The reason there's a W (Würgebohrung)only on the LH barrel is that it is the more heavily choked. The U (Untersuchung) is an inspection mark after proof firing. The S stands for shotgun (Schrotlauf) supplimentary proof. These marks with their Imperial Crowns and Eagles were only used by proof-houses in Germany between 1891 and 1939.
I can't say that this is true for a couple of reasons:
1. Whether each tube is lightly choked or heavily choked, if there is a constriction greater than 0.2mm, then the tube should bear the "Crown" over "W". This mark notes that the choked tube was subjected to an additional proof vs. a tube without the mark, which the diameter is measured at the muzzle.
2. The stamp of "Eagle" coupled with "Crown" over "S" noted the smoothbore tube experienced the 1st or preliminary black powder proof. A tube had to fall within 2 categories: rifled or smoothbore.
It may not have been a designation of either smoothbore or rifled but of shot or solid projectile fired thru either a breechloader or muzzleloader.
Thanks to the scanning efforts of Mr. Hallquist, I’ve now read the German Proofmark text by Lee Kenneth. I’m not positive of the year but I think it was 1975 which was the same year of Gerhard Wirnsberger’s German text. Again I’m not positive but the translation was very near the same time or just after. Also in transcribing or translating a text there are always errors and I haven’t read Wirnsberger’s text in German. But Lee Kennett gives that there were actually 3 categories or 3 different publications of tables for the proofing of tubes: one for muzzleloaders designed/intended to launch shot, one for breechloading tubes to fire shot and one for tubes to fire solid projectiles. I’ll re-read it a couple more times but I don’t seem to find it anywhere that the latter was for rifled tubes. Wirnsberger notes the “Crown” over “G” as for gezogene läufe or rifled tube while Kenneth gives it as a tube for which a solid projectile is fired. So when one reads Kenneth it appears that regarding breechloaders that there were those for firing shot(Schrot) and those tubes for firing solid projectiles or bullets(Geschoss). At first I was a bit perplexed but after reading the paragraphs a few times and noting that there are tubes with “Crown” over “G” on scatterguns, that in fact this could be true and that the shotguns were actually smooth bore longarms that initially were intended to fire solid projectiles or that were submitted to the proofhouse in the breechloading solid projectile category. There’s a current thread on a Funk that has the “Crown” over “G”(Geschoss?) with at least one French single set trigger. Is this a correct assumption, I don’t know for now except the possibility exists. From recent conversations and reading I think that each German proofhouse pretty much did what they wanted to thru a liberal interpretation of the Articles in the proof law. This was just a sidenote that I stumbled across in researching special or supplemental marks.
Kennett does list the “Crown” over “S”(Schrot) on a proofmarks page but doesn’t note it in the text. Instead he notes “Crown” over “W”(Würgebohrung) as a supplementary mark. So early on at the provisional stage of proofing the tubes “had to be in an advanced state of completion; barrels for multi-barreled guns had to be ready for joining, and could be also be submitted already joined.” I think that “already joined” may have been the case for many of the multi-barreled longarms as so doubles, and there may have been drillings and the like, were submitted in a finished state and were stamped “Crown” over “B” which had an original intent of being for imported finished longarms from a country of which the proofmarks weren’t recognized. “On request completed shotguns without choke and rifles could undergo a single definitive proof, although with the stronger charges of provisional proof. This was undoubtedly designed for imported arms whose proofmarks were not recognized.” But if you know law and those who interpret it, most will use it to their advantage and with a shrewd maker that was exporting to a country that didn’t have a set of laws on proofmarks, say the U.S. of A., then they could save money by utilizing the “Crown” over “B” proof. But getting back to what I was looking for, namely the “Crown” over “S”(Schrot) being a supplemental mark which lead me on to the supplemental mark of the “Crown” over “W”(Würgebohrung), Wirnsberger gives that choked tubes, as initially defined by the maker and based on English proof law which even choked at 0.1mm could by request been submitted to be stamped so. Maybe some of you fellas that are conversant on early English proof law just might enlighten us on the subject. But the Germans didn’t do anything without purpose. Kennett doesn’t mention that choke bored tubes were subjected to yet another proof vs. cylinder. But considering the “Crown” over “B” intent and the reasoning of why in the world would if a tube was choked to a certain degree that the proofmasters took the time to apply an all or nothing stamp. For now I agree with Wirnsberger that there was an addition test for choke bored tubes, although I don’t have any idea what it was for now, rather than just an inspection or measurement. Why take the time to perform a measurement and just stamp it all or nothing which would be something akin to looking down the tube and rendering an opinion of “yeah that one has a constriction”. There’s got to be something more to it.
Patriot USA, if I’ve contaminated your thread, I’ll gladly start another and thanks to Kiwi for jump-starting me to research a bit more.
Kind Regards,
Raimey
rse
