More on lLndner Daly dates--part 2 - 04/01/18 01:01 PM
Emails between Ken Georgi and me regarding dating lindner Dalys
Ken,
Help me out here. If Lindner wasn't allowed to use the crown after 1892, then all guns marked with the crown should be dated prior to 1892. Yes? LeRoy Mertz has #380 which has both the crown and crossed pistols also Builder on the BBS says his # 9xx has the crown over pistols. Unless his gun (9xx) is a hammergun from the late 1870's, it doesn't make sense. I own #922 and calculate that it is circa 1900-1901.
I understand that the second numbering scheme didn't start at #1...more likely 200+ but how can Lindner use the crown mark after 1892?
BTW, I'm going to take 8-10 Dalys plus some Smiths, Foxes and Parkers to sell at the Southern. I would appreciate it if you mention that to people who indicate they are attending the
Southern and are looking to spend too much for a gun.
Jon
Hey Jon,
From my observation, as a starting point, the “crown over crossed pistols” are pre-1892 and the “HAL over crossed pistols” are post-1892. That 1892 date appears to coincide with the serial number “renumbering” - i.e., starting the serial numbering over. The following exceptions to that general approach have been observed -
- There is a block of hammerless Dalys generally in the #1- “high 300” range where things get weird - i.e., don’t seem to follow that methodology.
- Within that niche range, several “abnormalities" have been observed. These include -
- Crown/pistols marked guns clearly made very early in the hammerless era. For example, my Daly #7 is a mid-to-late 1870 gun based on the features and the low (65) A&D patent use number.
- Later made hammerless Lindner Dalys - circa 1892 (plus or minus a year) - that are marked with the legacy crown/pistols despite being on the new serial numbering sequence
- Later made hammerless Lindner Dalys - circa 1892 (plus of minus a year) - that are marked with some combination of “HAL”, “crowns”, and “crossed pistols”, or all three.
My theory on these later two sub-bullets is that there was a group of Daly guns already in some form of production when the marks changed that needed to work their way through production. And depending on where they were in production, the markings varied. And because some Dalys took longer to produce than others (e.g., more highly embellished guns or custom orders), the exact sequencing of the marks is difficult to sort our based on the serial numbering. So add these transition period in with the block of very early hammerless guns and things get confusing.
In terms of Builders gun, assuming it is a hammerless, it would be REALLY unusual to have the crown over crossed pistol mark. Again, the last use of that mark I have recorded was in the 300/400 range. I’d love to see a photo to make sure it is not, for example, an old stock barrel on a newer gun. The Lindner barrel numbering would need to be consistent.
Does the above make sense?
Ken
>
>
>
Ken,
Help me out here. If Lindner wasn't allowed to use the crown after 1892, then all guns marked with the crown should be dated prior to 1892. Yes? LeRoy Mertz has #380 which has both the crown and crossed pistols also Builder on the BBS says his # 9xx has the crown over pistols. Unless his gun (9xx) is a hammergun from the late 1870's, it doesn't make sense. I own #922 and calculate that it is circa 1900-1901.
I understand that the second numbering scheme didn't start at #1...more likely 200+ but how can Lindner use the crown mark after 1892?
BTW, I'm going to take 8-10 Dalys plus some Smiths, Foxes and Parkers to sell at the Southern. I would appreciate it if you mention that to people who indicate they are attending the
Southern and are looking to spend too much for a gun.
Jon
Hey Jon,
From my observation, as a starting point, the “crown over crossed pistols” are pre-1892 and the “HAL over crossed pistols” are post-1892. That 1892 date appears to coincide with the serial number “renumbering” - i.e., starting the serial numbering over. The following exceptions to that general approach have been observed -
- There is a block of hammerless Dalys generally in the #1- “high 300” range where things get weird - i.e., don’t seem to follow that methodology.
- Within that niche range, several “abnormalities" have been observed. These include -
- Crown/pistols marked guns clearly made very early in the hammerless era. For example, my Daly #7 is a mid-to-late 1870 gun based on the features and the low (65) A&D patent use number.
- Later made hammerless Lindner Dalys - circa 1892 (plus or minus a year) - that are marked with the legacy crown/pistols despite being on the new serial numbering sequence
- Later made hammerless Lindner Dalys - circa 1892 (plus of minus a year) - that are marked with some combination of “HAL”, “crowns”, and “crossed pistols”, or all three.
My theory on these later two sub-bullets is that there was a group of Daly guns already in some form of production when the marks changed that needed to work their way through production. And depending on where they were in production, the markings varied. And because some Dalys took longer to produce than others (e.g., more highly embellished guns or custom orders), the exact sequencing of the marks is difficult to sort our based on the serial numbering. So add these transition period in with the block of very early hammerless guns and things get confusing.
In terms of Builders gun, assuming it is a hammerless, it would be REALLY unusual to have the crown over crossed pistol mark. Again, the last use of that mark I have recorded was in the 300/400 range. I’d love to see a photo to make sure it is not, for example, an old stock barrel on a newer gun. The Lindner barrel numbering would need to be consistent.
Does the above make sense?
Ken
>
>
>
