Question. Seen my Uncle's hammer 10ga double that he bought back in the 50's. He used it with modern factory 2 7/8 inch loads to about 1970 when one hammer spring failed. Looks like reblued fluid steel to me. If I remember right, top rib marked "W W Greener and Son works Birmingham". Barrel marked with crossed sceptres with crown on top and crown with double scriped B's (Birmingham proofs). 118 or 11.8 over 12m (both barrels) Not for Ball on left. some scroll engraving.
Serial Number 185**. Looking for date of manufacture and possibly replacement hammer spring.
That number would put it at 1877 when 1,500 guns were made by Greener that year. The Not For Ball stamp was used on choke bored barrels from 1875 to 1887. It will be proofed for black powder unless it shows later nitro proof marks. Lagopus.....
Thanks for the info. He bought it when he was a teenager and shot a lot of pheasant, duck, and geese with it despite an area of barrel dents about 2/3 the way up. Otherwise the barrels look good no pitting. But he had to fix the stock in high school wood shop when he fired both barrels at once. Learned not to do that again. He said duck hunting everyone knew when he shot because they could hear the barrels ring. A lot of factory nitro loads went thru it. Question, what fluid steel would have been used on this gun in 1877. He definitely proof tested it.
The barrels will be laminated steel not fluid steel which is similar to Damascus. Someone likely blued over the twist at some earlier time and it looks like steel.
Thank's Stallones. I have a few laminated, twist, and different types of Damascus. This Greener sure looks like fluid. It's just the way he bought it in the 50's. So if Greener wasn't using any fluid steel, who ever blued it, hid it good. When did Greener first offer fluid steel in their barrels?
Pictures of the proofmarks will tell a great story,
If you need assistance posting pictures, I will help.
Could be replacement or sleeved barrels??? Proof marks
will tell alot.
Mike
The possibility exists that he subject gun was fitted with Greener's weldless twist steel barrels that were subsequently reblued. The fourth edition of Greener's book ,"The Gun" published in 1888 states that Barrels of this type were being made and used on some shotguns. This type of barrels is uncommon! I have owned several and inspected many Greener guns over the past 50 years.Thus far I have only seen one example of a Greener gun with weldless twist barrels, in this case the gun was made in 1911.
I could not locate any reference to this type barrel in Graham Greener's excellent book, "The Greener Story!"
"Greener's Solid Weldless-Twist Barrel" with "figure similar to that of Wire Twist"
http://books.google.com/books?id=3HMCAAAAYAAJ&pg=P238&source
Hi Skeettx, Roy, and Drew. Skeettx, thanks for the offer to post pic, but don't have any. Just saw the gun last night when visiting him. I remember him duck/goose hunting with it when I was a teenager, but didn't pay any atention to it back then. Don't think replacement barrel and it's not sleeved. The barrels are thin in the front 1/3 and I can see the dents on the inside of the barrels that where there when he bought it. He thought rust frosting, but he was seeing shadow from the dents. At least they didn't buff the name on barrel, engraving or locks. They look good. He thought fluid steel, but I'm now thinking laminated. The "Not for Ball" was a red flag for me, but didn't tell him, also no nitro proof. Not knowing anything about Greeners I thought around 1890, but didn't tell him. I was only off 13 years!! Need to look at it with the magnifier. At least we got it dated. Need to buy a barrel thickness gauge.
Thanks for your input Roy.
Drew, like reading your posts. I shoot twist and damascus guns with both black and smokeless reloads and my uncle shot one with factory nitro loads even thou they would have been lower pressure 10ga. He still has a few Rem. green paper 2 7/8 shells.
Always good to hear storys of people shooting old black powder proofed guns with nitro loads and the gun not knowing the difference.
