http://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-fo...un_id=100736629

Looks to me someone should have bought a Parker shotgun at the Southern. Anyone else seen this advertisement?

No. I feel for the dealer, but, loaning a gun of that magnatude was an unwise decision.
That gun is bulged just outside the chamber. I'm guessing that there is more to this story than a high pressure load, it appears there was an obstruction.
Sad pictures.


Best,
Ted

In both barrels, Ted? Doubt that. I guarantee whoever did it knows they did it. Unwise or not, the S SxS has always been known for its policy of letting buyers or potential buyers try out guns at their "have a go" stand, and this person abused the privilege terribly. Probably end up putting an end to that deal.
JR

I agree there. You lend out a Nitro Special or a Hunter Special, not a graded Parker.

But, I've seen it before, trusting someone with a hand shake and then get pissed on.

There was a thread way back on here were an employee always praised his boss's Parker he had hanging up in his office and when he retire the boss gave him the Parker as a retirement present. What the guy do? Turned around and sold it.

I agree with John on every ruptured barrel it almost certainly caused by an obstruction. To see both barrels bulged and ruined like that was possibly caused by a 2 3/4 inch round loaded to CIP specs. I realize the extra length adds a little pressure but on an older gun that may have been honed and the bore cleaned up over its long life and service. Why risk it. That's why I don't use the stuff AEROSTAR and the HERTERS From Cabela's in any short chambered old guns except NIDs, Trap-guns and a nice Trojan I use for sporting clays. Its too easy to buy or reload pressure correct ammunition.

The dealer loaned it to two people. He knows the people.
Why didn't he just ask point blank who damaged the gun?

Do we know the bore diameter and wall thickness of this gun?

bet the shooter was just using over the counter 2 3/4in loads.....dealer should of made sure the shooters were using low pressure short shells only in this gun.....dealer is lucky the gun didn't blow up hurting the shooter....the dealer most likely would of been sued.....

Numerous times, just out of curiosity, I have wanted to shoot particular firearms on display for sale at the Southern, but I have refused to ask because of the risk and not wanting to have to buy something I really had no interest if something were to happen to it to cause damage while in my possession. Allowing customers to shoot firearms on display for sale has been a tradition at the Southern that many have enjoyed without problem for years. Borrowing a firearm does have risks for both the owner and the borrower; and now there is one of the two persons who borrowed the Parker to shoot who is assumed guilty until the person who actually is guilty is identified. Personally, I feel the person who is innocent deserves justice...but I do not see that happening in this situation.

Chances are, the dealer did their investigating, but that ad. doesn't really prove anything. All that comes out of it is that the shoot/show and the listing site became associated with the seller's boil over.

What if a spring or firing pin broke. It would've been a much lesser cost, but whose fault would it have been. At the moment, the seller would've probably been disappointed because the gun would have been off the market, even if temporarily.

It's a tough one. Only two got to shoot the gun? They were probably 'regulars' who were well known to the seller. Even if somewhat over pressure, chances are only target loads were readily available around a clays course. The gun looks refinished, is this the instance to not automatically assume an obstruction and not wonder about barrel thickness in the area.

It seems to me that it was most likely the second borrower who was at fault. I would expect anyone to notice if a gun they were borrowing had two bulges before, during or after they shot it. It is a testimony to how strong those barrels were tha even after bulging they did not let go. Perhaps the shooter used to heavy loads at the end. If I borrowed it and did that to it I would be honor bound to buy it. You break it you buy it. Might be different if it were a long repaired stock but both barrels failing at once is operator error not gun defect. Wrong loads were used.

I would live by the same thought, if I break it I buy it. I wonder if it had a 'mirror bore'. There was a discussion here not long ago. I wonder if the borrower could just say that there was a partial obstruction in one barrel, and then a 'pressure wave' caused the bulge in the other barrel. Sometimes, it doesn't seem to wash.

If the seller loaned it out to two people, and the seller is an expert, then the gun came back to the seller in proper condition after the first loan out came back. But, the seller didn't spot the problem until later.

I know what I would be thinking if I thought I shot the gun in a responsible way, and I got a heated call later. Unless the seller could narrow things down enough to play the fault card, they might possibly consider themselves lucky that it didn't let go.

Seems to me the gun had the forcing cones lengthened and most likely had the bores honed out and were too thin.
The gun looks redone, so who knows what had been done to it.
Only Barnett would know.

I seriously doubt that someone borrowed it and shot heavy loads out of it. Someone that might have been thinking about this gun and willing to pay the price would know not to shoot 10000 psi loads or higher.

If the 2nd guy who borrowed the gun didn't notice that bulge, he'd have to be blind--and he would have called Barnett's attention to it. Seems to me pretty certain that it happened the 2nd time it was loaned out.

I've borrowed guns to try from some dealers at the Great Northern or its UP SxS predecessor. Several years back, I asked Bryan Bilinski if I could try a nice little Sauer 20ga he had on his table. He gave me the OK. Took it to the 5 stand, discovered only one barrel would shoot. Broken firing pin. But it worked out OK for both of us. I took it back to Bryan, told him I liked it . . . but wanted both barrels to work. Turned out he'd just taken it in on trade. Anyhow, we made the deal, Bryan had Del Whitman fix it, and we were both happy.

Is it assumed that everybody at these shoots knows what the hell they are doing? Knows about pressures and damascus?

Those certainly look like obstructional bulges. It is noted that when Bell intentionally burst a G grade Parker Damascus barrel by going up in the vicinity of 30K PSI it still burst in the chamber, actually between the chamber & the hole for the extractor leg. For those barrels to have bulged that far down if it was only from a regular shell there had to be an extremely thin weak area there. I believe you could "Bet the Farm" that it was some type of obstructional burst. Highly unusual to happen in both barrels, likely faulty reloads the shooter thought were low pressure. Probably had he shot regular factory "High Pressure" loads it would not have occurred.

I think this makes two, possibly, unfair assumptions. First, how come the seller can't be held to the same blindness standard. I'd be highly certain that the gun at least got wiped down for smudges and finger prints, as well as the bores, after the first shooter brought it back, and likely after the next borrower. To command the likely asking price, it had to present well on the table. And second, how do we know the bulge wasn't there before the two shooters.

http://parkerguns.org/forums/showthread.php?t=19583&page=4

I agree to what Brother Drew posted on the Parker site and also agree to what the last poster said on the site "the gun needs to be inspected.

I edited this to say at the time this gun was made it would have been 2 9/16 chambers and not sure of bores of a Parker but L.C. Smiths up until the late 1930's were changed to 2 3/4" and the early ones would have a chambers 2 3/4" on barrel water table. Bores on early L.C. Smiths were .650 So it would be interesting to see what the bores are on this gun. I still say they were honed and the chambers lengthened.

Been informed both guys were told to be sure and use 2 1/2" shells only.
JR

We might never know for certain. What I do know is that just looking at that gun gives me a queazy feeling in my stomach. And I neither own or shot it for which I am glad. Others can fight it out but will we ever know for certain? Sad to see such a nice looking gun end up so wrecked.

I loaned a nice M 21 to a young man a few years ago to shoot birds. When he returned it, he had SLAMMED the action together so hard after shooting that it cracked the wrist. Never again.

In the car business that's called "puppy dog" it.
Usually sells the car.

BTW Even loaning a gun under "universal backround checks" that act would be illegal !

"Bloomberg laws create a very different definition. For example, the Washington state law says that “ ‘Transfer’ means the intended delivery of a firearm to another person without consideration of payment or promise of payment including, but not limited to, gifts and loans.” Rev. Code Wash. § 9.41.010(25). In other words, it applies to sharing a gun while target shooting on one’s own property, or to lending a gun to a neighbor for a weekend hunting trip."

maybe the gun was just clapped out.....polished and honed one to many times.....

I have no experience in failure testing of shotgun barrels. I am a mechanical engineer with experience in instrumented testing to failure of high pressure steel pressure vessels.

The seller seems to be assuming negligence on the part of one of the two shooters by using shells producing pressures that were too high. No information is available as to what those shells or pressures were.

Acceptable pressure would be a function of barrel wall thickness and yield strength. Yield strength would not vary after the gun's manufacture and should still be adequate for loads up to and including then operational proof loads unless wall thickness was reduced.

I would suggest that the seller should have wall thicknesses in the bulge regions measured and publicize the results. This would give a good indication of the pressure level necessary to cause the observed damage and the degree of negligence, if any, of the shooter in using shells leading to this pressure.

I assume that reasonable values for as-manufactured barrel wall thickness in the bulge area are available for comparison to measured values on these barrels.

Craig, these are people who had a potential interest in buying a gun. And a relatively expensive one at that. You're suggesting that both the two guys who tried it out to see if they wanted to purchase it missed what are, from the photos, very obvious bulges? Easier for me to see the seller--one like Barnett, who has a large inventory--maybe being busy with other customers when shooter #2 returned with the then-bulged gun. Guy puts it back on the table, thanks Steve, strolls away. Barnett doesn't notice anything wrong until he's packing up his guns. Or maybe until he's unpacking, back at his shop.

"Barnett doesn't notice anything wrong until he's packing up his guns. Or maybe until he's unpacking, back at his shop"

Almost 4 months later? No. Wasn't the gun cleaned prior to this listing.

Anyone requesting a testfire has inspected the gun within an inch of its life before taking it out. He didn't see the bulges. It is the second guy who bulged the barrels. My friend Steve may be a bit more careful in the future. Too bad.

At the ass-tro-nomical prices Steve asks for his guns, assuming he gets those asking prices, one might assume he can afford some blanket liability/damage/theft insurance. None of my guns are for sale or loan or try-out. The only time I have ever "swapped" a Parker was at tower shoot at our pheasant club, years ago. I was partnered with my favorite shooting pal, gunsmith Brad Bachelder- who had built this GHE "Project Parker 12 bore" for me, about 7 years ago- and he asked to try it on a few birds- so we swapped guns. he shot it very well, by the way.

If I were a high end used gun dealer, and a potential buyer wanted to shoot a shotgun I had for sale at a side-by-side event, I would ask for the full price in case from him first- if he breaks it, he has bought it- and as they say about that in the Russian Army- Toughski Kashitski-- and in the Southern (Bill Kemmpfer take note) Russian Army, I believe it is Toughski Kashitski, Y'all!!

I can't see anything that the seller or subsequent discussion provided that pinpoints the timing of the bulges. Fine, let's blame the second guy. Would you consider giving an educated comment to the following?

The damascus pattern photographed clearly. Would you expect the action to be so bright and lacking patina? Would you suppose that the barrels were abrasively sanded or otherwise struck so that some subsequent finish could show the damascus pattern?

How come there isn't any mention of wall thicknesses or bore condition. Is it possible that to match the expense and effort of the external barrel finish, that forcing cones may have been cleaned up and the barrels honed?

What caused the bulges? If it was over pressure loads, how much over pressure do you suppose? I think around a clays range, that most likely target loads were generally available. In the past you've mentioned that in some cases 2 3/4" hulls are fine in short chambers. So we may be over pressure, but how much?

How much over pressure would it take to cause that type of bulge? Is this a case of coincidental dual obstructions?

I think it was an odd place to air the unfortunate incident, and then we're left with much less than the full story. Did anyone complain about the guy shooting duck and pheasant loads? I believe in it's original condition, that gun could've withstood a little bit of over pressure. If I knew it was my fault, I would've shown the seller what happened and bought the gun. But, I wouldn't have been too tickled if it turns out to be questionable wall thickness.

So, from how the story goes, we can conclude it's shooter two?

Francis, have you ever test driven a car before buying it, or have you always put up the entire purchase price first?

Nope- I have never bought a brand new car in my 75 years- well,deduct 16 from that. Bought my first car, a 1951 Chevy 2-door coupe- 3 pc. rear window, 6 cyl with a three on the tree stick shift, from our family doctor for $250.00. My Grandfather taught me to buy a used but well maintained car or truck, after the first owner had "eaten" the depreciation. He also taught me to "Never let your car become a vehicle for your vanity"> Your comparison to the used gun schleppers and the ""test shooting" at the Southern, Northern, Vintagers, etc- is full of shit. All car dealers have insurance that covers them and their cars, at least they should have. So I test drive a 2009 Ford Ranger and get "T-Boned" at the corner of fifth and main- the dealer has insurance, and if not enough, my Auto-owners full comp. would kick in. Not a valid comparison I should think.

sleeve it...

Did this gun ever get fired before by Steve? He does not say.

How do we know it wasn't a ticking time bomb honed to within a whisker of blowing up the first time it was shot?

What proof does he have that the bulges weren't from RST's?

How would he feel if the shooter came back with a bloody stump for a hand with a ruptured barrel from a legit low pressure shell?

We could be reading a story from the shooter instead about how a dealer gave him a gun that was honed to death to shoot at a show that blew up and ruined his hand forever and his lawyer is suing his butt off.

Two sides to every story, but it was not right for the shooter to not own up to it.

It would be interesting to know the wall thickness. It might help to put the pieces together.

I consider Steve a friend of mine, but .......... if I were a dealer and loaned out guns to potential buyers I would SUPPLY the appropriate shells and either require the potential buyer to pay for them if he didn't buy the gun, or let it go if he buys it.

Then again, I probably wouldn't make it as a dealer.

SRH

He trusted the guy. He thought he was a stand up guy and that he knew what he was doing. Its a shame a hand shake or a word isn't worth very much anymore. Just one more example.

I doubt I've ever looked at the chamber area of one of my own guns, after a round of trap or skeet. I'm guessing Occam's Razor on this one. Anybody who thinks a bunch of gun geniuses are running around a typical shoot are badly mistaken, especially if alcohol is available. I also have a hard time believing a gun that would shoot forever at 8,000PSI would bulge at 10,000-12,000. It would take more than SAAMI spec to do the damage we are seeing, IMHO. I don't recall exactly the numbers, but, it seemed like Sherman Bell was waaay off the charts with what could even be stuffed into a 2 3/4" round in a typical reloader, before he had bulges in his testing.
I have a gun or two I would loan a guy I knew. They aren't Parker G grades. I think the only guns I ever borrowed were my Dad's. They live here, now.
I feel for the dealer. But, I'm not ready to condemn either shooter without knowing a lot more facts.


Best,
Ted

Without wall thickness information, the shooter can in no way be blamed for acting negligently.

He trusted the guy- hum- trust everyone, but always cut the cards- TWICE-- reminds me of the line in the great college spoof movie "Animal House"-- "Hey, you fucked up, you trusted us" Timmy Matheson as Otter- to some poor schmuck pledge--

I wouldn't make it very long as a gun dealer. It takes a special type of person to survive in that cut-throat game- where tricked up shotguns and rifles are sometimes (not always) sold at overly high prices to the un-knowing. Always do your homework before you even ask a dealer to handle on of his table displayed guns.

If you are at a show and there are shooting fields available, ask the dealer or one of his staff people to shoot the gun-test firing for function, perhaps a pattern board, and with the ammo They select- and offer to pay for that expense, whether you buy the gun or not.

Then, and again with their selected ammo, you shoot it to your satisfaction, then negotiate the final sales price- something you can't do at an auction.

Steve seems to be a victim of coincidence here. What are the chances that TWO test fire requests are made on ONE gun on a table display with a hundred or more guns? Requesting to fire a gun that you don't intend to buy is a juvenile act. What does it prove except that the gun will fire? I have never understood the practice.

For once, I am in agreement with my 'friend" Murph Da Surf. That's what snap caps and masking tape were made for- granted, you won't get to test for pattern and POI/POA (as per Tom Roster's recent article in SS magazine) but you will know that the strikers work properly, and that the ejectors (if the shotgun is so equipped) work and are in time. What were the odds of two schmucks asking to test fire/shoot with live ammo the very same shotgun on a dealers' show table. Ass-tro-nomical!!

I hope you don't mind my cut and paste Ted. Sums it up.

This thread begs the question for me. Has anyone ever seen a blowout or bulge in any barrel while using low pressure ammunition? If so, what were the circumstances?

5 years from now it will have been re-barrelled, and re-engraved.

It was a boner move for the dealer to post the ad.
Now the serial numbers will be etched in every collectors Rolodex as the "Parker with the bulged tubes"

It's ironic that many Parker afficionado's regail us more pedestrian shooters with their tales of hammering waterfowl with modern cartridges.

Evidently mystique and allure doesn't trump old age and physics.

FWIW, I'd have no qualms about rebarrelling it.

Boner move- good call- "No quite proper form" might have been a better phrasing, however. Why show the potential customer base you might have out there in "Inter-Net Wally World" that you have a hardon against two clowns that apparently "Fubared" a Parker you were offering for sale- Eat it, as a cost of doing business to the general public at sporting clays events, and just advertise any Parkers you have for sale on the PGCA Forum site, assuming you are a member in good standing. I read every issue of SS from front to page, over and over- I see my trusted dealer friend Kirby Hoyt's ads, but I haven't yet seen any from Mr. Barnett. Maybe he'll lick his wounds from this debacle, and go back to the family grocery store chain business?

Bill,
Low pressure ammunition is just that, UNTIL there is an obstruction in the bore.

When that happens, it isn't.

The only blown up guns I've seen were right here in cyberspace, save a long ago article in the DGJ on a Greener Empire that was blown up, with an accurate description of how it happened, and the sleeving of that gun. I've seen plenty of guns of all types with bulged barrels. For what it is worth, alot of the pictures of blow ups make only generic reference to what cartridge was being used at the time.

A very good English gunsmith working in the states told me he would be a much, much poorer man were it not for Americans with a reloader and an English double gun. Of course, the regulars here, there, and everywhere will then take great offense, and go on to tell you how they have been reloading for (insert multiple digit number, here) years, and they have never, ever had a mishap.

Then, just as regularly, we see a catastrophy, like this.

I can tell you every kind and type of cartridge loaded into any of my guns for the last decade, at least. Note the generic reference to ammunition used, in this event. I still would need more information than that to make any kind of accurate conclusion, or blame any one individual,

But, we don't even have a notion of what ammunition was being used in the gun. And, I doubt we are going to get it.

Makes you wonder.


Best,
Ted

I think all Dam ascus guns should be sold as wall hangers...deemed unfit for firing with modern ammunition......with that written on the receipt..

gunut, what is your term for modern?

As stated here, there is a lot more to this. And again I ask why did this gun appear in this condition almost 4 months after this happened????????????????
My two cents again, this gun was restored and the chambers lengthened and barrels honed.

John Roberts is a good friend of his, let him ask what the chambers and bores are. Would help a lot of issues and speculation as to what happened.

Let this horse die. The gun is not for sale. Steve made his point, good or bad.
JR

I wonder if this was a consignment gun and the dealer was forced to buy it after the failure at full price less his commission? If it were me as the dealer that would bug me. Forced to buy a bulged gun for real money and with now cheap or fast way to make it sellable. I agree this gun may come back whole later but there are not that many donor barrels to work with. Lot easier if it were a 12.

I would like to put another perspective on this situation. So here goes the dealer should have paid a little more attention in the first place! Firstly, why did he expect a person off the street to have a pocket full of low pressure or 2 ½ cartridges to try the gun with? Did he give a warning to each of the potential customers that the gun had short chambers 2 ½ inches or a load restriction? And of course there is Murphy’s Law governing the whole enterprise “What can’t go wrong will go wrong so act accordingly.
I must say here I am one of those lucky people that owns an 1869 Purdey Bar in wood nitro proof and in sound working condition which takes me sporting clay shooting from time to time. Now after a round of more miss than hit, usually on the way back to the club house to drown my sorrows, invariably there will be someone who will have recognised the gun and its maker.
And after answering the usual questions how old how long have I owned the gun etc. You can start to see the longing in their eyes and soon after the big question would it be possible for them to try the gun on a few clays. Now being a personable individual I inevitably say yes and why not! To give someone something to remember though I always add Purdey it may be but it won’t magically make you shoot better. Then I roll out the provisos only use the cartridges I give you! And then the warning if you put a 2 ¾ inch heavy load cartridge in the gun it would most probably burst and take half your face and a finger or two with it.
So it is the carrot! Free cartridges and the stick! Bad things may come to you if you do don’t do things properly. And over the many years I have had the gun I have lost count how many complete strangers have tried to use 150 year old 12 bore hammer gun with no choke 30 inch barrels with a short length of pull and a low combe, but most go away happy.
So the dealer could have side stepped this now expensive outcome by supplying the correct cartridges for the gun and given a warning use those or nothing. And finally if you test drive a motor vehicle, well over here you are not expected to provide the petrol (gasoline).

"A person of the street"? What exactly does this mean, at least over here in the Colonies. Some Limey phrase perhaps. What is the cachet about a friggin' Purdey- Rudy Etchen had at least one-possibly more- but when the hard money was on the table, what did the Rude-ster shoot, more often than not? A Remington 870 pumpgun. Loan one of those to the clowns that want to "borrow" your heirloom Purdey Island Lock- Mike McIntosh had one, and shot it- but for the average guy- a tad pricey, and unlike the 870, only goes Boom-Boom twice before reloading.

Rudy had at least two Purdeys, one still out there for sale on the internet. It may never sell because it has short barrels. I tried to buy the long barrel pigeon gun from his son, Joel, when he advertised it through the PA store, but it was already sold. I would like to have a second chance at that gun today. I doubt that Rudy used an 870 in the pigeon ring.

Here it is,

At the 1950 Grand, shooting one of the first Remington Model 870 pump guns produced (the same gun he would shoot throughout the remainder of his career) he broke 100 straight in doubles; one of the first ever recorded. He repeated this feat again 32 years later at the Louisiana State Shoot in 1982 by breaking 100 straight with the same pump gun. These titles go on and on, and include winner of the World Live Pigeon Championship HOA in 1966 in Mexico City, winner of the Live Bird Championship in Monte Carlo in 1955, in Madrid 1955, in Paris 1955 and Columbaire Championships in Seville, Spain 1965, Madrid 1966, Egypt 1955 and was high score 3 years in a row at the Grand National Quail Championship in Enid, Oklahoma. Unquestionably, Rudy’s accomplishments with a shotgun place him with the top echelon of the shotgunner’s world.

http://joeletchenguns.com/mr870.htm


Pump guns seem to run in this family though,

Rudy's father, Fred Etchen, was a legendary shot in his era. He was a fabled field shot, superb at trap and in the live-pigeon ring - and later excelled at skeet when it came into being. In 1924, Fred was Captain of the U.S. team which won the Olympic championship in Paris, France. Following the Olympics he won the European Open Trap Championship with 200x200. Two shells were allowed at each target, but Fred won it the hard way, using only one shot per bird because his Winchester Model 12 pump wouldn't feed the short-length English shells.

http://joeletchenguns.com/rudy.htm

If you borrow it and tear it up, you have an obligation to make it right...Geo

I think so too Geo. What do you do if you borrow it, and you're told you tore it up? The more I look at the pictures, it seems like that gun was found in pretty rough condition. Aside from a buyer getting their own inspection, maybe a good question might be, 'who fixed it up'.

Whole lot of unanswered questions here.

The posting on guns international opens everyones eyes to the additional questions.

I quit loaning out good guns years ago after a couple of bad experiences. In one case my BIL blew up an mint Field Grade LC ejector gun after he stupidly obstructed the left barrel, then fired a 2 3/4" magnum shell thru the same tube (lost a good chunk of his left hand in the process). In the other a good friend borrowed my late 60's vintage Grade II .22 Browning
auto, my pride and joy at the time; and when returned, the right side of the frame featured deep gouges where it appears the barrel threads had been mashed into the engraving. I was in my early 20's at the time, but those experiences broke me; that was until the LC Smith vs. Parker Challenge Event commenced when I found myself loaning out my A-2 and Dead Pigeon guns. But I've since sold those guns and so now am forever cured!

The only time I've ever bulged a chamber (have yet to screw up a barrel), I was also in my early 20's. I had purchased the best rabbit/brush gun I've ever owned; a Spanish made Erbi with an original set of 18" barrels bored cyl/cyl and 3" chambers. The gun certainly wasn't pretty, nor was it well balanced; but those little details didn't matter to a kid, and in thick cover (and youthful reflexes) it was simply impossible to miss anything that flushed. As it sometimes happened, we got rained out one Saturday and me and my BIL were sitting around lamenting our boredom and the missed opportunity. And possessing the energies and imagination of the kids we were, and also a box of Win 3" 1 7/8 oz magnums; we decided we needed to settle the dust over which of us was the toughest man once and for all time. So we stepped outside with the little Erbi and that box of Roman candles, and in the cold drizzle determined that the winner would be that individual who could pull both triggers simultaneously and remain standing. He went first; and knowing I couldn't back down now, I followed. He caught me so that I was saved the indignity of a soggy butt over in addition to a bruised shoulder, and was thus declared the official winner of our stupidity contest. Back inside and wiping down my dampened Erbi, I was flabbergasted to note a very obvious bulge in the forcing cone area on the bottom side of the right chamber! I know there were no barrel obstructions (after blowing up the Smith, my BIL and I always look for nice round holes of daylight in each barrel before loading); so either a bit of the fiber wad in one of those Win shells got a bit sideways, or the barrel steel in that Irbi simply couldn't take the strain. Bottom line, although I still have what remains of that box of Winchesters 40 years later; I ruined the best game getter I've ever owned, and paid for another of life's hard lessons thru my wallet. My deceased father always said that the Good Lord looked after XXXXXX's and fools; so thru His grace I've managed to survived, gaining just a little wisdom in the process so that I no longer do stupid things with guns any longer. But my personal experience could add a little understanding to the issue being discussed here in that I did not notice the aforementioned bulge until such time as I was cleaning the gun; and since the bulges in the above photos are subtle, it is entirely possible that the offending shooter didn't either? And certainly, had they been clearly evident, the dealer would have noticed something askew when the gun was returned and not much later when the gun was being cleaned and put away. And although we will never know, I have to wonder if the dealer actually noticed those bulges; or if perhaps the problem was pointed out to him by a customer or other observer long after the fact?

I doubt that he did, but Hemingway won a shitload of pesetas in Cuba on Flyers with his 1928 field Model 12 12 gauge 30" full solid rib "corn-sheller"-- Fred Etchen had some special stock designs for his beloved Model 12's--see Dave Riffle's book on "The Perfect Repeater"--

Sort of like your son or daughter who just learned how to drive asking if they could 'borrow' the Rolls Royce to go joy riding with their friends.

Not knowing barrel specs and type of ammunition used all I'm going to say is there is reason when one rents firearm at a range their ammo must be used in it.

The premise that every potential customer at a dedicated S X S shoot knows to use low pressure loads in particular types of guns is just ridiculous. I've been around some who think dram equivalent means a little bit of liquor. When you test drive a car the dealer doesn't assume you have insurance coverage in case of an accident, he assures it by providing it himself. Same deal.

In fairness to Steve, he may have actually told them to use the proper loads, and expected that they would. Pity such a nice old gun is so devalued.

SRH

Short English shells not functioning in Fred's Model 12? What a crock- I shoot 2&3/4" AA trap loads- and I have - and I have shot RSTds in either of my 2 Model 12 3" chambered Duck guns- and I have 5 other std. M12's in 12 gauge with 2 & 3/4" chambers-and the short RST 2.5' work like a charm. Were the Limey 2.5" loads in 1924 different, so as to bolex-up a "Perfect Repeater". I doubt it.

I also appreciate the confirmation that Rudy may well have used that 870 in some of the big money pigeon shoots in his long career. My late maternal Grandfather used his Parker 12 (32" F&F) AHE for box birds (he never shot columbaire birds that I know of) across from the Queen City to the Corbin KY area) but for bird hunting (ducks and pheasants) he shot either his Model 12 or his Model 97, both 12 gauge guns of course.To each his own.

RWTF, history is the study of what people did not what people should have done. His Model 12 didn't like those English shells, so he handicapped himself by shooting only one shell at a time, that's all we know.

Either way, Americans and their pump guns, its a beautiful thing.

You and I and and pal- Gough Thomas- a Limey who had the good taste to appreciate the American pumpgun-- best of which is the Model 12--

I'm still amazed that this has been plastered all over the interweb. Is it unreasonable to assume that the dealer could have confronted each shooter privately rather than trying to shame one in to admission of guilt by his public diatribe. Dealer needs to grow a pair.

Wow! You don't know Steve do you Mr Nelson!?!

The abuser needs to grow a pair and fess up - he knows who he is! - he destroyed someone else's property and he needs to take responsibility for his actions and pay Steve for this gun. I'm pretty sure Steve will cut him some slack and charge him a lot less than the price it was tagged with.

That's a big problem with American society today - they just don't take responsibility for their actions - to the further erosion of our great country's ethic and former glory!

I read this thread about 1 and a half times.

The thought that comes to mind is "Merchantability".

My thought is to be a bit sarcastic and say, finally we're getting some new information and details about the what happened.

The seller made the decision to put out what was put out. Neither he nor his friends and supporters have seemed to help round out the facts. Erosion of values seems to be an odd take on turning to the internet for some sort of justice, then complaining about it. He admitted he 'boiled over'. The problem with society today is feeling the need to share, but maybe that's a business model. Who knows, could be sales are up.

Our military, especially the Marines sure loved them and bought the Model 12 in staggering numbers.

Yes I do know the seller. I have done business with him in previous years. That still doesn't validate his approach to identifying the culprit that damaged his gun. There are only two choices. Geez

I agree with you 100%, Dean. Too many folks today do not take responsibility- whether it is the jerk you creams the door of your Stutz-Bearcat at the Vintage and Antique car show, whilst backing up his Studebaker Avanti- and drives off, without a care or concern for the damage done.

But I also think that if I were a gun dealer (never gonna happen, however- I'm not clever enough I guess) and a "person of the streets" asks me for permission to shoot and try out one of the guns I have for sale on my table(s)I would tell him that only with the ammo I have available, and that ammo at his expense- No reloads-- Here's a sad reason why. A friend inherited a nice Ithaca 5e Knick SBT- at an area gun club, years ago, before the sporting clays "boom" hit- he let a 'friend" shoot it at 16 yard rise- the friend was using Federal Champion reloads (paper hulls) and a wad was stuck in the barrel, when he called for his next clay and fired, he barrel bulged right at the end of the wooden forearm, lifting the ventilated rib off the barrel. Thankfully, it did not burst the barrel, but the gun had to have a new barrel and forearm fitted, which the "borrower's" home owners insurance partially paid for- this was maybe in 1978-

I never shoot reloads in my Model 12's for crows or pigeons, and to the possible rapid shooting one can encounter- I will shoot AA reloads in my 12 gauge L.C. Smiths, as I have the old habit of checking the barrels each time I open the gun and get ready to reload the chambers.

Perhaps I am naive, but after 7 pages I don't understand the overwhelming assumptions being made.
The two biggest are that:
this was absolutely preventable ( or said another way "a result of negligence")
and that:
It was instantly and definitely recognized.

When someone posts a grievance issue on the net it is usually safe to assume that private conversations among those involved lead down dead end street, so to speak.
One does not have to use reloads even in uncommon 16ga. Cabela's sells Italian-made 1oz 1100fps loads for $7 per box. Quite honestly if ones gun can't be shot with those than it's time to move on to new firearm and hang current one on the wall.

As I said before no conclusions of significance can be reached because we do not know physical specs of the barrels and type of ammo used that lead to the bulging.

Not our Cabela's here in West MI- maybe the "King Kong" Cabela's store in Dundee- here, you'll find a honest politico sooner than any $7.00/box 16 gauge loads. GM has some Fiocchi 16 1 ounce loads, at $14.99 box/25. RST would be my only choice, were I to slip into the 16 gauge "mantra"-- but then, my 12 bore shotguns would feel slighted, after all, a man can only shoot one of them at a time. So many guns, so little time--alas!!

Maybe he doesn't know the guy's name....?

Steve obviously needed to vent about it - can't say I blame Steve...I blame the shooter. The entire responsibility of situation rests solely on his shoulders, not Steve's. Should he just not allow anybody to try his guns? How would that work out for his 'business model'? Not too well I'm thinking.

What is so hard, or that makes for such a poor business model, about saying to the prospective buyer "Sure, you're welcome to try it a few rounds ... here are some shells. Please only use these."?

SRH

I believe there's just something wrong here. That first line might be considered a basic responsibility.

I believe the higher up the price scale the gun is, the more selective the potential clients. The folks who tried that gun out will likely remember it. What do we do if you're one who tried it, and you're an expert that verify the gun went back in perfect condition. I'm the other guy who doesn't have any witnesses that I know of, but I'm positive that I fired the gun ten times with factory 2 1/2" low pressure target loads. Maybe, I was kind of like the seller and handed it back without specifically checking for those particular bulges.

If I realized the buzz that came up, sure I'd call the seller and chat. What we do know is that if the will is there, the gun is still available for 'looking over'. But, we're left with guessing. I know I would've been highly concerned if I saw that I bulged those barrels using 'approved' shells, no matter how much the seller was fuming.

If the gun slipped past casual inspection after the bulges, maybe the rib laid okay and no cracks showed up in the forearm. Maybe it could be measured if things are a little thin just where the appearance would matter the most, not under the ribs or forearm. I might think we should see a 'ring' bulge.

When permission was given to shoot, merchantability and fitness for purpose were implied.

This is interesting considering all the wise advice given in the various forums and knowledge base about actually shooting damascus barrels.

I find it remarkable that; 1. a dealer would state a damascus gun is 'safe to shoot'. 2. a person would accept that declaration without any further investigation.

Drew has it right. Barrels were stretched beyond elastic limits by pressures excessive for THAT gun.

A gun in that condition should never be offered for sale as a shooter. Dealer is treading in deep water doing that.

Conversely, nobody has any business borrowing a damascus gun to shoot - potential customer or not.

This was fairly close to a catastrophic accident.

All parties involved share blame.

YES we can learn from this.

Why is it none of site experts consider that the borrower may have used home brewed 16 reloads that were loaded way over pressure? It seems many are assuming the gun was modified in some way and Mr. Barnet didn't catch it when doing the techy write up for his web site.

Seems far fetched to me is why I would not think that. But who knows?

We know no real details. Only what the vendor placed on the Internet/Gunsinternational.

In the Jan Feb issue 2013 of SS magazine- page 105-- Bryan lists a 2-barrel Purdey set in 12 bore as being one of the late Rudy Etchen's many high-end shotguns. Most likely NOT a live bird gun- 26" barrels choked .000" and .003", 28" barrels .009" and .027". Way out of my reach at 49.5K plus MI 6% sales tax-Wowza..

A gentleman on the PGCA spoke with Steve who stated that the barrels and chambers were "to the original specs" regarding wall thickness and chamber length, and had not been honed. The gun is unavailable, but he has asked if he might measure the wall thickness at the end of the chambers, at the forcing cones, and just before and at the point of the bulges, and the bore.

The problem is that there are no "original specs" for wall thickness in The Parker Story, any L.C. Smith related book, nor have I seen specifications for wall thickness by any other vintage double U.S. maker. That information would be invaluable to those of us measuring wall thickness and providing an opinion regarding originality, and safety.

The issue is not to dispute Steve's statement, nor to assign blame, but to reach some conclusion as to the cause of the barrel failure.

It is my sincere hope that this will not end as most posts regarding barrel/gun failures have ended; with no definitive, or at least learned, explanation. Modern guns sent to the maker for a failure analysis and metallurgical study disappear, and when litigation is involved, details of any settlement are made confidential.

So, without original specs no claim that the gun was original can be made. That's the problem, you only know what you see now not what it started out as.

Without knowing the strength of the material AS IS no amount of measuring and pontificating can arrive at a 'safe' value.

Thus the need for caution, which was notably absent.

Bell's articles and the internet discussions about the damascus guns currently in regular service has led to a rather cavalier attitude by some people.

I have a shooting acquaintance who is a well known gun dealer. His comment upon seeing my Parker on the line at skeet was that 'those are stronger than the regular barrels'. He has read and misunderstood Bell. He's not alone.

Consider that a 'low pressure' load is a low CHAMBER pressure load. This gun didn't bulge in the chamber, it bulged further down the line. Discounting the million to one double identical obstruction, we have a progressive burning load making up for the lack of chamber pressure by holding a residual pressure longer. It found the thin spot didn't it?

My personal strategy is to use very fast power in very light loads. The chamber is the strongest part of the barrel. I want a quick peak to a low value, and I don't mind the resulting 960 fps and very low recoil.

I've never used, nor will I ever use, a commercial shell in my damascus barrels.

I am curious as to how your gun dealer measures "strength" in shotgun barrels. I can only cite this scenario for your consideration. When steel shot loads became the "law of the land" for us die-hard waterfowlers, many gun writers wrote articles about the hazards of shooting steel shot loads in full choked shotguns- muzzle bulging. BS- I have 4 older (pre-1950 mfg.) 12 gauge Model 12 Winchesters, all with 30" (or one has 32") WPS full choke barrels. Factory choked, unaltered. Two are the 3" Magnum series (Heavy Duck) and the other two are std. 2& 3/4" chambered field guns. I do a fair amount of waterfowling, from early season geese in Sept, through the 60 regular season ending in Dec, and again, in the late Winter 30 day season here in Central MI-- I can tell you with a tool maker's eyeball, and also with verniers and mics-- NO bulge or distortion or out of round on any of those 4 "Perfect Repeaters". I have 5 older L.C. Smiths as well, the only one with Damascus barrels is a 00 grade 12 made in 1896-- I shoot only 1145 fps. loads in it, mainly those made by RST. Would I shoot a Kent Fasteel duck load in that old Elsie? Hell no. My guess is- your dealer has a boatload of good grade doubles with Damascus barrels he wants to sell to the "Vintage Lads" so he touts Damascus barrels openly--Just my guess..

Don't iron and low carbon steels have known 'strengths', which are impossible to go below. After that, maybe thicknesses can be plugged into formulas to calculate the strength of the item.

Doesn't matter what it started at, is something wrong with the metal to cause it to be weaker than minimum values, now.

There are a number of bursting pressure formula; Burrard used the Alger Burst Formula:
Burst pressure = Ultimate tensile strength x 3(OD – ID) / OD + 2xID

There is also Lame, Boardman & Lame, American Standard, and (most commonly used) Barlow's:
P=2 S t / D
P=Bursting pressure in psi.
S=Tensile strength of material in tube wall.
t=Wall thickness in inches.
D=Outside diameter in inches.

Barlow’s refers to a pipe capped at both ends with a static pressure (a pressure cylinder). Shotgun barrels are not designed to be pressure vessels as one end is open and the pressure rises and falls quickly. I've discussed this issue with a mechanical and a metallurgical engineer, and there is essentially NO formula that can be used for shotgun barrels.

Nor can the Hoop Stress Formula be reliably applied
http://www.engineersedge.com/material_science/hoop-stress.htm
http://lassengunsmithing.com/html/CylinderStress.htm

Shotgun barrels are “thin wall cylinders”
Hoop stress = pr/t
p= pressure; r is the inside radius; t is the wall thickness

Every burst formula requires knowledge of the tensile strength of the metal and the wall thickness. The average tensile strength in one (soon to be published) study for Crolle Damascus was 54,700 psi. That is a bit more than 1/2 of the standard for hot rolled AISI 1040 and Chrome Moly 4140; both of which may be "cold rolled" to higher strength, and heat treated to MUCH higher strength.

The barrels didn't actually fail either.

They were stretched beyond elastic limits, and deformed.

A lack of brittleness is indicated, and there are no tears or weld failures.

These were good tubes. Very good tubes.

A pity.

That was exactly my thought as well.

In rating steel strength two very important factors are elastic limit & ultimate limit. The elastic limit is the point at which if exceeded it will stretch but not return to normal. The ultimate limit is the point at which it will actually rupture.
As applied to gun barrels a barrel with a bulge means the pressure exceeded the elastic limit but not the ultimate. If it bursts, both were exceeded. Iron & mild steel has a low elastic limit in relation to its ultimate. As steel is alloyed & heat treated etc both limits are raised, but in most cases the elastic actually goes up higher in proportion than does the ultimate, thus the gap between the two narrows.
With modern steels such as 4140 etc the limits are quite high. It would normally take something of a catastrophic nature to exceed either, consequently it is more common to see one of these burst rather than bulged, but a bulge can also occur in them as well.
The fact that this barrel bulged rather than burst simply means for whatever reason the pressure exceed the elastic limit, but not the ultimate. This does not mean it was of superior metal, but rather more likely it was of rather soft metal with a rather low elastic limit.
While freely admitting for it to have occurred in Both Barrels is at best highly unusual I still say it has all the appearance of a localized obstructional bulge. May well have been brought on by the phenomenon of loading too slow a powder to too low a pressure by someone thinking they would be doing it a favor. Powders should be kept within the pressure range for which they were designed. Any gun which will not take lite loads for the gauge at pressures in the 7.5K-8K should be permanently hung on the wall & not be allowed to be fired by anyone.
Most likely if this gun had been shot with "Factory" loads not exceeding 1oz @ 1200 fps regardless of their pressure it would still be usable.
Understand I do reload for my Damascus barreled guns. I keep the pressures at around 8K with the fastest burning powders that will stay within this pressure range. "SLOW" burn powder were designed for Heavy payloads & High Velocities without exceeding SAAMI pressures, not for low pressures.
My thinking is that a lot of people need to learn this. I learned it through some squib loads which fortunately did not bulge or burst the barrels, but I now realise I was skirting with danger.
In fact when I learned it I was shooting with a new set of Bohler Steel barrels on an old Lefever. Had I had the original Damascus barrels on that day results may well have been different.

Miller,
I think the bulges look just like what you say they are. Obstructional bulges. Thanks for putting the differences between elastic and yield in a clear light.
Unfortunately, I don't see any further data coming to light out of this situation.
Further, I don't see how a sound tube, open at one end, can be considered safe at 8K and a ticking time bomb at 10K.
Unless it is obstructed.

Best,
Ted

Shotgunjones mentioned these were good tubes, and I agree. I think you summed what might be going on. While it may(?) not be their fault, the barrels did fail. I believe all gun barrel steels are considered 'soft'. The lucky thing was that it failed slowly, and signs showed that it was probably closer to it's ultimate limit than before the bulges.

The problem with being good tubes is the commentary is completely ignoring the thickness of the tubes. What's the point of having a barrel thickness gauge if the only requirement is to check barrels for obstructions and being alert to signs that an obstruction might have occurred, such as a squib load.

I think the British proof houses are plenty evidence that good tubes going in to the test, don't always come out the other end as good tubes. The point being that if obstructions aren't part of the test, then 'relatively', I think obscene, low over pressures can damage gun barrels.

If it were my money buying a gun with 'original' barrel and bore specs, I think I'd expect the barrel patina to nearly obscure the damascus pattern. Maybe, the bore would be a little frosty in likely places. Refinishing gun metal is supposed to remove 'negligible' amounts of metal, but I don't think that is always so.

If(?) no obstruction were present, then there seems to be little point to worrying about 'reasonable' over pressures. We seem to worry about over pressure when every thing is going well. Some metallurgists will say that the metal in the bulge is likely stronger now. Why not tap it down and call it good.

Miller is wise.

But an identical double obstruction...

You don't suppose do you....

That this was a 28/16 accident?

Doesn't work that easily, at least not for me. You can't remove the bulge between the ribs, and by the time you have tapped the bulge outside the ribs down the ribs have popped loose. Removing bulges is wasted time, IMO.

SRH

Burrard made the point that an obstructional ring bulge usually occurs 3/4” to 1 1/4” beyond the leading edge of the obstruction, and is invariably associated with lifting and bending of the rib. (which I do not see in the images)

I think, the more rare a gun, the more hoops that are worth jumping through to get it fixed as close to original as possible.

I was thinking that while cold working might technically increase the tensile strength of the bulge area, the comment about good tubes had to do with the ductility that the barrels showed. That characteristic would probably be lost around that area.

I hadn't noticed, in the pictures, a lifted rib or signs of cracks in the forearm wood either. It doesn't mean anything, but it might be supposed that this is not a 'ring' bulge.

Bro' Drew.
Your photo is not a bulge. It is a rupture. I don't see lifting and bending of the rib in the gunsunlimited picture, but, that doesn't mean it isn't there. Also, an obstruction in a bore is just that, until it isn't. An obstruction that clears miliseconds before yield is met will cause a distortion to some degree, if not a rupture.
Pure arm chair quarterbacking from here in cyberspace. But, interesting, anyway.


Best,
Ted

I think Sherman Bell measured wall thinning in the area of bulges. I don't think the thinning would return to the original wall thickness after "tapping" back into place.

Experts on Guns and Shooting George Teasdale Teasdale-Buckell 1900
http://books.google.com/books?id=4xRmHkr7Lp8C&pg=PA373&dq
On the subject of steel v. Damascus, Mr Stephen Grant is very clear, and much prefers Damascus for hard working guns. He related an anecdote of one of his patrons, whose keeper stupidly put a 12-bore cartridge into his master’s gun without knowing that he had previously inserted a 20-case, which had stuffed up the barrel. Fortunately, no burst occurred, but a big bulge, which, however, Mr Grant hammered down, and the gun is now as good as ever.


1902 16g No. 0 L.C. Smith. Chambers extended to 2 7/8" with wall thickness at the end of the chamber of .096"



Looks pretty thin on radiography



But the MWT at the bulge was .102. Bore in bulge was .680; 3 1/2" .660" with WT .114"


Sad 12g Smith 4E with nice Chain Damascus with two bulges



The biggest bulge was at 4 1/2" with bore at 3 1/2" .735" and at the bulge .758".
Wall thickness at 3 1/2" was .118, 4" .092", in the bulge at 4 1/2" .078", and 5" .073".
4 1/2" non-bulged barrel was .090" and 5" .080"

Those wall thickness you cite on the Smith's there Drew are certainly adequate. These as well as the one in question all still have the appearance of an obstruction.
We certainly have to remember that Teasdale's thoughts were written in 1900. Most steel barrels of that time were made with a very low carbon steel, on the order of a 1008 or 1010.
It did not take the industry long to begin upping the carbon content to something on the order of 1040 & soon going to alloy steels with other elements which increased the strength.
With the possible exception of those very early low carbon barrels any pressure which would bulge or burst a "Good" steel barrel would do likewise to the finest Damascus ever built.
I say this as a great admirer of Damascus, but their "Beauty" is not in their "Superior" Strength.

It's not so easy to find pictures of proof house failures, but the CIP does have a short video, in the 'proof' category, of failures. The reason I use that as an example is because a proof house, particularly if they show it, should have followed their procedures in which the barrels were fully measured and inspected prior to firing proof loads. In other words, free of obstructions.

Anyway, most of the shown failures appear to be twelve gauge guns, and chances are they would be thought to be obstruction failures. One picture in particular shows a 'banana peel' muzzle, lowest barrel pressure(?), blow up. Chances are the first thought would be someone stuck it in some mud or snow.

Maybe the topic gun was an obstruction, maybe not. A side thought on 'tapping down' a bulge. Material would have thinned when it was 'stretched' to a larger surface area, but the material is still there. Not likely at all, but theoretically it could be returned to where it was originally. Finishing would likely take more off, but if decent thickness remains, there're probably some unique guns to make the attempt. It's probably more common to raise a dent, the same thing in reverse.