mickey
.416 member
Reged: 05/01/03
Posts: 4647
Loc: Pend Oreille Valley, Idaho
|
|
Are they necessary?
There are some comments here that they are not necessary at all. (Searcy)
That only a couple work, that none work, that all work.
Do Makers that use one do it for show or because they like spending more money to make rifles?
Do the supposedly 'New' steels negate the need?
Anybody have an evaluation of these things and their importance?
--------------------
Lovu Zdar
Mick
A Man of Pleasure, Enterprise, Wit and Spirit Rare Books, Big Game Hunting, English Rifles, Fishing, Explosives, Chauvinism, Insensitivity, Public Drunkenness and Sloth, Champion of Lost and Unpopular Causes.
Edited by mickey (28/04/04 01:03 PM)
|
DUGABOY1
.400 member
Reged: 02/02/03
Posts: 1340
Loc: TEXAS USA
|
|
In reply to:
Are they necessary?
Today I don't think they are necessarily needed, but are desirable to me, as a safety back-up. I don't think they work the way people seem to think!
In reply to:
That only a couple work, that none work, that all work
I think, also, the only ones that work, at all, before something else fails, are well fitted DOLL'S HEADS.
In reply to:
Do the soupposedly 'New' steels negate the need?
I don't think there is much doubt that modern alloys are a big help with the stringth of double rifles.
In reply to:
Do Makers that use one do it for show or because they like spending more money to make rifles?
I believe in some cases it is strictly for show, but in most cases, it is, simply, because that is the way they have always done it!.
I do not believe the B. Searcy would be better with a third fastener, but some folks might be more prone to buy one if they had one!
--------------------
..........Mac >>>===(x)===>
DUGABOY1, and MacD37 founding member of DRSS www.doublerifleshooterssociety.com
"If I die today, I have had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"
|
500grains
.416 member
Reged: 16/02/04
Posts: 4732
Loc: Salt Lake City, Utah USA
|
|
If the rifle is properly built, a third fastener does not do anything. If the rifle is coming apart at the seams, then the third fastener, may do a little, but probably only if it is a dolls head. There is a lot more need for a third lug at the rear of a model 70 than for a third fastener on a quality modern double.
|
4seventy
Sponsor
Reged: 07/05/03
Posts: 2210
Loc: Queensland Australia
|
|
In reply to:
Are they necessary?
Imo, no.
The fact that there are plenty of doubles that work fine with no third fastener, and also plenty that work fine with third fasteners that are for looks only proves to me that they are not necessary.
Now I'm not saying that they are not desirable, just that they are not essential.
In reply to:
That only a couple work, that none work, that all work.
Imo few actually make much difference.
Hollands concealed third fastener for example only adds to what the underbolting is already doing, and doesn't actually do anything towards fastening the barrel face to the action face or standing breech.
Ordinary dolls heads can only work if the action remains tightly closed by the underbolting.
If there is wear in the bolting or flexing at the action bar, and the gun is opening slightly during firing, the dolls head looses contact within its recess and does nothing/little torward fastening the barrel face to the standing breech.
I like the idea of a dolls head which includes a third bite like those found on spade and screw grip Webley actions.
With these the dolls head type extension is actually held within its recess by the third bite and in theory this system attempts to both keep the action closed as well as fastening the barrel face to the standing breech.
The crossbolting third fasteners also attempt to apply a downward and rearward fastening of barrels to action and may work to some degree.
The Kirsten double fastener which has two barrel extensions instead of one, seems to be highly praised.
In reply to:
Do the soupposedly 'New' steels negate the need?
The new steels are far less likely to stress and bend than the old steels.
Ive seen a modern double that had fired an overload and was sprung open to a point that plenty of daylight was showing at the face.
After the fired cartridge was removed the action "sprung" back and returned to normal and the rifle was again tight on the face.
The reason for this is that the modern steel was able to flex slightly but was also capable of absorbing the stress and springing back to its original state without suffering any noticable damage.
It would be doubtfull if an old double built on case hardened steel would have survived the same stress without damage.
Now I'm not suggesting that it's a safe practice to work up hot loads in a modern double.
It would be very unsafe and unwise to do that!
The point is that modern high tensile steels may be able to give double rifles a longer working life.
I'm still a believer that double rifle pressures should remain in the region of those old nitro express "proven to work" cartridges.
It's my opinion that if a modern action is designed to operate without a third fastener, and the rifle is built properly, and utilises the correct steels etc, then it can operate safely with NO third fastener.
|
470Rigby
.333 member
Reged: 23/02/04
Posts: 328
Loc: Melbourne, Australia
|
|
mickey – even the experts are divided on the issue of third fasteners as a reading of the following references will show;
“The Gun and its Development, 9th Edition”, WW Greener, pp. 157
“The Modern Shotgun, Vol.1” Burrard, pp 45
“The Double Shotgun”, Zutz, pp 67
“Shotguns and Cartridges for Game and Clays”, Gough Thomas, pp145
I would lump them into three broad categories, viz;
* Those that might work if they were fitted properly.
* Those that will never work.
* Those that worked when the gun was new.
I tend to go along with Gough Thomas, who said (quote);
“The upshot of all this, in my opinion, is that the action body of a drop-down gun should be designed, as well as can be, to withstand the whole of the pressure acting on the breech, and with an adequate factor for safety. Better an external bolster, which can be neatly contrived, than a top extension of doubtful efficiency”.
So, if there are no up-sides to top fasteners, why do we put up with the down-sides, and they ARE numerous;
* They make a double guns more expensive to produce.
* They interfere with unloading and manual extraction
* They frequently jam with foreign matter like grass seeds, rendering the gun inoperable!
* Finally, is there anyone who HASN’T skinned their knuckles on them while scrubbing bores???
|
unspellable
.300 member
Reged: 06/03/04
Posts: 187
Loc: Iowa
|
|
The point of a third fastener is not so much overall strength as it is to reduce flexing. When the gun or rifle is fired the action tends to spring apart and slam back together. This what causes the piece to eventually loosen or go off face. In order to do this the third fastener must be well fitted. If not, it accomplishes nothing. Today, many pieces will see so little use that there is no danger of going off face with ot without a third fastener. The doll's head with no bite can be effective because the center of rotation of the barrels on firing is not the hinge as it is when opening the action.
Incidentally, this is why proper lubrication is so critical. The lubricant acts as a cushion to spread out the impact.
|
Morten
.275 member
Reged: 24/04/04
Posts: 89
Loc: Ås, Norway
|
|
Purdey patented their Third grip 30 January 1878. I refer to: purdey the definitive history:
-Upon the closure, the smal bolt would come in contact with the projection and lock it. The double bolt in the bottom of the action was of course still used and was the main barrel-locking bolt. This Third Fastening tended to be used on guns where there were greater pressures, such as pigeon guns or large-bore guns.-
The patent appendix:
No.397 - 30 january 1878 James Purdey. "improvements in Breech-loading Firearmes" Third Fastening.
|
ALF
.275 member
Reged: 21/11/03
Posts: 51
Loc: Out of Africa
|
|
So why do most if not all Double rifle makers (bar Searcy) still build Double rifles with third fastners?
|
mickey
.416 member
Reged: 05/01/03
Posts: 4647
Loc: Pend Oreille Valley, Idaho
|
|
That's my question? 
--------------------
Lovu Zdar
Mick
A Man of Pleasure, Enterprise, Wit and Spirit Rare Books, Big Game Hunting, English Rifles, Fishing, Explosives, Chauvinism, Insensitivity, Public Drunkenness and Sloth, Champion of Lost and Unpopular Causes.
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
