doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com early 20th Century Belgian 16ga help

An old Vietnam war friend recently asked me about a Belgian SxS 16ga he inherited from his grandfather. He had been told it was poor quality and that the quality of steel would prohibit him using anything but light loads.

I took a look at the markings: Royal Gun Works on the side plates and "Belgium" on the water table would look to indicate a US import of some sort. Proof marks look to be between 1910 and 1922....I can't see a date mark. Here are the markings. It's odd that the bore/muzzle measurement fraction appears to be reversed from normal. Appreciate any light that can be thrown on the origins and dates of the gun:






My original mark-up for him:

Royal Gun Works was a Pieper tradename Gene, for Simmons Hdw., St. Louis
The Ptd. refers to the Modified Diana Pieper Patent

Here's a nice one with steel breech and "Washington" tubes
https://www.gunsinternational.com/g...fied-diana-12-gauge.cfm?gun_id=101363054

It does not carry Nitro Proof, but that is not uncommon on guns made for export to the U.S. Nitro Proof was not mandatory until 1924, and there was an additional Proof House charge.

I don't see a lettre annale so it was made 1910 to 1921 by La société anonyme des Anciens Etablissements Pieper - probably pre-WWI

Much earlier Simmons catalog

Argo44,
Your Army Buddy's gun looks like the type of economical double gun that was reasonably popular around the turn of the century. It seems to be an example that is pretty much as it was when imported into the country. I have seen a good many of these, marked with many different names and most of them were not nearly in the shape this one is. It is true that it is not an A1 Parker, but it is still his grandfather's gun, and most grandsons would be proud to own it and pass it on to their own grandson (or granddaughter).
Mike

Thanks a bunch Dr. Drew. I'll pass on the info. No chamber markings. Assume it would be chambered for 2 1/2" shells? How good would the steel in the barrels have been? Belgian guns had a reputation in the lower quality for "chocolate steel."

DA: Helping our own. My friend was a gun-ship pilot and flew for Macv-Sog and on other really tough missions. He lives in Baldwin County and is a native Mobilian.

Pieper used Cockerill steel, as did most of the U.S. double gun makers.
Yes, certainly 65mm chambers.

Your friend might review this
https://www.shotgunworld.com/threads/is-my-gun-safe-what-load-was-my-gun-designed-to-shoot.366087/
The gun shouldn't be used, with any load, until it has been evaluated by a double gun specialist with the interest, equipment (bore scope and wall thickness gauge) and expertise to properly do so.
"Should be OK with light loads" is not an expert assessment.

Belgian Proof Marks are not my "thing" and I don't intend to start an argument but, I don't believe the surrounded 16c above is the bore. Rather I believe it is the chamber and would ID the standard chamber length, which was 65mm, unless a different length is given. The bore is given in mm as correctly shown, also above. Therefore, this is the mark that shows the chamber length (unless modified).
Mike

Lots of verbiage here
https://books.google.com/books?id=5fxGAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA52&lpg
Scroll down to p. 32 and the 16 over C in the diamond is simply "the calibre of the chamber" without reference to chamber length, which unfortunately the illustration below calls "bore".
This calls it "gauge size"
http://shotguns.se/html/belgium.html
This "calibre"
https://mallorquina.pagesperso-orange.fr/source/page2.htm

The Belgians didn't use 'LC' for long chamber as did the British

Chamber diameter and length was optional until 1924; thereafter the gauge and chamber length in the Omega
IMHO very few pre-WWI 16g had 70mm chambers, and if so carried the length over diameter mark

Curious about these two marks. The "star over Alpha?" and the intertwined "3's" or "long horns". Any ideas?

The spangled 'AF' is a controller's (inspector's) mark.
1853-1877 controller's marks were crowned rather than spangled.

Inspector's marks can not be used to establish date of manufacture; they were re-used over time and the significance of some has been lost.

Got it. Actually got the first provisional proof...not the second. Thanks as always.