Unloading: The 1887 in WWI
Added 2019-12-19 00:39:58 +0000 UTCSanta Othais with a Chrimmas Story!
For those of you who would like to download the audio:
https://podcast1z2.candrsenal.com/05-Unloaded-The_1887_in_WWI.mp3
Comments
Bummer. Some day, I hope...
Joshua Pinson
2023-09-22 02:57:49 +0000 UTCNot presently
C&Rsenal
2023-09-21 00:02:36 +0000 UTCGreat story! Does C&Rsenal have any more content on the 1887? If not, is some in the works?
Joshua Pinson
2023-09-20 03:21:50 +0000 UTCThanks that was very enlightening
Travis Tremmel
2020-03-03 22:39:18 +0000 UTCAlso, note that "bulk smokeless" was to shotguns what Trail Boss is pistols: A smokeless powder designed to be roughly equivalent to black powder (of the relevant granulation) by volume (hence: "bulk powder," because it was typically loaded by volume, as opposed to "dense smokeless," which was loaded by weight). It still would have had a smokeless-shaped pressure curve, so it would not have been *universally* safe to substitute for black powder. That said, 2 "drams" (see below) of bulk powder would have been a pretty mild load, especially since commercial 12-gauge black powder loadings in late 1890s catalogs I've seen ranged from 3 to 3.5 drams (I feel like I've even seen a single 4 dram example, but I might be misremembering). Technical caveat: There are several different historical measurements that go by the name of "dram" or "drachm" (originally the same word), but the only one that I have ever heard of people using to talk about in the context of shotgun shells is an avoirdupois dram, which is 1/16 of an avoirdupois ounce, a unit of *weight*. (An avoirdupois ounce is 437.5 grains, so an avoirdupois dram is 27.34.375 grains; for shotshell loading, an easy way to think about it (if you have a scale that gives weights in grains) is that 3 drams is almost exactly 82 grains, and 1/4 dram is just shy of 7 grains). In historical practice, however, loading black powder by volume was common that, combined with the factor that bulk powder was specifically designed to be roughly volumetrically equivalent to black powder, I think it's safe to assume that "about 2 drams of bulk powder" means "bulk powder occupying the same volume as about 2 drams of black powder, and that's what I do above. But, just for the sake of argument: Bulk powder was (is? does anyone still make it?) roughly half as dense as black powder, so that bulk powder that actually *weighed* 2 (avoirdupois) drams would be roughly equivalent to *4* drams of black powder . . . but all safety concerns aside, that would be a hell of a load to put behind 1 ounce of birdshot, even by American standards, and my vague recollection is that European loads of the era tended to be a bit lighter yet. And even 4 drams BP behind 1 oz. of shot would be less than a typical proofing load for a 12-gauge BP shotgun (as I said, I feel like I may even have seen a reference to a (hot) commercial load that strong). Not that that would make using such a load (or a comparable load of bulk smokeless) a *safe* decision, even without the pressure curve issue, but I'd imagine that the *probability* of blowing up a well-made BP shotgun that way would be fairly low. While I'm blathering at length: When you see "X drams, Y oz." on a box of modern shotshells, X drams is neither the weight of the powder, nor a (slightly informal) measure of the volume, but it is still meant as a measure of the equivalent amount of black powder, in the sense that (all else being equal, under ideal test conditions, in theory) X drams of black powder should propel Y oz. of shot at the same velocity as the (far smaller) charge that is actually in the shell should propel the Y oz. of shot (that is also actually in the shell).
Christopher James Henry
2020-03-03 22:21:16 +0000 UTC1901 Winchester could handle smokeless powder. I had an 1887 with a 1901 barrel and could shoot light smokeless loads in it.
Tom Sullivan
2020-01-07 15:33:34 +0000 UTCTwo drams of smokeless in an 1887? Thought the 1887 was BP only
Travis Tremmel
2020-01-02 15:04:17 +0000 UTCi really like the story. but man it really bothered me that the video and audio didnt match (i know this was intentional)
Tim The Enchanter
2019-12-26 22:28:35 +0000 UTCHappy Crimmus! I want a popsicle!
James McKenzie
2019-12-24 20:42:56 +0000 UTCCorrect, the video was just a placeholder
C&Rsenal
2019-12-22 22:46:50 +0000 UTCI'm sorry everybody. :P
Planescaped
2019-12-21 14:03:41 +0000 UTCAudio and video don't match at all
Robert N Ayres
2019-12-21 00:34:38 +0000 UTCYou have a way ruining Christmas spirit that qualifies you for appointment as The Grinch. ;)
Markus B.
2019-12-20 17:20:16 +0000 UTCbruh.
C&Rsenal
2019-12-19 21:53:04 +0000 UTCGod, you can't beat the older generations for writing. In an age where most people over 45 appear to take leave of their senses (and in particular their sense of grammar) whenever they approach a keyboard. A wonderful story full or poetic metaphor and euphemism. Loved hearing that. It does make you wonder what happened to that old 1887. That's a gun "from when pappy was in the War" with a great bit of history.
Benjamin de Groot
2019-12-19 17:24:45 +0000 UTCthe entire audio is out of sync for me "Clark... The little lights, they're not twinkling."
Donald Gray II
2019-12-19 17:15:28 +0000 UTCthey certainly were more alliterative back then.
Andrew MacDougall
2019-12-19 16:51:08 +0000 UTCin the end segment with Othias, audio is out of sync with video.
Andrew MacDougall
2019-12-19 16:50:48 +0000 UTC6:40 transparent wad on top: nitrocellulose? π³
Andrew MacDougall
2019-12-19 16:41:33 +0000 UTC"The incident rather spoiled the war for a few days" I can imagine finding the corpse of a german holding a photo of a girl and 2 babies doing that... For further spoilage the lady probably died in RAF bombing runs and the two kids probably were both killed at Stalingrad! ...
Planescaped
2019-12-19 13:24:40 +0000 UTCboo french.
C&Rsenal
2019-12-19 08:35:37 +0000 UTCThe video is a placeholder
C&Rsenal
2019-12-19 08:35:05 +0000 UTCI mean, I COULD have been
C&Rsenal
2019-12-19 08:34:54 +0000 UTCit's about shotguns, yeehee!
Andrew MacDougall
2019-12-19 07:07:01 +0000 UTCThat was a cool story to hear. Makes you wonder what happened to that ol'shotgun in the story. Yeah it would be interesting to ask questions about old guns that would be new to someone with little experience or first timers to old firearms
James G. Jones
2019-12-19 05:50:28 +0000 UTCThis story, is it not nifty? Personal stories are always cool to listen to/read.
Tiger in man's clothing
2019-12-19 05:32:54 +0000 UTCWould love to watch Ian's reactions to your mangled French in this. Suspect he may need to find moral support in the form of Absinthe...
Minion
2019-12-19 04:26:41 +0000 UTCThat was cool! Very enjoyable and harkens back to you and Maeβs discussion in 107 about if she would use the 1897 in the pitch dark. Thanks for the story!
Loren Hermanson
2019-12-19 02:53:39 +0000 UTCSweet old girl with stories to tell
Wayne Dygert
2019-12-19 01:40:27 +0000 UTCThanks, I enjoy these stories. I would love to see an episode or stories on the Colt 38acp automatics (I don't think Mae would like them) but so far I haven't seen mention of them in combat use after the philippine-american war other than in south america.
Mr. Lee
2019-12-19 01:31:45 +0000 UTCUmmm, is the audio track wrong? Doesnβt match the video.
Thomas Brown
2019-12-19 01:24:31 +0000 UTCUncle Evans always read us Christmas stories in his underwear.
Ethereal
2019-12-19 01:13:38 +0000 UTCOh boy! Just what I always wanted!
Shane Hawkins
2019-12-19 00:41:11 +0000 UTC
