My Charles Daly Linder 10 b SXS has serial number 1668. It has ejectors and appears to have been restocked. Weight 9.25 lb Krupp fluid steel barrels 30 inches. There is a number on the barrels 1914 (date of make?) in addition to Prussia and crossed pistols.
Question when was this Linder shotgun made, model number?
Thanks!
Jim

Jim:

If it wears the Lindner quality control stamp of Cross Pistols surmounted by a Crown or HAL, then it would indeed be a Lindner-Daly. Images would point to the modell number.

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

Photos are posted on the German Gun Collectors site- Prussian Daly Section.
Thanks!
Jim

http://www.germanguns.com/upload/showthread.php?1959-Daly-Linder-10-b-S-X-S&p=13340#post13340


Yeah, 2nd series Lindner - Daly. Schilling Forge tubes and the 1914 is a barrel number.

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

Damn, can't see any of the pics.

Ok, Canvas-Back...










Cheers,

Raimey
rse

What if the stamp is crossed pistols without the HAL? What does that tell about origin? I have a 12g Daly (SSN 2851) w crossed pistols beneath a crown but no HAL or Prussia stamp. Thanks for the information.

Pre 1893 I believe.

Thank you Raimey. That's a lovely looking gun.

It wouldn't be pre 1893, it has proof marks that were not used until early 1893- crown "S".
Mike

Ford, they aren't discussing the subject longarm.

Y85, either post or forward me an image of the marks.

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

To quote the great Gilder Radner "That's very different- never mind".
Mike

Lindner - Daly Nr. 2851 - 1st series.


I'd hazard a guess it would date to the mid to late 1880s.

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

Lovely....

Any idea of the date it was made?
Thanks!
Jim

Second series serial number 1668.

I'll take a stab.....1909??

Raimey, what do you think?

Well, what I think is coupling a Lindner-Daly to a date is tough. I always think the examples are a bit younger than they actually are. But yeah, I'd hazard a guess of the turn of the 20th century into the 1st decade. It is also possible it could have been in the waning years of the 19th century. I'll go back thru the Lindner - Daly Calculus & see what I might derive.

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

I agree with Canvasback. A 1668 (second series) Lindner Daly would put the gun in the 1909 production range, plus or minus a year.

The first Lindner Dalys with 1912 German proofs show up at approximately the 2000 serial number mark (second series). So with a production of 100-150 guns a year, a 1668 serial number puts you circa-1909.

One follow-up note the "about serial number 2000" marker for post-1912 guns: there wasn't a hard-cutover. What I mean is that I have observed Lindner Dalys with 1912 proof marks with a slightly lower serial number than Daly guns with only the 1892 proofs. The serial number differences weren't large and are likely explained with the variances in production times of different Daly models and quality levels.

Ken

Ken,
Thanks for your response!
Jim

Good God! I don't know what I'm doing and Ken agreed with my dating!
Maybe all the pouring over the fine print everywhere I can find it is starting to pay off!

Ken, regarding the total numbers for Series I & Series II Lindner - Daly production, do you have those as well as the years that bound them? So, there is a relatively constant benchmark @ the number 2000 for the 1912 Suhl proof rules, although I'm not certain that Daly would have paid for the Nitro proof effort seeing the longarms were destined for the U.S. of A., but do you have a benchmark for the year 1900, or thereabouts?

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

Raimey,

Another benchmark (of sorts) is the introduction of sideclips on the higher grade SxS Daly hammerless models. The 1902 SD&G catalog is the earliest I have found that mentions sideclips. Curiously though, the picture of the shotguns in the catalog above that description does not actually have sideclips. The 1903 SD&G catalog rectified that oversight.

As a guide, the introduction of sideclips comes pretty close to (roughly) serial #1000 (second series) which again happened in the 1901/1902 period. I have a another good date indicator in the 1899 year at ~#900 (second series). So the #1000 benchmark is reasonably accurate given those to date points.

All this assumes of course a relatively stable number of guns produced between the benchmark years which is likely a stretch, but also the best information I have barring any other benchmarks.

Ken

The production numbers per year is where I take issue as I just don't thing the production per year was as high in the 1890s as it was in the early 1900s, when Lindner made an expansion of his operation. When we find the Daly ledger, we will have the answers. Maybe, just maybe the Lindner ledger is contained in the Old Suhl jail?


Cheers,

Raimey
rse

Raimey,

I agree with your premise that the Lindner production was not consistent year to year, and likely nothing close to it. Looking at other period makers (with known production numbers) the yearly production volumes are often very lumpy, to use a technical term.

Changing demand due to the economic health of the market country, internal organizational and marketing changes within the company, etc., etc., would obviously all have an impact on production volumes. Lacking any of that information - and being too lazy to construct some model to account for some of the known issues - I have just assumed consistent production volumes between known "anchor points".

I also look forward to someone one day uncovering the Lindner production records so we can put this all to bed once and for all.

Regards,
Ken