doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com The pinfire game gun

Thanks to all who are contributing to the thread. There are indeed very knowledgeable collectors out there, and I would dearly love to see Mr Stockham's fantastic collection. Gene Smith and Chris Curtis's book, "The Pinfire System," is required reading for anyone looking into this period of gunmaking. They, and others, are experts on pinfire pistols and revolvers, a subject on which I know little, and on the matter of pinfire cartridges I again defer to the experts.

I am going to stick to pinfire game guns. To the members that have contributed so far, I will get around to Powell, Reilly and Erskine examples, I promise.

It is near impossible to follow a precise timeline in describing pinfires, but I am going to try starting with early designs, and guns that can attributed to an early date. Some guns can be precisely dated from records, while others fall into more general groupings, like post-1862 (from unmarked Jones underlever actions). The start in Britain was in the mid to late 1850s, and then the bulk of new designs and manufacture happened in the 1860s. A few makers built pinfires into the 1870s, I imagine to please conservative clients, but by 1870 few were being made, having been replaced by the centre-fire. Dual-fire guns able to use both pinfire and centre-fire cartridges appeared in the mid-1860s, but did not last long. And muzzle-loaders converted to breech-loading might have been done anytime during the brief heyday of the pinfire in Britain, a cheaper (though risky) alternative to buying a new gun. Guns carrying patent designs or features are a bit easier to place within a timeline, but guns built for the trade can be impossible to narrow down. As AaronN points out, some makers were coming up with inventive designs in the late 1850s.

I will get to all of these types in due course, but one generalization that can be made is that the Lang-type single-bite, forward-underlever fell from favour by the 1860s in light of better alternatives. Before leaving this type altogether, here is one signed Hugh Snowie. It is a good example of the lengths one might go to keep a gun in the field. A gun was a sizeable investment back then, as it is still.

From the IGC database, Hugh Lumsden Snowie was born in 1806 in Aberdeen, Scotland. He was apprenticed to Charles Playfair from 1821 to 1827. He might have been Playfair's first apprentice, as that was the year Playfair first started his own gun making business. After his apprenticeship Snowie worked in London as a journeyman gun maker for about two years before moving in 1829 to Inverness to establish his own business. By 1851 he was recorded living at 89 Church Street, with his wife, daughter, and two sons (Thomas and William, who eventually apprenticed under their father). Hugh Snowie died in London in June 1879, and his sons continued the family firm.

This gun has been heavily used, and it has undergone significant repair and maintenance work. It might even be a converted muzzle-loader, but I can't be entirely sure. What is certain is that someone went to great lengths to keep it in working order. It is a 14-bore, serial number 3277. My best guess is that it was probably made around 1860, or soon after. The 29" damascus barrels have London proofs, and an unsigned top rib. The back-action locks are signed "H. Snowie."

The gun is a single-bite screw grip action with forward-facing under-lever and assisted-opening stud, of the type Joseph Lang started making in 1853-54. The actioner's initials are "S.B", who I've not been able to trace. It could be the mark of Samuel Brown of 12 Lench St., or that of Samuel Breedon of Washwood Heath, both Birmingham gun makers at the time who could have supplied a barrelled action or partly finished gun to Snowie. Early in the development of breech-loaders there were not many who were experienced at duplicating Lang's action -- so it might remain a mystery. The under-lever swings out to the left, marking this a gun for a left-handed shooter. The gun has early features, such as a mechanical safety grip and a long butt plate upper tang, styles that soon disappeared in the breech-loading era (the reason behind wondering if this was a conversion). The gun has fences with raised collars, an attractive flourish. The hammers have extended flanges, and overall the gun has well proportioned lines, weighing a light 6 lb 10 oz. It is a real shame the 14-bore fell from fashion.

The story I want to know is why it underwent so many repairs. Several action screws have been replaced, the assisted-opening stud is missing, the under-lever looks like a replacement, and the right-hand lock plate has an extra drilled hole. Removing the lock plate shows that a new, shorter mainspring was fitted, which required a new hole for the spring's attachment pin. The gunsmith might have simply used a spring salvaged from another gun, but fitted it in a way whereby both hammers pulled with equal force, and at half- and full-cock the hammers still align perfectly. The gun has seen heavy use, the engraving is quite worn, and the bores are pitted. It was kept going long after someone else might have retired it from the shooting field, or returned it to the gunmaker to be scrapped for spare parts and iron. I wonder how many red grouse fell to this gun?