The bores are over my skeet gauge and the seller said they are .780 which I trust is correct.The wall thickness is .042
minimum and close to .100 9 inches out or some were near that I forgot the number forgot.But I cannot tell that the gun has ever been shot.Please I know I'm stupid but firing pin looks new no dents or flat spots.. underneath the goose looking hammers they don't ever look like they have struck a pin.What confuses me is the bores are mirror but .780. Woods a little beat up like it has bounced around the back of a closet.No screw has been turned until I took the locks off today to oil.Top lever engraving is very sharp checkering is very good as is it had no use..none...Stock is 13 7/8..was it cut? screw on the back of it looks like it has been turned.

anyway .780 is that normal?
13 7/8 is that cut.

serial puts it 1875 Crab knuckle top lever?

10 gauge? Photos?

Nominal 10 gauge is .770"-.775", so bores could be original 10 ga because a lot of vintage guns were somewhat overbored. Don't know if that applied to Westley Richards.



Is that a typo on "Wesley" or is that what's on the gun? I think there were Belgian guns sold as "W. Richards," no relation to the Brits.

What is it proofed as, 10, 10/1? Sometimes the proofs are the real answers.

jeweler,
FYI - The Westley Richards top lever,"crab knuckle" was still being advertised in their 1909 catalog. It was described as "Steel Action Body enclosed in the Stock."

Sorry in a hurry Westley. the proof is 10. [img:center]http://www.picturetrail.com/members/edit?p=8&imgid=410101419[/img] [img:center]http://[/img] [img:center]http://[/img] [img:center][/img]

Congratulations on your bar in wood Westley. Mine is a 34" eight gauge, cylinder bores, made in 1872. They are wonderful guns when in high condition. I don't think mine has ever spent a day outdoors. Strange that someone would own such a gun and never take it hunting. I bought mine the month I came home from the Army in 1969 to a growing family. I don't remember where the money came from. Murphy

At the time that your gun was made the 1868 rules of proof were in effect. A Gun marked 10 would be deemed in proof if it had a bore size in the range.752-.802 proof diameter.[Measured 9 inches from breech]
In 1887 the rules of proof were upgrade to indicate diameter at proof. From this time on we see proof marks that indicate nominal bore size at proof in thousandths of an inch for example a 10G could be marked 10[.775] ,10/1[.784] 10/2 [.793] a gun was not considered out of proof until the bore diameter entered the max limit of the next bore group. For example, In the case of 10/2 the max in proof bore diameter would be.802,.001 below 9 bore.

I'm a happy camper so far. I wish it had choke but I can keep wishing.I do see a turned screw on the face but this gun saw very little use.Still has the bluing on the hammers and lock.
Dang Murphy you have been collecting hammers that long...I need to come to Maryland and dig in your safe and help you get rid of some of your junk.
Monty [img:center][/img] [img:center][/img]

The locks drop out and go back in like they were put in yesterday. I'm not sure I wouldn't put Westley Richards side by side with any London firm..... Maybe my London guns have more use but it took a hell of a carpenter to inlet this gun.I couldn't imagine the hours it took.The wood is pretty scratched up.

Nice gun but I'm not sure where you see "not allot of use"...the breach face is pretty scared and has some pitting. The barrels were re-browned at some point. Looks to be a pin fire conversion ?

Homeless...There is no way this gun could have ever been Pinfire. no way! I could see how you could think that though because how the hammers look but I have seen several Westley Richards made that way.I think you are wrong about the barrels too. I am pretty sure they are original brown.. but I could be wrong there. I was wondering more about the .780 bore??? There is no serial number on the receiver that I have found. there was a number on the inside of the locks but I think it might have been the patent number.

Nice 3 Iron 'English Best' barrels. Was 'CM' the tube maker?
Remarkable contrast after 140 years if original.

Looks like a pin fire conversion to me too. I'm putting my money with HjOe on that.

I'm putting my money on Monty. I have seen several Westleys bar in wood guns that had the same look yet were never pinfire. My friend owned one for several years and we examined it quite closely under magnification. Another friend owned a very early Westley 8 bore rifle that also had this style fences and hammers. I had that one apart to build a new toplever spring and again there was zero evidence of a conversion. I think it was a stylistic feature that Westley Richards felt went nicely with the bar in wood action. Just my opinion, I could be mistaken.

Roy
Thanks Maybe they are original bore diameters. I don't know how to tell if it's been honed.The bore is near perfect just seems too good of a condition inside not to be honed.
Monty

Buzz you and Joe better keep your money in your pocket.


I don't think there is a wielder in this country that could make such a perfect conversion. Virtually impossible in my opinion even in modern times it would be extremely hard to do ...... in my opinion!

Joe we are having a shoot in two weeks in Jackson at capitol Gun Club.Come shoot!! October 11 th
Monty

The reach over hammers look pinfire...but the biggest thing is the cut outs in the breach face so the centerfire firing pins could be installed.

Judging from the condition of the rest of the gun I don't see the brown as being original.

Fall turkey starts on Oct. 11th.

I miss having a place to fall turkey hunting

Drew
Who was CM

Was hoping one of our British or Anglophile correspondents might know Monty.

All the pinfire shotshells I have ever seen had the pin coming out the side of the shell just ahead of the rim. This would put the pin coming out a cutout in the breech of the barrels, not in the standing breech of the action body. This is the way my Bar-in-Wood W & C Scott pinfire 12ga is constructed.
As nominal 10 ga is .775" as mentioned there is certainly nothing surprising about a .005" oversize of .780". What is the chamber size of this gun, 10 or 12. If it chambers a 12ga shell it was most likely built for use with thin wall brass shells. If 10 then it would have been for a standard paper shell.
The breech face of my pinfire is totally flat, no firing pin holes, no anything. I will say though the hammers certainly do look like pinfire hammers.

Jeweler,
I believe this is Westley Richards Patent No.1572 of 1871.

This is not my collecting specialty but I own this model
and two other variations. With the introduction of centerfire cartridges in c.1867, a number of makers (including Westley Richards) offered dual ignition guns (center and pinfire). Your model, with pin slots in the barrels, could have been a dual ignition.

If you remove your firing pins you'll note that they're a bit of a 'rube goldberg' design that works via a 'wedging action.' When the top piece is struck by the hammer it forces the 'half-moon' shaped pin out of the breech face.

Monty, the hammers were never part of a pinfire, they don't even extend over the breech end of the barrels far enough to have ever punched a pinfire. The setup for the firing pins is typical Westley for the time period. The barrel finish is original. The bore diameter is most likely as made. There was no standard and that's sure in the ballpark. And quit worrying about cylinder bores--you're going to find the lack of chokes on your decoyed birds to be a big help.

It's day 8 on the river Maim in Bavaria. My "new" Dougall 10 bore will be in next week. We will have a lot to talk about!

Joe
I hope you are enjoying some good pork knuckle and beer.

Monty, did you take pictures of the locks when you removed them? I have never taken mine out, so I don't know what they look like. Post pictures if you can.

The trick to seeing whether the gun is a conversion, a dual ignition gun or an original center fire is to examine the barrels. A filled in area of the top of the breeches would indicate a conversion. End of story, I think.

I think Steve has a good point. I cannot get to the picture trail portion of Monte's post, so cannot see if the Richards has slots in the barrel breech for pinfire pins, but the hammers are pinfire hammers, complete with the "rest" block that would bear on the top of the standing breech after firing. The hammers are sized so that they would strike the pin easily where it sits approx. .100" from the standing breech. I think if used as a pinfire, the dual ignition centerfire firing pins would be removed.

If the gun does not have the cutouts for the pinfire pins in the barrel, then the gun could be a conversion or even rebarreled . More pictures might help.

Stamped on the breech water table is patent 2546 ?

I'd like to see the extractor arrangement (for pinfires didn't need them) and top of the breech end of the barrels for dovetailed fillers, but those hammers and apparently retro-fitted or removeable centrefire pins scream original pinfire or dual ignition and subsequent centrefire conversion to me; but then the fences look originally purpose-built.
My money's on original dual ignition, subsequently rendered permananent centrefire from that era; I haven't got my refs to hand to see what the patents might be for.
Beautiful gun.

jeweler,
The "2546" should be the 'action patent use number.'

I suspect at one time that breach face was flat...that could explain the milled out spots where the new peculiar center-fire pins are now...

Of course if we were all X'spurts then we could just declare the gun was never a pin fire or maybe even a muzzle loader.

If you just want an antique toy or close range quail or show off skeet gun then I totally agree...don't worry about the choke.

No choke on a real hunting gun....I'd just keep on looking for another gun and not be intrigued by a name or the cool factor.

I hope you didn't pay over a couple of grande for this gun Montey.....

Yes Joe I agree that is a very good possibility. I would probably lean more toward it having originated as a dual ignition gun IE pin or center fire. I would certainly not eliminate the possibility though of a good "Forge Welder" having added those bosses to the breech balls here the upper parts of the firing pins come through. It is utterly amazing what a good "Blacksmith" can accomplish. It does to me at least seem unlikely these bosses would have been present on a gun built solely as a pinfire.
Note that I definitely did not intend to imply that your assessment was wrong, just trying to consider all the possibilities.

Breech view [img:center]http://[/img]

Joe
I actually ended up with one of your old W.C.Scott 10 hammer gun that you had sold that choke.I knew it was yours when the guy said he bought it from a guy that is a big turkey hunter.Very nice gun.
I want another Bar wood Westley in a 12 gauge if you have one you want to get rid of or is you see one keep me in mind.My wife's hands won't get cold holding the wood.
But I need to stop spending money..this is getting to be a habit.

I do think that this gun was built firstly as a dual use pin fire or centre fire then re-manufactured for permanent centre fire use. My reason for thinking this is that if the gun where manufactured exclusively for pin fire the breach face would have been made much thinner along the lines of the Eberall pin fire in the photograph

It is possible that the barrels were replaced at the time of the conversion, as it would be extraordinary to find that 3 Iron 'British Best' pattern on c. 1871 tubes. And I could be wrong.

Steven's William Powell & Son 12b Bar-in-Wood hammer gun sold in 1870 with Two Iron



1873 Purdey with 3 Iron

Drew
It's 1875

Drew
It's 1875 but oddly enough the receiver does not have a serial no on it that I have found.
Monty

What are the letters or numbers on the top face of the barrel breech ?

858

Montey you might save yourself some heart ache if you'd ask me about a gun I owned before you bought it....

Joe
I like it.tell me why you didn't? Fits me and has some choke.I can't remember anything wrong wit it major . Stock had a crack that was an easy fix.forend easy fix . Did I miss something?