I would like to find an exploded view/schematic diagram of the Greener Facile Princeps action. If anyone has one or knows where I can find one, I would appreciate it. I have searched the web with no luck. I have the Greener book and if there's one in there, I have over looked it. Thanks very much.

Send me a PM I'll send you a photo or two.

There are some pictures in "the gun and its development"
but nothing really in regards to an exploded view.
I would be keen to see one too if anyone has one.
I would imagine the patent would have had one.

The Modern Shotgun by Burrard Volume 1 pages 155 & 156 has a good schematic & explanation of how the action differs from a A&D boxlock.

There were of course variations on the basic design .It was a way round the Anson and Deely patent . There was also a court case between Greener and Bonehill over patent infrigements .I can nor remember what the out come was but it all hinged on the method used to cock the gun Greener used a rod ,Bone hill used a swivel like hook and later a hooked plate .

Greener won.

The key cocking difference is that the A&D uses the two cocking dogs to fit recesses in the forend iron, thereby forming a lever, which then cocks the locks upon the fall of the barrels. The FP has convergent cocking arms in the action body, activated by a stud on the lump.

Dig, I've been studying the action of my Greener FP. It looks to me as if a lot of force is used to cock the locks on a very small surface area with the small stud. The stud must be be small enough to fit within the dimension of the barrel lump, but be wide enough to contact both cocking arms. In your experience, is this an area of common failure? On the other hand, my gun was made in 1891 and still works. Thanks.

David here is the schematic as illustrated in Burrard.

Thank you Ian. Small Bore emailed a diagram and a photo of the action parts disassembled. Thank you both.

Isn't that a. A.H. Fox?

OWD

They worked quite well ,but it did mean a deeper action .Even Greener abandon it the 20's and went to the more standard "A&D " style ,though they kept the cross bolt . Biggest problem with the "FP" was that it was more complicated to fit ejectors ,the Needham system used in the old "G" guns was complex and not as reliable as it could have been .As a result most FPs that I have seen used Baker ejectors the forend not having enough depth to fit Southgate or a Deeley box . That said Greener made a lot of guns so the action stood the test of time without question.

Attached is a scan of several pages from Greener's 9th Edition.

Greener's Facile Princeps

Curl

does one know why it is called "facile princeps"?

I believe it is Latin for "easily first". W. W. Greener was foremost a great promoter of his products. And why shouldn't he be--they were great.

David, your comments about "small spaces for big parts" reminds me that there are more inoperative ejectors on small Facile Princeps Greeners than on big FP Greeners. At least that is what I have noticed in my limited experience.