doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Iron / Steel possible defiinitions

The Industrial Revolution in Iron: The Impact of British Coal Technology Evans & Ryden, 2005
http://books.google.com/books?id=Qcal0cma0hoC&dq=evans+chris+%26+ryden+g%C3%B6ran

Iron-Making Societies: Early Industrial Development in Sweden and Russia Evans & Ryden, 1998
http://books.google.com/books?id=pIZ0vkPFPNQC&dq=evans+chris+%26+ryden+g%C3%B6ran

Iron-Making Societies: Early Industrial Development in Sweden and Russia Maria Ågren 1998
http://books.google.com/books?id=_2pPAAAAMAAJ&dq=evans+chris+%26+ryden+g%C3%B6ran&pgis=1

History of the Manufacture of Iron in All Ages James Moore Swank
http://books.google.com/books?id=xkVPNtRagDkC&dq=evans+chris+%26+ryden+g%C3%B6ran

Seeing books about "Early Industrial Development in Sweden and Russia" causes me to recall that in 1719 Russians actually raided many of Vallon Järnbruk in Uppland and did as much damage as they could. This caused some years of setback and rebuilding, which actually resulted in improved, more modern plants replacing those burned. Forsmark was one.

I cannot quickly find referances, but Russian iron from various parts of what is now Russia, heavily(?)from Novgorod(?) Principality (once an independent state), etc. was widely sold in Baltic lands. This was lower quality iron, as I recall, and competed directly with lower quality Swedish iron.

Niklas

2-Pieper makes four points in the context of being a slow learner at age 70 (I'm 67); notice the points are all couched in internalized equivacation: "I have learned" and "I see no reason" and "One wonders" and "I am not saying."

(1) Advertising is, in fact, a very good source for period correct information if one has read enough to seperate the wheat from the chaff. The vanadium steel wear slug was patented in 1905, and slightly re-engineered in 1910, which dovetails with the advent of vanadium steel per the story I related as told by the aerospace people from the Smithsonian, later confirmed by specific mention of "chrome vanadium" in Parker ads. One needs to be able to seperate self-validating factual statements in ads, such as "Wins the GAH" and/or "uses vanadium steel" from the puffery of "The World's Best Gun" al la Ansley Fox. Yet there will always be naysayers who simply rest on their laurels, stating that their life experience substitutes for case-on-point research. Please Mr. 2-Piper, tell us where your special knowledge can be found other than on this website where, with a little training, a chimp could post a message.

(2) The fact that 2-Pieper "can see no reason" is not exactly what people reading this forum have come to expect in the way of advancing the body of knowledge. Mr. 2-Piper, have you noticed that your bold pronouncements are always in the context of what you profess not to know? This is how it started; I posted a well-considered positive statement re: century-old metalurgy at Parker Bros, and you saw fit to nay-say citing what you didn't know, as if double gun knowledge has to pass through the filter of your lack of information on the topic.

(3) And here's another bold statement of fact: "One wonders..." about low carbon actions and "superior steel" bolt plates, prefaced with the adjective "bragging," of course, just to show your know-it-all hostility. Fact is, case colors were Parker's trademark. There was a breakthrough in metallurgy somewhat coincidental with the advent of Winchester's Model 21 in the early 1930s, when the Depression was in full swing, and the gun works was doing busy work to keep the skilled gunmakers occupied. The 20 most senior men averaged 36 years senority while production bottomed out at about 100 guns in 1933-34. Then Remington bought the rights to make the Parker Gun.

The purchase of a "double fit" gun was criticized in the trade press and there was some 20-20-hindsight hand wringing at DuPont and Remington when the public just wasn't interested in the Remington Parker. Meanwhile, the Mod.21 was single fit, which accounted for the non-case colors funeral gun finish. The technology changed in the 1930s. The Parker gun was NOT striking a responsive chord with case colors, but would have been even less popular had Remington adopted the single-fit technology. Mr. 2-Piper, this is seminal information that is out there for anyone motivated to search it out. Double gun people who value and thrive on this sort of research pay money to read my stuff. You are getting here for free and seem to value it consistent with what you paid.

(4) Here's another thing that you are "not saying," but then you go on to say, "there were plenty of steels..." Pray tell when? And which steels in your not so humble opinion do you know about ca.1905 or 1910 or 1920 that the gunmakers at the Charles Parker Company, which employed 1,500 people did not know about? The Parker co. made everything from buttons to RR wheels, forging presses, printing presses, steam engines, tools, hardware, and some of the most expensive guns. And along comes 2-Piper, and citing a resume of being almost 70 years of age and Poof! 142 years of well-documented gunmaking history at Parker Brothers is just a counterpoint to one anoynmous poster's unsubstantiated opinions.

So there it is: 2-Piper at almost 70; EDM at just barely 67; two or three years senority meant something in grade school, but it's the next three score that tells this tale. Yet sometimes the best informed, those of us who have done our homework, wonder why we bother. For the time it took me to post this diatribe I could have made twenty bucks at McDonalds, and got free French fries. Alas! EDM

revdoc drew,

Those would appear to be excellent references. I previewed the pages available on Internet for book "Iron-Making Societies: Early Industrial Development in Sweden and Russia Evans & Ryden, 1998" and will be looking for it at Barnes and Noble. It covers lots of territory and paints with a sometimes broad brush, understandable when subject is so widespread and diverse.

Summer of 2007 I visited several of Vallon järnbruk and so far, all my reading about Swedish iron production has been recent books about these sites of iron production from Dannemora iron ore. Rather a smaller topic that what Evans and Ryden and colleagues take on.

Thanks again,
Niklas

I'm continually amazed, and humbled, by how one little clue ie. the Walloons headed to Sweden, opens up another universe of undiscovered (by me anyway) knowledge. Now we have to add, in our assessment of damascus patterns, from which source did that particular maker, at that particular time, in that particular country, obtain his iron ore, steel, coke, and charcoal?
And I'm still NOT learning Russian!

BTW: per http://books.google.com/books?id=YT7VBxc...1jEEZw#PPA47,M1
the Walloons, Protestant refugees from Belgic provinces of what was then Spain, were also invited c. 1622 to New Netherland (NY), and ended up in Delaware, Long Island, Albany, NY, and along the Connecticut river. Huguenot (French Calvinist) immigrants came at the same time and founded New Paltz, New York c. 1624, and also found safe havens in the Lutheran and Reformed states in Germany and Scandinavia, in Ulster, and the Netherlands. The loss of the Huguenots was a huge 'brain drain' on France, and a great prize for this country.

revdoc drew,

Lots depends on one's perspective, or maybe language(s). Valloner are "big deal" in Sweden and at least hundreds of books have been written about them, their roll in Swedish iron industry, in Sweden's very history, industrial, cultural, music, arts, etc.

Russian is easy language, at least for those that grew up with it. Much harder to get at actual historically accurate information in Russia than in Sweden, although that has improved lots in recent years, with lots and lots and lots more to go.

Outside English speaking world, England is just another small country on a rather large planet. Not worthy of much more attention than Portugal or Spain or Norway or Germany or Nederlands or ....

Then, there were major "business" organizations, Dutch East India Company and an earlier one Hansea League, that greatly furthered industrial and trade development in their respective spheres of operation, as well as provided bases for further industrial and trade development.

Niklas

2-Piper, you'd better choose your opponents carefully. EdM is an expert and can read and do gazintas.

As for veracity on advertising, his 1978 Granada pampers him in luxury what with its sumptuous velour seating surfaces and tasteful simulated wood trim. It's powerful 140HP six cylinder engine whisks him along with the greatest of ease and the E78-14 tires provide him with the road grip he craves. Ed could drive a Lexus or a Mercedes but what would he gain?

GregSY; I realize who Mr Ed is. It may though be debatable whether or not he can read, anything other than what he wrote himself that is. I quoted the desirable qualities imparted to steel by the addition of Vanadium as a "Direct" quote from Machineries Handbook, one of the most highly regarded publications in the metal working trade & he then implied I had simply hatched them up in my feeble mind. Copy rights from this book go back to 1914 & it is still to be found in virtually every metalworking & engineering facility around. One does inded wonder "Why" "If" Parker was having such problems with their bolting surfaces wearing, Other makers did not seem to, it took then until 1905 to add a removable wear plate. One could quite easily have been fashioned from 1050-1070 steel & even heat treated to desired hardness (incidently I did ion fact mention this alloy in a previous post even though he said I offered "No Known Suitable Steel). It would have been installed after the bbl brazing had all been accomplished so would have been subject to no further heating to decrease it's temper. I have absolutely no doubt Parker was aware of the existence of medium to med/high carbon steels, so again one wonders "Why" they didn't use it. This certainly would have been a great improvement over "Soft, Low Carbon Steel". Was the Vanadium Steel "Better" for this application, maybe, maybe not, either way it would have been only a matter of degree, It certainly is not the only steel suitable for the purpose, which was all I stated to began with. My advice to Mr Ed is to read Rocketmans excellent comments on this, He is not a Dumb Hillbilly like me, but a professional, his remarks though, back up mine not Ed's.
As to value Mr Ed, I checked out your last Parker book from the local Library, & "Almost" got my Money's Worth. On the other hand I paid $60.00 for "Uncle Dan Lefever, Master Gunmaker" & found it a great bargain.

"Iron-Making Societies: Early Industrial Development in Sweden and Russia" by Maria Agren


The anvil in the lower image is a very old design. The smith is using a trip hammer.

Pete

One of the values of this board to me is the open exchange of information, ideas, and points of view, all of which get discussed. Sometimes someone even learns something new or changes his mind!!

2-p has proven to be very, very smart, in posession of a wealth of practical experience, and a fine researcher. I am respectful of EDM's research, but share some of 2-p's questions.

Was Parker having a problem with bolt/bite wear? Did it really take vanadium alloy steel to solve this problem? Did Parker ever adapt vanadium steel to other wear points? Did the use of the vanadium steel wear plate distinguish Parker guns in some recognizable way?

I find it very interesting that the breakthroughs in metalurgy have had so little impact on guns. 125 year old guns with case hardened low carbon receivers and damascus barrels keep on tickin'. They occasionally need to have the oil changed, springs replaced, wear points maintained, and the wood serviced, but they still give admirable service. The M-21 is near the peak of metal development. Yet, it needs to have the ribs relaid on occasion and some parts serviced. Aerospace wasn't going to happen without modern metalurgy - guns had already happened.