doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Reunited True Pair - Input on Options?

Through mostly dumb luck and a little bit of paying attention, a few months ago I re-united a true, matched pair of sidelock ejectors. As an aside they belonged apparently one E.A. Herbert, presumably Brig. General E. A. Herbert and were "made" by Horsley. I'm pondering how to address what I see as some issues with them and would welcome thoughts of the forum. So here's your chance to take advantage of our current cultural climate and let loose with your opinions on a topic while not being constrained by many facts All opinions are worth hearing on this.

Without further facetiousness, here is the relevant information.
The guns were not made at the same time. EAH acquired #2, several years after #1, it appears on promotion to Lt. Col. (perhaps the social needs of the position demanded a matched pair ). Consequently there are some trivial variations between the two but nothing immediately obvious. #2 is engraved as such. #1 is not; it was a single when first purchased and was not modified thereafter. The exposed wood heel is cosmetically different between the two having different checkering patterns. That's about it for visible differences.

At some point the two were separated and one was re-chambered to 2 3/4"; the other remains at 2 1/2". Both are relatively thin walled at this time but should pass re-proof it needed. I would like to be able to use them periodically as that's a goal I have for most of my collection. For safety reasons that poses a problem since they are chambered differently with the risk of confusion. I could use 2 1/2 shells in the 2 3/4 but don't believe that's a good idea. My inclination is to gamble on rechambering the 2 1/2 to 2 3/4 and reproof. Both guns are perfectly shootable as is.

The stocks are also relatively short at about 13 1/3 LOP so I'd need to either add a large spacer and probably twist them a bit or use a large slip on pad for my fit. I don't think they warrant restocking and I can't afford that. I don't like the look of wood extensions.

Cosmetically my inclination is to engrave #1 as such in the style of #2.

Any thoughts on these? Keep them completely original? Use as is? Modify? If modify what aspects (stock, chamber, ? ) ?

Looking forward to comments.

Jeremy

No chamber modifications. Why would you double up on a mistake made by a previous idiot? Congratulations on a gun by a great maker.

Other folks would probably know better, but why not shoot 2 1/2" shells in both. If it were me, and I thought I reunited a true pair, I wouldn't modify either with irreversible changes. I'd figure if I was putting money into new, not restoration, engraving, why not do it to any old two guns and call it a pair. I really don't mind what someone decides, I know for me I tend find true classic guns less interesting if they have been personalized.

I would like to see pictures, but that is just a selfish request, remembering my last Horsley, the best engraved gun I have ever owned.

I agree with eightbore and wouldn't open the 1 gun to 2 3/4. I wouldn't spend the expense to get the 2 3/4" gun reproved. However, I would have the 2 3/4" gun inspected for safety.

If you have records from Horsley, I wouldn't engrave a 1 on the first gun.

How much change do you need to make to the stocks?

Ken

Congratulations on the return of the pair

2 1/2" ammo for both guns, that is what I would use.

Mike

p.s. these may be of use to you

http://www.buffaloarms.com/slip_on_and_lace_up_butt_pads_pr-4018.aspx

I would suggest you think long and hard about re-proof of the guns in England. The proof house is doing a great job of blowing up perfectly good old English guns, due to a change that requires re-proof with two rounds in each barrel, one generating proof pressure in the chamber, and a second round generating proof pressure 9" down the barrels.
Cogswell and Harrison "Avant Tout" models have made a recent name for failing English reproof, others have as well. The cost and logistics of getting them back and forth is problematic, as well.
I'd turn them both over to Kirk Merrington, and take his advice about what both guns need to continue shooting. I'd also feed both of them the ammunition they were originally designed for.

Good Luck.

Best,
Ted

I think that's your answer for the time being with rubber slip on recoil pads to give a more appropriate length of pull. Shoot them for a few months (with 2.5 inch low pressure shells) and see if they are long run keepers. If so, then it may be worth it to invest in whatever modifications you deem necessary. I find whenever I get a new gun I am really excited about the possibilities and that that same enthusiasm can wane somewhat over time.

Can you explain your qualms about shooting 2 1/2" shells in a 2 3/4" gun?

Are you aware of the research done on shooting 2 3/4" loads in 2 1/2" chambers?

Do you reload?

DDA

My inclination is to keep them as they are. You have reunited this composed pair and in their current state they are as close to how the original owner had them as they can be.

Do what you can to ensure the provenance now remains with the guns for ever and they'll retain their integrity as well as their value, both historically as well as financially.

Tim