Side by Side Club

[matone]

If the bores are .742 inch at up to 9 inch from the breach ,it`s out of proof .The wall thickness is taken as the thinnest part,wherever that occurs.

Hth.

[JohnfromUK]

You will find proof sizes here https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/articles/proof-sizes/

And more background here https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/articles/514-2/

and here https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/articles/proof-law/

A 12 starts life as 0.729 as a 'proof' size - but these were measured with 'plug gauges', so in fact it could have been larger diameter, but it is classed as 12 because a 0.729 gauge would fit and a 0.739 gauge would not fit.  0.738 is the MAXIMUM diameter for 12 before reproof is required.

IF  the next size gauge will now fit (0.739), it would require reproof before it could be sold (in the UK anyway).

Edited January 19, 2019 by JohnfromUK

[wymberley]

34 minutes ago, Sereremo said:

Ok..first of all thank you Mr. John!

The great information is that 1 1/4 oz. was tha max load and probably 70mm. Normally is written but probably not at the beginning of the century.

I have all the tools to measure barrel but not chambers..so I ask in the forum about it.

Due to the serial number it seems been produced between 1900 and 1905 so surely it’s no possibile to shot steel cartridge but, in my books is written that 12 has a diameter.738 in. while those barrel are .742 in. and at 23 cm from the breech the wall is .650 mm....so Eley cartridge 12/67mm could be a good trial.

Chokes now are 10/10 and 11/10 of millimeters 

Regards 

 

There is something wrong with the red quoted sentence. The current 12 bore mean diameter is now 0.728" The .742 figure just happens to be the diameter of an over-bored Browning Maxus.

[Sereremo]

Here what is written about shotguns produced before 1925...In the previous post I wrote a mistake: barrel wall are measured 23 cm from the top of the barrel (where there are chokes...could you please tell me the correct name?)

anyway I’m Here to better understand English bespoke and not to sell it :))

 

 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Sereremo

[panoma1]

19 minutes ago, Sereremo said:

Here what is written about shotguns produced before 1925.

anyway I’m Here to better understand English bespoke and not to sell it :))

 

 

A 12 bore at 18.55mm............is .730 in inches!

[Sereremo]

Before 1925 there was a tolerance of 0.2mm ....so between 18.55 and 18.77 mm

[panoma1]

6 minutes ago, Sereremo said:

Before 1925 there was a tolerance of 0.2mm ....so between 18.55 and 18.77 mm

The gun was proofed in Birmingham proof house after 1925 and before 1954, it has Birmingham provisional proof marks on barrels, with a maximum service load of 1 1/4ozs shot. I am surprised there is no chamber length stamped on the flats, as this was used under the 1925 rules of proof? I have an 8 bore Tolley gun which has been rebarrelled using Westley Richards 'special steel, tubes, I have no knowledge of what HL means....but it does not mean Steel Proofed!

[panoma1]

32 minutes ago, Sereremo said:

Before 1925 there was a tolerance of 0.2mm ....so between 18.55 and 18.77 mm

The gun was proofed using imperial measurement not metric, so in metric 18.55 was .730 and 18.77 was .739....I don't think conversion from imperial to metric works exactly? 12 bore proof size using Imperial measurements is .729 to .739....... .740 renders the gun "out of proof"

Edited January 19, 2019 by panoma1

[Sereremo]

I know that is out of proof but it’s not the point...the point was chambers length that I believed has been written on the barrel flats.

[Gunman]

 

To clarify a few points that have been made .

 The barrels were proofed in Birminham  under the 1904 rules of proof .

1&1/4 oz is 2&2/4" case now 70 mm.

12 is .729 which goes  out of proof at .740" .   If one barrel exededs this size the gun is out of proof . 

Steel refers to the barrel matrial  .It is made of steel  not "damascus" 

HL wil be the barrel filer [ the man who made the barrels ] or possibly the supplier of the tubes . It will have no other meaning .

Guns no matter when they were proofed , will be judged and continue to be measured and assesed under the rules they were originaly proofed under .

 

 

[Sereremo]

Ok it’s now clear the length of the chamber, I will try this my “new” shotgun and I will let you know.

In the mean time I post to you another particular Italian S&S shotgun produced at the end of ‘70.

regards

 

Edited January 20, 2019 by Sereremo

[panoma1]

13 hours ago, Gunman said:

 

To clarify a few points that have been made .

 The barrels were proofed in Birminham  under the 1904 rules of proof .

1&1/4 oz is 2&2/4" case now 70 mm.

12 is .729 which goes  out of proof at .740" .   If one barrel exededs this size the gun is out of proof . 

Steel refers to the barrel matrial  .It is made of steel  not "damascus" 

HL wil be the barrel filer [ the man who made the barrels ] or possibly the supplier of the tubes . It will have no other meaning .

Guns no matter when they were proofed , will be judged and continue to be measured and assesed under the rules they were originaly proofed under .

 

 

Hi Gunman,

Whilst I am aware the Nitro proof marks were introduced in 1904 and was optional pre 1925, but how can you tell the gun was proofed under 1904 rules? in the pamphlet in my possession, which is a proof house publication, the proof marks indicate it was proved under the 1925 rules (except that the chamber length stamp was missing)

Genuine question.........….I am not doubting your knowledge!

I assume the 2&2/4" in your posting is a typo and it should read 2&3/4"?

[wymberley]

38 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

Hi Gunman,

Whilst I am aware the Nitro proof marks were introduced in 1904 and was optional pre 1925, but how can you tell the gun was proofed under 1904 rules? in the pamphlet in my possession, which is a proof house publication, the proof marks indicate it was proved under the 1925 rules (except that the chamber length stamp was missing)

Genuine question.........….I am not doubting your knowledge!

I assume the 2&2/4" in your posting is a typo and it should read 2&3/4"?

Best left to the professionals, I fancy. But then again, it's a nightmare.

Chamber length not introduced until 1925 - one up to Gunman.

But "Shot" is missing (as is "oz") which was retained until 1925. So, anybody's guess.

[Gunman]

In answer to queries 

Nitro proof became standard in 1904 unless black powder was requested 

Yes it was a typo on the chamber length

By the style of the marks tells me that they are post 1904 based on long years of looking at them and checking guns for proof/ dates  A picture of the  marks on the action flats would confirm the gun as being after 1904.

Under 1925 rules both chamber length and shot load was marked.

It is not uncommon to find guns with proof marks that do not exactly tally with what is written often in periods around change over from one set of rules to those succeeding them .

As I have passed on a lot of my stuff including data sheets and books I am working from memory but I am 95% certain of my facts 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 20, 2019 by Gunman

[panoma1]

1 hour ago, Gunman said:

In answer to queries 

Nitro proof became standard in 1904 unless black powder was requested 

Yes it was a typo on the chamber length

By the style of the marks tells me that they are post 1904 based on long years of looking at them and checking guns for proof/ dates  A picture of the  marks on the action flats would confirm the gun as being after 1904.

Under 1925 rules both chamber length and shot load was marked.

It is not uncommon to find guns with proof marks that do not exactly tally with what is written often in periods around change over from one set of rules to those succeeding them .

As I have passed on a lot of my stuff including data sheets and books I am working from memory but I am 95% certain of my facts 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for your response Gunman, just requesting a little more clarification!

So the optional nitro proof marks from 1904 are (except for chamber length and shot load) the same as the mandatory proof marks from 1925 to 1954 only changing under the 1954 rules? Have I got that right? 

The gun in question does bear a 1 1/4 mark, does that not refer to the shot load?........As per 1925 rules?

Again genuine questions.

P1

 

[Sereremo]

A very interesting conversation ... what I was looking for..

Thank you!

[panoma1]

On 19/01/2019 at 18:42, Sereremo said:

Here what is written about shotguns produced before 1925...In the previous post I wrote a mistake: barrel wall are measured 23 cm from the top of the barrel (where there are chokes...could you please tell me the correct name?)

anyway I’m Here to better understand English bespoke and not to sell it :))

 

 

23cm metric is approx 9 inches imperial.....this is the distance from the breech end where you would measure the bore diameter to establish the proof status, the end of the barrel where there is choke is the muzzle......the other end where you put the cartridge's in is the breech! I understand minimum barrel wall thickness is usually measured just before the chokes, as this is often the thinnest place, but measurements in several other places in the bore may be useful?

I really think you must either work in metric or imperial, I don't think it helps using both!

Edited January 20, 2019 by panoma1
Clearly I can't ****** spell!

[Sereremo]

I think you are correct, but consider that all my shotgun books are in Italian and all the measure data explanation are in metric and not imperial. This is the reason why I came here, very interesting forum,  asking help. I have little experience on Italian and Belgian shotguns but my knowledge on English shotguns is poor. Thanks for the name of the part ( breach and muzzle).

I will let you know all the internal measurements when I will be able to go to my gunsmith.

[Wiggum]

Does anyone know how to age a Baikal SxS ?  It’s says made in the USSR on it so I assume it was made before it’s break up. 

[panoma1]

2 hours ago, Sereremo said:

I think you are correct, but consider that all my shotgun books are in Italian and all the measure data explanation are in metric and not imperial. This is the reason why I came here, very interesting forum,  asking help. I have little experience on Italian and Belgian shotguns but my knowledge on English shotguns is poor. Thanks for the name of the part ( breach and muzzle).

I will let you know all the internal measurements when I will be able to go to my gunsmith.

Sorry Sereremo, clearly I can't spell! It is "breech" not breach! 😡

[Sereremo]

Ok! Breech.

[Gunman]

5 hours ago, panoma1 said:

Thanks for your response Gunman, just requesting a little more clarification!

So the optional nitro proof marks from 1904 are (except for chamber length and shot load) the same as the mandatory proof marks from 1925 to 1954 only changing under the 1954 rules? Have I got that right? 

The gun in question does bear a 1 1/4 mark, does that not refer to the shot load?........As per 1925 rules?

Again genuine questions.

P1

 

Pretty much , There were occasional differences in the actual stamps as they were replace due to ware . The 1&1/4oz is the maximum amount of shot the gun was supposed to have used and related to 2&3/4" chamber . 1&1/8 oz would have been 2&1/2" chamber which was the norm for most game guns of the period .

Many guns for export were proofed for heavier loads as were "pigeon" guns .

Guns proofed for nitro prior to 1904 bore similar marks but  without the NP ,the the view mark was a crown over crossed pikes which would also be on the action 

 

[DUNKS]

On 15/01/2019 at 10:44, JohnfromUK said:

I have seen some (photos of) restorations done by USA 'collectors'.  They look absolutely awful, the worst part being that they try and redo the case hardening colours - which looks terrible.  Even more amazing is how pleased they are with themselves about how they have 'saved' an old gun.  They also often seem to lengthen the chambers, and frequently don't re-proof, so the gun is in effect unsaleable in many markets.

I could not agree more John. I have seen some of these horrors.

It's the only reason I bought my 1895 English Ellis. To save it from some American buying it and taking it away!!!

"Not sure she really believes me!"

[arjimlad]

A little report of my shooting over the weekend if I may indulge..

I had been growing a bit despondent about shooting my 1974 Gunmark Merlin (Vincenzo Bernardelli) recently. I'd not been having all that much success with it compared to my Browning 525,  although the stock length is the same.  On Saturday though, it was pressed into service as my son was also invited to shoot with me, and he used the Browning.

On the first drive I dropped a very nice clean hen bird with the gun. On the second drive I missed two close birds (and was duly ribbed at the coffee break). But on the third drive I dropped a great fast partridge crossing behind me. My son also shot his first partridge at a good height crossing from right to left over his head, and was beaming for the rest of the day.

Come the final drive of the day I was stationed in a hot-spot - and lo & behold I started to connect with the birds really well. I was killing them a good way out front.

So on Sunday I took the old girl clay shooting, and did the usual 50 bird sporting. We don't keep scores as such but I was happy & confident with how I shot with the gun at last.

I don't know what changed, I was using the same shells as before - just something seemed to really click this weekend. I guess I have got used to the different sight picture of the gun compared with the Browning, although I have always shot SBS and OU.  Thoughts of selling the gun for a different model are shelved.

Happy days !

 

 

 

[arjimlad]

On ‎20‎/‎01‎/‎2019 at 00:23, Sereremo said:

Ok it’s now clear the length of the chamber, I will try this my “new” shotgun and I will let you know.

In the mean time I post to you another particular Italian S&S shotgun produced at the end of ‘70.

regards

 

Lovely looking gun !