Hello All - Just signed up and (of course) have a question about a side by side...Made in Belgium pre-1930?, I hope its not rude to post a few photos.

My experience has been with modern shotguns 1930s- 90s... I have little understanding of European made shotguns from the turn of the century era.

Looking through your site I have found some great info in previous posts and links to Belgian sites identifying marks.
The barrel markings were nearly all found through links recommended here.

[img]http://www.flickr.com/photos/7847003@N07/3143764895/[/img]


This 12 Ga Janssen and Sons Co was bought last summer at auction in Iowa by a friend. There were 5 other guns bought that day from a large collection. Some of the others were LeFever 12 Ga, LC Smith 12 Ga, A Fox 10 Ga, and I am not sure the brand of the others. The prices were right...

The Janssen and Sons Co was the only gun that the buyer wanted...
I got the Field Grade Lefever and my Dad got the LC Smith. Both Great serviceable guns that we will be hunting with for many years.

The question is - what does the buyer have exactly... he wants to use this gun in the field with modern loads (NO not Steel)and I am concerned about its ability to withstand a seasons use.
(Yes at some point we will have it taken to a good gun smith) In the mean time can anyone tell a bit more about it from photos.

Is the gun valuable to the point that using it might ruin a desirable piece of history?

The gun is tight - nothing shakes or gives the impression of being mis-aligned. The left Hammer was repaired at some date and is a bit less tight when cocking compared to the right which is like it was when new...great action on both - no catching or play.

The metal on the receiver is fairly coarse (cast?)and is bright for its age. What is this metal? Is it Nickle or Silver?

The look of this metal makes it seem more "hand made" than machined. A few of the screws are hand cut of the same metal although the pins are a hardened steel...

The gun was bought for around $200...

Reciever, Barrel, and Forearm are stamped 66 (or 99)
The Barrel states BELGIAN FINE DAMASCUS

The picture of the Barrel shows the marking well...
Other stampings on the Barrel are a .17EL
and a PJ

Both Barrels have 18.1 stamped in them....

Any opionions would be appreciated - Here are the photos...

[img]http://www.flickr.com/photos/7847003@N07/3143783091/[/img]

[img]http://www.flickr.com/photos/7847003@N07/3143792531/[/img]

[img]http://www.flickr.com/photos/7847003@N07/3144611550/[/img]

[img]http://www.flickr.com/photos/7847003@N07/3143779527/[/img]

[img]http://www.flickr.com/photos/7847003@N07/3144604358/[/img]

[img]http://www.flickr.com/photos/7847003@N07/3143768761/[/img]

[img]http://www.flickr.com/photos/7847003@N07/3144596870/[/img]

Welcome. Hope you stop by on a regular basis.

The gun does not have any Nitro proof marks that I can see. It is not safe with today's normal ammunition and requires low pressure loads.
It "appears" to be in good condition, but is not very collectible.

For more on Janssen Sons & Company:
http://www.littlegun.be/arme%20belge/art...%20cie%20gb.htm

http://damascus-barrels.com/Belgian_All_Proofmarks.html

Pete

I thought the almost total lack of barrel flats was interesting...Geo

Thanks for the replies so far.

To me examining the gun up close looking at the "tooling" marks this seem like sand cast metal that was then hand tooled...

The workmanship is good but does not look precise like the machining on an American or English gun.

Geo - what do you mean by the "total lack of Barrel flats?"

I could not get the camera to work well enough to show the Barrel Damascus while standing around in the guys kitchen last night.

There is a rib runs down the center although its not very deep - the site at the end of the Barrel looks to be an ivory circle with a round brass bead pinning it through...Again Bad light could not capture the detail...

Billy: PeteM was right on. After you have the gun inspected & OK'd by a competant gunsmith the gun should be fired only with low pressure shells. BTW Fox never made a 10 gauge gun to my knowledge. Welcome & Best Regards.......George

Billy: PeteM was right on. After you have the gun inspected & OK'd by a competant gunsmith the gun should be fired only with low pressure shells. BTW Fox never made a 10 gauge gun to my knowledge. Welcome & Best Regards.......George

Billy: PeteM was right on. After you have the gun inspected & OK'd by a competant gunsmith the gun should be fired only with low pressure shells. BTW Fox never made a 10 gauge gun to my knowledge. Welcome & Best Regards.......George

Your first picture shows the proof markings on the bottoms of the barrels and only a slim section of the flat area usually found at the bottom of the barrel breeches. That flat area is where you would usually find the markings, which on the gun you picture are on the barrels...Geo

Ditto all the above.
This maker was all over the place in quality. From fine guns to those made to a low price point for export.
We took the locks off a beautifully engraved one and the insides were rather rough.
I suppose that I have seen a half dozen and never bought any.
I think that you and your father got the cream in that bottle.
Best,
John

Thanks Geo - to be honest I have not looked at enough of these to spot things like that... But there again it says to me that the amount of metal at the FLAT - which is typically "machined" and hardened steel where it is mated to forged barrel isn't up to snuff for modern powder...and may not be real safe at all...

These are all clues and reasons to give the owner not to run any modern loads through it...

Someone said all over the map in terms of quality from this manufacturer...

The body of the reciever looks like cast Nickel or some Silver alloy... It would be really really beautiful if it had been buffed out and polished when it was made... What type of metal would this be? Anyone with an idea?

Sorry, boys, looks like just another Belgian Clunker to me. Chops

Thanks George. I forgot to mention having it inspected. John is correct about this maker being all over the place in terms of quality. Janssen was involved with several other makers in various collaborations. They did produce some very nice guns.

This is a Janssen from the link I provided above to Littlegun. Also a hammer gun.



The lack of flats and cupped receiver seem to be common. A Janssen of this quality was not the best of the litter. If you want to see a top Janssen, then Adolphe was the maker to choose:
http://www.littlegun.be/arme%20belge/art...dolphe%20gb.htm

Pete

Thanks Pete - for the link...

The Gun looks interesting because it is not "clean" cut like a machining/stamping process will allow... it looks 'one off'

Yes - it is obvious that this company has used harder metals and better machining.

I have read also that many of these were mass imported to the USA... But unlike hershies melamine this gun has all the testing marks from proofing houses and it is also to German specs for the time... The metal of the reciever is not a standard gun metal... at least not the hardened steel or Damascus I am used to.

so my real question (apart from can it be used) is why was it made? Was it a tourist type catch the eye gun? Was it a special order? Was it an apprentice given the go ahead to make a gun?

The thing is - someone for the last 100 or so years kept it in really good condition... or didnt trust it enough to fire it all that much...

I guess maybes thats the appeal of these older guns...

Ya, if these old guns could talk. I love to take an old clunker, freshen it up and take it out hunting.
I like the gun but like others have said, it's all over in terms of quality. The lack of barrel flats is uaually an indication of a cheap JABC (just another Belgium clunker). It has a stock made of utility grade walnut set off with rather tastful carving (to my eye) yet the checkering is of very poor quality. The engraving has an art-deco look, it might give a clue as to age. I have no doubt the frame is made of steel or iron, you might check with a magnet. Despite the negatives, it does have character and would be a good candidate for Winchester AA Low recoil/noise shells or even the Winchester AA Xtralites assuming the a competant gunsmith checks it out.
Steve

I will take a stab at answering some of these. Something on the order of 1 million of guns were imported from Belgium over a 15 year period. They were always contract guns, IE, they were purchased by an American company with a contract to have them produced in Belgium. Remember Sears advertised that they had Belgian guns for sale.

The receivers were always fluid steel. Damascus was only used for the barrels.

The Belgian guild system was old and long. An apprentice would only move up after many years. Often a journeyman was hired based not only on experience and skill but also on the number of sons who could run errands for the shop.

It was most likely produced for a large catalog house. But as Steve wisely points out, if they could only talk. This one has been cared for. It was some one's pride for a long time until it became a hand me down. The art deco look is not much different than that seen on some graded Flues.

Having made all the above generalizations, I am sure there were exceptions to every one of them.

Pete

It was a price point tool made by an industry with lower labor costs, as well as an adequate labor force, trained, that could all but supply the world with longarms. One note on the German proof law of April 1, 1893 is that German excluded Liege from its proofhouse reciprocity forcing Belgium to revise their proof law on July 11, 1893 which lead to the "Crown" over "ELG" in an oval. Without it, Belgian tubes had to be reproofed/reproved in Germany. You see the mark of the tubes experiencing re-enforced proof, or something acknowledged by the German proofhouses, on your post 1898 longarm.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

Hey Thanks everybody for the quick info on this gun...

We have convinced the owner to let it sit until a gunsmith looks it over well.

To my eyes it looked really interesting - the silver of the metal was just unblemished...It did not look like steel to me.

My dad thought the gun looked "wrong" on chintzy... sort of a fabulous fake. He thought the reciever metal looked like "pot metal"

Both of us were worried about the thing firing.

I checked the metal and all silver parts are magnetic, they are just in near original condition... bad die casting leaving a few small voids in the surface of the metal. No polishing leaving a grainy rough texture.

I am sure most of you have seen this book or have it...

The Gun and Its Developement

http://books.google.com/books?id=3HMCAAA...esult#PPA396,M2


Its a long link - but it describes what to look for in a double gun as well as what to spot in a fake... It mentions that Belgium was a common place for both poorly made guns as well as fakes that tried to pass off as quality manufacturers...

This article and everything you guys gave for input has really helped me spot some of the problems with this gun. I'm a sucker for history and this has been a great way to learn some things I never knew.... The gun is not a modern fake - it may not be a fake at all, but it is not well made.

Thanks again

Everyone have a good new years eve...