So I have inherited an Army & Navy C.S.L. 12 Gauge.

I had it buried in the safe for a while, waiting for the day that I either came up with some 2 1/2" shells, or got off me arse and dug up a recipe and loaded some.

So I'm wiping it down, oiling it, and looking down the bores from each end. For a lark, I drop a fired and deprimed 2 3/4" Win AA hull that I had on hand into the chamber. Thunk. All the way in. Wasn't that strange. So I root around my shop and come up with a nice clean bit of aluminum rod. Slide that into the chamber till it stops. Pull it out. compare to the hull (2 3/4"). Just a little longer than the hull.

"Hmm" sez I. Clearly marked 2 1/2". Grandfather is long gone (this gun was apparently a gift to him, when he turned 19, in 1919. Not sure from whom). My father also is passed away and not answering calls on the crystal ball :).

I'm trying to figure out if the stock chamber would have been as long as this, or if it is most likely that the chamber has had a reamer dropped into it at some point. This is something I was unwilling to do, but will happily take advantage of, if it is already done.

I cannot see any difference in the surface textures in the area of the forcing cone (which is quite steep and clear) that would suggest that it was not original, but it could have been carried out a fair while ago, too.

Can any of you kind gents provide me with the dimensions for a chamber length gauge? Or at least tell me where I am supposed to measure from? It seems obvious that I should be measuring from the very beginning of the forcing cone, but I have seen enough obvious things that were the wrong thing, that I wish some confirmation and/or advice.

Further to the Army & Navy topic, can any of you gents suggest to me who may have been the maker of this gun?




The A&N serial number is 683XX, while there seems to be another set of numbers marked about some of the internal parts, which is 1132XX. The most readily spotted of the "other" numbers is on the forend lug, also marked with an arrow cipher.

I'd be quite pleased to hear what you think.

I figure that it rates as a good grade, though probably not nearly a "Best" grade gun. It has seen quite a bit of use, probably some abuse, and in spite of all that, still has some case color in spots out of the way of hands and fingers.
One of the triggers has been silver soldered back to function, and it appears to have been savaged at one or more times, by an unsympathetic hand with a screwdriver.

If the chamber gages out at 2 3/4", it may very well see some field time for grouse! Otherwise, I would just as soon tuck it back away and await some more appropriate shells.

Thanks!

Cheers
Trev

Trev, I'd guess the gun is based on the Webley & Scott "Proprietary." A photo of the top of the gun would help clear that question up. The loop number looks like a W&S number from about that time frame. You can easily clear up these questions by buying the original sales records from Glasgow University Custodian of Archives.

As you are a reloader, you can easily make low pressure loads in 2 3/4" cases. Dig out a loading manual and find 7/8 oz to 1 oz loads that go about 1100 feet per second and have a chamber pressure of 5500 - 7500 psi. The low pressure will be kind to the metal parts and the low recoil will be kind the the 90 year old wood and to you. It is quite well established that low pressure 2 3/4" reloads don't have much pressure increase in 2 1/2" chambers. Many of us who shoot such guns regularly use this approach. Even if your gun had been rechmbered 2 3/4", it would not be suitable for USA - SAAMI standard loads as they are too high pressure. There are also plenty of factory specialty loads available via e-commerce and shipped to your door. Do not shoot loads of unknown pressure!!

The easy way to measure chamber length is to hold the barrels up towards a light source. you should see a very distinct shadow where the chamber meets the forcing cone. Slide a steel rule into the chamber until you see it touch the shadow. Read depth off rule. The depth measuring rod of a sliding caliper works well used in the same fashion as the rule above.

I doubt that the chamber have been lengthened

The gun is typical of Webley-bult Army & Navy boxlocks. It is not a high-quality gun but will be properly constructed from good materials.

What do the proof marks tell you about the chamber length?

Teh US is full of guns with extended chambers - I saw a Purdey pigeon gun on my last visit - extended to 3" (unknown to the owner) from the original 2 1/2". It may not be an issue there but it makes the gun illegal to sell in the UK unless and untill it has been re-proofed.


The proof marks will tell the original dimensions - post a photo of the barrel flats if you can.

The proofs are clearly marked as 2 1/2", Nitro, etc.

I'll see if I have a picture on my box at home, and if not, will see to taking one and getting it up.

After I posted, I bodged up an expander to hold the crimp wide open on the hull I was playing with, in order to see if it would hang up on the beginning of the forcing cone taper, and it slid fully home without any pressure required, so one way or another, it seems that it will clear the 2 3/4" hull. By how much, I would like to determine.

One fellow I spoke to thought the answer to everythng was to drop a long forcing cone reamer into it. I have not been back to his place. I am not very interested in modifying the gun, when I can modify the shells to suit.

Cheers
Trev

I think your approach is correct. I have on old Hellis which appears to have longish chambers also. Don't know why that is the case. I had the chambers on a Fox lengthened and I'm sorry I did. The data does suggest very little pressure rise when firing a 2 3/4 cartridge in a 2 1/2 chamber. Removing steel to relieve the very modest pressure rise seems like a bad idea since removal reduces its capacity to contain pressure. Much better to reload to modest pressures and leave the chamber alone. My 2 cents. Looks like a nice family keepsake to shoot and enjoy.

Trev, if "2 1/2" is marked on the barrel flats and if your grandfather received the gun in 1919, there's something a bit odd afoot. Brit proof rules did not require that the chamber length be stamped on the gun (as long as it was the standard 2 1/2") until 1925. What you should find is a shot charge (probably 1 1/8 oz). If you find the word "Maximum", that would make the gun even older (1896-1904). But as mentioned above, simply by providing the serial number, you can get more information from Glasgow University. For a fee, you can even get the order book sheet listing your gun, original buyer, date, who made it, etc.

Not this gun.

This gun was built and finished by Webley & Scott. Hard to say which specific model without a photo of the top of the action. Engraving is Webley's style. Army & Navy's number of 68,3XX is actually quite a late number for them, and would be in volume 10 of their records, which covers the period 1927-1935. The number 113,2XX is Webley's serial number, and is from 1929. The proof marks include the chamber length mark (2 1/2") introduced by new rules of proof in 1925. A & N's records will probably show 1929 or 1930. You can request a copy of the ledger page for this gun. Email the Archivist at the University of Glasgow. They will provide the year the gun was sold and who it was sold to free via email. If you want hard copy of the ledger, they charge 25 GBP, IIRC. Their records will include both of the numbers mentioned above, date of order, date of sale, the make profit code, name of buyer, who built the gun, etc. It's a neat thing to have, especially if the gun has been handed down in the family.

Another potential way to check the date, if your gun was proved in Birmingham (the quick check is the view mark on the flats. Birmingham's is a crown over BV, London's is a crown over V), it should bear a date code. This is a small mark on the flats consisting of a pair of crossed swords with a letter in the 12 o'clock angle and a numeral in the 6 o'clock angle. The letter is the date code. If it was proved in London, there will be no date code. Your gun was built and finished in Birmingham. That doesn't mean it was proved there. Webley had many thousands of double guns proved in London.

Wow, great info!

Off the top of my head, I beleive that the proof is Crown BV, along with, IIRC, two other marks with the crown present.
It is marked 1 1/8, as well.

I'll post pictures this evening!

The dates being off as much as that, does not surprise me at all. Such is the hazard of relying on word of mouth to get sorted on what happened over such time.

At one point, before my time, my father was quite an avid bird hunter, making a pilgrimage of sorts, each year, out to Saskatchewan or Alberta to hunt ducks, and he had an Irish Setter that he used as his bird dog. By the time us kids were well enough established in the yard, the dog was getting old, and the time was taken up with all those things in life that get in the way of getting out.

Cheers
Trev

Looking forward to photos of the proofmarks. If it has both 2 1/2" and 1 1/8 oz stamped on the flats, it dates from the 1925-54 period, unless there was a reproof somewhere along the line.

And as best I can tell from the photos, now that I look closely, your gun appears to be the same model as my A&N pair: "Anson" Hammerless Ejector. Engraving certainly matches. Can't tell from the photos. Does yours have a Greener crossbolt? The Anson sold for 25 pounds in 1933-34. Mine were made in 1933, and are about 200 numbers later than yours by SN.

Trev, I agree with everything said so far by the others. Do consider loading regular 2 3/4" hulls at low pressure and blast away. Forcing cones: I've had some lengthened and some are original, I'm rather ambivilent about it.

Here's the e-mail address for the Duty Archivist in Glasgow: dutyarch@archives.gla.ac.uk . I have found them to be very polite and responsive.

Thank you for the email address.

Photos!

First the proofs.

Is the diamond with the 12 over a G a duplicate mark to the number 12 stamped at the breech mouth, or is it something relating to the charge of powder? Or?



The top view of the action. Sorry about all the carpet. At least I got my toes out of the way, eh?



I'll get an email off to the U of G in the next day or so. I will report back the results, certainly.

I was noting that Winchester and Federal are both loading 1oz loads at lower pressures, but sadly, they do not look like ammunition that is readily available, from a volume sales perspective. I'll have to have a look for it when I get into the city for a day trip.
It might be worth a try.

Cheers
Trev

Hello Trev,
I do happen to own a virtual clone of your A&N.
I have on my desk #68327 with Webley # 98638. It's peculiar that the A&N #s are 52 off while the Webley #s are ~15,000 off. So much for predictability...
The action is the same and the engraving is very similar. This model is not depicted in my 1922 Webley catalog, but it is definitely a Webley action.
My chambers measure very close to 2 5/8", but that does not mean that your gun's chambers are not originals.
I will ask for the records on my gun as well.
Best regards,
WC

I got to fiddling with a ruler, as well as my blocked open AA hull and a dial caliper, and best as I can measure,the chamber is a tiny bit short of 2 3/4". The AA Hull measures almost exactly 68mm, so, the chamber is short of the full 70mm that should mean a 2 3/4", but long(ish) for a 2 1/2".
That does not take into account, the variances and "extra" room, that would have been allowed for in the chambering, to cover the eventuality of different length cartridges.
I expect that this means that the chamber is indeed a correct 2 1/2" chamber and unmolested, and that there should be not much to worry about, provided that I can keep it from falling into the hands of those that believe "more is better" and would load it up with high brass steel shot goose loads <shudder>.

Must get the hole gauges into the chamber, and get a measurement of the diameter, and make a decent fitting plug, or sort out my supply of low temp alloy, and make a cast of the chamber.

I was digging around the past posts here and saw the rebuild done to an A&N by a gent from Ontario. WOW!

Cheers
Trev

Trev, that's definitely the "Anson" model, exactly like mine, and less than 150 numbers apart. Proofs . . . those are exactly what you would expect to find for a British gun made in Birmingham between 1925-54. The 12 over a C in a diamond simply indicates it's a 12 gauge and the chambers are shorter than 3". The "choke" means that the barrel has at least a minimum amount of choke; going from recall here, but I think it means more than .006 or something like that.

Using a Galazan chamber gauge, the chambers on my A&N's measure about as dead on at 2 1/2" as you're going to get.

Powder charge . . . Unfortunately, all you can tell from the proofs is that at the time the gun was built, it could be used safely with any 2 1/2" British shell containing 1 1/8 oz shot. I have been reloading standard 2 3/4" hulls to appropriate low pressures and shooting them in my guns--a lot--for the past 3 years. Mostly 7/8 oz target loads, but some 1 oz and 1 1/8 oz hunting loads. No problems whatsoever.

The action is clearly a W&S "Proprietary", except for the cross bolt. The 1914 and 1939 W&S catalogues show it as a screw-grip action. The engraving pattern would fall somewhere beween the very plain Grade 3 and the fancier Grade 2. I imagine A&N had the purchasing power to get the cross bolt and brand specific engraving. Perhaps A&N staff believed cross bolted guns sold better than screw grip guns or there was a ptice/profit difference. It most certainly came from the factory as a sound and servicable gun.

Here is the same basic gun as a screw grip and in Grade 2 get-up for James Woodward (sold in 1910).

As a follow up to the story.

I built myself a chamber gauge, .774" dia, and marked out in 1/4 inch increments more or less matching what lengths of shells are available.
I turned the gauge from some scrap plexiglass that I had on hand.

When dropped into the chambers, the 2 3/4" line sits proud of the chamber by about 1/16", or about 2mm. Pretty much what I had measured before.

I still have not heard back from the U of G Archivist.

How long is usual for the turn around time from contact?

Cheers
Trev

larry Brown is right on with the period of proof. The 1 1/8 is the mark applied to indicate it has standard 2 1/2" chambers. If it had 2 3/4" chambers it would have the 1 1/4 oz. mark. The chamber may measure slightly longer due to the angle of the forcing cones or, if someone has lengthened them which would render them out of proof under British proof law. I think that you will have a standard 2 1/2 " chambered gun. Just an adition; if it was meant for 3" cartridges it would have an 'L' after the 12 over C in the diamond to indicate 'Long' chambers or the 1 1/2 oz. mark. Lagopus.....

Rocketman, it's straight out of the 1933-34 A&N catalog as an "Anson" model. Same crossbolt, same engraving. And the order sheet on my guns is clearly marked "W&S" (Webley & Scott).

Thanks, Larry. The "Anson Model" does not appear in either the 1914 or 1939 catalogues. Does your gun have the semi-circular stock inlet at the junction of the tang and the action fences? Also, does it have a screw slightly behind and below the hinge pin? I haven't found these two features illustrated on any guns other than the Proprietary --- but, then, neither have I seen a Proprietary with a cross bolt illustrated, either.

Lagopus,
Slight correction:
The mark for chambers not less than 3" would be "LC", not CL (I was very pleasantly surprised to find the LC mark on a recent purchase...); was the service charge weight for the LC/3" really a whopping 1 1/2oz?!
Sorry, thread drift...

Nice old gun; great to have a family provenance, and great to have access to such detailed information on the individual gun's "birth". (there, I'm back on!)
RG

Rocketman--Yes to both your questions. As you can see from Trev's photos, the engraving is definitely very different. The crossbolt shows quite clearly in the illustration of the "Anson" in the A&N catalog, so it must have been a standard feature on that model. Wonder if there are any other features that would distinguish it from the Proprietary? The Anson does have bushed strikers. Are those also found on the Proprietary?

The Woodward shown above does have bushed strikers. Also, in the photo below, you can see the screw threads of the screw grip mechanism.



Here is what seems to be another example of the A&N under discussion. http://gunroom.shootingsportsman.com/listing/1873

Well,

Heard back from the U of G today.

The gun was purchased by a Miss Jones, in 1930, for the sum of 25 Pounds Sterling.

I'll send for the page of the sales book, soon.

That certainly fixes the manufacturing date.

Cheers
Trev

Trevj, 25 pounds in 1930 had the same buying power as 1911.86 current dollars.

This from Historical Currency Conversions

JC

I'm quite looking forward to seeing if there is enough info there to figure out which family member that was, whether it was one of my Grandfather's sisters, his mother, or his wife.

Yep! 25 Pounds was not an insubstantial sum at the time.

Cheers
Trev

My A & N sold for seven pounds, seven shillings! It looks similar without the engraving. I like it a lot.

Hi Larry,
My gun has bushed strikers as well, so we are converging on the "anson" model.
It is not a screw grip, so won't qualify for the "proprietary" model.
My W&S catalog does not show the breech face of the Proprietary, so I can't say if it was made with Bushed Strikers.
WC

wc - see the Woodward photo above for one Proprietary model breech face that is bushed. Does the catalogue picture of the Anson model show the semicircular action inlets/stock protrusions?

My Ansons aren't screw grips. The photo of the model I have in the catalog copy provided by A&N is a little hard to see, but it does seem to show the protrusions--which are definitely present on my guns.

Looking at the 2nd A&N catalog page I have, I see that ALL the boxlocks listed are referred to as "Ansons". The specific model I own, and the one Trev owns, is the only one shown with a Greener crossbolt.

Mine also sold for 25 pounds, in late 1933.

This is the stock inletting detail I'm talking about.

A few more words on the "Proof". Larry quite accurately answered the enclosed 12/C mark. The 12 mark indicated bore dia at time of proof. This was marked by determining the largest of a series of plug gages which would enter the bore for at least 9" from breech. 13 =.710", 13/1 =.719, 12 =.729, 12/1 =.740 & 11 =.751. It is not really that uncommon to find a gun with 12ga chamber having any of these bore marks & even on occasion a wider variation.
I also am operating from memory here Larry, but my recollections are when the "Choke" mark replaced "Not for Ball" it was made mandatory on any bbl having a choke constriction of as much as .008" (0.2mm). This change was done to counteract the belief held by many that even a ball made suitably undersize to pass through the choke was still unsuitable for use.
In black powder days the standard load for the 2½" 12ga gun had been established as 3dram-1 1/8oz & for the 2 3/4" gun 3¼dram-1¼oz. As smokeless powders took over from black, loads having similar ballistics also became standard & this wt of shot charge became a part of the marking at proof. It took until 1954 to alter these marks from one of wt to one of pressure. However for many years prior to this shells had been specifically tailored for use in nominal 2½" chambered guns, & which did not violate the 1 1/8oz proof, which contained shot wts of at least from 15/16oz up to 1¼oz. This was done primarily by altering velocity & eventually by adopting new powders to maintain normal pressures. It must of course be noted the 1¼oz Standard as loaded to normal velocity at a higher pressure level for 2 3/4" chambered guns "Did Indeed" violate the 1 1/8oz proof. This of course led to a good deal of confusion, much of which still lingers around to the present day.

Right. Mine looks like that.