Maverick,  You pose a most interesting topic and question.  It will be interesting to see where this goes.  I will make a few comments that may add to the topic.  First, the Brits still proof damascus/twist steel shotguns for current, smokeless loads.  They go across the auction block with some regularity and are things of beauty to say the least.  Most often the chamber length is shorter than the 2 and 3/4 inches we are accustomed to, and I do NOT know the pressures they are proofed to withstand.  Secondly, I have and shoot a damascus twist side by side by another manufacture than Winchester.  I loaded black powder or a black powder substitute in modern, plastic shot shells and use that rather than take chances.  It is one I have inspected as well as I can for deep pitting, etc, in an effort to assure a barrel won’t burst.  I have always been told and seem to recall being printed as the proverbial “old wive’s tale” with those attendant inaccuracies and dangers, the problem is the strength of the welds in the twists and whether a pit formed at a weak weld area which allows the higher pressures of smokeless (even with low base, trap loads) to cause a burst.  You don’t ask questions IDLY.  Kind of wonder what you are looking for, as I am sure you, too, have heard the proverbial old adages of not using smokeless shells in damascus barrels.  Good luck with whatever ends you are anticipating.  Tim.

Bert H. said

As we know, both the Model 1887 and Model 1893 were made for a 2-5/8″ maximum length shell, and yes, loaded with black powder.  Depending on the type of load, the resulting pressure was somewhere in the 5K – 7K range. 

My Nickel’s worth,

Bert  

Off topic but I’m glad you finally agree that the 1887 was chambered in 2-5/8″ too.  That is what my 10 ga. will chamber not anything longer.

I agree with Bert that most shooters do not understand Damascus barrels. They are indeed stronger than conventional barrels of the time but personally I don’t feel they should be subjected to the pressure curves of modern smokeless ammunition. The chamber length issue is often overlooked as well. My brother inherited an old shotgun that I had previously examined and advised him not to shoot with modern ammo. He fired it, against my advice, and reported that the recoil was excessive. I again told him not to fire it, explained why (again) and he finally understood that modern ammo and antique firearms are not always a good combination.

Bottom line: we shouldn’t fire ANY shell just because it fits. It needs to be the correct ammo for the firearm. Basic firearms safety. 

Mike

TXGunNut said
I agree with Bert that most shooters do not understand Damascus barrels. They are indeed stronger than conventional barrels of the time but personally I don’t feel they should be subjected to the pressure curves of modern smokeless ammunition. The chamber length issue is often overlooked as well. My brother inherited an old shotgun that I had previously examined and advised him not to shoot with modern ammo. He fired it, against my advice, and reported that the recoil was excessive. I again told him not to fire it, explained why (again) and he finally understood that modern ammo and antique firearms are not always a good combination.

Bottom line: we shouldn’t fire ANY shell just because it fits. It needs to be the correct ammo for the firearm. Basic firearms safety. 

 

Mike  

Mike I agree.  Some shooters don’t remember that the shotgun chamber has to have enough room to allow for the crimped part of the shell to open up when it is fired.