How far would you go to save some weight?

sillymike said:
Did some googling last night, seems like the guy was known for making light guns...
- The address of "172 New Bond Street " was used between 1892-1893

The proof mark crown over BNP, was used the Birmingham proof-house starting in 1954
The diamond with 12 over C was used for the chamber size, from 1887 to 1954
The diamond with only 12 inside was introduced in 1954
The 2 1/2" was introduced in 1925

Just thinking out loud, but in the 1890s, wouldn't the barrel had been some sort of Damascus?
Click to expand...


The "L" to the left of the crossed swords, (bottom left of the barrel flats) would indicate a 1960 reproof. Having the gun proved again would be necessary for retail in England.

https://www.hallowellco.com/proof_date_codes.htm
 
sillymike said:
How far would you go to shave some weight off your SxS ?

Stumbled upon this, listed by InterSurplus


When I first look at it, my reaction was a :eek: what is that?
- After a bit of time... doesn't seem that bad... and a 6lbs SxS with 28" tube, that could be interesting...

eXWU7Co.jpg


EzSz6z3.jpg


MbRaqXV.jpg


zb4W7Eg.jpg


EgH9AXg.jpg


A26okQg.jpg


CL6Ysie.jpg


tTIBY59.jpg
Click to expand...

A 6lb 12ga? Well it wouldn't be me pulling the triggers unless it was loaded with some 3/4oz low velocity loads.
 
There is another Thomas Turner light weight in today's Landsborough auction, accompanied by a somewhat dilapidated case. It is in lesser condition and has less embellishment.
 
Last edited:
Ashcroft said:
This sudden glut of British guns looks suspiciously like unsold leftovers from a large British auction, mostly previously consigned by gun shops with a surplus of unsold stock. Many of them have marked bores, have thin wall thickness or are sleeved, all features that make them a difficult sale in Britain or Europe. Some of them may have marginal proof dimensions. Some may be out of proof making them illegal to sell in Britain or Europe. There are some good solid used guns coming in to various outlets that could be fine value but do your homework carefully.
Click to expand...

This X2 :agree:
 
9.3mauser said:
The "L" to the left of the crossed swords, (bottom left of the barrel flats) would indicate a 1960 reproof. Having the gun proved again would be necessary for retail in England.

https://www.hallowellco.com/proof_date_codes.htm
Click to expand...

So I'd guess a single reproof in 1960, for nitro proofing, since this was a black powder proofed gun originally in 1892-3.
Sizing between the reproof bore dia of .729 and original bore stamps of 13/1 and 12 are close.
That's good, certainly reasonable anyways.
 
the spank said:
A 6lb 12ga? Well it wouldn't be me pulling the triggers unless it was loaded with some 3/4oz low velocity loads.
Click to expand...

For sure like those lightweight 2" 12gauges, or the 12/20 concept of a 12 on a 20 frame...basically you'd want shoot vintage English 16 or 20 bore equivalent loads if doing any volume.
At 6 pounds it would handle occasional 2 1/2" hunting load fired in the field...just wouldn't want to shoot them all day long!
I wish Kent would bring back their 12gauge 2 1/2" 3/4 oz #8 ~1200fps low recoil target loads...those shells are awesome.
I've got one precious flat left....
 
Here are some good resources, inclluding the date codes link that 9.3Mauser posted.


The Vintage Gun Journal rules of proof articles (Diggory Hadoke has done a good job publishing this material):
1.
London 1868-1875
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/rules-of-proof-1-london-

2.
London 1875-1887
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/rules-of-proof-2-london-

4.
London 1887-1896
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/rules-of-proof-4-london-

5.
London 1896-1904
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/rules-of-proof-5-london-

6.
London 1904-1925
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/rules-of-proof-6-london-

3.
Birmingham 1925-1954
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/rules-of-proof-3-birmingham-

7.
Birmingham 1954-1989
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/rules-of-proof-7-birmingham-

8.
Re-Proof
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/rules-of-proof-8-re-proof-#:~:text=If%20chambers%20are%20lengthened%2C%20re,illegal%20to%20offer%20for%20sale.

Proof mark dates for British guns:
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/514-2

Is that gun in proof:
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/is-that-gun-in-proof-

Bore size proof marks:
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/proof-sizes

Hallowell and co date codes charts:
https://www.hallowellco.com/proof_date_codes.htm

Doublegunshop serial numbers:
https://doublegunshop.com/dgsnos.htm
 
ParksPipes said:
For sure like those lightweight 2" 12gauges, or the 12/20 concept of a 12 on a 20 frame...basically you'd want shoot vintage English 16 or 20 bore equivalent loads if doing any volume.
At 6 pounds it would handle occasional 2 1/2" hunting load fired in the field...just wouldn't want to shoot them all day long!
I wish Kent would bring back their 12gauge 2 1/2" 3/4 oz #8 ~1200fps low recoil target loads...those shells are awesome.
I've got one precious flat left....
Click to expand...

I have several 12 gauges that are sub 6 1/4 pounds. The lightest is 5 pounds even. I am angling to buy one that is about 5 3/4 pounds. What's the point? Well, there are many 16's, 20's and 28's down in that weight range. I have some of them. But from a theoretical standpoint, the same load will pattern better out of the larger diameter bore. Take a well balanced, good handling gun in 12, 16 or 20 gauge. All with same length barrel and chokes. fire a 7/8 oz load of #6 out of each and the 12 should have the best pattern. That's why lightweight.

When I'm hunting I often use 1 oz loads in those guns. Never notice the recoil. However, would be quite different at the range.
 
Here are a couple pics of the one that just sold today. I was really on the fence about buying it but then thought about fiscal responsibility and, well, necesssities like food, gas, upcoming gunsmith bills - things that a mature semi-retired person ought to consider. This one had not just a skeletonized stock but also rib. Not a mini short fore-end but rather a long slender one. I was quite taken by this gun and the terrific Damascus.
a8BjwSQ.png

NJX0zGj.png
 
Yes, I can see why you would say that. The gun is in remarkable condition. To my eye, the longer, slender fore end lends a much improved look to the gun overall.
 
ParksPipes said:
For sure like those lightweight 2" 12gauges, or the 12/20 concept of a 12 on a 20 frame...basically you'd want shoot vintage English 16 or 20 bore equivalent loads if doing any volume.
At 6 pounds it would handle occasional 2 1/2" hunting load fired in the field...just wouldn't want to shoot them all day long!
I wish Kent would bring back their 12gauge 2 1/2" 3/4 oz #8 ~1200fps low recoil target loads...those shells are awesome.
I've got one precious flat left....
Click to expand...

My stock of those loads is getting lower than I would like. I really wish Kent would return to making target loads as well.
 
Last edited:
straightshooter said:
Yes, I can see why you would say that. The gun is in remarkable condition. To my eye, the longer, slender fore end lends a much improved look to the gun overall.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'm happy to go with my current choice of woodcock guns. This one in it's tired maker's case today went for a very reasonable price (plus 15% buyer's premium and 13% HST). If anyone here bought it, let me know by PM. I might be able to help the new owner with improving the leather case.
 
Ashcroft said:
This sudden glut of British guns looks suspiciously like unsold leftovers from a large British auction, mostly previously consigned by gun shops with a surplus of unsold stock. Many of them have marked bores, have thin wall thickness or are sleeved, all features that make them a difficult sale in Britain or Europe. Some of them may have marginal proof dimensions. Some may be out of proof making them illegal to sell in Britain or Europe. There are some good solid used guns coming in to various outlets that could be fine value but do your homework carefully.
Click to expand...

The gun owners in the Euro zone are really getting the short end of the stick... Scoot over to Bolts and look at auction results. The market over there for SxS is pretty darn soft... As in, unless they are exceptional pieces, guns are pretty much being given away.
 
canvasback said:
I have several 12 gauges that are sub 6 1/4 pounds. The lightest is 5 pounds even. I am angling to buy one that is about 5 3/4 pounds. What's the point? Well, there are many 16's, 20's and 28's down in that weight range. I have some of them. But from a theoretical standpoint, the same load will pattern better out of the larger diameter bore. Take a well balanced, good handling gun in 12, 16 or 20 gauge. All with same length barrel and chokes. fire a 7/8 oz load of #6 out of each and the 12 should have the best pattern. That's why lightweight.

When I'm hunting I often use 1 oz loads in those guns. Never notice the recoil. However, would be quite different at the range.
Click to expand...

I picked up a 6.2 lbs 20ga sxs recently for grouse hunting this year. Ive had several different sxs but this is the first with ejectors. Just from shooting it at the range this week, I quickly confirmed that I prefer extractor guns. And here you are making me think I should've bought a 12ga 2 1/2" with extractors instead :p


..and I've already picked one out.
 
burns k31 said:
I picked up a 6.2 lbs 20ga sxs recently for grouse hunting this year. Ive had several different sxs but this is the first with ejectors. Just from shooting it at the range this week, I quickly confirmed that I prefer extractor guns. And here you are making me think I should've bought a 12ga 2 1/2" with extractors instead :p


..and I've already picked one out.
Click to expand...

When I first started buying and using SxS I instinctively wanted ejectors, because in the vintage gun world, they are more highly valued. But it didn't take me long to learn I much prefer extractors. I rarely shoot driven pheasant from a peg with a loader for my matched pair of London Best. (That's sarcasm right there). So extractors work better in the field for me.
 
canvasback said:
When I first started buying and using SxS I instinctively wanted ejectors, because in the vintage gun world, they are more highly valued. But it didn't take me long to learn I much prefer extractors. I rarely shoot driven pheasant from a peg with a loader for my matched pair of London Best. (That's sarcasm right there). So extractors work better in the field for me.
Click to expand...

What is it about extractors that make them preferable to ejectors in the field ?
 
sillymike said:
Personally, I don't like to scatter empty hulls throughout the woods...
Yeah, you'll learn soon enough to put your hand above when opening the action... but still, every so often one will forget, and spend a few minutes looking for it...
Click to expand...


Exactly. I can manage with an ejector gun, it's just easier with an extractor gun. Was never really an option when i used to shoot pumps. LOL

Not having ejectors also makes the gun lighter and is one less significant mechanical process that could go wrong and need fixing. Fixing ejectors properly on vintage SxS not a fun process, either for the guy doing it or for the guy paying the bill.
 
Westward1 said:
What is it about extractors that make them preferable to ejectors in the field ?
Click to expand...

I do my best not to leave empty hulls on the ground. I mostly hunt public land (conservation area tracts, crown land etc). Leaving trash is a quick way to get access shut down.
Also, extractor guns close real smooth. An ejector gun has to #### the ejectors when you close it, so it takes more force obviously. I'm very accustomed to extractor guns already so I'm not liking that so far.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom