|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,572
Posts546,457
Members14,424
| |
Most Online1,344
Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,532 Likes: 85
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,532 Likes: 85 |
Dustin,
Perhaps reach out to “gunman”, I’d bet he knows it off the top of his head. The only guess I’d have is a variation of the more well known “box” ejector systems.
Was a Perks box system somewhat similar? Sorry, when I have a question about English stuff, I ask you, usually.
Best,
Ted Thanks for the thought . I will admit I do not know who's patent this is ,had it in my mind that it was Perkes but never had that confirmed . Seen a few of these and some variants ,as a lot of designs were basically improvements , simplifications or combinations of other designs as a a way of getting round patents . Like so many functional ejector systems they all ( house style not considered such as Cogswell's or Boss ) were surpassed by Southgate /Holland , Deeley box and Baker , probobly for there simplicity or availability in the case of Deeley box's which could be bought in complete
|
|
2 members like this:
Ted Schefelbein, LeFusil |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,278 Likes: 530
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,278 Likes: 530 |
Dustin,
Perhaps reach out to “gunman”, I’d bet he knows it off the top of his head. The only guess I’d have is a variation of the more well known “box” ejector systems.
Was a Perks box system somewhat similar? Sorry, when I have a question about English stuff, I ask you, usually.
Best,
Ted Thanks for the thought . I will admit I do not know who's patent this is ,had it in my mind that it was Perkes but never had that confirmed . Seen a few of these and some variants ,as a lot of designs were basically improvements , simplifications or combinations of other designs as a a way of getting round patents . Like so many functional ejector systems they all ( house style not considered such as Cogswell's or Boss ) were surpassed by Southgate /Holland , Deeley box and Baker , probobly for there simplicity or availability in the case of Deeley box's which could be bought in complete I did send you a PM regarding this system. Thanks for responding here, though. It’s much appreciated. You’re definitely not the only full time (retired or not retired) gunsmith who’s not familiar with this system. Osborne, being a fairly prolific maker to the trade, I would’ve thought more gun workers would be somewhat more familiar with this system. It must not have been used for very long at all. Dustin
|
|
1 member likes this:
Ted Schefelbein |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,857 Likes: 384
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,857 Likes: 384 |
So is this ejectors so complex because it is an assisted opener?it's a shame so much information is gone about the English trade I tried doing research on some mfg.of English guns and just hit a dead end good luck.mark
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,278 Likes: 530
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,278 Likes: 530 |
So is this ejectors so complex because it is an assisted opener?it's a shame so much information is gone about the English trade I tried doing research on some mfg.of English guns and just hit a dead end good luck.mark My hunch is simpler mechanisms were adopted because of ease of manufacture, simplicity and reliability . Like mentioned earlier, the Deeley box, southgate, bakers etc are much simpler to manufacture than this system or even a Perkes. This system (The Ross) uses 4 total springs (two big V springs and 2 flat springs), and also has the complex rotary sears. The rotary sears themselves look like a real chore to manufacture and fit up. In addition to this system are two blades that are connected to the tumblers in the action that trip & cock the rotary sears. Whew. The Osborne gun is not an assisted opener. This ejector system provides no means of mechanical assisted opening that I can see. Dustin
|
|
|
|
|
