doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com damascus shooting

Chuck--I feel for you Californians. Unfortunately, hunters and shooters in CA are not a large enough minority to make the noise they would need to make to fend off the anti-lead movement. I'm sure it will happen other places too. But fortunately, not many places where there's really good upland hunting, because those places tend to have a far higher % of hunters than CA. Thus more likely to get the politicians' attention. Moves to expand nontox requirements have been shot down in MT, WI, IA, and SD. Maybe other places I'm unaware of. But we need to remain vigilant, because the anti-lead "environmentalists" will keep trying.

Welcome Nudge, and here you go:

The Double Gun & Single Shot Journal "Finding Out For Myself" series by Sherman Bell with technical assistance from Tom Armbrust
Vol 10, Issue 2, Summer 1999, Part 1, p. 9
Vol 10, Issue 4, Winter 1999, p. 21 - Destructive testing of Parker GH Damascus
Vol 16, Issue 2, Summer 2005 - Destructive testing of Parker VH Vulcan Steel
Vol 17, Issue 3, Autumn 2006, p. 12 - Destructive testing 8 Damascus doubles
Vol 17, Issue 4, Winter 2006, p. 28 - Destructive testing 7 Damascus
Vol 18, Issue 1, Spring 2007 -
1. Destructive testing on a Damascus barrel with thinned walls; calculated by O.D. - I.D., not measured
2. Destructive testing using various obstructions, including a 20g shell
3. Destructive testing using a shell loaded with 3 1/4 Drams by volume or 56 grains of Unique (similar to �Infallible�) with 1 1/4 oz. shot. The chamber burst with the first shot. The 3 1/4 Dram Equivalent load is 24 grains of �Infallible�.
Vol 19, Issue 2, Summer 2008, p. 18 - Destructive testing 1 Damascus, 6 Twist
Vol 20, Issue 3, Autumn 2009, p. 108 - Destructive testing 1 Damascus, 5 Twist �Bottom-Of-The-Barrel Wall-Hangers�

Total 28 vintage doubles/54 pattern welded barrels + 1 Fluid Steel Parker

A Parker GH with Damascus barrels and the Parker VH with Vulcan Steel barrels were the subjects of destructive studies in Vol. 10, Issue 4, Winter, 1999, "Finding Out For Myself" Part II and Vol. 16, Issue 2, Summer 2005, Part IX.
Both guns were subjected to sequentially higher pressure loads at about 2,000 pounds/square inch (psi) increments. The GH testing started at 11,900 psi and one chamber ruptured at 29,620 psi. The VH started with a Proof Load of 18,560 psi. Both chambers bulged at 29,620 psi and ruptured at 31,620 psi.
An as yet unpublished failure analysis and metallurgical study has been performed on both barrels by Ron Graham.

In reality a lesser density in the shot mat'l results in more pellets per ounce. The fly in the ointment though is in order to maintain any semblance of killing power it is necessary to increase shot size by at least two sizes. Thus 1oz of #4 steel for instance would contain less shot than 1oz of lead #6. With this switch you still end up with a lesser number of less efficient pellets. 1oz of #6 steel would contain more pellets than 1oz of #6 lead, but would be considered as more of a replacement for #7� or #8 lead.

One of the leading duck hunting identities here is reputed to have had a container full of imported steel shells ready to sell even during discussions about lead's possible banning; he was all set to cash in once it happened...
Our supposed peak body here, the SSAA, seems not so fussed about fighting restrictions such as mandatory range attendances and club memberships for firearms licence holders. Guess who gains monetarily from those range attendances and club memberships?
If there's a buck to be turned - even at the expense of freedoms - someone'll put 'emselves there to turn it.

AMEN

I believe Roster owns the patent on steel shot wads. No surprise that he would promote steel shells. His articles in Shooting Sportsman rarely interest me.

Drew Hause,

Wow! Thank you for aggregating that! Those articles are a terriffic resource.

- Nudge

Wow. I was always a little suss on his opinions and pseudo science, as well as those parroting it; it makes perfect sense now.

Miller, you are correct of course, and that was a brain-fart on my part. A given volume of lead #6 shot as compared to steel #6 shot should be virtually identical in number because they are the same sized spheres, but certainly not in weight. At equal velocities, the lead shot will have significantly more foot lbs. of energy per pellet. Roster also claimed that steel shot which had the same kinetic energy as equal sized lead shot had greater killing power because it penetrated deeper. That seemed rather dubious and misleading too since the steel shot would have much less sectional density per pellet. If the steel and lead shot were of equal size, the steel shot would have to have a much higher velocity to have equal energy and it would not flatten any upon impact. But that is like saying that a full metal jacketed bullet has more killing power than an expanding bullet of equal kinetic energy just because it will likely penetrate deeper. He completely ignores the wound channel as a factor in killing. I guess he missed all the evidence of more crippling when waterfowl hunters were forced to change to steel. And I wonder which one is more likely to crack a tooth if you missed one while cleaning your game?

Keith;
You got it all right this time. I did calculate once sizes necessary to obtain equal sectional densities for steel comparable for lead & it was for the most part simply impractical to go to that large of shot for the given load vs game to be shot. Ballistic coefficient is of course the main factor in velocity retention but as all are spherical the BC is pretty much proportional to the SD. Obviously the reason steel has to be given a higher initial velocity is because it sheds it so much faster & we are primarily interested in retained velocity at point of contact. Muzzle velocity is of little consequence unless one is in the habit of shooting their game "At the Muzzle" of their gun. There is just no way steel is the equal of lead for shot.