doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion German & Austrian Sporting Guns @ doublegunshop.com Hammer Drilling with Lefaucheux forend from 1937?

Thanks, that could be it. I confess I've never handled a Drilling of a sufficiently early date to have pattern-welded barrels, but I can see how the hammer/Lefaucheux elements might fit nicely with that. I regret that I don't have an image of the action "table" (not so flat in the case of a Drilling!)

I doubt that replacement of a hammer would require a repair proof, in itself. However, an owner could voluntarily have the drilling submitted for proof, maybe it was being sold and the new owner wanted it proofed. There is no evidence of this, it is only a guess, but possible.
Mike

https://doublegunshop.com/forums/ub...ds=lefaucheux&Search=true#Post569909






I would hazard a guess that the original tubes, if any, resembled the pattern welded(twist?) ones in this thread.

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Thank you. Some fascinating stylistic features on that gun, and some good-looking barrels!
I was thinking about the choice of chambering: 6.5x58 S&S. It seems this was introduced in the late 1890s and was going out of fashion by 1937 (https://forum.cartridgecollectors.org/t/6-5-x-58rmm-sauer-attribution/24402/3). This might make the idea of a rebarrel around the latter date seem less likely, although perhaps the owner was on such good terms with the "old" cartridge that they decided to keep it rather than opting for something more "modern".

Interesting mechanics marks above. Now according to the Krupp Steel Stamps, all three tubes are of the exact same Krupp Steel.

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Remember too that Old Jägers held with old ways. The platform for example, a very old style platform so I think the Jäger would have demanded an antiquated kalibre too.

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

That sounds very plausible, and I suppose they already knew the action could take the pressure of the old cartridge, whereas it's ability to resist the higher pressures of more modern alternatives, however strong the new barrels, was unknown.

I was flipping thru Dixon's Cartridge text & he gives that the 6,5x58.5R S&S arrived on the scene circa 1897. With that, maybe the marks were worked off, or a new tubeset was constructed in 6,5X58.5R S&S by the demand of the custodian?


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

I believe that the adornment is referred to as Wetzlaub, Altdeutscher Laubgravur or truncated to Deutscher Laub.... - Black Leaf Engraving....



https://www.engravingglossary.com/Hand%20Engraving%20Glossary%20A.htm


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

With regard to the choice of 6.5x58R S&S for the rifle cartridge, some hunting areas had only "Low"(small) game and there was no to little chance of encountering "High" (large) game. Even though Reh (Roe) deer is a trophy animal it is included under the designation of "Low" game. The 6.5x58R S&S was perfectly capable of cleanly taking Reh deer and was a popular cartridge for the purpose. If Dixon is correct and the cartridge was introduced in 1897, the Drilling would have fallen under the 1891 Proof Law and would have required proof when it was made. This would negate the possibility that an older non proofed gun might have been voluntarily submitted for proof in 1937, as I opined above.
Mike