doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com British Shotgun Questions

I still think that they are new barrels as the original would have been damascus (serial number puts it at 1880). The re-proof mark would still have to be applied as it would refer to the action also which would have been 're-proofed'. I can't say too much about London proof as I always use Birmingham and they leave all the old marks on as it is a useful chronological record of the history of the gun. I would think that if the old marks were polished off the barrel flats and the action flats so much metal would be removed as to make the thing fail to fit together; English guns are made to fine tolerances. Lagopus.....

Lagopus, the different barrel lengths definitely support your idea.

I'd also concur that removing/erasing proof marks would leave quite a "gash".

JC

The barrels are sleeved.

If you look at the picture with the top rib, right behind the letter "K" from "York" one can see the slight difference in bluing.
With sleeved barrels, is it still worth that much?

See what you mean Silver but not quite sure if it is the photo or not. As I mentioned earlier, they sometimes miss off the stamp that says sleeved; mistakes do happen. Still a fine gun. Lagopus.....

Ya t'ink?. I've heard a number of guys in the London trade complain bitterly about this policy for precisely that reason, among others. The cost of refitting sometimes adds considerably to the cost of re-proof. I remember speaking to Cyril Adams (former owner/managing director of Atkin Grant & Lang) about this very issue a while back. He really went off about it. I spoke to a friend in the London trade over the weekend who says that the new proofmaster has recently stopped enforcing it (the requirement that the old marks be removed), after years of London having insisted on it. Again, this policy referred to the marks on the barrel flats only, not those on the action, as the action is case hardened.



I had never heard that before. Since that's so contrary to my experience, I checked. The re-proof mark is applied only to previously proven guns re-proved with existing, previously proven barrels. The London Proof House confirms that they do NOT apply the re-proof mark to previously proven guns re-proved with NEW barrels. London treats old guns fitted with new barrels as new proof, not re-proof.

Given the age of the gun, of course it's possible that it was rebarreled at sometime along the way, and the ad does suggest that they've been replaced. However, contrary to what some here suggest, the proof marks clearly show that these barrels were not new in 1989. The proof marks are normal (including the removal of the old marks) for a RE-proof done with existing barrels in London in 1989. As to the inch difference in listed length, I think one or the other simply wrote it down wrong. That happens all the time. I don't see a seam to indicate sleeving. If it has been sleeved since 1989, it's out of proof.