doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com C. Daly

20ga. Looking at for possible purchase. Only interested in value in said condition as you see in pics. Thanks!

Nice
Would help to see the proof marks

Is it a 65mm chamber?






Mike

Is it a Sauer or Lindner �made� gun? A bit of a cult has grown up around the later. Adds a bit more value to it. Proofs would help as well as the previous post states.

I cannot see that well from your pictures, but it is not one of the high grades. It does appear to me to be a featherweight model which adds value.

As stated above it may be either a Lindner or a Sauer. Daly imported from both. The Lindner will probably have his crossed pistols maker's mark on the bottom of the barrels.

In the shape it appears to be in, I'd say two grand, maybe a little more if its a Lindner and those markings on the rib show it is a featherweight...Geo

What is that piece on the side of the forearm for? Decoration? Haven�t seen that before.

Ejectors...Geo

The piece on the forearm? Yes, decoration. Frequently seen on Dalys. I've heard it referred to as the fish eye.

buy it for $500...redo the wood and barrels, you may wind up with a $1000 gun...

Another issue for many will be the barrel legenth. 26� or 28�. If 30� a lot of members on this board would be very interested.

Is it a No. 135 (extractor) or a No. 185 (ejector)?

Battle,
Let us see the proof marks.
Mike

Prussian Daly

65mm chambers

Ejector gun

http://www.shotguns.se/html/germany_1890-1945.html

Mike

p.s. 185
fun reading

The BEST ONE

https://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-f...=100588595#lg-6

https://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-f...un_id=101253741

AND

https://www.rockislandauction.com/detail...0-gauge-shotgun

George, what makes you think it's a Featherweight?

I think Researcher is on the right track and I think it's an ejector gun so maybe Model 185. Those "fish eyes" are on ejector models, I believe. They aren't just decoration, Larry.

Battle, those may theoretically be pics of the proofs and barrel markings but not much more than that. The devil's in the details and not a lot of detail visible there.

I don�t think the barrel lugs protrude through the frame on non featherweight guns?

other "prussian daly"s" that i have seen have " made for charles daly by jp sauer"...or something like that, stamped on the top rib...they all were pre ww1 guns, as i recall, of fine quality...circa 1900...

Crown U is final proof (black powder)
Crown W is proof of choked barrels
Circle 20 is 2 1/2" 20 gauge denotation
2273 is the serial number

Mike

I have a Drilling (16-16 - 8x58 Sauer?) which does not fit this chart. It carries a date code of 2,07. I am unable to make out the proof house number for the year, but it is in the 6 hundreds. All barrels are marked Krupp & carry Nitro Proof marks, with loads given. The shotgun was proofed with or for Schultz powder. It is definitely a pre-1912 gun for the rifle barrel chambering is marked 172.28 - 59. Except for that 1 mm in length, all dimensions are a match for the 8x58 Sauer.

It�s not a featherweight. If it was, it would be marked on the rib.

Battle,
I couldn't read all the proof marks but Skeettx was good enough to list most of them. If both barrels have the crown W then both are choked, but the amount of constriction is not shown. If only one barrel is so marked, then only one is choked. The 20 in a circle shows it has the 65mm 20 gauge chambers and the 19 next to it shows the barrel's bore diameters ahead of the chambers are 19 gauge. The Proof marks show it was made after early 1893 and the lack of a date shows it was made before 1923( Suhl started dating them in 1923, Zella-Mehlis was not in Prussia).
Mike

["George, what makes you think it's a Featherweight?"]

Just because I could not read what the barrel inscription said. I have one that is very similar and it clearly says featherweight. I agree with battle that if it were a featherweight it would say so...Geo

Miller,
Your drilling is not from Suhl, rather it was made in or around Zella-Mehlis. Suhl didn't start dating the proofs until 1923 and didn't show the ledger numbers like Z-M did. You are correct about the nominal caliber of the rifle, but it was also sometimes called 8x58 1/2 R S&S.
The 59 just means it will accept a 59mm long case, by actual measurement. A nominal caliber designation doesn't always match actual measurements. Your drilling's markings are correct.
Mike

Lindner 20ga ejector. In the condition it�s in what would be a fair offer?

If it has the crossed pistols trademark, my guess would be $1,500 to two grand...Geo

For whatever my opinion is worth?

Thanks for the info Der Ami. I knew it was not a Suhl gun, it was just that all the info I had come up with had indicated that German proof was not supposed to have a date mark prior to 1912.
Thus it appears that only applies if it was proofed at Suhl. Yes I had seen reference to this caliber being listed as 8x58 1/2 R S&S.

Also Ihav read that prior to 912 smokeless powder proof required the same increase in powder as was used for black. Thus if the proof load was a double charge of black, if the gun was proofed for Schultz they also had to double the charge. Tis would put a tremendous load on the gun, so it was stated that most shotgun makers did not submit their shotguns to smokeless proof until it became andatory in 1912 & the rules were also changed then to a mre reasonable level.

Do you know if these same rules applied at Zella Mehlis?
I have a 12 gauge sidelock built by Sauer & Son for VL&D & marked as their Knock-About. Its SN dates it to around 1901-02. Even though it is around a 7 1/2 pound gun & marked for 70 mm chambers it does not carry smokeless proof.

Thanks for any infoyou can provide. Even at 81 I'm not too old to learn.

If this is truly a 20ga I would guess that the pricing suggested is way off. I'll buy any decent 20ga Daly for $1500 - really?

Not sure what had happen to the forearm tip. Maybe fell out and glued back in? Anyway he says that's the worst part of the gun. I know if I purchase the gun the barrels will need re-bluing. Not sure about the wood finish.

Well Doug, it is not in great shape and it is not one of the higher grades, and it does not seem to be a Lindner. I have one very similar to it in 12 gauge that is a Lindner and I paid $1,200 for it. But I could be wrong...Geo

I was under the impression it is Lindner...

It may be but its not just because it's a Prussian Daly. The question in my mind is whether it has the Lindner trademark. I did not see the crossed pistols on the barrels in your pictures...Geo

Crossed pistol over HAL just in front of the action flats, a Lindner gun in my view.

The trademark would clinch it, but I'll stick with my numbers...Geo

George... the last string of pics I posted show the crossed pistols ahead of the barrel flats.

Yup, I embiggened it and now I see the trademark...Geo

Miller,
I wasn't trying to sharpshoot you, it was just my "wordy" way to explain the early date and what seemed to be a long chamber. As far as I know, whether it was dated or listed the ledger number, was a proof house decision, not mandated by law. You are correct that early smokeless( voluntary nitro)proofs had to follow BP rules for the amount of powder used in the proof loads. It is true that some guns that were really intended to use nitro powder were submitted for BP proof. Also, some were submitted for nitro proof, but for a smaller duty load than was intended for use. As far as your gun having a 70mm chamber, the proof houses proofed the guns for nonstandard chamber lengths on request. This was fairly common on guns for export. If the gun had a standard chamber the size(caliber) was enclosed in a circle. Non standard chamber lengths( either shorter or longer) had to be marked with the nominal chamber length in mm(if export maybe inches). The proof load being shown on the gun, showing bore diameter in gauge measurement, and without chamber length for rifles, calculating smokeless proof load weights, under the 1891 law( effective early 1893) caused a lot of confusion and improvements were made in an attempt to clear up the confusion, in 1911. The significance of the 1912 date is that was when the 1911 improvements became effective. I did note that your bore( not groove or bullet) diameter was shown in gauge measurement(pre 1912), but the chamber length was shown( post 1912). There are a couple explanations for this, but I think it may have been by request, since it was for export to VL&D. I hope I didn't confuse matters.
Mike

Der Ami;
I may have confused you some in speaking of two different guns. The 16 gauge drilling barrels have 65 mm chamber lengths. There is no makers name on the Drilling. The 172.28 gauge bore diameter converts to 0.300", which seems a bit small for an 8 mm. My understanding though is this was checked by a series of plug gauges in.010" increments. Next step up would be 156.14 gauge or 0.310". The bore currently measures 0.309" with a groove diameter of 0.321".
The load of Shultz on the shot barrels converts to a 2�dram-1oz load which is lighter than normal. This gun was brought from Germany by a WWII Veteran.

The Sauer & Son/VL&D 12 gauge double is the one with 70mm (2 3/4") chambers. The 70 is stamped on the extractor face & actual measurement of the chambers show that to be correct. This gun is in good overall condition, with a couple of exceptions. It had a leather-covered cheek piece in the stock covering what appears to be cork which was set in a pocket cut into the stock. The leather is dried out & has rips in it. The entire forend, wood & iron is missing. I could repair the stock but this is of no benefit until I find a forend.

I also have a hammer drilling made by Miller & Val Greiss in 16-16-9.3x72R. It is dated from 1913 & has all proper proof per the 1912 rules. It does have one rather poorly made replacement, the left one, fortunately, so does not affect the trigger which switches from shot to rifle barrel.

Miller,
You are correct, I did think you were talking about one gun. I understand the "steps" between the plug gauges used to measure bore diameter was .1mm or about .004". Even though it was almost 156.14 gauge, if the plug wouldn't quite fit in it would be marked the next size down, even though it wasn't as close to the actual size. We have to remember the time the system was formulated, though. Your gun was intended to use .318" bullets, but you can use the 32 Win. Spec. .321 bullets in hand loading and I hear good things about the new Flex Tip bullets. I'm pretty sure Larry Schuknecht at Dutchmann Wood Works can make you a new forearm( incl. iron)for the Sauer. Do you know who actually made the Miller & Val Greiss? If it was Meffert, I have a parts drilling( frame cracked & Welded) that has two good locks with matching hammers. It also has a good forearm, but it wouldn't do you any good.
Mike

George, I am far from a Lindner expert, I have however seen a fair number and have owned a few also. I have never owned a 20ga Lindner and have seen only one that I restocked for a customer. Sub gauge Lindners are, IMHO, pretty rare hence my price?

Has HAL over the proof marks. Lindner had to change their proof marks because they were too much like the proof marks of the proof house.

Jon and Doug, I think George wrote that post before a photo was posted that showed the HAL mark of Lindner.

The "piece" is not decoration. It is an attaching point for ejector parts. It is missing on extractor guns. A 20 gauge steel barrel Lindner Daly with original length barrels is a rare piece and valuable. Let us know if you get it. I saw it in the auction catalog and promptly forgot about it.

eightbore...

This gun is being sold by an individual. However, I haven't been able to contact him since talking a few days ago. Maybe he has listed it with a auction company?

I suspect I was mistaken about seeing it on an auction site. I would like to see it, however.