Proof testing a shotgun in Canada?

Longwalker

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
GunNutz
Rating - 100%
213   0   2
Location
Saskatchewan
i have a really nice, well cared for and very old double barrel exposed hammer shotgun, built as far as I can tell by a small maker / Guild member in Brescia, Italy, using Krupp fluid steel barrels from Germany. Likely built before 1920. It is 16 ga, and the previous owner opened the chambers from what was likely 65mm ( 2-1/2") to the more modern 2-3/4" It is a two barrel set. I don't just automatically trust the good fluid steel barrels and some anonymous gunsmith to come up with a safe conversion. So do any of you fine and experienced gun nuts know of a practical way to proof test the barrels before I sink some more money into a little stock work and fitting so I can take it out hunting again as it deserves? Is there a good "double gun gunsmith" in Canada who can proof test this gun for me?
 
I don't know of anyone proofing guns in Canada...

You would have to make a few overloaded 16 gauge shells and fire them... who would want to do that?
 
So you want to check if it's safe by hoping it doesn't blow up when "proofed"? This is an unusual thing to do after a gun leaves the factory let alone 100+ years later.
 
I do not think it is unusual to proof barrels - is law to be done in Europe for anything sold to a consumer - I see the proofing stamps on Remington and Winchester products that they do in-house in USA factories - so kinda leaves us accepting that the home guys or small guys can produce a "safe" barrel - they would not be allowed to do so in Europe -without going through a government proofing house - but okay to do here in USA or Canada. That is kind of odd, I think, not the idea of having a barrel proofed today...
 
i have a really nice, well cared for and very old double barrel exposed hammer shotgun, built as far as I can tell by a small maker / Guild member in Brescia, Italy, using Krupp fluid steel barrels from Germany. Likely built before 1920. It is 16 ga, and the previous owner opened the chambers from what was likely 65mm ( 2-1/2") to the more modern 2-3/4" It is a two barrel set. I don't just automatically trust the good fluid steel barrels and some anonymous gunsmith to come up with a safe conversion. So do any of you fine and experienced gun nuts know of a practical way to proof test the barrels before I sink some more money into a little stock work and fitting so I can take it out hunting again as it deserves? Is there a good "double gun gunsmith" in Canada who can proof test this gun for me?

In one word “no”. Proof is a legal responsibility and most European countries as well as Britain have government proof houses, all operating now to the same standards and there are laws in these countries regarding proof, proof testing and proof requirements. USA, Canada and Australia are about the only major countries without proof houses or proof laws - proof on new firearms is the sole responsibility of the maker - or whoever modifies the gun. What could go wrong? Many gunsmiths will examine your gun, some will test fire it, a few will give a verbal assurance of the safety of firing the gun with the proper ammo. Even if they have the knowledge and the experience they do not have the facilities or instruments to do a proper proof test. If they felt really confident they could load up a hot load of some untested overload and test the gun with it but only a fool would put himself legally liable by now certifying in writing that the gun was safe. To send it overseas for proof will knock the daylights out of a $1000 bill by the time you are done.
 
SAAMI has proof testing standards that are rigorous.
SAAMI standards are public for all to see.
SAAMI is a voluntary organisation of manufacturers.
US law assumes that liability in the courts protects the firearms consumer.
Liability settlements are part of the Remington bankruptcy.
 
It is safe to assume that the gun was used with modern 2 3/4" loads after having had its chambers lengthened.
Is the action tight?
Did the reaming thin the barrels excessively right in front of the chambers?

If the action is tight, and the barrels are intact after having been used with modern 2 3/4" cartridges, why would you doubt its safety?

If you could obtain industry standard 16ga proof loads the gun cold be "proofed". But that isn't likely going to happen. And trying home brew heavy loads isn't the same thing.

Given that the gun is elderly, it might be an idea to avoid heavy loads. It was probably intended to be used with standard field loads. I can't see that continuing to use moderate loads would be problematic.
 
tiriaq's post is about a key notion - a "proof load" - aka "blue pill" - is not a random heavy load - is a very specific load to create a specific pressure - calibrated, etc. - is most definitely not a "home brewed thing". The concept is very foreign, I suspect, to a lot in Canada and USA. CIP, for example, requires a 125% pressure for a proof load, over standard loading pressure. Does not mean gun is good for 125% pressure - it means the gun withstood that, once, and did not have any permanent deformities - hence, deemed "officially" safe for continued use with specified standard pressures. British proofing used to require dipping that proof load into oil - and the arm was then fired twice that way - without permanent deformity. In Britain, was even done with used firearms that were surplussed from their military - why you see all those stamps on chamber area with Lee Enfields - was the "proof" documentation for a civilian customer.
 
Pressure Trace sells a strain gauge pressure testing system, aimed at advanced amateurs, for about $1k US.
Authors like Sherman Bell used their system, I believe.
While that is significant, it is not outrageously expensive.
There is a lot more to proof testing, but it's not beyond possibility.
Gunsmiths with any wisdom, are not going to undertake this work, because of the potential liability.
Government proof testing facilities function because they have adequate protection from liability.
 
Thanks for the insightful replies received so far. Perhaps a little more explanation is in order. I am not looking for some sort of lawyer certified or Government endorsed "proof" such as European government proof houses provide, stamp and all. I am merely looking for someone with the skills and experience who can provide a test load, that is reasonably expected to produce the precise pressure required to give me confidence in the soundness of my nice old double while using normal SAAMI pressure factory loads. I already belong to the 16 ga. low pressure reloaders group. I know how to assemble loads that will likely never be a safety hazard in this gun. But I'd like to check it out anyway.
I have found some barrel / chamber thickness charts from England that provide some level of confidence and guidance. But of course metallurgy and time can skew the results in real life.
Please carry on with the discussion!
 
It's already proofed to some standard in 2.5"... they'll be stamped on the barrel usually on the bottoms where it's flat next to the action. I'm not familiar with the German marks but they'll indicate chokes, chambers, and whether suitable for blackpowder or smokeless.

At different times in history, Whitworth's fluid steel invention could have been stronger or weaker than a damascus barrel... that invention improved with time though the limitations of both should be acknowledged. Proof houses are the place where strength testing was conducted and it's been that way for a couple centuries now. It is a step between manufacture of the action/barrel and finishing before shipping to market. Even to this day I believe the same major cities have proof houses to which makers would send their action/barrel and they all have a unique stamp added with all the other stamped info. Respecting all those, the only thing a gunsmith would actually consider is did the removal of that 1/4" impair or corrupt the strength for which it was originally tested.

I don't know if Stuart Newbie is still active and in BC: He used to be near here and evaluated an oldie for me and some shells I got with it (some period correct smokeless loads that were safe for use in the damascus barrels.) Mine experienced some cosmetic abuse that could be restored... a chamber cannot be "re-shortened" though this doesn't mean it's kaput. Stuart is an English trained gunsmith... and very knowledgeable. If he's retired I recall his son possibly following those footsteps. Found this old contact link online: S J Newby Gunsmiths Ltd. (Half Moon Bay BC 604-740-3725)
 
If you have, or have access to barrel wall thickness measurements, and they fall within acceptable limits, I would be tempted to proceed to use modest pressure loads.
I don't think that you are going to find a proof test in Canada that will add to your confidence.
If another consultant would add to your confidence, perhaps following up with Stewart Newby is a good idea.
I have every confidence in the advice of Martin Hagn, if he would venture an opinion.
 
Well - A proof test was used historically to ascertain if metallurgical flaws were present ie a destructive test. This was done before the science of non-destructive testing was developed. Of course, the advantage of NDE is that it doesnt have the potential to fail the rifle.
Your shotgun passed proof many years ago, so you can be reasonably assured it is flaw free. Moreso, given that it has been shot successfully since then, even with the chamber ream. I would check the wall thickness in the affected area, and make a decision based upon this. You would be surprised to know how little wall thickness is required to hold 12000 psi, based upon hoop stress.
Of course, shooting low pressure loads with modern powders would be prudent for any older gun.
 
well if you reload you can do up a "proof" for your own piece of mind. if you look at hodgdons online they list loads from 7kpsi to 11kpsi. you could load your self a 11k psi load, remote shoot that in the gun, if all goes well and action is tight and everything checks out, just load your self 8800psi loads, knowing you have a 20% pressure difference then your "proof load" and will have some piece of mind

I did the same thing for my 43 express, I used a 71/84 barrel on a large ring 98 and was warned not to load it to hot as the barrel will be the weak point.

so I set an arbitrary pressure number of 28k psi (saami's max for 45-70 trapdoor, same era gun, near same bore) then loaded some rounds at 32.5kpsi (59.5gr IMR3031) 20% more then my 28k and remote fired them, took measurements of the barrel chamber area before and after also noted extraction and what the case measured.

seemed fine, everything checked out. i dropped the charge back to 28k (56gr IMR3031) and feel confident firing them all day.

I used QL and using all numbers I could measure to figure it out, in the end the gr and fps on QL matched what I was loading/seeing on the crony. so it probably was a 20% increase in pressure, if not it was still 3.1 more gr powder over my max load
 
Last edited:
You need a competent person to properly measure the bore diameters 9 inches from the breech end and see if they match the proof diameters. Then, if your barrels aren’t pitted, dented or otherwise damaged and your bores haven’t been bored oversize your bores would be in proof as originally made, a moderately honed bore can still be in proof but a .010” overbore takes it out of proof. However if this gun was originally chambered 2 1/2” (65mm - 67.5”in Europe) and the chambers have been lengthened and the gun not reproofed with these longer shells and so marked the gun is no longer in proof for any ammunition. Then wall thickness becomes important, particularly at the area that was at the forcing cones of the original chambers, where material was removed to lengthen the chambers. This is the point of highest barrel pressure and both the thickness here and the strength and elasticity of the steel are critical factors. Not knowing the qualities of the steel used in these barrels the only known factor affecting strength at this point is the thickness of the steel and I don’t believe there is any specified minimum thickness, it’s usually an experienced judgement call well tempered by caution, most experienced shotgun smiths will decide on a case by case basis. Bottom line, if it’s in proof, including original chambers, and in excellent condition go ahead and shoot it with appropriate ammo but avoid heavy loads in deference to the age of the gun.
If as you suspect, the chambers have been lengthened, then it is out of proof, no argument. And you can not get a certified proof in North America. A very competent shotgun can inspect and measure your barrels and could recommend whether it would be safe to shoot and with what but these are only his recommendations, he has no control over what you decide to feed it. Many many old guns with lengthened chambers are presently in use, probably some of which shouldn’t be, most are fine but a few could be a ticking time bomb and without professional assessment nobody knows.
Yes, Stuart Newby is still in business, semi retired and very selective about what he does and who he does it for these days. He has a superb shop but has no store front and actively discourages visitors. At this time he is probably the most experienced and skilled English trained gunsmith in Canada and he can properly measure and assess your barrels. He will tell you what you have and give you his trained opinion of what you can do with it. He won’t put ‘proof’ pressure loads through it and I’m sure he will discourage you from trying this as well. If he takes you on as a new client he will give you a time estimate for this and normally his turnaround on most jobs is very reasonable.
If your gun passes inspection it must be considered capable of indefinitely safely digesting any ammo that fits, it can’t be assumed that you or all the owners that follow you will only feed it special low pressure ammo, someone someday will be using off the shelf ammo of unknown but likely high pressure. For your own use your low - moderate pressure handloads are obviously safer and they have the added advantage of easing strain on an old treasure, greatly extending it’s service life. J.
 
You certainly have, but i will add something that hasnt been covered that i could see. Pressure damage to steel can be "cumulative" meaning that a load that shows no visible/measurable damage to your barrels with one or two firings might very well show something after 3 or 10....you have no way of knowing when the "critical stress" is going to be attained...for me, Russian Roulette come to mind using any "field level loads" in an early fluid steel barrel that has had part of its strength integrity removed in the exact area where the pressure spike reaches its peak.
For the above reason I NEVER shoot rounds in turn of the century guns that exceed the BP pressures of the times...even if they do have, as often roll stamped on them "modern smokeless steel" or something similar.
Personally I wouldn't even fire "lo pressure loads in your gun until I had a very accurate measurement of the steel thickness left after the reaming.
 
Back
Top Bottom