S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 members (cable, bsteele),
236
guests, and
2
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,860
Posts550,098
Members14,452
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 38 Likes: 11
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 38 Likes: 11 |
I was looking with interest at an unnamed hammer Drilling last weekend. Its chambers were 16g, and 6.5x58R with a recommendation for an 8.2gram copper-jacketed bullet on the rifle barrel but no charge weight. Unfortunately (inexplicably?) the 6.5x58R is not an officially obsolete cartridge in the UK. The engraving was comprehensive and attractive, in a style seemingly influenced by the Art Nouveau movement. I was surprised, however, to see a proof date of "5.37". Were German makers really producing hammer/Lefaucheux guns that late, or was this an older gun (pre.1890) that had dodged the proof house for several decades? Regrettably, I couldn't make out a mark that would let me identify where it was proofed. [img] https://www.dropbox.com/s/fhxke4i4dpffbah/Action%20RH%20side%2001a.jpg?dl=0[/img] [img] https://www.dropbox.com/s/4erg7atxydtqft0/Proof%20marks.jpg?dl=0[/img]
Last edited by JulesW; 08/04/23 05:10 PM. Reason: Images & missing decimal added
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 11,066 Likes: 224
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 11,066 Likes: 224 |
![[Linked Image from thumbs2.imgbox.com]](https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/e1/6f/ywd08RfL_t.jpeg) ![[Linked Image from thumbs2.imgbox.com]](https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/b8/d7/dM12La0l_t.jpeg) Zella - Mehlis in 1937. Now considering the platform, all the chicken scratching, etc. I was hazard a guess that it was an early, possibly pre-1893, longarm and the platform was alterered in some way and passed thru the Z-M Proof Facility in the late 1930s. But then again, times were most difficult & these components that compose the platform may have been al the mechanic had on hand. I would like to see the marks in person. Serbus, Raimey rse
|
1 member likes this:
JulesW |
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,554 Likes: 230
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,554 Likes: 230 |
I could not find a repair proof, but that doesn't mean there isn't one. It is possible that it was new in 1937, but unlikely. You could have a similar gun made today, if you want one badly enough. I agree with Raimey that a close "hands on" inspection of the markings might reveal something. I'm sure you will find that the bullet is 8.2 grams rather than 82 grams. Mike
|
1 member likes this:
JulesW |
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 38 Likes: 11
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 38 Likes: 11 |
I'm sure you will find that the bullet is 8.2 grams rather than 82 grams. Those pesky decimal points! (Original post duly amended)
Last edited by JulesW; 08/04/23 05:11 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 38 Likes: 11
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 38 Likes: 11 |
Now considering the platform, all the chicken scratching, etc. Many thanks for your most helpful reply. Could you explain what "chicken scratching" is, please?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,554 Likes: 230
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,554 Likes: 230 |
JulesW, It is also sometimes confusing because instead of a decimal point, they usually used a comma. Mike
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 38 Likes: 11
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 38 Likes: 11 |
I would hazard a guess that it was an early, possibly pre-1893, long arm and the platform was altered in some way and passed thru the Z-M Proof Facility in the late 1930s. Thanks. The gun does have a replacement hammer on the left-hand lock. Is it possible that when it was taken to a gun maker to have this fitted, was found to be un-proofed, and duly sent to the proof house? I imagine re-proof would not have been required on an already-proofed gun, but perhaps that was the point where legislation caught up with this one?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 11,066 Likes: 224
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 11,066 Likes: 224 |
![[Linked Image from thumbs2.imgbox.com]](https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/85/98/4f9NBtth_t.jpeg) Regarding the >>Chicken Scratching<<, just a reference to all the overstamps?, errand marks?, scratches, maybe blurred foto, all that prevent one from seeing just what has occurred. The Chaos is akin to a Mother Chicken scratching the ground in an adhoc fashion trying to teach her bitties to hunt for food. Just a lot of noise & such that obscures what the marks actually are... That lower >>J<< is more than likely for a Jäger mechanic. Serbus, Raimey rse
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 11,066 Likes: 224
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 11,066 Likes: 224 |
It could be that the custodian wanted the >>Nitro<< Stamp, but outside of that I am just not sure unless there was some alteration on the platform. Possibly a whole new tubeset was added replacing the pattern welded tubes with which it was originally equipped. But an image of the water-table just might shed some light.
Serbus,
Raimey rse
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 38 Likes: 11
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 38 Likes: 11 |
Thanks, I wish it were a better photo. Believe it or not, this de-saturated, slightly-sharpened and contrast-boosted version is a lot more readable than the original.
|
|
|
|
|