My registration has not been cleared by the admin at the Fox site so I'll put this up here first.

I have always thought that the beavertail on this gun was not original, and obviously the extension is not. At some point I posted pictures of it minus s/n and several folks commented that the work looked 'factory'. When I posted the s/n I was told that it was too early and could not be done by the factory. What say all of you? Original (minus extension)?

doesnt look like any of my factory beavertails. But a letter would clear up some of it. Obvioulsy the extension aint right!!!!

I like it. Obviously a PA gun. Is it for sale?

Looks like a DIY project, not factory.
bill

Weatherby perhaps, looks kinda rakish for a Fox.

I will be getting a letter this time around.

Why do you say PA gun? I found it a long way from PA traded it to a gentleman in Wisconsin and eventually got it back.

For sale? No, this time it stays in my safe for a while.

I have always thought it was a replacement. Can you tell me how it differs from factory Fox BT's?

PA trap and pigeon shooters are fond of "working on the wood" and using Miller Triggers. Their guns are easy to identify even when far removed from their state of origin.

The trigger (we've never been able to ID it as a Miller for sure) is serial numbered to the gun.

Geoff,

Did you take any pictures of the trigger when you had the buttstock off the gun?

I think the checkering and the concave top section of the barrel divider (on the inside) look like factory work.

The raised spine does look like it was run with a moulder or scraper--pretty sophisticated cf. to Lowell's rifle stock cap on the end. Perhaps it is Penn. Crude combined with Fox. But if it's half factory, the transition to the iron is about the nastiest thing I've seen.

jack

I know nothing of Foxes...but I say it's non-factory.

I wouldn't loose any sleep over it.

jack,

There have been some repairs under the iron (soft, punky wood replaced & new screw), and the 'nastiest' part appears to mostly be dents from 80 years of handling.

I am not arguing that it is original, I had never thought it was. Just seeking out opinions. The checkering and concave section on the underside of the forend are what folks pointed at as being 'factory'. Hopefully the eventuall letter will clear things up.

Murph,

Did Miller usually s/n the triggers to the guns? Why do PA shooters get so much 'credit' for working on their guns as if the rest of the shooting community shot bone stock guns?

Are they getting even for the Kentucky Rifle?

Sorry, didn't take the time.

I have no particular expertise with Fox guns to draw from, but there's something about the forend wood that differs from the butt that makes me thing the forend is not factory. The grain is more open or not filled as much, gouges in the barrel channel, the wood is proud of the FE metal while not on the butt, and that funky shape...looks very 50's-60's, much like my restocked LC Ideal.

Chuck,

It may be the shadows in the pictures, but there are no gouges in the barrel channels. All pictures were taken with a flash which may have an affect on the wood 'color'. I don't think the finish on the FE or buttstock is original, but it is consistent.

I Believe the reason the wood looks proud is because it comes up above the center of barrels, couldn't be any narrower than the widest part of the barrels.

I missed the 'proud' part of your post earlier. In the pictures it does look that way, and in fact I wasn't sure, so I pulled the gun out to double check.

I flares out quickly due to the size of the forend but at the metal/wood junction it is not proud.

From the Fox site.

Don posts here also so I don't think he'll mind me quoting him.

I mistook a stain or grease spot on one of the pictures as the Miller stamp. Looking back, I realize that wasn't what it was. However, the configuration of the trigger installation is very similar to a non selective Miller trigger. Don K. would know.

Murph,

The trigger is selective.

Utah, take a look back at the thread on my Ithaca NID single trigger. http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbt...age=3#Post59426

Some of the best research sources on this site provided their input on Miller, Howland, and Ithaca triggers. Also there are some drawings of the triggers which may help you ID yours. Drop that triggerplate and lets see it.

I thought there was some question about the source of the trigger (Geoff Roznak's post Oct 13}. If it has the crudely stamped RSL marking on the top tang, there is no doubt that it is Miller.

Murphy,

Yes, the tang is stamped as you mention, which is why I have always identified it as a Miller.

When in Geoffs possession the gun was apart for the forend repairs and a general check-up by a 'smith of good reputation and experience. As I remember (Geoff can correct if I am wrong) the 'smith did not think the mechanism looked like the Millers he had seen.

I won't drag this thread to far off topic since I won't have the time to pull the buttstock/triggerplate for the forseeable future.

Mike,
What was revealed as significant (to me at least) in the Ithaca trigger thread is that all three, Miller, Howland and Ithaca triggers have top tangs marked RSL and have identical function and nearly identical form. I have no idea on what makes/designs of single triggers were installed by Fox since I'm delinquent in re-reading my Fox book for this info.

Are you thinking that your gun has a post delivery single trigger?

Yes.

The only Fox I've held that I thought had a factory single trigger, had a notch out of the side of the upper tang where the selector came thru. I can't recall if it was in place of the safety or was in addition to the safety. I just recall thinking I'd have to weld up that notch if the single trigger couldn't be made to work on that old dog.

Chuck,

I think that is the Fox/Kautzki(sp?) trigger you describe.

That sounds like an Infallible Single Trigger, not a factory Kautsky. Maybe someone could post a picture of a factory Kautsky trigger to clear the air.

Utah The rear portion does look Fox and the stock wood sure looks to match the forend.I have not handled any Philly guns with what I consider factory beavertail forends but yours sure does look close. I think the beavertail did not appear in the catalog until 1930 but Im sure Fox would have made a beavertail before that if the customer had specified it. The reprint 1930's catalog I have list a "English Beavertail" with the large schnabel and a "Trap Style beavertail" with fuller proportions. Is it posible that the gun in question originally had a English type beavertail that a subsequent owner did not like and removed the schnabel and added the new tip? Just a thought! What vintage gun are we talking hear? late 20's early 30's? I am also posting a picture of a Fox-Kautzky single trigger showing the selector location. Paul

FOXIST,

Per the list on this site the gun was one of the first made in 1927.

Chuck and Utah, there is a picture of a factory Fox trigger. Any selector up off the tang next to the safety means a Lancaster Infallible and not a factory Kautsky trigger.

Utah I think a factory letter is the only way to know for sure. Going by serial# while 90% of the time is close can sometimes be misleading. I Hope you find the answers you are looking for in the letter. Keep us Posted. Good Luck!! Paul

Thanks for all the information.

If I can round up an envelope and stamp I'll mail out a request for a letter from the small town I am spending the week in.

I posted this on a few sites and from the information I recieved my bet is the following.

BT Forend is original, trigger is not.

We'll see what the letter says.

Thanks again,

Mike