|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,504
Posts545,544
Members14,417
| |
Most Online1,344
Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 16
Boxlock
|
OP
Boxlock
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 16 |
I am very curious as to what the symbols mean. Thanks for any help you can give me.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,814 Likes: 194
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,814 Likes: 194 |
It passed thru the new(1952) Eckernförde facility in December 1954. Interesting that the proofmarks parallel those of Ulm.
Cheers,
Raimey
rse
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,814 Likes: 194
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,814 Likes: 194 |
Intertwinded >>SuS<< - Sauer Process mark
Eagle over M - Preliminary proof of black powder for scatterguns or multi-barreled longarms.
Eagle over N coupled w/ Oak Leaf - Definitive Proof w/ Nitro Powder for scatterguns & multi-barreled longarms
Not sure on the single Eagle over N on the 16 bore, maybe the left the Oak Leaf off or one Oak Leaf does it all???
Those on the water-table I believe to be coupled.
16/70 - Bore diameter & chamber depth
7X57R - Calibre
12 54 - Month & Year of proof
Cheers,
Raimey
rse
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,464 Likes: 207
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,464 Likes: 207 |
243 Ackely,
To supplement Raimey's remarks. The oak leaf is the housemark for the Eckernfoerde proof house. On the rifle barrel, it is only a happenstance that it is next to the definitive nitro(later "normal") proof( eagle N). The eagle N on the shot barrels and frame are also nitro definitive proofs.
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,814 Likes: 194
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,814 Likes: 194 |
Ford, I realize you were in Eckernförde when it was proven, but if you look @ the Ulm proofs, the mark of the proof facility pairs w/ the proof step/process mark.
Cheers,
Raimey
rse
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 16
Boxlock
|
|
OP
Boxlock
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 16 |
Were the proof marks proven in a certain order?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,814 Likes: 194
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,814 Likes: 194 |
Indeed, material or component, preliminary & final w/ inspection marks in the mix
Cheers,
Raimey
rse
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,464 Likes: 207
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,464 Likes: 207 |
Raimey,
The proof marks themselves are Federal Republic of Germany marks and are the same for all proof houses at the time. The house mark for Eckernfoerde was the oak leaf, the house mark for Ulm was a stag ( Red Deer) antler. I didn't see the Ulm house mark on the gun. One of my drillings passed through Ulm for a post war reproof after rechambering and the font seems smaller, but the marks are otherwise the same.
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,814 Likes: 194
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,814 Likes: 194 |
No Ford, from the references I've viewed, the 1952+ proofmarks show the final(definitive) & repair proofs coupled w/ the proof facility within which it passed. There's not an Ulm proofmark. Just saying they protocol was very similar.
Cheers,
Raimey
rse
|
|
|
|
|
