|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,500
Posts545,472
Members14,414
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 518
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 518 |
I could be wrong here, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that Keith Kearcher has done this.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,456 Likes: 86
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,456 Likes: 86 |
Maybe Keith Kearcher did this one.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,588 Likes: 9
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,588 Likes: 9 |
Maybe Keith Kearcher did this one. No. Keith Kearcher did not do this work. I believe I know which English shop did the work, but I am not 100% sure and for obvious reasons I can not ask the owner.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,588 Likes: 9
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,588 Likes: 9 |
Today, you would more likely have Teague pull a new tube inside the reamed out damascus. No need to mess up the exterior of the original barrels. I believe the original barrels were cut or one of them had a crack from an obstruction. Again, I can't ask the owner. My curiousity is more about how this would have 'slipped' through the Proof House.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743 |
Note that in the original posting it is stated the gun "WAS" re-proofed. The question concerns the "Sleeve" mark. Anyone know at what point this became a requirement for a sleeved set of bbls. Perhaps it was sleeved & re-proofed prior to this requirement, or perhaps it was submitted for re-proof with no mention of having been sleeved & as was all Damascus the proofer just failed to notice this fact. Or perhaps he just forgot to place that mark upon it, several possibilities here, may never know for certain.
Miller/TN I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,588 Likes: 9
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,588 Likes: 9 |
I am betting it was reproofed. Would they have to restamp it back then?
Pete
Back when? I may not have been clear. This work was done within the last 5-6 years.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,588 Likes: 9
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,588 Likes: 9 |
Drew, No offense was intended and I was planning to copy a couple of those pics when I got to this computer. That was the best pic I have seen of the barrels with the damascus muzzles. The auction catalog pictures were posted a couple years ago but I don't remember that picture.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,588 Likes: 9
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,588 Likes: 9 |
What is the possibility of such a procedure being performed today? Anyone interested? Murph, I think you may have seen this gun.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,456 Likes: 86
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,456 Likes: 86 |
Looks like a job for Myth Busters...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 3,642 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 3,642 Likes: 1 |
Hello Mike,
For all the excellent things this BBS provides, PMs are not its forte. I added a dedicated email to my profile.
Best,
JC
"...it is always advisable to perceive clearly our ignorance."ť Charles Darwin
|
|
|
|
|
|