doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Matska S/N list

These are the barrels from Bill’s gun No. 274 if that will help sort it out.

Regarding reproof on Jeff G.'s, herein lies the kicker with that: If it was sent back for reproof and assuming it was in the finished state, then it should have a mark of Crown over a skiff in a shield. The "E(backwards) P" holds the position of the mark for joined tubes. There is another mark on the tubes that isn't in focus. But this would also seem to make Matska's client of French origin or the owner really liked the proofhouse in Paris. Maybe he dropped it off in Paris while on vacation.

But like the Matska #123 in question, they guys at the proofhouse making 8, or maybe 10 hours, may have really like the Londons proofs and thought hey there's not a choke mark so let's put ours just above theirs because who's going to notice anyway. Or the "12 C" in a rhombus might have been stamped by a new guy who hadn't quite figured out how to index the die?

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

I think these London marks, Petrov's post, to be mixed in time. Matska expired circa 1907 and these marks, less the lower provisional proof of the Lion rampant over g P and the dark/heavy number "12", are from the 1925-1954 time period and appear to not have any constriction. So this looks to have been reproved in London after 1925. What might the watertable hold for us?

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

I believe that the Bernard stamps were still being used well after 1890.
My hammerless Lefaucheux double rifle in 8 Lebel is stamped 1898 which makes sense as a date and only bears the Bernard marks. The barrels SN is 35321. I guess that is possible that Bernard made those steel barrels much sooner, but certainly not before 1886 when the Lebel was developped.
The EP shown above was used starting around 1897. This was a proof meant for the barrels only, not the finished gun. The seal of Paris was used for the finished gun. IMHO, it would make no sense to only reproof barrels. However, it would make sense for Bernard to proof the barrels before delivering to another tradesman or before exporting the barrels.
Best regards,
WC-

This example possibly experienced provisional proof pre-1887 as apparent by the darker stamps of the Lion rampant along with the number "12". Then experienced reproof after 1925, that is if I have my marks correct. This is Matska # 274.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

Assuming # 123 was made before # 247, then it had to experience provisional proof prior to 1887 also, so where is the number "12" stamp to complete the pair? First, after the Lion rampant over gP, the sequence seems to be out of order. Next in line should have been the view mark of "crown" over "V" followed by the previously stamped bore diameter. Was there a different sequence during the 1887-1896 period?

And is there a possiblity of equating the trade mark number to a specific year?

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

Wow, certainly appreciate the expert opinions and insights of the aficionados on this list! I have not measured the chokes but have a gauge on order and will post after doing so. Will also get some additional pictures.

Seems that most of the 9 shotguns identified so far were from the second half of his production. I wonder why earlier shotguns (other than s/n 17) have not been seen?

Mr. Petrov, what do the water tables on s/n 274 look like?

There is name of lock maker, Joseph Brazier.

Thanks for the info Tuomo. Any opinion on who cast the frame of Matsak #17 from those who have had it in hand?

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

Johnmwmd --- for better pictures of the engraving, try shoting the pictures outside on an overcast day. This trick work s for me when taking pictures of my engraving.