gauge Longrange/Wildfowl guns with Chambers 3 Inches in an oval. These are the norm, and there were others so marked that were done by the factory.
David
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 714 Likes: 9
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 714 Likes: 9 |
I got to "blood" the old girl today, and on the first pheasant I was glad to have that ounce of number 4's in the left barrel. My gun does not have any indication of chamber length marked anywhere I can find, but they do measure 2 3/4". I thought I read somewhere Hunter Arms switched to 2 3/4" on subgauges around 1936? It has 28" barrels and weighs 6 pounds ten ounces empty. I don't think the stock was cut, the extender is on there because I am 6'4".  CHAZ
Last edited by Hoof; 11/18/13 01:56 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,967 Likes: 578
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,967 Likes: 578 |
I have no idea what Doug's agenda is now, but lots of examples of chamber markings here http://www.picturetrail.com/sfx/album/view/19686599This 1928 20g Field grade with 2 3/4" stamp is courtesy of Jim Akins.  It is not clear if this was a special order stamp or if placed after chamber lengthening. 20 gauge chambers were lengthened from 2 1/2" to 2 3/4" about 1936, and usually were NOT stamped thereafter, by Hunter Arms or Marlin, unless 3". David's is interesting. I have never seen a chamber length stamp on the barrels. This a Marlin era 20g  I personally would glasbed the head of the stock and then shoot 3/4 or 7/8 oz. loads at targets, and 1 oz. loads for pheasants without concern. Will await Doug Somebody's correction of our collective confusion, but believe this childish game is unbecoming and have no interest in participating
|
|
|
|
|
