W.H. Davenport 20 gauge (questions about craftsmanship...)

[TomBulls]

Hey, everyone-

I picked up a W.H. Davenport single-shot 20 gauge today, and I'm trying to learn a little more about it.

I bought it on a whim, sort of as a challenge to test my gunsmith resto skills, and I'm more and more intrigued by it the more I learn about it.

The barrel is marked "THE W.H. Davenport Fire Arms Co. Norwich, Conn.", and the receiver is marked on the left side, "ACME." I'm guessing that ACME is one of the brands that Davenport manufactured for, right?

The only other marking, aside from a four digit serial number, is "PAT AUG 14 1900" on the take-down key which is inserted from the right side of the receiver.

Most of the information on the 'net seems to be recycled information simply passing around as truth, but the closest I can figure is that the shotgun was made somewhere b/w 1900 and 1910. The pawn shop was under the impression that it has a damscus steel barrel, and I don't think they know what they're talking about. Is there a way that I can definitively ascertain whether it is damascus? The stock has me puzzled also. I've strippped the old finish off, dried it out, and the wood is still really dark. All I know right now is that it smells just like the antique cedar chest that I keep all my wool blankets in. I was planning on staining it, but dark as it already is I'm just gonna do some minor repairs on dents, raise grain, buff with steel wool, stain it with BLO and call it quits.

Any thoughts?

-thomas

[Dutchman]

Best guest on stock is walnut. Never ever saw cedar used on a gun.

Twist steel barrels are rather obvious to the eye.... usually. Photos photos photos :)

There is a rather large amount of info on this maker on the net.

http://www.gunvaluesboard.com/firarms-company-reference-file-w-h-davenport-268.html

http://www.cornellpubs.com/old-guns/item_desc.php?item_id=1190


as a challenge to test my gunsmith resto skills


stain it with BLO and call it quits

The best test for your skills would be to replicate the original finish or at least come close to it, me'thinks. A gloss varnish finish was often used in the old days. Nowadays you can get a real nice finish with TruOil, 7 or 8 hand-rubbed layers buffed with 0000 steel wool inbetween.

Dutch

[uscra112]

Wm. Davenport was a gun designer and entrepreneur from the 1880s. He designed an interesting falling-block rifle that was briefly manufactured as the "Bay State", and was eventually taken up by Hopkins and Allen. He also worked for H&A for a time as well. He appears to have been a reasonably competent designer, but was never in one place for very long. In his independent efforts he was never a top-line maker of guns of any kind. I know little about that shotgun, but I do collect "boys' rifles" and can attest that I have never seen a "Davenport" branded one that was very well-made, even by the standards of 100 years ago. I don't even bother buying them. I'd be wary of that gun when it comes to firing it.

Many, many shotguns were made in that era using a kind of lacquer finish that simulated Damascus. It was still a popular notion that Damascus made for a better gun barrel, even though even then it was pretty obvious that it didn't. While it's possible that your gun was made using an import Damascus barrel, I'd be a bit surprised. As far as I know nobody was making actual Damascus barrels in this country by 1900. It just didn't pay. And in Europe the makers were I believe generally small Belgian shops who wanted to make a fast buck. At least that's what I've retained from my reading.

You can tell for sure by polishing a patch about the size of a dime on the underside of the barrel, then etching it with a strong acid. A true Damascus barrel will etch to show the Damascus pattern - a faux-Damascus barrel will just be plain gray. I'd rather see the gray - that will be a "fluid steel" barrel of at least reasonable quality

[TomBulls]

The best test for your skills would be to replicate the original finish or at least come close to it, me'thinks. A gloss varnish finish was often used in the old days. Nowadays you can get a real nice finish with TruOil, 7 or 8 hand-rubbed layers buffed with 0000 steel wool inbetween.

Thanks, Dutch. The wood is very dark, even after having dried out considerably. I'm guessing that it's partially because of the extreme age of the shotgun. As with my other resto jobs, I'll give it a wet-sanding with 400 grit paper, raise the grain with acetone, and then buff it down with steel wool. I'm a big fan of BLO, and I've made some really pretty pieces with standard BLO over a dark stain. This one is definitely going into my resto portfolio... I'll post some pics when I'm done.

[TomBulls]

I'd be wary of that gun when it comes to firing it.

I'll shoot the hell out of it if a competent gunsmith says it's safe to do so, but I only really bought it to have another piece to tinker with. Thanks for the tip, I'll be sure to have it checked out.

[uscra112]

I'll pass along the method I have used for several of my stock restoration efforts, which is to run the wood through the dishwasher, with the heat as high as it will go, and using trisodium phosphate instead of that faux detergent they sell nowadays (thank you the EPA). Real TSP can still be purchased at the hardware store, in the paint section. (Nothing else strips grease off kitchen walls like TSP.) I have had badly oil-soaked stocks from beat-up old guns come out so well cleaned that I was able to glue up cracks and have them hold like it was new wood. It also does a pretty good job of raising dents. This isn't a new idea, actually. An old time gunsmithing book I have tells you to boil oily milsurp stocks in a tank of TSP solution. The dishwasher is a whole lot easier!

I too prefer straight linseed over all these fancy preparations. It's the patience and skill of the restorer, not the kind of oil, that makes for a good looking finish.

[gnoahhh]

BLO is ok on an el-cheapo shotgun, but if I have umpteen hours invested in prepping a stock I'm sure as heck going to use something more resistant to water fenestration (not penetration) than that- as nice as it may look. Take a minute and blend some varnish into it and a dollop of mineral spirits before you start rubbing it into the wood. Then when your done, plan on waxing the bejapers out of it. That way you'll at least gain some real protection.

If you mean by "raising the grain" you mean 'whiskering' the wood, forget the acetone. Solvents won't do that for you. Wet it with a damp sponge and water, then quickly dry it over a heat source. An electric stove element works great.

That stock is probably darkened by a century of gun oil, and is likely punky from it to boot. If you are hell-bent on lightening it, try the TSP/dishwasher routine, or soak it a couple days submerged in acetone, or any number of other proprietary methods of oil removal.

Rather than fret over whether it's a damascus barrel or not, I would be more concerned about if it has egregious pits in the bore which cause weak spots and will be where the barrel will likely rupture if it's inclined to. Damascus isn't the bug-a-bear that previous generations of gun authorities would have had us believe. Sherman Bell, writing for "Double Gun Journal" laid that myth to bed quite conclusively with his series of articles exploring the strength of a multitude of various grades of damascus barrels from many different makers.

How tight is this gun? Is it on face? If you aren't sure about all this, best have a competent smith check it out before pulling the trigger on it or devoting a ton of labor into 'restoring' it.

[TomBulls]

How tight is this gun? Is it on face? If you aren't sure about all this, best have a competent smith check it out before pulling the trigger on it or devoting a ton of labor into 'restoring' it.

Thanks for the tips, Gnoahhh. I'm not familiar with what it means to be "on face." The action feels tight and doesn't have any play in it, so it doesn't feel unstable in that way. I was going to put the labor into it anyway because I'm trying to build up a portfolio. It may (or may not...) turn out very well, but the **** on the surface of the rifle doesn't look like it's bad pitting. I'm going to get it checked out by a certified gunsmith after I'm done, but I'm not holding out with any ideas of it being a born-again-field-gun.

-thomas

[uscra112]

What is varnish made of? Not polyurethane, but plain old spar varnish. Linseed oil and turpentine. In recent ages they've added lacquer to it, but that wasn't always so.

[TomBulls]

A while back, on a whim, I bought an 8oz bottle of Formby's Tung Oil Finish.

It's not an oil, there's not a single drop of Tung Oil in it, and it's actually a high gloss varnish.

After four coats it looks like wet glass, and it may not even be the best for a firearm finish. Not sure if it is really strong enough to stand up to being handled, picked up, set down, rained-on, sun-baked, and whatnot. We'll find out here in a bit, but until then-- it looks really nice.

[uscra112]

[smilie=l: Maybe it's called that because it's supposed to look like tung oil?

Keep in mind an old man's advice to me - that you don't build up to a smooth finish, you cut down to it. Lots of elbow grease, steel wool, and in the old old days a leather pad impregnated with rottenstone. (Today we just use 240 grit wet-or-dry.)

[gnoahhh]

What is varnish made of? Not polyurethane, but plain old spar varnish. Linseed oil and turpentine. In recent ages they've added lacquer to it, but that wasn't always so.

Wrong. No one uses turpentine in their varnish formulas anymore. That goes back 50 years or more. Spar varnish consists of a drying oil (tung, linseed, etc.), resins, and thinner. The more solids (resins) the better the UV protection and the better prevention of water fenestration (and the more expensive it is). Lacquer is not a component of varnish. If it were it would be, well, lacquer. Natural resins makes for classic spar varnish, artificial resins comprise polyurethane. Overly simplified, but that's the basics.

What we are sold as 'oil finishes' are in truth more or less wiping varnishes. Varnishes with a higher ratio of drying oils than in regular varnish.

The thing with using straight oil is although it has a nice warm look it offers zero UV protection to wood, and is a rotten moisture barrier. And if one wants to fill the pores (and keep them filled) one needs to do that before slathering on oil. To do otherwise makes for a utilitarian looking stock- without much utility.

As for using steel wool to cut down a finish, be advised that the steel wool you get at the hardware store is impregnated with oil to keep it from rusting. Do yourself a favor and de-oil it by washing it out in acetone or lacquer thinner, or better yet buy cabinetmakers oil free steel wool. But, even then microscopically small bits break off and can be embedded in the finish or the wood under a finish where it can very likely cause little brown rust spots.

Final rubbing out of a finish is better accomplished with 600-800 grit paper than steel wool.

Straight linseed oil and 220 grit paper leaves a stock looking like an army rifle stock. Why did the gov't take that approach for a couple hundred years? Because it was quick and cost effective, not because it was the best approach to finishing walnut.

[Bren R.]

Straight linseed oil and 220 grit paper leaves a stock looking like an army rifle stock. Why did the gov't take that approach for a couple hundred years? Because it was quick and cost effective, not because it was the best approach to finishing walnut.

Amen. I stain, shade with alcohol-based acrylics, Danish oil finish (dryers and varnish and all) and then for field guns, I spray a cut coat of oil-based poly, then finish with brushed oil poly, sanding between coats. I don't use water-based poly at all, it doesn't level like oil. And I can get a much cleaner look with a brush than I can with a high pressure gun.

Bren R.

[gnoahhh]

To the original poster: don't be daunted by all this talk that sounds like we're trying to deter you from your project. It sounds like you are keen to learn, and the best way to learn is by doing. We all started somewhere, and usually with a project like yours. I started by re-doing an old N.R.Davis 12 gauge single shot as a 15 year old kid, 45 years ago. I wanted to get 'er done before Pop got home from work, so you can imagine what my two hour restoration project looked like. Dad was none too happy...

[danyboy]

I have a 12 gauge with exactely the same company markings. This company had different way of marking it depending and 'W H Davenport Fire Arms Co Norwich Conn USA' dates back to 1900. No, the barrel isn't Damascus nor twisted steel. It is good steel and strong. I never tried modern ammo but my gunsmith told me he wouldn't be afraid to try Kent low charge Terget ammo in it. In the meantime, I'll keep reloading black powder for it. I shoot 1oz slugs with 60gr(volume) of Pyrodex RS FFG. Barrel never failed and load quiete accurate at 50 yards.