Dannyboy220 Posted December 23, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 23, 2016 You can tell nothing from the muzzles! If the person who honed out the bores prior to submitting it for proof left the original choke untouched? This is quite common! The fact that it was proofed for black in 1979 is probably because of the amount of metal removed (probably due to pitting) rendered it unsuitable for Nitro proof? In the original proof The 13B indicates the original bore, the 14m indicates the choke..... I see, I did have a chat with the local gunshop who said it was only proofed for black powder but I didn't realise it had been reproofed in 79 and as you say probably failed. Gunshop said about loading my own black powder carts, I should have asked him I guess but are the components for this still fairly available? I know there's a few black powder enthusiasts on here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy220 Posted December 23, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 23, 2016 (edited) https://s23.postimg.org/u379b2xd7/IMG_20161219_191032.jpg https://s23.postimg.org/jues599bf/IMG_20161219_191013.jpg https://s23.postimg.org/vxop6k9rf/IMG_20161219_190954.jpg https://s23.postimg.org/7v7vbot4b/IMG_20161219_190931.jpg https://s23.postimg.org/sgmn3lap7/IMG_20161219_190854.jpg https://s23.postimg.org/yvlo09hez/IMG_20161219_190826 Edited December 23, 2016 by Dannyboy220 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy220 Posted December 23, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 23, 2016 No it's not an ejector unfortunately Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted December 23, 2016 Report Share Posted December 23, 2016 I see, I did have a chat with the local gunshop who said it was only proofed for black powder but I didn't realise it had been reproofed in 79 and as you say probably failed. Gunshop said about loading my own black powder carts, I should have asked him I guess but are the components for this still fairly available? I know there's a few black powder enthusiasts on here. It didn't fail.........but guessing.......it was probably assessed by the gunsmith as unsuitable for nitro proof and on who's advice it was submitted to the proof house for black powder proof only? All cartridge components are easily available, but you will need 2 1/2inch cases, and fibre or felt and card wads.....the black poweder is only obtainable if you have a licence to buy and keep it!....and you have the correct storage facilities........pyrodex is a BP substitute you could try! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy220 Posted December 23, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 23, 2016 Thanks Panoma that's very helpful Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted December 23, 2016 Report Share Posted December 23, 2016 No it's not an ejector unfortunately The Sidelock gun is of a similar date to the hammer gun, original London proofed, then proofed for nitro in London in 1972 under the 1954 rules of proof. The gun is showing it's age, what are the bores like? Some clearer pics of all proof stamps may reveal more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy220 Posted December 24, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 24, 2016 The bores are like mirrors and I have to disagree about it showing us age. Holland and Holland said it's an original parts and the barrels are 33thousand now. In 1974 when as you say it was proofed they were 34thousandths so lost 1thou in 40 years. This gun is dated 21st September 1885 is as tight as ever and shoots beautifully I'll get some more pics up later of her Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted December 24, 2016 Report Share Posted December 24, 2016 My comment regarding the gun showing its age may be due to the photos? It is certainly down to dated design! The photo of the underside of the action appears to show worn engraving? There is some pin screw head damage, and forend iron to wood fit looks worn/not crisp!......But as I say it may be the photos.....Better photos may disprove the apparantly engraving wear? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunman Posted December 24, 2016 Report Share Posted December 24, 2016 (edited) Several reasons that a gun was re-proofed for black powder ,one being that it might have been wanted to sell in the US where they shoot competition with black powder guns so a nitro reproof would disqualify it . Is there a makers name on the hammer gun? Edited December 24, 2016 by Gunman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triumphant59 Posted December 24, 2016 Report Share Posted December 24, 2016 Difficult to tell from the photos but could someone have been a bit heavy handed with course steel wool on the action? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.