Damascus Steel/Belgian Best Rolled steel? Shotguns?

[oneounceload]

But anything short of the utmost caution is to invite serious injury.

I do not believe anyone is in disagreement there.....

 

[snooperman]

John BT may be correct

I read in one article about rolled steel being a type of Damascus, but then in another where Winchester made some 1897 pump guns in rolled steel before going to fluid steel. I am , to say the least ,a little confused, and may be wrong in my early assumption that they are one in the same. I can not find a definitive answer. Also Baker and Manhatten made both Damascus and rolled steel barrels too. Why isn't there more information on this is perplexing. Why?? Because if your gun says on the barrel Rolled steel and it is the same as fluid steel , it makes a big difference in the gun being able to safely shoot modern powder loads to some degree.

 

[JohnBT]

http://books.google.com/books?id=pa...esult&ct=result&resnum=6#v=onepage&q=&f=false

The 1897 Sears catalog has some guns listed with Damascus and some with rolled steel barrels - like the 2 Winchester shotguns. "Finest quality, patent rolled steel barrels."

 

[RandKL]

"Damascus", or what was called "damascus" was pattern welded stock wrapped around a mandrel to give it a pretty pattern. The edges overlapped on each wrap and those edges got forge-welded together by hammering on them while hot. Twist steel was strips of steel wrapped around a mandrel with very little overlap and most often a butted joint. "Rolled steel" is just what it sounds like. It's steel sheet wrapped around a mandrel with a 100% overlap that's welded into a solid tube by forging it the same as a damascus or twist barrel was. Think roll of aluminum foil. Rolled isn't damascus. Rolled doesn't tend to get weak with age. Rolled steel barrels were used on Belgian shotguns up until the 1920's and they were almost always nitro proofed for smokeless powder.

If it scares you, use black powder loads. If that scares you, hang it on the wall.

Take off the forearm and post any and all markings you find here and we'll see what you have.

richard

 

[JohnBT]

So rolled is what a lot of sources call laminated? They describe wrapping a thin sheet of steel around a mandrel and welding the seam. And then wrapping a second layer on with the welded seams staggered, and one source mentioned using an additional partial layer or more on the chamber end to add thickness.

They might have been nitro proofed, but I've read more than one statement that the welds were prone to the same weakening over time as found with Damascus.

John

 

[RandKL]

They might have been nitro proofed, but I've read more than one statement that the welds were prone to the same weakening over time as found with Damascus.

With damascus steel, all the welded joints are on the outside exposed to the air. Rolled steel isn't. It would be the same as if you unrolled half a roll of aluminum foil and found a rusted spot half way through the roll.

 

[JohnBT]

The description of rolled steel barrels that I have read describe a series of increasingly larger tubes, each with a welded seam. The seam on the outermost tube is exposed.

John

 

[Robert Wilson]

Double Gun Journal ran a series of articles wherein they attempted to blow up several dozen different Damascus guns. To the best of my recollection they were not able to do it even with proof loads. They eventually got tired of endlessly firing proof loads and resorted to silly things like obstructing the barrels with cleaning tools, and thinning barrels to half of the traditional "safe" wall thickness, and still found that while many barrels blew, many others didn't.

Their conclusion was that the weakness of Damascus barrels was largely mythological, and traced the origin of the myth to the transition to smokeless powder: at the time, quite a few loaders used the new smokeless powders just the way they had with black, then blamed the results on the gun.

I think it's a shame to make wall hangers out of these beautiful and useful guns. But it does keep the prices down!

 

[JohnBT]

I read an article like that once. Were they using quality guns like Parkers and Smiths? The point being, the Damascus could have been several grades better than what was used in a workingman's gun.

John

 

[RandKL]

I think it's a shame to make wall hangers out of these beautiful and useful guns. But it does keep the prices down!

Same here, Robert.

I've been loading for them and shooting them for close to thirty years. At one time I had over 140 singles and half that of doubles in my collection. That's pared down a lot these days, but I have yet to see one blow up except by the liberal application of some really fine quality stupidity. If you're not an Elmer Keith setting out to blow one up or a teenager Rambo wannabe looking for the most powerful thing you can shoot out of a gun, chances are you'll have no probs. I've seen far more modern guns blown up than old ones.

I sure do miss the days when you could walk into a pawnshop and pick up an old Folsom or Crescent for $25-30, though. Belgians used to be a dime a dozen, it seemed. Nowadays, if it looks old, common beater-type gun or not, someone expects to put their kids through college on it.

Peace.

richard

 

[Robert Wilson]

I really should dig out those back issues, but laziness is one of my leading qualities.

Again to the best of my recollection, the tested guns were mostly low end and no-name. They didn't want to destroy fine guns anymore than we would, and they did set out with the goal of making a mess.

 

[Robert Wilson]

Oh, and an even fuzzier recollection: I believe one of those articles posited that the low end guns might actually be stronger than the fancy ones, because the finer guns tended to have thinner and lighter barrels for better handling. That is truly a fuzzy recollection, though, so i wouldn't hang your hat on it.