doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Looking for info about this fine old shotgun.

troublsom1-Pay attention to lagopus. He's knows what he's talking about. I'd pay a lot less attention to what some others are saying. (HJ comes to mind.)

Good point about Tanky's gun even though the standard form of the gun points to Midland. Your proof marks look fine. I was thinking along the lines of a 'C' Quality Model 67 Scott. They came in all grades. Can't see anything that points to Belgium in there. Like a lot of these old guns; they remain something of an enigma. Lagopus.....

jOe, In the last few minutes I've looked at several W & C Scott guns on the internet, and they all do appear to be higher quality than my gun. It's hard to say from only looking at pictures, and I have none of your obvious experience and expertise. Though, there are similarities, and lagopus says Scott also made made guns "for the trade". Your price was from $500 or less to $1000 which I thought was an estimate, and appreciated the effort, but that could mean anything form a penny to $1000. I suppose with such a broad range, one could consider it firm. Of course it doesn't matter, and it's not mine to sell even if I wanted to. I'm only curious about this old gun. My questions aren't meant to disparage anyone's judgment. I'm just trying to learn what I can. No offence intended.

So, if it's too early to be a Midland, and too crummy to be a Scott, even a "for the trade" Scott, what is it? If it's Belgian, why the Birmingham proof marks? Are there Belgian guns out there more similar to mine than the Midlands and Scotts I've seen?

Lagopus, From the pictures I've seen so far I think tanky's gun may well be a Scott. The engraving on mine looks more generic than his, and his firing pin screw is in the right place for the Scotts I've been looking at, as well as the shape of his lock plate. Have you seen Scotts with the firing pin screw like mine? Sure would like to see a few pictures of that "C" Quality Model 67 Scott. Think I'll take another run at the internet and see if I can find one. Thanks.

I found one at: html//www.cabelas.com/gun-inventory---scarborough---english-sg---932981-wcsct-sca.shtml, I just ran a Google search for W & C Scott shotguns, and it was about the 8th one down the page. Similar to mine but again the firing pin screw is different. This is the closest lock to mine I've seen yet. The forward edge just in front of the hammer is curved though like tanky's whereas mine is angled. This one is suppose to be 1882. I wonder if they used different locks thought the years.

Note that the chamber marking 12/C in a Diamond did not appear until 1887, nor did the intermediate gauge markings as 13/1. The markings on your gun appear absolutely correct for an 1875-1887 Birmingham blackpowder proofed shotgun.

The fact that your gun chambers a modern 2 3/4 shell dose not mean it is safe to shoot modern 2 3/4 smokles shells; to do so is to court disaster!The breech pressure developed by most modern smokless, 2 3/4 shot gun shells, is in many cases equal to,or greater,than the proof pressures generated by the original black powder proof test. Prior to shooting smokless loads in any black powder gun it should first be submitted for nitro reproof.
For the record, at the time when your gun was made a 2 1/2 inch and 2 3/4 inch black powder shell with rolled turnover, did, believe it or not, measure 2.5 and 2.75 inches in length! From this you should be able to appreciate the fact that if you tried to chamber a 2.75 B.P. shells in your gun you would not be able to close the action!
Strongly recommend that you abandon the "fishing trip" and send your gun to a competent gunsmith who is properly equipped to acurately measure and evaluate the condition your gun.

Amen

Case closed....and it wasn't built by W&C Scott.

Relax everybody. I said early on that I had no intention of firing this thing with smokeless, black or otherwise. Never considered it for a moment. Don't know how you got the idea in your head. I did say that I thought it was chambered for 2 3/4 inch shells, and now that you mention it I'm probably wrong about that. It's more likely meant for 2 1/2 inch shells as Lagopus says, though it would chamber a modern 2 3/4 inch, the chamber is not quite long enough for the unfolded crimp; close but not quite. As I'm sure you know it's the unfolded length that is important. It really makes no difference how long it is when it goes in, no matter what kind of crimp it has.

I'm still interested in finding out who the maker was and any other information I can get. I started this as a search for knowledge, not a fishing trip, and I've learned a lot in the last couple of days.

At first I thought it was a Midland but it appears too old for Midland. It may be Belgian but knowledgeable people here doubt that theory, so for the present I must discount that. The 12C inside a diamond appears to be irrelevant, except that it means it was made prior to 1887. In my mind Scott is still a possibility though it doesn't appear to be the 1882 model C that I saw online. I have yet to see a "C" Quality Model 67 Scott however, and it could even be another model Scott. So, my mind remains open, and the search for knowledge goes on. One thing I want to make clear, and respectfully so. I have no intention of getting into some sort of online pissing contest over it.

Relax everybody. I said early on that I had no intention of firing this thing with smokeless, black or otherwise. Never considered it for a moment. Don't know how you got the idea in your head. I did say that I thought it was chambered for 2 3/4 inch shells, and now that you mention it I'm probably wrong about that. It's more likely meant for 2 1/2 inch shells as Lagopus says, though it would chamber a modern 2 3/4 inch, the chamber is not quite long enough for the unfolded crimp; close but not quite. As I'm sure you know it's the unfolded length that is important. It really makes no difference how long it is when it goes in, no matter what kind of crimp it has.

I'm still interested in finding out who the maker was and any other information I can get. I started this as a search for knowledge, not a fishing trip, and I've learned a lot in the last couple of days.

At first I thought it was a Midland but it appears too old for Midland. It may be Belgian but knowledgeable people here doubt that theory, so for the present I must discount that. The 12C inside a diamond appears to be irrelevant, except that it means it was made prior to 1887. In my mind Scott is still a possibility though it doesn't appear to be the 1882 model C that I saw online. I have yet to see a "C" Quality Model 67 Scott however, and it could even be another model Scott. So, my mind remains open, and the search for knowledge goes on. One thing I want to make clear, and respectfully so. I have no intention of getting into some sort of online pissing contest over it.