doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com I don't know Fox guns?

I was looking at a gun today that I was told had 3 inch chambers and had a serial number 1612, and I understood the PIN guns were Sterlingworths, so my questions are; how did it get that serial number, and why would a PIN gun have a 3 inch chamber? I going to try and post a picture. The gun is marked just FOX where Sterlingworth typically is. Thank you.

Not a A.H Fox gun. This Fox was also built in Philly but just before A.H. Fox started production. Parts are not interchangeable. And I highly doubt it started out with 3" chambers. You can easily distinguish the difference by the floor plate. which has only one screw on the A.H. Fox guns.

KY Jon. Thank you for replying. I did see the difference in screws on the floor plate and was curious. It was also my concern about the 3-inch chambers that they had been lengthened. I had done some reading on the creation of the super fox and the 3-inch chambers and with that serial number the timing was off. I was unaware there was a Fox gun prior to the A.H. Foxs. Thank you for the information.

That is a Philadelphia Arms Co. Fox gun.



See the info here on the A.H. Fox Collectors Association, Inc. web site --

https://www.foxcollectors.com/pre-fox-guns/philadelphia-arms

Keep in mind that at the time of the Philadelphia Arms Co. Fox doubles the longer shells offered by our manufacturers didn't carry heavier loads than could be had in 2 3/4-inch shells. They had more/better wadding which many gun cranks considered an advantage. My gun the C-Grade pictured on the AHFCA site is chambered for 3-inch shells.

Could I have some more info on 1612? Barrel length? Grip style? I have been keeping track of observed Philadelphia Arms Co. guns. I've recorded 93 guns, or parts thereof, with extractors from serial number 51 to 1846. A single ejector gun with a serial number in the 26xx range has been observed.

That chamber was most likely lengthened, and if some fool was shooting magnum loads out of it I'd be weary.

Fox is even more complicated than that. There was also a Baltimore Fox company, Philadelphia ArmsCompany and AHFox Company. And Ansley had some connection with all three. He was a part of Philadelphia Arms Company which made this gun. He quit there in December 1904. Later as AHFox his third gun company he bought the physical plant that PAC had built in November 1906. The Baltimore Fox was his as well with several partners for money. It failed. PAC was next and it failed. AHFox was last and he ended up selling out, which is a nice way to say it was failing, it was later sold again and everything moved to NY.

So three different Fox guns, three different Fox gun companies, three different cities and states involved. One thing they all had in common was Ansley. His design got better as time went by, but he entered the double gun business towards the end of mass production numbers and when the repeater was quickly taking over.

Most PAC guns were well made, with good barrels. 3” was not really a factory chambering but the barrels would be capable of any shell made in that day. The later Winchester 3” shell was 20+ years away when this gun was made. I’d pass on the gun as a good 3” shooter. If that’s what you want there are hundreds of AYA doubles with factory 3” chambers that are in the same price range.

Well, I nailed it. I don't know Fox guns. Yes, I was "desirous" of this particular gun with its 3-inch chambers and 30-inch barrels with Improved modified chokes, but it is perhaps not the waterfowler I'd want it to be. I think I'll lean a bit more modern than 1905 and more certain the chambers are original. I had no idea such a gun existed. Thank you, Researcher and KY!

Your Fox 3” guns were mostly H and HE grade and Sterlingworth Waterfowl models. Both bring a premium price due to rarity. I picked up a AYA 12 model 3 for under a grand in like new condition for waterfowl. It came Full and Full so needs chokes opened up is steel shot is used. But it is a modern gun and built long after the concerns about internal parts being soft that many Spanish guns suffered from in the 70’s.

The long ARROW 12-gauge shells offered by UMC in 1905. With bulk smokeless powders, DuPont, E.C., Schultze, etc. --



With dense smokeless powders, Ballistite or Infallible --



The standard chambering for Philadelphia Arms Co. was 2 5/8-inch (likely intended for 2 3/4-inch shells), but they would chamber for longer shells if the customer requested. Recommended loads from the 1905 Philadelphia Arms Co. catalog --



The only two A.H. Fox Gun Co. catalogs that mention chamber length are the 1913 and 1914. They both state 12-gauge guns are regularly chambered for 2 3/4-inch shells, 16-gauge 2 9/16–inch shells and 20-gauge 2 1/2-inch shells. That being said, virtually every 12-gauge Ansley H. Fox gun made in Philadelphia (other than the HE-Grade Super-Fox) that I've run a chamber gauge in shows about 2 5/8-inch. The chambers of unmolested 16-gauge guns seem to run about 2 7/16-inch and 20-gauge guns a hair over 2 3/8-inch. A very few graded guns were ordered with longer chambers. Savage began stating chambered for 2 ¾- inch shells in their 1938 Fox catalogues.

All this being said there is a good body of evidence that back in those days chambers were held about 1/8-inch shorter than the shells for which they were intended. In the book The Parker Story the Remington vintage specification sheets on pages 164 to 169 call for a chamber 1/8-inch shorter than the shell for which it is intended. Also, in the 1930's there were a couple of articles in The American Rifleman (July 1936 and March 1938) on the virtue of short chambers. A series by Sherman Bell in The Double Gun Journal showed no significant increase in pressure from shooting shells in slightly short chambers.

Ky. I was looking at AYAs based on an earlier post of yours when I came across the Fox. I'm leaning toward AYA as you suggest. Researcher, I am understanding that there were 3-inch and even 3&1/4 inch shells in 1905, and at least Fox and Remington thought 2&5/8 chambers were just fine for 2&3/4 shells. I am assuming a roll crimp was used on those shells as well as those tested by Sherman Bell? My Sterlingworth does measure 2&5/8 and I have been loading a 2&3/4 inch star crimp shell for it with a stated pressure of 6800 PSI so I'm not worrying. I did get my roll crimping tool out to test today. It works as it should. I have also been thinking Black Powder though if I can find some Longshot powder there are some Bismuth loads that run about 7500 to 7700 PSI.

Thanks again to both of you for the great information.