doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com eeb's Scott 10 SxS

Thanks Bret, and reproof at the time of jug choke is likely. It would have been pre-1896 as there is no 'oz. Max' on the flats.

'RH' is a new one and no clue as to the identity

Since the barrels have "Not For Ball" on them (1875-1887), they must have been originally choked. It's my understanding that if barrels were cylinder bore during that time period, no "Not For Ball" was necessary. Were the barrels cut and then rechoked?

re "RH": A whole string of similar initials (though not "RH") are on some (not all) Reilly barrels from the 1870's as well. Since there were no barrel makers left in London, these barrels had to come from Birmingham or abroad. Wonder if these were the barrel borer?




The note on estimated Scott production is very interesting: 50,000 guns made over the course of 75 years.

Pretty sharp Drew! I never thought anything of it having both markings. It was choked half/half per the records, then jugged later. It does throw beautiful tight patterns.

Another question I have, is since eeb's gun is a bit earlier, did they move the proof marks out in front of the bbl flats between his, and mine? Or is it whomever was working that day, or did they acquire a roll marking setup, and no longer needed to hand stamp?

Bret, so the 10 bore is choked and jug-choked? Interesting combination.

the reference i mentioned regarding the adjustable lump patent is contained in this post; https://www.justanswer.com/firearms/cdnpo-scott-son-double-barrel-shotgun-wife-s.html

about 1/3 way down the page, as part of the recitation of scott's history, are specific patents and developments....that include the 1870 adjustable lump (patent #452) and a mention of an "improvement" in 1872. i have no knowledge of the source of this information - other than the fact it's on the internet, and therefor doubtlessly correct....



In 1870 an adjustable sliding front lump was patented under No. 452, this was popular abroad as any wear and looseness could be easily corrected.

In 1871 the Dorset Place showroom in London closed and the firm moved to 10 Great Castle Street, Regents Circus (now Piccadilly Circus) where they were to remain until 1899.

In 1872 an improvement to the adjustable front lump was patented. In 1873 patent No. 1268 covered a drop-down barrel action and gunstocks, and patent No. 1273 covered two mechanisms for linking the firing pins to the top lever. Patent No. 3756 covered a bolt locking mechanism (fore-end fastener?).



best regards,

tom

Correct, originally choked, and jugged later.

Mine has no choke. The adjustable lump sounds like an innovative feature. How long did Scott include this feature on their guns.

Something is odd in the story of the Purdey lock/Scott Spindle symbiotic relationship. There is Scott putting Purdey 1104 Patent Use Numbers and "Purdey Patent Lock" on all his guns (along with a letter claiming Scott was paying Purdey for the privilege). And here is an 1874 Purdey 10 bore with a Scott Spindle with nary a nod to Scott - nowhere is the Scott patent mentioned: (notice the non retracting firing pins). Something is rotten in Denmark.

https://www.drake.net/j-purdey-lond...oading-hammer-gun-9233-completed-in-1874

eeb, your gun was SN'd in 1874. Chokes had been tried - jug choking for instance - but nothing to write home about. It was Greener who popularized choke boring in 1875 and it was his work that led to the change in the proof marks to include "NOT FOR BALL" in June? 1875 (for guns with chokes).