doublegunshop.com - home
Posted By: Drew Hause I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 11/28/22 11:17 PM
https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=609802

Flues Grade 1

[Linked Image from photos.smugmug.com]

The only thing that saved the gun was that the bullet was much smaller than the bore, and the gun recoiled freely. I'm amazed that it still locked up afterwards! The wood was missing from the top left before the shots.
Factory .50 BMG cartridge runs about 55,000 psi.

Scroll to 5 min.

Posted By: eeb Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 11/29/22 01:47 AM
“Hold My Beer” morons. What next?
They found the .50 caliber slugs on the ground, under the table. They went off, in the gun, but, the cases had to be knocked out of the chamber.
I doubt anywhere near 55,000psi was generated with the sloppy way the chambers fit the .50 cal rounds. It was gutsy, and stupid. Barrels didn’t look to be 18” to me either. Gutsy, stupid, and against the law.

Best,
Ted
Posted By: Argo44 Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 11/29/22 04:18 AM
Somehow one thinks, with the accents and attitude towards gun safety, that this might actually be in the Balkans someplace..or maybe southern Turkey.
Posted By: GMCS Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 11/29/22 11:38 AM
I did a 5 month job in California before retiring. went to the ranges I could find between San Diego and LA to shoot clays. I noticed a whole lot of these type guys hanging around the ranges. Even Kim Rhodes home range. Its no wonder why California gun owners have no voice when it comes to gun ownership. With so many Clowns like these The antis don't even have to try hard.
Posted By: lagopus Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 11/29/22 03:51 PM
Next year's contenders for the Darwin Awards maybe? Lagopus.....
The scary part is when you encounter that type of mindset while hunting in the woods! Makes you want to continuously "check your six"!
Karl
Posted By: Gankai Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 11/29/22 06:25 PM
I got back in camp one afternoon (Mt Frasier, CA) after getting shot at and a yahoo was talking about having three herd shots. I asked him how he missed an entire herd of deer 3x?? He laughed and said I heard something so I fired. One of the reasons I gave up hunting and yes the firearms were unloaded and secured at that point.
Posted By: Gankai Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 11/29/22 06:26 PM
That guy left a signed confession for ATF.
Posted By: sxsman1 Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 12/01/22 10:16 AM
What a couple of morons.
Posted By: coosa Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 12/01/22 04:40 PM
There is a guy on another forum with 00 field grade 12 gauge LC Smith that is pre-1913. He was asking if it was safe to shoot factory loaded 3" TSS turkey loads. He and other family members have been using regular 2.75" field loads in it for years, and also using it for turkey hunting with 3" lead loads and even some 3" Hevishot loads. He says it will chamber a 3.5" shell, but he hasn't shot one. He has been advised to shoot proper shells for it, but it's apparent that he is going to continue to shoot what he has been using.

I was wondering how it can even chamber a 3" shell, much less a 3.5?
Originally Posted by coosa
There is a guy on another forum with 00 field grade 12 gauge LC Smith that is pre-1913. He was asking if it was safe to shoot factory loaded 3" TSS turkey loads. He and other family members have been using regular 2.75" field loads in it for years, and also using it for turkey hunting with 3" lead loads and even some 3" Hevishot loads. He says it will chamber a 3.5" shell, but he hasn't shot one. He has been advised to shoot proper shells for it, but it's apparent that he is going to continue to shoot what he has been using.

I was wondering how it can even chamber a 3" shell, much less a 3.5?


This is the kind of thing that makes me wonder why any manufacturers would entertain the notion of producing consumer firearms and/or ammunition, today.

We have seen the enemy, and they are us.

Best,
Ted
Posted By: ed good Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 12/01/22 05:07 PM
would be interested in knowing barrel wall thicknesses 3 1/2 up from breeches...
Posted By: nca225 Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 12/01/22 05:24 PM
If I were grandpa and I saw that video, I think the next time junior came over, I would learn him what a pistol whippin' was. Specially, with that sawed off Fluesy.

Hey Ted I think this is the second time in as many weeks I find myself agreeing with you. Is there something wrong here?
Posted By: keith Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 12/01/22 06:21 PM
Originally Posted by Ted Schefelbein
Originally Posted by coosa
There is a guy on another forum with 00 field grade 12 gauge LC Smith that is pre-1913. He was asking if it was safe to shoot factory loaded 3" TSS turkey loads. He and other family members have been using regular 2.75" field loads in it for years, and also using it for turkey hunting with 3" lead loads and even some 3" Hevishot loads. He says it will chamber a 3.5" shell, but he hasn't shot one. He has been advised to shoot proper shells for it, but it's apparent that he is going to continue to shoot what he has been using.

I was wondering how it can even chamber a 3" shell, much less a 3.5?


This is the kind of thing that makes me wonder why any manufacturers would entertain the notion of producing consumer firearms and/or ammunition, today.

We have seen the enemy, and they are us.

Best,
Ted

People have been abusing guns, cars, trucks, motorcycles, and all manner of machinery for as long as machines have been produced. The "Hold my beer and watch this..." attitude is nothing new.

What is relatively new is the attitude, driven by the Liberal Left, that manufacturers should be held legally liable for injuries or deaths that naturally occur when idiots insist on doing stupid and dangerous stuff. Using things for purposes that they were never intended for, and pushing guns or machines far beyond their design limits is bound to cause accidents. The Liberal Left response to this is to sue companies into bankruptcy. It's the same sort of mentally deficient lunacy that blames inanimate objects like guns, and millions of law abiding gun owners, for the actions of a tiny minority of criminals.
A post on the LCSCA Forum in Dec. 2014 regarding a 1906 No. 0 10g; barrel composition unknown by the gentleman:
“I was at a farm where a guy I have known for a couple years came out with this L.C. smith. He first shot the gun with Federal Premium Vital-Shok 3 1/2 Inch Magnum copper-plated 1100 fps 27 pellets No. 1 buck (27 pellets of #1 buck is about 2 1/2 oz.). I still have the box and 1 live shell. He fired one shell out of each barrel with no problems. I asked if I could shoot the gun...and fired 1 shell out of each barrel.”
“I have never seen a gun this old nevertheless shoot one. I thought it would be cool to hunt with it. I'm guessing from your comment not such a good idea.”

A recent thread on Shotgun World
https://www.shotgunworld.com/threads/identifying-belgian-10-gauge.552771/#post-4774604

OTOH
Buck Hamlin’s destructive testing, courtesy of Tom Archer
http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=422672&page=2
Buck Hamlin was given an extremely well-used damascus barrel Lefever with a burst right barrel just past the forend tip. The barrel wall thickness at the rupture point was .010”, and the chamber was 2 5/8”.
With the intent to rupture the left barrel, Buck measured the bore diameter and started his effort with a box of 2 3/4” 1 5/8 oz. short magnums. After 25 shells the left barrel had no change in bore diameter. He then lengthened the chamber to 3”, and following 25 1 7/8 oz. magnums (lead #2 and BB) there was still no change in bore diameter.
Buck then lengthened the chamber to 3 1/2” and used 3 1/2” 2 1/4 oz. lead turkey loads. The left barrel blew after only a few shots. The wall thickness at the rupture point, which was almost aligned with the bursting point of the right side tube, also measured .010”.
Posted By: Hal Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 12/01/22 09:17 PM
Reminds me of how we young teenagers used to shoot .38-55's in our .410 singles, and also arrows with the pellets removed from cartridges. And then there were the homemade fireworks and flame throwers.
Posted By: Brian Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 12/01/22 09:46 PM
Originally Posted by Hal
Reminds me of how we young teenagers used to shoot .38-55's in our .410 singles, and also arrows with the pellets removed from cartridges. And then there were the homemade fireworks and flame throwers.

ah, the good old days!
Posted By: KY Jon Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 12/02/22 02:26 PM
You did notice they were not using a ithaca 20 bore gun. All but one cracked frame I have ever seen were 20's with a very light receiver. Best outcome for all is for that video to be banned and those "shooters" to have a vasectomy to stop their genes from being passed down to others.
Posted By: coosa Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 12/02/22 04:01 PM
Originally Posted by Drew Hause
A post on the LCSCA Forum in Dec. 2014 regarding a 1906 No. 0 10g; barrel composition unknown by the gentleman:
“I was at a farm where a guy I have known for a couple years came out with this L.C. smith. He first shot the gun with Federal Premium Vital-Shok 3 1/2 Inch Magnum copper-plated 1100 fps 27 pellets No. 1 buck (27 pellets of #1 buck is about 2 1/2 oz.). I still have the box and 1 live shell. He fired one shell out of each barrel with no problems. I asked if I could shoot the gun...and fired 1 shell out of each barrel.”
“I have never seen a gun this old nevertheless shoot one. I thought it would be cool to hunt with it. I'm guessing from your comment not such a good idea.”

A recent thread on Shotgun World
https://www.shotgunworld.com/threads/identifying-belgian-10-gauge.552771/#post-4774604

OTOH
Buck Hamlin’s destructive testing, courtesy of Tom Archer
http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=422672&page=2
Buck Hamlin was given an extremely well-used damascus barrel Lefever with a burst right barrel just past the forend tip. The barrel wall thickness at the rupture point was .010”, and the chamber was 2 5/8”.
With the intent to rupture the left barrel, Buck measured the bore diameter and started his effort with a box of 2 3/4” 1 5/8 oz. short magnums. After 25 shells the left barrel had no change in bore diameter. He then lengthened the chamber to 3”, and following 25 1 7/8 oz. magnums (lead #2 and BB) there was still no change in bore diameter.
Buck then lengthened the chamber to 3 1/2” and used 3 1/2” 2 1/4 oz. lead turkey loads. The left barrel blew after only a few shots. The wall thickness at the rupture point, which was almost aligned with the bursting point of the right side tube, also measured .010”.

Thanks for the great info, but I don't understand how the guy I referenced above or the one you mentioned are able to chamber a 3.5" shell in an old LC Smith. Don't they all have short chambers? Do they have long forcing cones that make this possible? Thanks
This is an engineering drawing from 1907, but from the beginning Hunter Arms chambered 12g guns 2 3/4", and 10g 2 7/8", and indicated on the flats if otherwise

[Linked Image from photos.smugmug.com]

The forcing cones were cut 1/2" - 5/8". The 3 1/2" shell length is after firing, so with a push could fit in a 2 3/4" chamber.

Could someone please measure an unfired and fired 3 1/2" shell?
Posted By: keith Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 12/02/22 05:07 PM
Originally Posted by KY Jon
You did notice they were not using a ithaca 20 bore gun. All but one cracked frame I have ever seen were 20's with a very light receiver. Best outcome for all is for that video to be banned and those "shooters" to have a vasectomy to stop their genes from being passed down to others.

There was a "spirited discussion" back in February that debated this issue of alleged frame cracking in small bore Ithaca Flues guns. No evidence was presented to support the silly idea that they are prone to cracking when they are used with proper normal loads, and not severely abused in some manner. In fact, the best evidence came from a guy who owned a 12 ga. Flues that had a frame that had cracked after it had been fired with heavy factory loads, and it doubled. The next best evidence was a letter from Ithaca Gun Co. where they had examined a 10 ga. Flues that they determined must have been fired with overloaded ammunition. Of course, neither of those Flues guns was a 20 ga.

https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=610266&page=1

The only Flues with cracked frames that I have seen in my entire life were the very few that have been repeatedly posted here, and on other forums, by the same guy with a "Chicken Little" mentality. What we have not seen is any evidence of Flues gun frames that cracked when used with the loads they were designed to digest. I am still waiting for evidence to convince me otherwise.

The Internet and Internet Gun Forums can be a great resource, but you have to be intelligent enough to understand that there is a lot of utter nonsense and incorrect information posted. When bullshit gets repeated often enough, gullible folk start to believe it, and then it gets accepted as fact by people who should know better.

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]
Posted By: Hal Re: I guess Flues are tougher than thought! - 12/02/22 07:36 PM
10 ga 3 1/2" slide so nicely into my chamberless, brass frame Navy Yard flare pistol, but I am not tempted to shoot it in the slightest. OK to pop off primed empties though. Been looking for some original flares.
© The DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com