March
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
Who's Online Now
4 members (Dale May, NZHunter, SKB, 1 invisible), 308 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums10
Topics38,373
Posts543,977
Members14,389
Most Online1,131
Jan 21st, 2024
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 18 of 52 1 2 16 17 18 19 20 51 52
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 423
Likes: 73
Sidelock
***
OP Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 423
Likes: 73
Daryl, I've not noticed any particular timeline for the form of attachment or in particular rearward attachment to back-action 'peninsula' locks. Someone with a good collection of muzzle-loaders might be able to help us here.

For those curious about the various types, I have noted three forms of attachment on early breech-loaders:

a) One is with two cross pins, in which both pins screw into tapped holes in the opposite lock plate. Usually the head is on the left side, but occasionally the locks are pinned from the right. I would think this is a strong structural arrangement, though by necessity the hand is drilled through in two places.

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]

b) The second is the one you asked about, where the locks have a single cross pin at the leading portion of the plate, and the rear is fastened by a shallow pin on each side, against which the lock plate is wedged -- half in, half out.

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]

c) The third is the neatest configuration, where the rearward tail of the lock plate has a hook that fits into a hidden recess, and the whole is fastened with a single cross pin, usually at the leading edge but sometimes towards the middle of the lock plate.

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]

Each offers a slightly different look and the various types can be artfully incorporated into the decorative engraving. As a layman I would have thought the two cross pin attachment would be strongest, but the hidden hook attachment seems to be prevalent on higher quality guns. It also seems to be prevalent on European breech-loaders. I'm presuming the maker, when ordering locks from a supplier, would specify what type of lock plate was needed. There must have been a terminology that I'm not aware of, or, it could be that the form of lock plate attachment was a subtle clue as to its quality.

Should a time machine be invented that would allow me to go back to 1860, I will add this to my already-long list of questions I would have in hand...

Last edited by Steve Nash; 02/04/21 05:29 PM.
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 423
Likes: 73
Sidelock
***
OP Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 423
Likes: 73
Ah, it is near-impossible to follow a time or invention sequence with early British breech-loaders in the 1850s and 60s, everything gets jumbled pretty quickly. There were so many advances and patents, both good and utterly pointless, so many individual craftsmen making their mark, and to confound everything, clients could order whatever their fancy, be it the newest patent or a favoured older design, to whatever grade their purse allowed. Every maker, from high to low, sought custom, and profit margins were tight, especially as annual sales of sporting breech-loaders by any given maker were in the tens, not tens of thousands. With the class system in full effect, a craftsman might be highly regarded and sought after -- but he was still just a craftsman, someone with no social standing or influence. Through my research I've gotten the impression that the French valued their gunmakers much more as gifted artisans, inventors, and true artists, though I have nothing concrete with which to prove that theory. But there has to be a reason why almost every significant technological advance in gunmaking has come from France (the flintlock, percussion, pinfire and centre-fire systems, hinge and hammerless actions, and more -- and German Johann Nicolaus von Dreyse came up with the needlefire system while working in Paris). There are some that debate certain origins, but the French were always at the leading edge, pushing the boundaries. They still are, as Darne and Idéal owners will attest.

As my previous offering to this thread was on back-action locks, here is a continuation with a look at a set of very peculiarly marked lock plates, from a maker with a prestigious history. I've sought information on this gun and its attributes on this board before, but it never hurts to ask again.

The Smith gun making business in London started with William Smith, who was apprenticed to John Joyner in 1766 and then to William Shepherd in 1771. He was later recorded as a gun lock maker in St James's in 1792, and St Pancras in 1800. In 1805 he traded as a gun maker at 34 Tottenham Court Road, moving in 1806 to 2 New Lisle Street. In 1817 William Smith was appointed Gunmaker-in-Ordinary to the Prince Regent, and he moved to 59 Princes Street, Leicester Square. In 1820 when the Prince Regent became King George IV he was appointed Gunmaker-in-Ordinary to the king, and the following year moved to 64 Princes Street. Smith had also been appointed Gunmaker to the Tsar Alexander I, Emperor of Russia, and to Maximilian I Joseph, King of Bavaria. This says a lot about the quality of Smith guns, and the regard in which they were held.

In 1825 William was succeeded by his son Samuel (1794-1855) and the name of the firm changed to Samuel Smith. In 1834 Samuel's brother, Charles, joined him and the firm became Samuel & Charles Smith. Between 1835 and 1837 they were appointed Gun Makers to His Majesty (William IV) and to the Duke of Gloucester. By 1855 both Samuel and Charles had died, and Samuel's two sons, also named Samuel and Charles, took over the firm. In 1867 Samuel (Jnr) patented a breech-loading action (patent No. 1075), which had the curious feature whereby half-cocking the right-hand hammer withdrew the barrel locking bolt. However, it is known only from an incomplete patent drawing, and no examples have ever surfaced. In 1870 the firm moved to 18 Oxenden Street, Haymarket, until 1875 when the business closed and the Smith brothers emigrated to Australia.

The firm has tremendous history and pedigree, and Googling the name turns up exquisite examples of flint and percussion guns, and even a few pinfires. Like most makers of the pinfire period Samuel and Charles Smith appear to have offered different grades of guns, including some with patented actions from other makers. Today's gun is a standard double-bite screw grip action by Samuel and Charles Smith of London, and serial number 6583 places it about 1864 in date. The 29 3/4" damascus barrels are signed "SamL & C Smith Princes Street Leicester Square London" on the top rib, and carry the usual London proofs. The barrel maker's mark "H.S." is still a mystery to me, but earlier percussion guns by the brothers also carry the same barrel maker's mark. The gun has typical percussion-style fences, an extended top strap, and flat-sided hammers, all of no particular note -- this was the entry-level pinfire gun of the mid-1860s, not much different from the offerings of most London and provincial makers. Where this gun becomes highly unusual is with the back-action lock plates. Look closely, the name inscriptions, "SamL& C Smith Princes St. London," are inverted. This is different from other Smith pinfires I've been able to trace, which have normal inscriptions on the locks. The locks are pinned from the right, which is unusual but not unheard of. And after pouring through a mountain of books, and tapping the considerable knowledge base on British guns that resides in the far corners of the Internet (including here), I can say with confidence that no one else has seen, or heard of, the like, which leads me to be equally confident in saying this was not an engraver's mistake, but a special request from the client. In what might remain a gun-lore mystery, the question remains as to why?

Inside the lock plates are the lock maker's mark, "N.B", which I believe to be that of the lock maker Noah Butler of Darlaston Road, Wednesbury, Staffordshire (or an alternate nearby address, 4 King's Hill, Wednesbury). Butler was born in 1827 or 1828, and his trade was a common one in Wednesbury and nearby Wolverhampton, sources of the best gun locks. These are quality locks with nicely shaped bridles, befitting a Smith gun.

The gun, however, is in a very sorry state, with a broken mainspring, parts missing, worn engraving and an overall tiredness that can't be hidden. The bores are heavily pitted, and the gun, minus a few small parts, weighs 6 lb 10 oz.

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]

Last edited by Steve Nash; 02/04/21 05:31 PM. Reason: Clarification
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,133
Likes: 309
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,133
Likes: 309
Steve, please don't say this is the last post in this line. Others need to pitch in. This is historically the most interesting line of the decade....duo-decade.


Baluch are not Brahui, Brahui are Baluch
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 175
Likes: 73
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 175
Likes: 73
Quote:
As my last offering to this thread


I think he was referring to his last post not saying this would be his last. I had to reread the beginning of this sentence to as I thought It was heading in a bad direction!


Clock Guns, Pauly Guns, Pinfire Guns and Pinfire Cartridges
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 423
Likes: 73
Sidelock
***
OP Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 423
Likes: 73
Sorry, bad choice of word, now corrected. I was referring to my previous post.

There is much more to cover!

Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 423
Likes: 73
Sidelock
***
OP Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 423
Likes: 73
This is just to reassure readers of this thread I have no intention of stopping just yet.

I admit I have been genuinely surprised by the steadily growing view count, considering the subject matter is a little-appreciated invention that few have ever stopped to examine in detail, or thought about in the wider context of sporting gun evolution. Even more so in North America, which saw very few pinfire sporting guns, period.

In its heyday the pinfire game gun was the plaything of the British rich, and a few ardent sportsmen. With the advance of the railroads there was much more access to the countryside, but shooting, and especially driven shoots, was mostly a landowner's pursuit. The pinfire was never a meat gun as it was to be in France, Belgium and Sweden, and it was overtaken too quickly by the centrefire to be much of an export item. It remained a status symbol of the British upper classes, a toy to fawn over in between pheasant drives and multi-course lunches. We've already seen the New York connection in this thread with the Genez guns, and Poultney & Trimble of Baltimore sold pinfires. The few pinfire guns that made it to Canada were mostly as heirlooms, and ammunition supply was always going to be a big problem. For the most part, North America went from percussion to rimfire/centrefire, largely bypassing the pinfire.

Today's gun is a William Wellington Greener, and it is one of the guns brought over from Britain at some point in the distant past. It is also the only W W Greener pinfire I've ever encountered, and I've only seen one other illustrated in print (see Smith & Curtis's The Pinfire System), along with a low-grade "William Wellington" offered for sale on a US website (more on this grade later). As a renowned supporter of the pinfire system, you would think WW Greener's pinfires would be out there, but the firm in the 1860s was not the manufacturing behemoth it would later become. I have no idea how many, or how few, the firm might have made. If anyone reading this has one, I'd like to hear of it.

But first, a diversion on how guns were being sold in the 1850s and 1860s. It is easy to think back to grainy black-and-white photos we've seen of the James Purdey & Sons Long Room, but that didn't come about until 1883. What did an earlier gun maker's shop look like? Early photographs exist of workers turning out barrels and stocking guns at work benches surrounded by tools -- but what did the retail shop look like? I don't know.

I imagine that in the 1860s you could walk into a British gunmaker's premises and order a gun made to your specifications and measurements, and a few months later your gun would be ready. This can still be done at the firms still in business, though the wait can be much, much longer. But back then a gun could also be bought ready-made and "off the rack," if the maker had a stock of such guns, as well as any second-hand guns that might be available, obtained as trade-ins or sold back to the maker. Some firms also sold newly-made guns of various makers, and second-hand guns perhaps taken as trades or part payment. In some cases, this trade in ready-made and second-hand guns was a very large part of a firm's business, and this was reflected in the trade labels affixed to gun cases, and in newspaper advertisements, in the use of the terms "gun repository" and "gun warehouse". Hardware stores (ironmongers) and occasionally general-goods merchants also traded in guns, ammunition and loading supplies (which will be the subject of future posts). In addition, a number of silversmiths and jewellers devoted part of their trade to dealing in guns, acting as agents for gunmakers. This was a favourable arrangement, as a Birmingham maker wishing to sell guns in London could do so through a well-situated London agent at a lower cost than opening and maintaining a London shop themselves.

In previous posts I mentioned that Benjamin Cogswell started as a pawnbroker (later advertising himself as a "gun and pistol warehouse", before declaring himself as a gunmaker). Westley Richards's London agent, William Bishop, aka "The Bishop of Bond Street", was a jeweller. And William Wellington Greener used Edward Whistler.

Edward Whistler was a silversmith, pawnbroker, and dealer in guns and pistols at 11 Strand, London, from 1844 to 1875. In 1867 his business was advertised as "Edward Whistler, Gun and Pistol Repository", offering new and second-hand guns from "the most approved London makers." Whistler was one of two London agents used by the Birmingham maker William Wellington Greener.

Greener was an early promoter of the pinfire system, which put him at odds with his father, the eminent Birmingham gunmaker William Greener, who had nothing good to say about the newfangled breech-loaders. The elder Greener wrote in 1858 in his book Gunnery that "the French system of breech-loading fire-arms is a specious pretence," adding "there is no possibility of a breech-loader ever shooting equal to a well-constructed muzzle-loader," and "the gun is unsafe, and becomes more and more unsafe from the first time it is used." Perhaps to cement his point, three W. Greener muzzle-loaders were entered in the 1858 Field trial, and all out-performed the competing pinfires. Ouch.

However, the tide of history was on the side of breech-loaders, and William Wellington Greener looked to the future, not the past. W. W. Greener would go on to author several important works, invent (co-invent?) choke-boring, develop the cross-bolt fastener (his "Treble Wedge-Fast"), put forth various other patents and improvements, and build one of the country's largest gun factories. But that is all much later than the period I'm interested in. W. W. Greener built two grades of pinfire guns: lesser guns and export-market guns were signed "William Wellington," and higher grade guns carried the Greener name. Greener had his own trademark or "proof" mark, an elephant's head, that appeared on his barrels (and sometimes actions). This might have been an evolution of his father's earlier "elephant and castle" trademark.

This gun is a 12-bore double-bite screw grip rotary-underlever pinfire sporting gun by William Wellington Greener, retailed by Edward Whistler, 11 The Strand, London, and probably made in the late 1860s. The 30 1/8" damascus barrels have Birmingham proof marks, and a barrel maker's mark "SP", which I believe to be the mark of Samuel Probin of Loveday Street. The top rib is signed "W. W. Greener 11 Strand London." The gun has unsigned bar-action locks, nicely sculpted hammers, a beautifully figured walnut stock with drop points, and the fore-end has a horn or possibly ebony tip. The bores are slightly pitted at the breech, and the gun weighs 6 lb 15 oz.

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
[img]https://i.imgur.com/im4VG4c.jpg?1[/img]
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]

A fine quality gun overall, but there is more. The gun is lacking a serial number, and the barrels lack the elephant mark. The story I was told was that when the gun was brought to Canada from Britain, the barrels were still "in-the-white," and were rust-browned locally. Graham Greener, of the current company, W W Greener (Sporting Guns) Limited, confirmed the gun was a Greener and that it would have sold for 30 guineas, but could not explain the marking discrepancies. All of which lead me to speculate that the gun was re-barrelled in Britain during its working life (not uncommon for later guns, but unusual for a pinfire). Greener guns of the period carried their serial numbers on the barrels and not the action bar or elsewhere, so a re-barrelled gun would lack the Greener serial number and trademark. The original rib might have been retained and put on the new set of tubes, or the name and address could have been engraved on a new rib -- I can't tell for sure, but suspect the latter, from the somewhat awkward letter spacing. The fact that the gun was not converted to centre-fire suggests the new barrels were put on at a time when pinfires were still in common use (or it would have made sense to change the hammers, drill strikers and add barrels with an extractor and centre-fire chambers). Why the new barrels would have been left in-the-white is a mystery. So many of these stories will never be known.

The Greener family has quite a remarkable history. William Greener was born in 1806 near Newcastle-upon-Tyne. He apprenticed with John Gardner in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, and for a short time he worked for John Manton in London. In 1829 he returned to Newcastle to open his own business. In 1835 he wrote his first book, "The Gun", or "A Treatise on the Various Descriptions of Small Fire-Arms". Around this time he invented the first bullet designed to expand in the barrel in order to seal the bore. In 1841 William Greener wrote "The Science of Gunnery". In 1844 he relocated to Birmingham, with three men, the rest of the work done by outworkers. In 1848 the firm was appointed gunmaker to HRH Prince Albert. In 1851 William exhibited at the Great Exhibition, and his guns were awarded prizes. However, his irreconcilable views on the new breech-loaders were said to be the cause of the split with his son William Wellington, who set up his own business in 1855, probably with his financial help. The new firm was named W Greener Jnr. It was recorded in Lench Street from 1858 to 1863, but in 1863 the name changed to W W Greener and he moved to 61-62 Loveday Street, the premises being named the "St Mary's Works". Continuing the family's inventiveness, William Wellington patented in 1863 a sliding bolt single-bite snap-action breech-loader (patent No. 2231). The patent also covered an extractor for pinfire guns. In 1867 William Wellington Greener registered patent No 1339 for a top lever locking mechanism, with a cross-bolt through an extension of the top rib, which eventually became his treble wedge fast grip. He went on to obtain many, many other patents, but these are beyond the pinfire period I've looked at.

William Greener died on 23 August 1869, and shortly afterwards William Wellington bought his father's business, and his operation at St Mary's Works at 61-62 Loveday Street was expanded to St Mary's Square and St Mary's Row. In 1874 William Wellington acquired the business of Joseph Needham. In 1878 he took over the firm and premises of Theophilus Murcott at 68 Haymarket to use as a London base, and opened a shop in Paris at 8 Avenue de l'Opera. On 25 July 1921 William Wellington Greener died at the age of 86. The firm continued and went on to be the largest sporting gun factory in the world. In 1965 the company was sold to Webley & Scott Ltd., which continued making Greener guns until 1979. In 1985 the W W Greener name was revived and the firm re-established at 1 Belmont Row, Birmingham, and guns carrying the Greener name are still being built.

William Wellington Greener surpassed his father as an author. In 1871 he wrote "The Modern Breech Loader", followed by "Choke Bore Guns and How to Load for All Kinds of Game" in 1876. In 1881 he wrote "The Gun and Its Development," which went on to nine editions and reprints in the period up to 1910. In 1888 WW Greener wrote "Modern Shotguns," and in 1900 he wrote "Sharpshooting for Sport and War". In 1907 he and Charles Edward Greener published a book entitled "The Causes of Decay in a British Industry" under the pseudonyms Optifex and Artifex. Finally, in 1908 William Wellington Greener wrote "The British Miniature Rifle".

Last edited by Steve Nash; 02/04/21 05:34 PM.
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 948
Likes: 2
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 948
Likes: 2
This discussion thread is such a great gift.
I really do appreciate you having made this gesture for us all.
Thanks for your efforts.

One thing that I'm getting from this is a look at some of the engraving patterns and borders, and metal sculpting on the fences, actions, and hammers from this transitional period.
Great stuff!

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,133
Likes: 309
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,133
Likes: 309
Steve, re the famous William Greener (the father) quote about breech loaders and the comment above:

"The elder Greener wrote in 1858 in his book Gunnery that "the French system of breech-loading fire-arms is a specious pretence," adding "there is no possibility of a breech-loader ever shooting equal to a well-constructed muzzle-loader," and "the gun is unsafe, and becomes more and more unsafe from the first time it is used." Perhaps to cement his point, three W. Greener muzzle-loaders were entered in the 1858 Field trial, and all out-performed the competing pinfires. Ouch. "


I'm not sure the three W.Greener muzzle-loaders at the April 1858 trial at Cremorna did out perform the breech loaders. "The Field" in its 16 October 1858 review of the book excoriated Greener on this point, noting that Mr. Reilly breech-loaders shot the equal of one Greener gun and had not at all be humiliated by the others. Here's a portion of the text. Just noting this because "The Field" clearly saw the future after this trial:




Last edited by Argo44; 08/14/20 09:12 PM.

Baluch are not Brahui, Brahui are Baluch
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,264
Likes: 196
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,264
Likes: 196
Argo, thanks for the article. It is surely interesting on how it relates to Greener's thoughts on the breechloading pinfire. I would guess Mr. Nash will bring to light more on the Greener sourced pinfire.

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,264
Likes: 196
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,264
Likes: 196
From Mr. Nash--------------

"In its heyday the pinfire game gun was the plaything of the British rich, and a few ardent sportsmen. With the advance of the railroads there was much more access to the countryside, but shooting, and especially driven shoots, was mostly a landowner's pursuit. The pinfire was never a meat gun as it was to be in France, Belgium and Sweden, and it was overtaken too quickly by the centrefire to be much of an export item. It remained a status symbol of the British upper classes, a toy to fawn over in between pheasant drives and multi-course lunches. We’ve already seen the New York connection in this thread with the Genez guns, and Poultney & Trimble of Baltimore sold pinfires. The few pinfire guns that made it to Canada were mostly as heirlooms, and ammunition supply was always going to be a big problem. For the most part, North America went from percussion to rimfire/centrefire, largely bypassing the pinfire."

I think the above is a good synopsis of the countries relating to pinfires. I may have seen a couple from Sweden, but cannot name a maker or source from there. From my experience, you may add Germany to the list of pinfire producers.

From North America, most of the pinfire double shotguns I have seen seem to be rebranded British guns. Poultney and Trimble, Forsyth [Made for Syms and Bros., N.Y.], and a few others. But, one gun I have seen seems to be mostly, if not all, an American product. It is a double barrel pinfire shotgun marked C. E. Sneider, Patentee, Baltimore. Barrels surely came from Europe, but the rest of the gun is not like European samples. I cannot recall another North American maker of pinfire doubles that did not seem to originate from Europe.

Understanding that we don't want to get too far off of the subject of the British Game Gun, indulge me a bit with the Sneider, the only U.S. double pinfire that I know of. There are probably others. As Mr. Nash stated , the U.S. seemed to jump from muzzleloader over the pinfire, directly into the centerfire breechloading double. This is logical because we are talking about the period of the U.S. Civil war when the citizens were preoccupied with things other than game guns. By the time the effects in the U.S.of the War were over, the centerfire breechloader was starting to bloom in Britain. Soon on to the U.S.

Somehow the Sneider did come out in that period. Sneider , if my memory is correct, did have some British patents. He was also in the forefront of the first American hammerless breechloaders. This pinfire "may" have European locks, but I have not taken them off. It should be noted that Sneider was continually advancing the sidelock design in America, using coil springs quite often. A friend and I compared three different Sneider locks, and the similarity of each was coil springs, but the designs were completely different. The odd almost circular piece on the inside of the bar is a stop/keeper for the barrels. When turned the barrels could not be removed. A later Sneider patent used a crossbar in this area to retain the barrels.

After removing the lock on the Sneider, I think the lock and barrels had a British origin. The stock appears to be American Black Walnut and the receiver and lockup details seem done in the U.S.



















Last edited by Daryl Hallquist; 08/15/20 07:38 PM.
Page 18 of 52 1 2 16 17 18 19 20 51 52

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 - 2024 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: 0.086s Queries: 35 (0.065s) Memory: 0.9181 MB (Peak: 1.8987 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-03-28 09:58:51 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS