S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 members (Hugh Lomas, SKB),
403
guests, and
6
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,443
Posts544,800
Members14,405
|
Most Online1,258 Mar 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,709 Likes: 474
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,709 Likes: 474 |
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.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,815 Likes: 4
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,815 Likes: 4 |
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.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,015
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,015 |
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."
Hillary For Prison 2018
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,418 Likes: 2
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,418 Likes: 2 |
Been informed both guys were told to be sure and use 2 1/2" shells only. JR maybe the gun was just clapped out.....polished and honed one to many times.....
gunut
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 251
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 251 |
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.
Last edited by vangulil; 08/15/16 03:56 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,375 Likes: 105
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,375 Likes: 105 |
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 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. 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.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,725 Likes: 49
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,725 Likes: 49 |
"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.
Last edited by JDW; 08/15/16 04:20 PM.
David
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,111 Likes: 195
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,111 Likes: 195 |
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.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114 |
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!!
"The field is the touchstone of the man"..
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,463 Likes: 212
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,463 Likes: 212 |
....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?.... 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?
|
|
|
|
|