September
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
Who's Online Now
6 members (Stockman, Bob Jurewicz, Tyler, SKB, 2 invisible), 119 guests, and 5 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums10
Topics36,146
Posts507,797
Members14,079
Most Online462
Aug 5th, 2016
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,544
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,544
Kyrie,

A nice dig to enhance the Spanish trade perhaps?

The Spanish certainly produce guns at a cheaper price. I'll give you that.

I think you over state your case to the point of it being undermined.

Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 617
Sidelock
*
Offline
Sidelock
*

Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 617
Kyrie, with all due respect, isn't the original post more concerned with re-proofing old guns ?
I can't comment on the suggested poor standards of practice carried out by the English proof houses as I haven't heard any stories.
Is there any evidence to back up the statement that sub standard guns were being passed ?
No messenger shooting, just wondered


Rust never sleeps !
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,078
Likes: 17
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,078
Likes: 17
Originally Posted By: Kyrie
....The English proof houses have clearly been passing guns that were mechanically unacceptable under any professional manufacturing standard, including C.I.P....


Were there inaccurate measurements taken or pressures used that were below CIP agreements? I wonder if government contract arms breeze through without a hitch.

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 3
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 3
The Proof houses seem work on the two rule system .
Rule one , The proof house can not be wrong or in any way at fault .
Rule two , If it can be proved beyond shadow of a doubt that the Proof house is incorrect or has made a mistake , see rule one .

Always has been always will be .That include guns rejected because of dented barrels that were not dented on submission etc. unfortunately the British Gun trade association is to weak to stand up to the Proof houses and individuals meet a stone wall of denial of any fault .As many of us have discovered over the years .

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 480
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 480
Originally Posted By: Small Bore
Kyrie,
A nice dig to enhance the Spanish trade perhaps?
--- snip --


You're mistaken. I'm quite fond of some Spanish shotguns, but could not care less about the Spanish gun trade.

Last edited by Kyrie; 11/19/14 03:05 PM.
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 480
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 480
Originally Posted By: El Garro


--- snip ---
Is there any evidence to back up the statement that sub standard guns were being passed ?
No messenger shooting, just wondered


From Small Bore's post:

Originally Posted By: Small Bore


--- snip ---
The Gunsmiths’ Tale
A well known dealer, with a busy repair shop recounted the sad story of his ‘sleevers'. He told me he has, for years, been submitting sleeved guns for re-proof after completing the necessary work. He has up-to-date chamber reamers from the USA and is sending his work to the proof house now, as he has done for over a decade, expecting the proof process to be carried out without mishap and have the guns returned with new proof marks. Last month a batch failed. He re-submitted them and they failed again. The first reason cited was shorter chambers than required, then they failed again because the diameter was deemed outside of required tolerances.

He has had identically prepared guns passed on a regular basis until now, using the same reamers and gauges. Suddenly, it is all change at the proof house and what was passable in June is a fail in September. Something has apparently changed. What?

Another long-established Birmingham gun-smith has totally given up on re-proof jobs due to recent failures and what he considers inconsistent regulations. “It is simply not worth the hassle anymore”, he said. Now he simply turns away any work that requires re-proof.

Another gun smith told me the “newly dogmatic application of CIP rules” was a hindrance to doing the job correctly, in his opinion. He had delivered a rifle with the rim cut precisely for the headspace he wanted and thought optimal for striking but had it rejected as ‘too shallow’, despite the head fitting exactly flush, as befitting best work.
--- snip ---


This last bit is especially demonstrative:

“Another gun smith told me the “newly dogmatic application of CIP rules” was a hindrance to doing the job correctly, in his opinion. He had delivered a rifle with the rim cut precisely for the headspace he wanted and thought optimal for striking but had it rejected as ‘too shallow’, despite the head fitting exactly flush, as befitting best work.”

C.I.P. sets the minimum and maximum range of headspace. The gunsmith quoted/paraphrased above was accustomed to substituting his judgment for C.I.P. required dimensions and having the proof house aid and abet his failure to adhere to C.I.P. standards.



Last edited by Kyrie; 11/19/14 03:13 PM.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 6
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 6
So Dig, as the Government don't run the Proof Houses; as some here think they do, and they are really run by the Gun Trade to protect their interests and protect the public at large, then my question is; what are the Gun Trade and the Guardians; who are members of that trade, doing? Is this just another example of Political correctness and 'Elf 'N Safety' gone mad? Lagopus.....

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,544
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,544
Actually, the gunsmith was submitting a rim that fitted precisely, the CIP dimensions are sloppy, not best practice yet imposed.

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,544
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,544
What it seems to be is this:

Governments sign up to CIP (which, you are correct, is primarily interested in safety).

The Proof Houses were set up by Act of Parliament to govern the safety of small arms. They act with a Proof Master in charge, answerable to a board.

Rules of proof have been issued over the years to take into account changes in gun making and ammunition.

Presently, the proof houses are having to enforce the CIP directives imposed on all members.

One question is whether introduction of these CIP dimensions is an improvement. I think it is arguable.

Another question is how are the proof houses implementing the rules? This is the main issue currently under investigation.

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 480
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 480
Originally Posted By: Small Bore
Actually, the gunsmith was submitting a rim that fitted precisely, the CIP dimensions are sloppy, not best practice yet imposed.


And there is the issue in a nutshell:

Who sets the manufacturing standards? C.I.P.? Or every gunsmith from a town large enough to have a crossroads?

Clearly, the answer was “the gunsmith.” But that looks to have changed, and the answer is now “C.I.P.”

Small wonder the gunsmith(s) feel put upon. They are unaccustomed to the rule of law, as the English proof houses have let them have their way for many, many years and the change is a shock.

Small Bore, I spent many years in the firearm business here in the States and had friends in the business in England. I understand your predicament and truly sympathize. But the simple truth is the gun making and gun servicing legal environment in England appears to have undergone a sea change to something that at least resembles what the rest of C.I.P. signatory Europe has been coping with for decades. Some makers/gunsmiths will adapt and survive, and some will not.

I wish you well.

Page 2 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Link Copied to Clipboard

doublegunshop.com home | Welcome | Sponsors & Advertisers | DoubleGun Rack | Doublegun Book Rack

Order or request info | Other Useful Information

Updated every minute of everyday!


Copyright (c) 1993 - 2021 doublegunshop.com. All rights reserved. doublegunshop.com - Bloomfield, NY 14469. USA These materials are provided by doublegunshop.com as a service to its customers and may be used for informational purposes only. doublegunshop.com assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in these materials. THESE MATERIALS ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANT-ABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. doublegunshop.com further does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information, text, graphics, links or other items contained within these materials. doublegunshop.com shall not be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages, including without limitation, lost revenues or lost profits, which may result from the use of these materials. doublegunshop.com may make changes to these materials, or to the products described therein, at any time without notice. doublegunshop.com makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. This is a public un-moderated forum participate at your own risk.

Note: The posting of Copyrighted material on this forum is prohibited without prior written consent of the Copyright holder. For specifics on Copyright Law and restrictions refer to: http://www.copyright.gov/laws/ - doublegunshop.com will not monitor nor will they be held liable for copyright violations presented on the BBS which is an open and un-moderated public forum.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.0.33-0+deb9u11+hw1 Page Time: 0.046s Queries: 35 (0.019s) Memory: 0.8591 MB (Peak: 1.8990 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2021-09-28 20:24:21 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS