doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Proofmark puzzle

If I am reading the proofmarks correctly this was first proofed as a .577 BPE. With the smokeless proof does this mean it is now a nitro express?

Can't help with Belgian proof marks except this line. Raimey and Dr. Drew should be here shortly.
https://doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=49372&Number=626856

Mike,
I'm more familiar with the Belgian shotgun proof marks, but what I see on this gun is that it was nitro proofed between 1898 and 1924. Looks like only one set of marks to me. What makes you think it was reproofed? As Argo said, I'm sure we'll get a good answer from Dr. Drew and/or Raimey shortly.

https://damascus-barrels.com/Belgian_All_Proofmarks.html

The word express to me means black powder express. Maybe wrong. But the rampant lion over PG is for smokeless powder proof.

The crowned R indicates rifled barrels > 8mm after 1897
Yes, it does carry the post-1898 Smokeless Proof mark, which could be requested by the maker at an additional cost. It is however the later stylized lion but I can't find when it was first used. It is typically used on post-1910 shotguns.
It does not have a lettre annale so proved prior to 1922
The Belgian proof house did not have a reproof mark; there would be a 2nd set of marks
The '557' and 'EXPRESS' have different fonts but I haven't seen enough Belgian BPE rifles to know if that is abnormal

Can you pleasure us w/ a foto of the weight of the tubeset as well as the water-table?


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

The 1906 revisions of Banc D'Epreuves Des Armes a Feu De Liege are here
https://books.google.com/books?id=5fxGAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA53&lpg
Scroll down to p. 77 and it shows the stylized lion smokeless proof so the gun should date thereafter
The font of 'EXPRESS' shown is different
The pressure to which Nitro Express are proved is not shown.

Thus far, I do not see >>B. BLINDÉE<< or >>B. PLOMB<<.


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Per the decrees of 1897 & 1898, there were say 25 semi-smokeless powders that could be used. By 1924, there were at least 19 powders.

But the stamp of the Rampant Lion of PV was first used in October 1898 to denote a military calibre less than 8mm. Then in 1903 the mark would denote all rifled barrels larger than 0.22". Now, it doesn't say all >>Military<< calibres, but it was originally for that.


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Sources give that >>B. BLINDÉE<<, and possibly >B. PLOMB<<, were in use since 1910 and typically were coupled w/ the >>Commercial Name<< of the cartridge, but akin to Hause, I just have not see that many Belgian double rifles. But post 1924, the brace of stamps should be found & coupled.


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Does the rifle regulate with BP Express or Nitro Express ammo?
Mike

I would say these stamps are truly coupled as the Belgians like the Germans were most methodical in their procedures and application. The Calibrator applied the stamps, as well as cobbled together the proof load or approved the proof cartridge, and this was his job. He/she was a very proud lot & took their task quite seriously. Although the font is indeed different, I again say the Calibrator applied the encircled marks in one effort & then the Inspector applied his mark.


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

So to answer your Powder type question, the tubes in a singular state, experienced proof w/ a Blackpowder load prescribed by the Calibrator and then when joined the tubeset experienced Semi-Smokeless proof as prescribed by the Calibrator, who early on required 0.6mm windage between the difference of the diameter of the projectile and the diameter of the tube.


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

But the Question that begs, is what exactly does the letters >>PV<< under a Rampant Lion denote. When 1st pressed into service, the stamp meant Voluntary Proof of Semi-Smokeless for a Military Callibre. Therefore, and I acknowledge of French, could it stand for Proof Voluntary / Volunteer ???


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Ah, I finally found it: >>Poudre Vive<<, an early moniker for Semi-Smokeless Nitro Powders. So yes, still in the language of French.

With the advent of the optional >>Poudre Vive<<, then is is most likely that such a platform experienced up to 5 Proof Efforts, with the last couple being Optional.


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Not semi-smokeless Raimey
At the beginning of the optional PV in 1891 the specific bulk smokeless with which the gun was proved was specified; "E.C.", "Schultze", and later Mullerite, "New Schultze" and "E.C. No. 2 & 3"
Smokeless “Schultze” was offered by Von Lengerke & Detmold in the U.S. in 1887
The American “E.C.” & “Schultze” Powder Company was established in Oakland, New Jersey by Capt. Money in 1890.



I've seen guns later than 1898 still indicating the powder

"E.C. No. 3" with the stylized lion
“New E.C. (Improved) No. 3” was introduced in U.S. in 1904; likely earlier in Europe and England



Mullerite proved

I still contend the phrase >>Semi-Smokeless<< at its core applies as it revolved around >>Wood Powder<< and was indeed the Sch & EC you note. The proof was purely optional & had to be submitted in writing by the maker.

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Maybe by the hard-headed Germans but not by the Belgians nor the clueless Americans

American Wood Powder was an improved version of Dittmer powder, the first “Nitro” (semi-smokeless [according to the British] nitrated wood cellulose) powder produced in the U.S. (not likely ever offered in Europe to compete with "Schultze") and was introduced about 1883. It was marketed by Von Lengerke & Detmold. It was replaced by King’s Powder Co., Cincinnati “King’s Smokeless” in 1895.

Scientific American Supplement, October 4, 1890 “Smokeless Powder”
https://books.google.com/books?id=6d45AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA12308
Wetterven, Walsrode, Maxim, Nobel, and Vieille all mentioned

1893
S.S. (Sporting Shotgun) didn't last long as it developed high pressures with small gauge shells

You penned it Exactly.


The only reason the Belgians were updating their proof rules & powders was an attempt to keep in pace w/ the Germans as the Belgians were supplying ALL the Rough Bored Tubes for the German platforms. The Germans also had a Semi-Smokeless Voluntary Proof and if the Belgians adopted the same process and powder, how could it not be Semi-Smokless? It wasn't till 1911/1912 for the Germans to migrate to a True Nitro stamp and the Belgians may have gotten wind and started their efforts in 1910???


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Yet another interesting Belgian Decree of November 18th, 1903 established the use of the >>Unique<< >>standardized smokeless powder<< as the Official Smokeless Powder, instead of the 25 powder variations, and was deemed the 4th Proof as an Optional Proof and the Calibrator applied the stamp of the Rampant Lion over PV(>>Poudre Vive<<). Then if a maker wanted a specific proof from the lot of 25 approved and available powders, the platform was subjected to a 5th Proof Effort, purely optional or voluntary of course.


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

On May 10th, 1912. a decree was issued that made the proof of rough bored tubes optional as of June 1st, 1912. And again, all of this jockeying for position in Proof Procedures was driven by the Germans, and the English to a lesser extent. But all this would have come to a consensus in 1914 @ the Proof Council had not the 1st Major Disagreement in Europe been kicked off...... So the proof standards, with metal technology & powder advances jockeying for position also, would have to wait another decade.


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Mike,

If you were dealing with British loadings you would have 3 different loads (for each case length):-

1. .577 Black Powder Express (lead bullet, probably paper patched, comparatively slow rifling twist)
2.,.577 Nitro for Black Express ( for use in 1. above - lead gas checked bullet )
3. .577 Nitro Express (jacketed bullet, much higher pressures, will FIT in 1 &2 above but unwise probably dangerous to use)

Rifle made for 3 above will be stronger, heavier, probably faster twist and noticeably thicker across the breech ends)

What does yours weigh? What is the twist?

It's not mine. The owner is a member of my facebook page "Antique & Collector Firearms". He is from Hungary and was asking me if it was made for .577 nitro express. I have told him not to shoot NE in it or his friends will start calling him two fingers if he's lucky. It's a very nice looking BPE though.

But we aren't.
We are - very likely - dealing with very klassik Kontinental loadings, which once were quite popular and common. Although their misleading name seems to harken back to the UK.

Carcano

So indeed it was noted as passing proof using the >>Unique<< powder. One has to keep in mind that the Proof Facilities lagged woefully behind technology. I would guess 5 years to a decade. It just took so long to enter & pass legislation. 1st the bill had to be penned, entered & then you bribe 1/2 of the governing body & threaten the other 1/2 to get something passed. And it was not for the Protection of the Public; it purely for commerce. After 1891 when Germany devised some prooflaw as sort of a stop gap measure to try to keep in pace w/ the English & French, Germany closed the door on Belgian tubes until Belgium could get their Proof House in Order. Then & only then would one see change in Proof Law. Gun Powders and Steel Technology greatly outpaced Proof Law in any country.

But this platform looks to have a Jones Underlever Lockup? I for one would like to see what marks are forward of the flats up to the forend hanger.


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Manufactur D'Arme Deluxe is a non-specific marketing term and was used by several Liege makers, including Manufacture Liegeoise and Brancquaert
Cornell pubs has a 1905 Brancquaert catalog, available as a PDF, which might show the gun
https://cornellpubs.com/product/114...aUsU1n-xoWQWWGX2D85af2RILlSGMhsEF3YDyxsa
Also Masquelier
https://littlegun.be/arme%20belge/artisans%20identifies%20ma/a%20masquelier%20gb.htm

Unfortunately, it is not - at all - French. Even a 10-years-old would have been caned in any Francophone school for that.
What you write is not true. Simple.

Khyber Pass production, with some likelihood.

Not sure about any of that, but for sure the Belgians were importing military arms, sprucing them up a bit and passing them on to end users in the Khyber Pass and in the Congo. So the makers didn't want to undercut their bottom $; therefore, they didn't want to absorb the cost of proof and as always they wanted an out / an exception for arms imported & exported. Makers have from the Get-Go wanted exceptions on their behalf, which led to weaknesses in the Proof Law & in enforcement. The 1888 Rules were just that, which were a direct result of Court Cases pointing to the weakness in the Rules. By this time the makers were just beginning to see the value of Proof and for the most part the makers wholeheartedly supported the new rules. The Royal Decree of March 6th, 1889 was just that. It recognized foreign proof marks so that the makers could import old military arms, clean them, spruce them up and export them on to places like the Khyber Pass and the Congo. But still there was an exception to the Proof Law and it was this decree that allowed the makers to send their wares >>in the white<< to a foreign proof facility and bypass the Liège Proof Facility. I knew this exception existed as I had read it long ago, but just now stumbled up on it again.

Another neat provision was from the November 24th, 1885 Decree which mandated that 5% of the yearly profits of the Proof House was to be set aside for the Liège Arms Museum, which was actually proposed by a March 31st, 1859 Decree.


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Khyber Pass was sarcastic, as I admit, but on target.

Most likely a German or Eastern Central European journeyman, without even an elementary school knowledge of French, fake stamped the "Lancasterpatrone" rifled exchange barrels for the originary Belgian sxs shotgun platform.

Carcano

Sorry Carcano. I assumed 'Manufactur' was a shortened version of 'Manufacturière'
I believe your hypothesis would explain the odd font of the 577 EXPRESS. The other proof marks certainly appear genuine however.

Or maybe not. A 1926 by lettre annale .475 No. 2 with similar EXPRESS font

The adjective "manufacturière" indeed exists, but it is very stiff and formal. You may find it in a learned economic paper on the reasons for the decay of industry in the old gunmaking centres since the 1960s (and in a wider conspect in the whole country since the mid 1970s, when the "Trente Glorieuses" ended in France), and then almost always in the fixed combination "industrie manufacturière", but never ever on a gun.

As to the cartridge and chambering, a chamber cast of course will bring more certainty.
I would place my bet on a classic Lancasterpatrone (using the very old term back form the late 19th century, when nigh every centre-fire metal cartridge was called thus, in distinction from pin-fire Lefaucheuxpatronen), which were ever so popular until 1890, and then very rapidly lost followers.
English speakers of course never used this German term, they called these guns "bore rifles "or "gauge rifles".

Here, we very certainly have a 24 gauge double rifle, the last of which were produced for conservative hunters up into the 1920s. They were popular also in Eastern Central Europe (not the least for economic reasons and ease of black poweder reloading, whereas the newly fangled Nitro Express cartridges were - not without reason - considered "dangerous shtuff"). Cartridge cases existed in many lengths, and the ammo manufacturers' catalogues are full of them, with their karakteristik hemispherical bullets,"Katzenkopfgeschosse" or "Bienenkorbgeschosse", as they were called back then.

We have various threads on the those in this very forum (e.g. the "24ga Collath double rifle" thread), and an even better one in the 'Nitroexpress Forum'. Just do not mistake these typical hunting guns for the outwardly almost similar .577 Snider. The stout original military Snider load would not be suitable for those.

Carcano

P.S.: The latest offspring from this tradition was the 14,9mm Dombrowski-Heißig from around 1887, in two case lengths. A failed endeavour almost from the outset, as contemporaries already stated with some sharpness.

So 7,35 Carcano, are you saying there lies herein lies & deceit¿¿¿. That an unscrupulous maker in an attempt to mask his cobbled together wares & circumvent the stout Belgian Proof Law, orchestrated this platform & sold it to an unsuspecting Jäger from the East named Billy¿¿. Billy was a simple country boy, you might say a cockeyed optimist, who got himself mixed up in the high-stakes game of international diplomacy & world intrigue which finds it core in the Belgian Proof Law¿¿¿

The Penalty was pretty Stout by the way....

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Good find Hause & see the caliber is coupled with >> B. Blindée<<. Might have been the same unscrupulous mechanic with the same die set¿¿¿ Maybe for Christmas during WWI his wife gifted him an additional set of dies where he could add >>B. Blindée<<¿¿¿

Or was it an unscrupulous Calibrator¿


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

So in closing although I obviously don't speak French and know nothing about Belgian double rifles, IMHO the proof marks are legit.

And a blessed Incarnation Day to all.

Yes. Obviously in the barrel engraving. Which falser could not be.

Blindée is the feminine form of the French adjective for "armor".
. .armored car - voiture blindée
. .bulletproof glass - verre blindé

So with that Argo44 and considered the French phrase Balle Blindée, should one use Armour Piercing or Armour Plated as the projectile¿¿¿


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Full metal jacket.
"la peau des dents" - Tide description and not pretty.

Ugly as Home-made Soap; either one.

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

More Blindée
https://www.gunboards.com/threads/b-blindee-and-belgian-proofed-mauser-receiver-based-gun.1245773/

[

Just as a side-note, the actual meaning of Belgian marks/stamps have a time varying definition and evolved over time. The above was a direct result of the 1891 German Law and under Belgian decree of July 11th, 1893 the mark was to denote a reinforced proof of the tubes of percussion lock & breechloaders in a effort to facilitate the export / import of Belgian Tubes to Germany. It became the mark for all breechloaders proofed w/ a reinforced black-powder proof.

It is possible that the Germans made One or Two guns without any Belgian contributions, but the vast majority of German Guns utilizes Belgian components. Germany should have made Liège a German Satellite Stamping Station, or did they¿¿¿


Serbus,


Raimey
rse

That would have been August 5, 1914

Sorry, I didn't understand the rest of the discussion.

How 'bout >>Semi-Smokeless Express<<???

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Raimey, thanks. I think I understand the question.

Yeah, just a Red Herring in defining what smokeless powder was & when?? Basically when was what was called smokeless powder actually Smokeless Powder or Nitro Powder as you put it.

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

With a scant bit of fleeting time around the Holidays, I was re-reading references on the Belgian Proof Law & >>B. Blindée<< and its sister stamp >>B. Plomb<< were used since July 8th, 1910 but truly wasn't officially adopted / recognized until the 1924 Proof Laws.

Now scattergun pressure or tubes for shot, there exists quite a bit of info on proof pressure but for solid projectiles, info in lacking. The Board of Administration set the tone for breechloaders of Military Calibre and the Direktor of the Poof House established or cobbled together a Table for ball & powder. I would think that early on the Belgians followed the Brit's Table but soon they followed the German's pressures as the Germans were their main clients. I will search & try to find said tables.

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

Too, I would hedge my bets that the use of the >>B. Blindée<< stamp, etal, was due to the fact that the Germans were about to have a rules change in 1911/1912.


Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

There is information about charges, but none regarding pressures here
“Report by Consul Robertson on the Manufacture of Fire-Arms in the District of Verviers and Liege – (1853) Rules of the Proof House, Gun-Proof Establishment at Liege, Belgium”, 1885
https://books.google.com/books?id=7EhJAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA132&lpg

Banc D'Epreuves Des Armes a Feu De Liege, 1906
https://books.google.com/books?id=5fxGAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA53&lpg

I haven't found shotgun pressures referenced until the 1924 revisions.

An equation for proof pressure per the Oktober 30th, 1897 Belgian Decree/May 10th, 1898 note the Proof Charges were to attain a pressure of 80% over the maximum service pressure and the resulting mark was the Rampant Lion over the Max load stamp.

Belgian Decree of November 18th, 1903 with the >>Unique<< Powder for the 4th proof was not to exceed 875 kg/cm^2 or 13k lbs/in^2.

The Pressure for the 5th Proof Effort was not to exceed 750 kg/cm^2 or 11k lbs/in^2.


Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

This stuff is highly volatile and changes with the wind due to the fact the powder technology as well as the steel technology was doing the same. Proof Law was obsolete when enforced and was chasing the wind of Powder & Steel.


Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

A little tid-bit more of info from another source gives that early semi-smokeless powders achieved a vast array of pressures between 6k to 10k PSI. So it was the goal of the Oktober 30th, 1897 Belgian Decree to adopt a powder to achieve a proof pressure of 80% over the max service pressure but that value must exceed 8.8k PSI.

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

For the 4th & 5th Proof Efforts, max pressure in 16 bore was 11k PSI and 13k PSI for sub gauges.

Rifles are mentioned but literally zero proof pressures.

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

Thanks for the effort brother.
BTW that 13,000 psi by modern transducers would be about 14,500 psi - which is what U.S. doublegun makers used.

You had me confused on all the "semi-smokeless" verbiage until I found that's what our superiors on the Continent and Great Britain referred to what we American deplorables called "smokeless"

Was "Unique" the name of the Belgian Proof House powder? I couldn't find the powder used after Nitro proof powder was standardized c. 1898.

Um, yes the Europeans referred to >>Semi Smokeless<< as the status quo until Nitro took over.


Yes, >>Unique<< was the powder and another source doesn't name it but gives that it was NOT commercially available and that it was equal to or superior to any powders available to the average sportsman. What the Belgian Proof Masters were concerned with was that they needed to cover all possible bases as the end user, the Hunter, may use something all together different that sued in the Proof Effort. And stouter as well. The had gotten upside down and overwhelmed with the vast choice of powders to the Sportsman.

Indeed, >>Unique<< was the Official Name in late 1903.

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

Another interesting tid-bit regarding Pin-Fire Scatterguns was that they could NOT be proved w/ Semi-Smokeless Powder nor could the any Semi-Smokeless stamps be applied. Now there was a caveat that under petition that the Spezial Department of Trial could strength test a Pin-Fire Scattergun and on demand, a letter could be issued that the platform was tested. A Proof Certificate was NOT acquired.



Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

After 1924, one sees the term >>Copper Crusher<< used in the Proof Rules so I am not sure exactly how the previous pressures were measured?

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

Ah, I did find the term >>Poudre Vive Unique<< in a reference to the 1924 Rules..... So indeed, the Smokeless Powder @ 1924 was named >>Unique<<. A Maker could request a 2nd Nitro Powder Proof from a choice of available powders but the pressure was not to exceed the Unique Powder Effort.


Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

After the platform was tested with the powder >>Unique<< and the Rampant Lion over PV(Poudre Vive) was applied, what was the 5th test could be performed with your powder of choice but for a 16 bore the powder had to produce a max pressure of 11k PSI and the sub gauges had to achieve a max pressure of 13k PSI. Then the stamp of the Rampant Lion over the >>Powder of Choice<< was applied.

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

Reaching a bit further back in time, in January 1877, the change of the inspector's mark from a Crowned Letter to a Letter surmounted by a Star was due to a petition / request by the British Government to the Belgian authorities to prevent the Belgian Inspector's Mark from being confused with the London Proof Marks. So the proof facilities actually worked a bit closer than one would think?


Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

For the one or two readers still following along, the 1924 Belgian Proof Rule too did allow for unproved guns to be shipped directly to a Foreign Proof Facility.



The only mark that was applied was the Rampant Belgian Lion in Heraldry:

One finds the Rampant Belgian Lion in Heraldry in the Postage Stamps of Belgium too.


Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

And the upshot of all this, well the mechanics @ Liége were weapons makers to the world is Best how to phrase it. From the 18th Century, and possibly prior, the Belgians were supplying rough barrels to the Brits, French, Germans, Russians, etc. 20k platforms a month was an estimate. Now I have not seen in print that the Ferlach mechanics were recipients, but probability is heavy in favour of it. The Liége mechanics adamantly resisted centralized or organized proof, but then again there was National Pride locally as well as at the top. I am sure the jobbers/handlers, as well as end users, of the rough tubes, etc. also pushed back against centralized and organized proof as no one wanted the Truth to get out that the end platform was actually from cobbled together components from the Continent. The retailers wanted to mask the actual construction. Liége was unequivocally a victim of economic prejudice, but the mechanics really didn't seem to care if they could sell their wares. And one hears all these War Stories of how a mechanic took raw Earth , which he dug with his own hands, as well as a crucible and fashioned all the components platform. Pure Rubbish...... And as is that a maker totally made a platform in-house.

So 2 takeaways here: There was always masking of components, as I am sure there is today, to prevent the end user of having knowledge that an item was cobbled together and Proof Marks have a time varying definition.

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse