Re: Paul Curtis comment on cross bolting 1934 Archived Message
Posted by SGT on September 23, 2008, 3:39 pm, in reply to "Re: Paul Curtis comment on cross bolting 1934"
Cocking indicators were never a feature on a Smith gun; they were a hold over from the hammer gun days where one could, with a glace, see if a shotgun was cocked and ready to fire. When first introduced, the hammerless double design received a lot of negative press from hammer gun makers as regards the safety of the design due to the fact that it was impossible to tell if a closed gun was cocked and loaded. For that reason, its acceptance by the public was initially slow, which is most likely the reason some makers incorporated cocking indicators into the design; and also developed "automatic" safeties. But the truth is that the hammerless design was a much safer design than the hammer gun, as cold wet thumbs often slipped before reaching full cock causing a premature discharge. The hammerless gun was also much faster and easier to operate; and also easier to shoot accurately, as there were no hammers to obstruct one's view.
As to the Smith rotary bolt design, properly fitted, it was as good a double gun bolting method as ever designed; but the bolting surfaces on any make double gun are always metal to metal and will eventually wear with enough use (and more so with abuse). The Smith rotary bolt was a success, which is exactly why it was copied by Fox, used in the Ithaca NID, and also some Stevens model doubles. Interestingly, the Ithaca NID was developed to replace the Flues model which had both a complicated double underlug and top bolting system; but the accomodation of that bolting and cocking mechanism required extra milling of the frame, which weakened the frame and earned that model a poor reputation for strength. Another note of flatery as regards the rotary bolt design is the fact that, when John Olin at Winchester decided to develop a 10-bore magnum load to duplicate the outlawed 8-bore load, he elected to work with Ithaca; perfecting that load using the Ithaca NID with it's strong rotary bolt. Olin did the same thing with the Fox gun when he worked with Fox to develop the then revolutionary 12-bore 3" magnum and the Fox HE model. For what it's worth, I have no idea why a Smith gun was not selected for those purposes, as John Olin himself owned a Smith gun; but certainly the Smith gun was strong enough for such purpose. I personally modified a pre-1913 5E (with plenty of barrel wall thickness) to 3" chambers and had the stock head properly glass bedded. This gun weighed 8 pounds even and handled 3" two ounce loads with ease; a load many times stouter than the original 3" 1 3/8 ounce magnum loads John Olin originally developed for the Fox HE.
|
|