doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Dating early 20th Century French Shotguns

Ted in a separate line asked how I could date a Saint-Etienne 16 gauge accurately. I've chosen to start a new line to keep from "jumping the shark" on that one.

I’ve been looking for a early 20th century Saint-Etienne fusil de chasse for some time. French guns are very difficult to date we all agree. Using the usual markers (prizes won, models, catalogs, patents, etc) might get us into the ball park. But there are two items that will definitely narrow down an earl 20th century period piece:
...1) use of cm to denote chambering would mean it was pre-1912? (it would be interesting to find out the exact date this changed from cm to mm): and
...2) Didier-Drevet barrels are dated and have a serial number.

I wonder if there are more examples of dated Stephanois guns? For background (and it's been discussed before ) here are a few dated Didier-Drevet barrels from the internet (reorganized chronologically): -- (images back thanks to jpgbox)

1). 1878 Didier-Drevet fusil (damascus) date on the gun (not the barrel). 65m Chambers.



http://www.tircollection.com/t18880-un-beau-fusil-de-chasse-sobre-et-elegant

2). 1900 12 gauge:
Didier-Drevet Acier Mandrine (Mandrel Steel) (Mandrine means "turned on a mandrel or lathe"; un Mandrin is a Mandrel; Mandrine is an adjective modifying the feminine noun Acier) Canon Plume barrels; 18.4; 6.5; 1900 - 8971



http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=396092&page=all

3) 1904 from a Russian site:
Didier-Drevet Eureka Canon Plume barrels; 18.4; 6.5; 1904 - 11046
http://img.allzip.org/g/1/orig/15625032.jpg



4) 1905 Cyrillic site:
Didier-Drevet Eureka Canon Plume: 1905 - 11604 (unclear)
http://arc.violity.com/ruzhe-didier-drevet-1900-g-12132152



5) 1906 16 gauge with 7cm chambers: The is Ed Good’s gun previously posted. I discussed this with Ed and he assured me a chamber gauge showed them to be 2 3/4”. I told him it had to have been rechambered. Then noticed this little “7” on the barrel flats (7cm). It does indeed seem to be a 1906 with 2 3/4” chambers.
Photo deleted: Didier-Drevet Eureka Canon Plume barrels Stamped 17.0; 7; 1906 - 11985




6) 1906 Didier-Drevet 12 bore from 1906 with 7cm chambers:
Didier-Drevet Eureka Canon Plume barrels; 18.4; 7; 1906 - 12076



7). 1908 Per able2zero, Shotgunworld:
Didier-Drevet Eureka Canon Plume barrels: 17.0; 6.5; 1908 - 12740
http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=223806

8). 1910 12 gauge with chambers labeled 6.5. The seller advertised the gun as having 2 3/4” chambers. I asked him about this - he claimed “6.5” had nothing to with 65mm and the chambers were as advertised. If so, it’s been relieved:
(photo deleted - Didier-Drevet Eureka Canon Plume barrels labeled 18.4; 6.5; 1910 - 13185



9). 1918 Didier-Drevet - Skeetz's gun:
Didier-Drevet Eureka Canon Plume barrels; 18.4; 65; 1918 - 14204





There must be some additional info someplace: The French magazine “Armes de Chasse” issue nr 42, Juillet - aot - septembre 2011 had an article under Collection titled Le trio Didier-Drevet.

Argo,
To begin with, it is Ted, not Tim.

While it is easy to say a Didier barreled gun has a date stamp, it is a much different thing to document that. Further, even if it is a date stamp, what would it represent? It could be the date the barrels were provisionally proofed, the date the barrels were assembled, or the date the gun was final proofed. We really have no way of knowing for sure. There could be YEARS between any of those events, and when the gun reached inventory, and years between when that happened, and when it was sold.

Picture number 6 is a gun I am very familiar with, as it lives in my neighborhood, and I posted a bit about this gun here on the board. It is the wreakage of a high grade Darne that doesn't fit the description of R, V, or P model. The picture you posted is missing the proof stamp, which, was for powder J. 1900 was the year powder T was introduced, but, for at least a few years after that, one could specify powder M, J, S, or T. Hence, we can't even state with authority when a gun was built based on the powder it was proofed with, save the fact that anything proofed with powder T would be post 1900. Further confusing what and when with this gun, is the fact that Regis Darne's offerings were pretty well sorted by 1900, and this gun doesn't appear to be a cataloged model, or, marked with a stamp in reference to grade.

Documenting an exact time of change for the markings 6.5 and 65 could be problematic as well. The proof house in St. Etienne is a literal hive of activity, and the day I was there, there were rack upon rack of modern pump and autoloading barrels being proofed for Verney Carron, among all the other barrels. It would seem to me that the 6.5 mark could have very well been used alongside the 65 mark until it simply wore out and was discarded.They mean the exact same thing. Again, documentation would be wonderful, but, we simply don't have that, yet, and anything else is speculation until we do.
I was very lucky on the day that I visited, as if there had been military contract barrels of any sort in the building, access would not have been granted to me. I would be willing to bet few Americans have toured the facility.

Best,
Ted

Ted, we ran across the possibility of stockpiled barrels with the EM Reilly's. Some barrels were proofed before 1896 but not mated with a gun until 1901-2. So what you say may be right. In which case logically it would have been the barrel maker Didier-Drevet (DD) doing the stockpiling not the gun maker. ("ring ring - DiD mon cher...do you have a 17.0, 70cm barrel on hand? Great..send it over).

However, having a date on a barrel (and a Serial Number) is better than nothing, especially with the chamber stamps. I suspect knowing the French, that the change from cm to mm was a directive or law and that as such there would have been little slippage. This is Napoleonic bureaucracy at its best. It’s worth looking into.

As for (for example) the Gerest-Berthon for sure it was made 1906 or later. And it was made before the change in the chamber stamp from cm to mm. So to date it it would be fair to say something like this - the barrel was made in 1906 and mated to the gun sometime between 1906 and WWI"? If I could find a Berthon SN later than this gun...it would cut the date down to a couple of years.

And you could add, that at that time at least some French guns were being chambered for 7cm i.e. 2 3/4. (There are two guns on the list with 1906 barrels, Didier-Drivet SN 11985 and SN 12025, one 16ga one 12ga, and one 1907? SN 12537, 12 ga and all have 7cm chambers). At least that”s a start.

And, If more could be found, more markers might come into play. For instance, Berthon Freres registered two patents; for later guns it’d be interesting to see if those were applied to those guns which could date them. I believe that with some detective work (especially with the dates on the DD barrels and their SN's which may or may not have been consecutive), and exploring when the French began to chamber guns for 7cm - 2 3/4 could indeed help narrow down the date of the manufacture of a gun.

This may also apply to other Saint-Etienne gun manufactures...especially if you can sync up the gun serial numbers with the dated barrel SN’s and get a pattern.
For instance, if you can find 10 Darnes with DD barrels - and you have a SN on each Darne, and a dated SN on the barrels...you probably could construct a matrix to hang dates on all of the rest....might not be 100% but it would be better than what we've got. That's pretty much what I did with the Reilly's and it was a real historical trip to do the research.

Gene Williams

12 gauge both with 65mm chambers

2292 number but no date


19468 number but no date


Mike

Both look to be in mm, right? Kind of interesting to look at the SN progression and dates of the DD barrels above - might not mean squat or then it might:
1853? - DD begins to serial number and date his barrels
1878 - ...????; 65 chambered in mm; 18.6; Gun Maker: Didier Fusil; Sn: ?? (damas underlever hammergun)
1885 - ..4922; ??? chambered in mm; 17.0. Gun Maker: ??; gun sn: ?? (from page 3)
1900 - ..8975; 6.5 chambered in cm; 18.4; Gun maker: Darne; gun sn??
1904 - 11046; 6.5 chambered in cm; 18.4; Gun maker: ?? gun sn:
1905 - 11604; ??? chambered in ??; 18.4; (unclear); Gun maker: ?? gun sn: ??
1906 - 11985; 7 chambered in cm; 17.0; Gun maker: Gerest Berthon; gun sn
1906 - 12075; 7 chambered in cm; 18.4; Gun maker: ??; gun sn: ??
1907?- 12537: 7 chambered in cm; 18.4; Gun maker: ??; gun sn: ?? (from next page)
1907 - 12613?; 7 chambered in cm; 18.4; Gun Maker: Geneaux; gun sn: ; (from 4th page)
1908 - 12740; 6.5 chambered in cm; 17.0; Gun Maker: ??; gun sn: ??
1910 - 13184; 6.5 chambered in cm; 18.4: Gun Maker: ??; gun sn: ??
1912 - 13689? 65 chambered in mm; 18.4: Note the 1912 shift to mm. (page 4)
1918 - 14204; 65 chambered in mm; 18.4: Gun maker: ?? gun sn: 19488; (Skeetz's gun)(doubt many shotgun barrels were made August 1914-November 1918; in fact yours might have been the first made after Nov 11, 1918? who knows...but just go ahead and claim it's true - the story makes a gun)
no date - 15035; 65? chambered i mm; 18.4: note the lack of a date; (page 4)

DD looks to have been making about 300 barrels a year from 1885 - 1910? With production/sales declining towards WWI - and probably zero 14 Aug 1014- 11 Nov 1918 for obvious reasons.

And on some of those barrels, other SN's are overlaid, possibly from the gun manufacture itself. Match up the DD barrel dates with those SN's or with the guns those barrels were mated with and voila, you have at least an early mark on their entire production.

Anyone want to construct a graph?

I've been playing a similar version of this game for thirty years. You can come close, but, I question ever being able to nail a precise date down.

This would appear to be the oldest gun I've got, at the moment:



Note that the gun has the 6.5 chamber stamps. Proofed with powder T, for sure later than 1900. I once owned a Darne V20 that was identified as 1910 by the maker. It had 65mm stamps. It was also serial numbered in the 52,000 range, illustrative of a few things. Production was roaring on Darne guns in that era. I've seen few Darne guns of that age with Didier barrels, and I suspect the Darne factory simply out grew their suppliers fairly early on. You will see many old Darne guns with the stamp "Canons Darne" telling you that Darne produced their own tubes. At what point they made that leap I am not positive, but, I suspect prior to 1910. The V20 was clearly marked that way.
Herv Bruchet dated the V20 by comparing the work of the engraver who signed the gun, "Bernaud", with earlier, known examples of his work and a bit of history. Bernaud had to work into his mid 90s, and the later his work was, the worse it got. This was evident on my example.
But, it is the exception in my experience, rather than the rule, that one can nail down a date. No, we can't be sure who stockpiled barrels for French shotguns at the turn of the previous century, producer or manufacturer or, for how long.
The Halifax barrel flats, shown above, are from a pretty old gun. A friend has a Halifax 4, this being a Halifax 3, and the engraving is identicle, which points to his being a later gun, as does his five digit serial number, as opposed to the four digit number on this gun. A call to the factory got him a date of early 1930s, which, seems about right when considering the catalog evidence.
I suppose I'd guess the example Halifax in the photo as between 1905 and 1915. It is an educated guess, but, no more than a guess.
I can't clearly see a way to narrow it down beyond that.


Best,
Ted

Probably best to remember that with those French ladies, don't think only about dating them. Think about taking them home for a longer term relationship.

At least when we are speaking of Darne products, you aren't holding up your end of the bargain, Mr. Brown...


Best,
Ted

I have two French doubles and one French spouse. None are going anywhere (that I know of...at least the first two).

Great informative discussion.

But I guess Photobucket has struck again.

I am convinced that the change from cm to mm dates from 1906-1914, but don't know exactly when. I most doubt that a call to the St-Etienne office would resolve that.


It would be very nice to know when and accessorily why.
The change between CGS system (centimeter, gram, second) to MKS system (meter, kilogram, second) is much later, so I don't think that it plays a role here.
One of the reason would be that a lone "7" looks funny.

I did not know that DD put a date on his barrels.
The first one I know who did this was Bernard, and that is documented in a different thread.
It is important to understand that in the French trade, barrel makers would make barrel sets (with lumps, ribs, etc.) and not individual barrels.
With LB I have documented many cases where there was a significant (years) lapse of time between barrel making and gun finishing.

Final proofing is always the job of the gun maker. But provisional proof is the job of the barrel maker.

So there could be a lapse between barrel dates and final proof dates.

The use of T powder is also questionable. MF used S powder proofing much after 1900. Sometimes multiple proofs were done at the same time. I have a Pirlet gun with PJ, PS and PM marks.

All the best...
WC-

Actually, digging further, MKS was introduced in 1889 so that change could have been the reason.
Best regards,
WC-

That's true, Ted. I've determined that those French sliding breech blondes aren't for me. Doesn't mean I wouldn't take home a sweet break action brunette.

WC, I'm not quite understanding a couple of points in the post (And I'm pretty much a novice so pls have patience).

-- Saint-Etienne barrel makers made and assembled both barrels with lumps and ribs then sold them to the gun makers. So all the lumps were the same for all the manufactures? Darne, VC, ZF...all what..95 of them?

-- And there are two 7cm chambered DD barrels dated 1906 above. We've documented in another line how many different shells were being marketed in America by 1900. This line can only document two different French chambers for shells at the time - 6.5 and 7.0. Is there anyway to find out what shells were being made and sold in France at the time and what guns were chambered for them? It looks like universally 6.5 with the occasional 7. and that's it. Yet British gunmakers like Americans were ramping up the length and power of their double riflesand shotgun cartridges/shells at the time.

Finally, Passionlachasse.com and other sites have questioned the date of the change over from cm to mm in Saint-Etienne guns. 1912 seems to be the most accepted possible date. All agree that if this can be nailed down, it will be an important marker for French guns. There has to be some directive/documentation on this. It's worth the effort historically to track it down. But no one seems to want to take the bull by the horns and actually write to the proof house or do the research. There just has to have been a directive.

- re: barrel making.
I am sure the barrel maker would do anything as asked: barrel length, width at the breech, weight, rib extension, type, length and width of lumps etc. However, it was his responsibility to have the barrels assembled and provisionally proved.
This was done for sure by the best vendors such as LB or DD or Jean Breuil or Heurtier (who did braze their ribs..).
Some vendors might have provided individual barrels upon request.
And of course Granger did everything himself AFAIK.
- 65mm was the mainstay at least until WWII. Pigeon guns were different of course. I would say that 70mm took off well after WWII for general usage. 67mm was and still is also an option at least for the ammo. Again I'll look in the MF catalog to study the trend.
- it would be fun to call the "banc d��preuve" and ask! That would be amusing for sure. There most likely was some paperwork associated with that, but I doubt it showed up on the "journal Officiel". And if the paperwork still exists in St-Etienne , it is buried way deep in there...
Best regards,
WC-

7 cm chamber: Another Didier-Drevet barrel - previously posted by Raimey; Can't see the date but it's an "Acier Mandrine" (I think Mandrine means "machined" or "rolled" on a mandrel - a central chuck; see the 1900 barrel with the same "Acier Mandrine") SN looks like 12537?? (1908 per SN progression). 18.4 and it's chambered for 7 cm. (Made for a Darne??). If you can match up the gun SN with the barrel date, you might have a ball park idea of when that particular gun were made.



7.5 cm chamber: And this is interesting: An 1890-1912(?) 18.2 guage G.Peyron hammer gun chambered for 7.5 cm. Barrels by Marsot. "Double verrou,levier � volute" � platines "en avant" dont on trouve d�j� des mod�les dans des catalogues de 1884,mais il doit en exister de plus anciens car le "Levier � volute" existait d�ja sur des Lefaucheux � broche.



Le Levier � volute ne doit pas �tre confondu avec un syst�me voisin la "Cl� Beringer" ou "Pontet-Serpent" .
Les premiers commandent une fermeture dite "en "T"" ou "T anglais" ("Tea time's" ?) Very Happy ;mais par la suite ils seront comme le tien adapt� � un double verrou classique.
Pour donner un point de comparaison permettant de le dater; la "ManuF" � propos� des mod�les strictement identiques au tien de 1890 � 1900 avec des canons Damas
Je n'ai pas r�ussi � trouver s'il y avait eu apr�s 1900 des mod�les � canons acier comme ce fut le cas pour les mod�les � platines "en arri�re" jusqu'en 1912 .
Il faut toutefois noter que les mod�les "en avant" comme le tien valaient en 1893 20% de plus que les mod�les "en arri�re" � canonerie �gale.
Mais le "Levier � volute" pu aussi bien �tre abandonn� pour les mod�les les plus chers, et r�serv� aux mod�les "�conomiques" vu la diffusion apr�s 1900 de la cl� "Top Lever" que nous utilisons encore.

http://www.tircollection.com/t22742-fusil-de-chasse-g-peyron

Argo, I'm a little suspicious about those 7.5's. Virtually nothing else nearly as clearly legible. Makes me wonder whether they might have been lengthened later on--perhaps by someone clever enough to know that on a gun of that vintage, they needed to use 7.5 rather than 75.

I don't know Larry; it's a fascinating looking under-lever with apparently Damascus barrels though they look steel in the photo. Here is the comment about the chambering:

Concernant le chambrage il est vrai que les fusils de cette �poque �taient chambr�s � 65 mm toutefois certains mod�les dit "� chambre longue" existaient, et si je te parle de �� c'est que le double marquages "7.5" m'interpelle car je me demande s'il ne s'agit pas de la longueur de chambre en cm.
As for the chambering, it's true that long arms from this era were chambered for 65mm although certain models called "long chamber" existed. If I speak of this, it's because of the double mark "7.5" especially since I'm wondering whether this might not refer to the length of the chamber in cm.

And by the way, the poster uses three words for types of underlevers:
-- levier � volute
-- Lefaucheux � cl�
-- Cl� Beringer" or "Pontet-Serpent

Mike, I just realized your "19468" is not the SN for the DD barrels. The DD barrel SN is 1918 - 14204 per comment above. That 19468 must refer to something else; perhaps the SN of the gun itself?

YES, and I just looked again and there is that second set of numbers

1918 . 14202

Mike

As I mentioned above. I wonder if this was one of the first shotguns made after Nov 11, 1918. I think the whole Saint-Etienne industry concentrated on the war effort and not on making sporting guns. This is mentioned in an article about the Berthon Bros patents. Is that other number the serial number of your gun? Is there a name on your gun? If so, you've come pretty close to dating it.

This 1902 book is interesting. It uses mm to delineate chambers - 65mm is the norm (all while Saint-Etienne was using cm) - but then goes on to say that some shotguns were being chambered in 70mm up to 90mm!!





New word:
�tui - shell, cartridge

For history here is a letter written by Didier Drevet to the local Saint-Etienne Newspaper on Nov 28, 1878 apparently on the regulation and excellence of Stephanois barrel makers and apparently advocating tariff protection. I cannot get access to page 2 to read the whole letter...this is page 3...but it's evident he was a prominent artisan at the time..and a member of the board of the proof house. The response by the editor was solicitous.

http://www.memoireetactualite.org/presse/42LEREPUBLIC/PDF/1878/42LEREPUBLIC-18781128-P-0003.pdf



Here is a rough translation...very rough...don't feel like making it a finished product, you'll get the idea:

.....Government so that the law will apply everywhere. And in closing I recall, in conclusion, that the Americans and the English do not have special expositions for barrel makers, that the Belgians don�t produce anything but mediocre products and that Paris and Saint-Etienne alone are left standing
.....Our production of die cast tooling involves every facet of barrel production and in the near future, will surely be top ranked.
.....I have the honor, sir editor, to be your devoted constituent.

Didier Drevet
Master barrel maker, member of the com-
mission for oversight of the proof-
house of Saint-Etienne.

.....We roundly congratulate M. Didier-Drevet for the report so complete and instructive that we�ve just read.
....The gun making community Stephanoise will not fail to profit from the opinions which he has given to reform our toolmaking/diecasting such that his advice regarding the law on barrel making and the methods are applied in Paris. We also are happy to congratulate M. Diider-Drevet on being chosen as delegate in the workers� meetings and that a better choice could not be found.
.....He is in effect, one of the master barrel makers the most honored of our city. He is credited with a number of inventions and of reforms in the craft of barrel making such as the substitution of barrel lump "souped" for barrel lump "vise" and the creation of several types of damascus steel, such as those that were designed per a preceding report under the name �damas mirlitou� and which were noted in the written report of M. Jussie.
.....One can see that there is nothing to lose in letting the interested parties take care of their affairs. They will reap the benefits of the success that will come from protection, such as the ones they had from preceding governments.

Lovely find & contribution. He was one of a very small pool of master mechanics who could roll a proper tube.

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

Bernard, Fanget, Breuil . . . the French had some pretty darned good canoniers.

Yeah, I guess L�opold Bernard of Paris was the best of the best & set the tone to be emulated by the rest.


Cheers,

Raimey
rse

Book on the 1900 Universal Exposition in Parts....display of Saint-Etienne arms makers for hunting: Didier-Drevet won a gold medal. You'll see familiar names. Manufrance, Verney Caron, Rivolier, Gerest (not yet Berthon), Brun-Latridge, Darne, Peyron, Meatt Czeron.etc. What is interesting in this book are pictures of large artillery pieces. One is measure in mm. Yet one of the largest shown is "21 cm" (210mm - 8")..i.e French military seemed to be using cm some of the time...or at least Saint-Etienne was.

http://www.forez-info.com/encyclopedie/l...le-de-1900.html




14 grands prix furent d�cern�s, toutes nations confondues. Trois d'entre eux ont distingu� l'industrie st�phanoise:

- La soci�t� Didier Drevet et Fils (canonniers): " Leurs divers types de canons en damas et en acier avec les diff�rents genres de bandes et d'assemblage r�alisaient une irr�prochable perfection", rel�ve le Jury.

One of the nicest French guns I've owned was a 16ga boxlock with sideplates by Drevet.

I have found the other page of the 1878 article written by Didier-Drevet on the state of Saint-Etienne barrel making posted below. It's fascinating. I'll translate it but it may take a day or two - there's a lot of metallurgical terms - great for learning and there's an explanation about "Acier Mandrine" too. - snarky comments about Paris gun makers and he takes a careful swipe at Leopold Bernard.

http://www.memoireetactualite.org/presse/42LEREPUBLIC/PDF/1878/42LEREPUBLIC-18781128-P-0002.pdf




Here is a rough translation of this article. - M. DD essentially advocates upgrading the tool and dies of Saint-Etienne and complain rightly about the Paris gun makers who are not abiding by the proof-laws while be favored by the Exposition:

Here is the report of M. Didier-Drevet, master barrel maker, sent by his colleagues to the universal Exposition:

Monsieur the Editor: As barrel-maker I was a part of the delegation of gun-maker workers who were sent to Paris last October.

That delegation, you will recall, was designated by the gun makers following a meeting organized by the workers themselves at the invitation of the representative for the Loire.

It is under these circumstances that I went to the 1978 Exposition and I consider that it is my obligation to communicate to my constituents some observations that I can recall about the part of arms making with which I�m most familiar, the barrels.

I regret that the passage of time and the difficulty of visiting all the displays does not allow me to analyze in detail all the products of each exposition, but I have seen enough for me to form an informed opinion of the current state of the fabrication of barrels in each country represented at the exposition.

I cannot speak for all the barrel makers of St-Etienne to the Stephanois, each of whom whom knows what it takes to make something work.

It is sufficient for me to state that we were represented by three companies who have an old and excellent reputation and which this exposition was one of the most important and one which is a judgment of the value of their arms from the the point of view of the barrel. However, if they are behind in hunting products, they seem in contrast to be very advanced in combat barrel making.

Their displays confirm that their carbine barrels are made in an irreproachable manner.

Besides the specimens which accompanied the barrels for showing the diverse phases of barrel making, the American barrel makers did not show a method of drilling useful for our manufacturers. It would be too long and too arduous.

The barrel is made in the middle of a steel sleeve 25-30 centimeters long. This sleeve is founded in a hollow manner to avoid losing material, it is then forged on a single spindle chuck machine in order to rationalize and equalize the surfaces and then stretched on the interior and exterior on a rolling machine in different passes in a way to obtain the desired length and at the same time in a conical form which is right for forming a barrel.

This has shown to have, according to me, two marked advantages: it involves a great economy of material and of machining; and stamping metal by the double action of the rolling machine and of the single spindle chuck mandrel machine gives it a toughness and a resistance to all tests.

It is possible that the mandrel rolling presents some practical difficulties, but it doesn�t seem to me probable that these difficulties could outweigh the advantages that one finds by the process, such as the economy of material used, of hand work and of tooling, and of the quality of the metal.

It would be desirable if our large factories in the basin of the Loire, which have such powerful means, might try this process of fabrication; They are able certainly with little study and of perseverance to produce at a very good price barrels for war and barrels for hunting. They are enriching therefore the local industry by a new branch of production and they give to the Stephanoise gun-making industry the means to reconquer the export market which they lost because of not being able to produce marketable barrels.

English exports: I have noted with surprise that the English barrel makers do not have special expositions such as other factories of Europe. I cannot explain their abstention; in any case I can judge their knowledge and inspect the barrels exhibited in the display windows of the manufacturers.

Their barrels are not distinguished by a variety of types. Their barrels are in general of damascus of a large design of which the appearance is not at all seductive. They are besides strong and well made, well turned and certainly well polished; but there are some qualities of care owing to which one obtains them everywhere and puts up the price.

One sees in their display cases some rifles costing 770 Fr of which the barrels are ordinary damascus and seem according to all reports to resemble those being used on St-Etienne rifles costing 300 fr.

Whatever the demand that one professes in certain circles for English long-guns. I do not see that that preference is justified by the value of the barrels and I maintain that our stephanois barrel makers are capable of producing a better set of barrels as perfect in the execution and more appealing.

Those who have a predilection for English manufacture do not realize the weight of the gun, and, how that question of weight has great importance for the barrel maker. A variance of several fractions of grammes changes all the conditions for execution. In order to make a barrel at the same time light, solid and well, one must use a fine art, taking care and precautions which repeat themselves on each operation, and, more, running the risk of the tasks which are larger the lighter the piece.

Currently all the barrels that are being ordered from Saint Etienne in caliber 12 are measured in a weight of 15 or 16 grams while in England they tolerate up to two kilos.

It is the style in France in certain circles to see with rose colors glasses everything which comes from England. It is a very bad habit which will pass like many others.

Exposition Belgian: I have not analyzed the exposition of M. Leopold Bernard. This house is known throughout the world and It�s necessary to agree that it is successfully supporting its old reputation. However, when one compares this work with that of St-Etienne, one quickly recognizes that the gap is of little importance; that in reality the contrast which exists between the two expositions is more about the abundance of products and the richness of the display than in the superiority of execution. The only thing missing from our body of barrel work, which would equal that of Paris, is some additional installations; of better rolling mills, better made and more appropriate to the work of the barrel making, ovens to braze and polishers. Our methods of production are far too primative and our products suffer from the lack of means; but it is not a question of organization which might be solve this, and allow us to be able to deliver our production across the board.

For everything which touches the area of the barrel making, our infrastructure possesses all the elements; our forges, our dressers without boasting one can say have little comparison in the whole world.

Without wanting to diminish the merits of the house of Leopold Bernard, one must recognize that he is operating at an advantage because of his location.

For a long time his manufactures were encourgesd and supported by the Parisian gunmakers, who needed to have a prestigious barrel from Paris in order to have the rest of the gun which was made abroad accepted.

It�s true that the beautiful movement of egos was close to being extinguished because most of the long guns which I was given to look at in the display cases of the Parisian exposition were mounted with Belgian barrels and even barrels that were decidedly mediocre.

I visited in detail two of the display cases. I will abstain from citing the name of the two exhibiters, but I picked up ours and the brand names of the barrels and I could, if necessary, justify what i�m going to say in advance.

In spite of the long guns which were in the two display cases, I only found one barrel legally proof-marked and it was from Liege.

All the others were without a brand name, and of such of those I figure that six of the barrels were Belgian made.

It�s true to say that there is not a proof house in Paris. The government has not judged it necessary to establish one because there is not a single maker of barrels in Paris. It is this state of affairs which facilitates fraud and which I brought to the attention of the Paris Exposition. One can bring in barrels from Liege which have not been proofed; One can decorate them with a proper mark/name and one can then babtise them as Paris barrels. I know very well that M. Leopold Bernard, who is careful about his reputation and who, decidedly sells very expensive products, but without submitting his barrels to a serious proof test.

But as for the gun makers who buy these barrels without a proof mark abroad why would they do it differently?

In any case it�s not legal neither for one method or another. There cannot be two laws in France, one for Paris, the other for St-Etienne.

Here is the decree of 22 April 1868 applied to us.

The decree says:

�The barrel makers, merchants and workers cannot sell any barrel without it having been proofed and stamped by the accepted proof mark, a fine of 330 fr for the first time and a penalty of double that for each case after and the confiscation of the barrels which are put on sale."

The terms of the law are clear. How then can one allow to be spread out in the middle of the Exposition products which would be seized if they were in our city, at the frontier as always, by agents richly rewarded to make the law respected?

The jury of the Exposition could recompense, with their eyes closed, the gun-makers of Paris and shower gold medals on these barrels breaking the proof house decree. But the government cannot have two weights and two measures.

It is not admissible that the Stephanoise barrel makers are stringent in their proofing when their competition can spare the allowance and the risks that they bring.

It is sufficient to signal this state of affairs to the Government so that the law will apply everywhere. And in closing I recall, in conclusion, that the Americans and the English do not have special expositions for barrel makers, that the Belgians don�t produce anything but mediocre products and that Paris and Saint-Etienne alone are left standing

.....Our production of die cast tooling involves every facet of barrel production and in the near future, will surely be top ranked.

.....I have the honor, sir editor, to be your devoted constituent.

Didier Drevet
Master barrel maker, member of the com-
mission for oversight of the proof-
house of Saint-Etienne.

And this I've added to the Didier-Drevet date database and the serial number dating matrix:

1885: 17.0; 1885 - 4911 - hammer gun, underlever Damascus barrels on a PONDEVAUX ET JUSSY gun (photos kaput thanks to greedy photo bucket) -raimey and WC - if you have photos of the barrel flats saved someplace, it would be an education to see them again.

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=406682&page=4



With the 10 examples above, we can now pretty well date every serial number barrel made by DD! 10 points on a graph over 33 years is pretty darned definitive (even if we don't know the exact start date of his manufacture - it must be before 1855 because he won a prize) - and by dating the barrels and matching them to the guns they're mated with...we'll have a firm marker on the dates the guns themselves were made? And since we have that marker on a date that brand of gun were made - it could be carried over to a whole series for the brand. Not bad - not definitive but better than nothing. I need to make a graph.

Argo, re your reference above to General Journee's book: He's recognized as a real expert on the subject. I have the book in a more recent (1949) paperback edition. Thought about trying to translate some of it several years back, but a lot of it is too technical for my English vocabulary, let alone French!

I've completed a rough translation of Didier-Drevet's letter to the editor of "L'Republican de la Loire et de la Haute Loire," 28 November 1878. (Welcome corrections/edits - I may have missed some technical terms). It's posted above for anyone with historical metallurgical interest. He recommends upgrading Saint-Etienne's rolling machines and mandrels (mandrin). He lambasts the Parisian gun makers for using Belgian guns and barrels and relabeling them. However, lest anyone think the guns Saint-Etienne were making at the time were inferior, here are photos of an 1878 Didier Fusil (Barrel flats already pictured above):













And check out the arsenic case colors - not to American tastes but popular in France.

I'm going to post four Saint-Etienne Barrel flats from 1900 to 1938. Two reasons: 1) Didier-Drevet may not have been the only one dating his barrels at this time; and 2) 70 mm (7.0 cm) seem to have been more common than assumed:

1). 1900, 6.5 chambered in cm; 17.0; Barrels by Ronchard Cizeron showing the proof stamp of St-Etienne in use from 1868-1900. Probably made at the end of the 19th Century and proofed for nitro powder. Expert option (see link) is that it was made, assembled or marketed by a gun dealer in Rouen.



http://www.littlegun.info/arme%20francaise/artisans%20p%20q%20r/a%20ronchard%20cizeron%20fr.htm

2). 1908 (?)(date?) (no SN); 17.0; 6.5; No name; Saint-Etienne.





http://www.passionmilitaria.com/t78322-fusil-de-chasse-a-identifier

3). 1939-45; 18.4; 70 chambered in MM. Neltir believes it is C.G an Cie from Sociee Fran�aise de cycles. The name was registered 2 Feb 1916 and lasted to 1947. This gun used either Heutier or Belgian barrels



Bonsoir , je crois savoir que le marquage C.G & cie �mane de la soci�t� fran�aise de cycles fond�e par Cl�ment et Gladiator sp�cialis�e dans les armes de guerre et de chasse au Pr� St Germain en Seine St Denis ,76 grande Rue . Cette marque a �t� d�pos�e en 1916 le 2 f�vrier et active jusqu'apr�s 1947 . Ils utilisaient soit des canons heurtier soit des canons Belges en acier sp�cial Treble trial Stell import� d'Autriche je crois me rappeler .Ces canons Belges �taient export�s par la fabrique Belge "The Liege United Arms C� LTD depuis 1923 et nomm�e par la suite en 1946 FAL et puis F:A:U:L pour fabrique d'armes de liege et fabrique d'armes unie de Liege qui pr�s �prouvaient les canons destin�s a l'export .Cette pratique �tait utilis�e dans la p�riode sombre des ann�es 1939/45 et apr�s suite l'occupation car la France manquait de produits armuriers .
Neltir .

http://www.passionlachasse.com/t15623p15-trouvaille-de-vieux-fusils

4). 1928 Ideal, chambered for 70 mm.





Tr�s bel IDEAL , il est de 1928 et normalement chambr� en 12/65 , �jecteurs automatiques , canon droit ray� "supra" pour le tir � balle et le tir dispersant � plomb .
Le n� 9EE/S est propos� � la vente en 1930 au prix de 4600 fr . A l'�poque , �a repr�sente une somme !!

http://www.tircollection.com/t18237-et-j-ai-vu-aussi-ceci#239972

Another dated w/SN Didier Drevet barrel in an unnamed Saint-Etienne gun with SN and chambered for 7 cm (2 3/4). The numbers stamped on these barrels (see the various ones above) not/not associated with a date - in this case "17502" - are the SN's of the gun itself stamped on the barrels by the gun maker. I've confirmed this several times. - Neat looking gun!! (And if you don't know where is "Avranches". take a look at the Normandy campaign breakout)

1). 1907 - 12613?; 18.4; 7 chambered in cm; Gun SN is 17502 (No idea what this means); No name; marketed (or assembled) by Geneaux of Avranches (Normandy):





http://www.gunbroker.com/item/667146081

And this date graph continues to expand (see page 1); if gun owners with DD dated barrels can supply gun maker names and gun maker SN's...soon we'll have a decent idea of French gun dates in the first 20 years of the 20th century.

I'll try to do this graph...starting with dates....adding proof marks, powder marks...using the SN's from the DD barrels..and then separate graphs for each manufacturer who used those barrels. I can do the analysis (and Ted, WC, Raimey, Larry et.al. have the knowledge) - But you all have the data.

And what's with all the 7.0 chambers? I have one a 1906 with a butt plate stamped "model expresse". Can I shoot modern 2 3/4" ammo?

I've been trying to match dated pre WWI Didier Brevet barrels with makers' serial numbers without much success. Here are three Darnes"

1). A Darne from second paragraph first page with DD barrels dated 1900 chambered for 6.5 cm (pre circa 1912). No Darne gun SN is mentioned in Ted's original post about the barrels.
http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=396092&page=all

2). A Darne type 18 12 guage with Darne made barrels SN C692 on the barrels and 692 on the gun and chambered for 6.5 cm (pre c1912)
http://www.gunbroker.com/item/670294785








3) a Darne type 10 20 gauge with Darne made barrels SN C643 on a gun with the number 643 and chambered for 70 mm (post c1912).
http://www.gunbroker.com/item/671021768





I guess as far as Darnes go, there is no matching up the SN's. Did they have SN's?

Argo,
The serial number of the Darne wreakage, with the 1900 date stamp, if that is a date stamp, in my above post is 759. I did make mention of that in the post.

Darne serial numbers make sense to whatever regime was running the company at the time the gun was built. All Darnes have a serial number, and, as far as I know, all clones do as well. We are discussing a company that has been in business for near 150 years, and in a country that has come out victorious in two world wars, after suffering under a scorched earth policy during same.
While it is possible to date a Darne by it's serial number, there are so many exceptions and running changes that one needs to be in contact with someone knowledgable at the factory to be able to do that. Example: It is impossible to accurately date ANY Darne with an SPC or SPL prefix-this referred to a custom order gun, and the serial numbers were not broken out by date of order. When Paul Bruchet was alive, it was very possible he would recall building a higher grade V model so marked, but, that was a long shot, as well. Further, even using the list that was posted on Geoffroy's website until it went dark some time ago, you only got close with a serial number-the combination of letters and numbers only identified a decade, not a year.
That list, incidentally, only applies to guns sold in Europe-anything could be and was imported to the states, which, was considered a secondary market.

Good luck in your quest. I believe it will be quite daunting.


Best,
Ted

Here are three more Didier Brevet dated barrels and with these, there are definitely date markers.

1). 1903 - ????? 18.4; chamber? (ad says 65mm but no pic - assume it is 6.5cm); Buffard Armurier SN 5397. (no pics of the action or barrel flats - only the description)
http://www.naturabuy.fr/Juxtapose-Buffard-item-4014832.html



2). 1912 13689? 18.4; 65 chambered in mm; Note the 1912 shift to mm.
http://www.naturabuy.fr/Fusil-Juxtapose-St-Etienne-cal-12-70-Didier-DREVET-item-3577295.html


3): no date - 15035; 18.4; 65? Chambered in mm; note the lack of a date;
http://www.naturabuy.fr/Magnifique-rare-Didier-fusil-grand-prix-1900-canon-plume-item-3949391.html





With this we're pretty close to nailing down
-- the date of the change-over in Saint-Etienne from cm to mm,
-- the date of the first barrels made by DD following WWI, and
-- the end of DD punching dates on their barrels.
I'll post a proto-graph separately which will be based on these datapoints compiled on page 1 - repeated here.

1852 - DD begins to serial number and date his barrels
1855 - Gold Medal for Barrels - Exposition Universelle des produits de l'Agriculture, de l'Industrie et des Beaux-Arts de Paris 1855
1878 - ...????; 65mm chambered in mm; 18.6; Gun Maker: Didier Fusil; Sn: ?? (damas underlever hammergun)
1885 - ..4922; ??? chambered in mm; 17.0. Gun Maker: ??; gun sn: ?? (from page 3)
1900 - ..8975; 6.5 chambered in cm; 18.4; Gun maker: Darne; gun sn??
1903 - ,,?????; chamber 6.5??; 18.4; Buford Armurier SN 5397
1904 - 11046; 6.5 chambered in cm; 18.4; Gun maker: ?? gun sn:
1905 - 11604; ??? chamber?; 18.4; (unclear); Gun maker: ?? gun sn: ??
1906 - 11985; 7 chambered in cm; 17.0; Gun maker: Gerest Berthon; gun sn
1906 - 12075; 7 chambered in cm; 18.4; Gun maker: ??; gun sn: ??
1907?- 12537: 7 chambered in cm; 18.4; Gun maker: ??; gun sn: ?? (from next page)
1907 - 12613? 7 chambered in cm; 18.4; Gun Maker: Geneaux; gun sn: ; (from 4th page)
1908 - 12740; 6.5 chambered in cm; 17.0; Gun Maker: ??; gun sn: ??
1910 - 13184; 6.5 chambered in cm; 18.4: Gun Maker: ??; gun sn: ??
1912 - 13689? 65 chambered in mm; 18.4; Note the 1912 shift to mm. (page 4)
1918 - 14204; 65 chambered in mm; 18.4: Gun maker: ?? gun sn: 19488; (Skeetz's gun)
..................(possibly one of the very first commercial barrel sets made by DD after Nov 11, 1918).
1921?- 15034; (no date) 65? Chambered in mm; 18.4; note the lack of a date but if you calculate 300 barrels/year after 14204 from 1918, the pre WWI rate this will = circa 1921?); (I'm wrong - photo cut off the date - see below)
1924 - 2?871; 75mm (chambered in mm); 19.2 (10 gauge); gun number 1080 for Didier Brevet (SIFARM) gun labeled "Excelsior."

DD looks to have been making about
-- 1852-1885: serial numbers 0 - c5000; i.e. 200 or so a year? (actually probably the normal 250 once he got his reputation going with that 1855 gold medal).
-- 1885?-1914: Serial numbers c5000 - c14,000: 250-300 barrels a year from 1885 - 1914? (and given the history - possibly his maximum capacity for manufacture - Darne may have gone on their own barrel manufacture about 1900 because of this)(and was DD totally anal about his quality at this time? - the demand was there - looks like he refused to accelerate his barrel production)..
-- 1914-1918: Sn 14xxx-14204? Sports barrel production was probably zero from 14 Aug 1914- 11 Nov 1918 for obvious reasons.

Suffice to say for now, if your French Saint-Etienne barrels are chambered in cm...they are 1912 or earlier.

And by the way, it looks like there are a lot more pre WWI French shotguns chambered for 7cm/70mm (2 3/4) out there than previously understood.
.

Ted, thanks for the Darne list reminder. I just checked my doublegun link for it and unfortunately it had been photobucketed and was gone. I found it in the cloud in google images and downloaded it. This is as good as any place to re-park Geoffroy Gournet's serial number and date list for Darne guns. Gil

Argo,
I'll remind everyone again, just as the list above advises-There are many exceptions.

I've handled at least a dozen different grades of genuine Darne guns that had serial numbers between 50 and 60 thousand. Hell, I've owned two of them. I have always hazarded a guess that they were pre 1923, based on old style proof marks and the odd (for Darne production) all digit serial numbers, as opposed to the letters/numbers more commonly seen.

My oldest Darne at the moment is the 6.5cm marked Halifax, which, would be considered to be in remarkable condition for a gun of pre 1912 vintage, and, one that does not seem to be cataloged in that era. I'll mention again that it has a 4 digit serial number, and has components that are marked with several different serial numbers from around the same sequence. I have no idea as to why this is. I don't find the catalog issue to be deeply troubling, the Halifax grade guns seemed to fade in and out depending on the economic times. There were three grades of Halifax just prior to WWII, fewer when economic times were booming.

All of the French guns I have seen that were marked for 2 3/4" chambers were modern production. I have handled guns that were stamped 65 that actually had 70mm chambers, and can document they were built with the 70mm chamber. The big switch seemed to occur in the early 1950s.

I see no reason to doubt that some were built and proofed that way prior to that becoming standard practice.

Best,
Ted

Not directly related to Argo's very good effort at dating guns via serial number, but, a good example of some of the horseflies that show up in the yogurt:

http://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-fo...un_id=100884559

Mr. Dealer has a gun he has listed as a Darne, R13. He does mention that he doesn't know what era it was produced in, and would like some help in that area.

A sharp eyed, and interested, student of the Darne guns emailed me, wondering just what the hell it was. I guessed (not having a photo of the barrel flats) that it could be a Bruchet, produced early after they received permission to use the Darne name, as it is engraved, similar to the method used to put the Bruchet name on the even earlier production Paul Bruchet guns. Student proceeded to ask for, and receive photos of the barrel flats.




It is neither a Darne, nor an R13. It appears to be an upgrade to a Francisque Darne gun, with that makers information stamped on the flats of the barrels, and the trademark Darne script applied to the opening lever.

If it had been a Bruchet produced gun, it would be an OK deal at that price. Based on what we can see, it is a lower grade clone aping a more expensive gun, and not a good deal. I can't help but notice that although the dealer provided barrel flat pictures to someone who requested them, he did not put them in the original ad, or correct/edit the ad. This bothers me a bit. It would bother you too, if you had graded as many Darne guns as lower in actual grade AFTER someone purchased them, as I have. That, sucks.

Many thanks to the sharp eyed Bill Wolf, who stumbled upon this little quandary to begin with.

Do be careful out there.


Best,
Ted

Ted, thanks for the Darne background and you are indeed the Darne expert. And thanks GLS for the Darne SN list. Here's a question for Ted. There are two Darnes pictured above with SN's that are very close.
-- C692, a 12 gauge with a chamber stamp 6.5".
-- C643, a 20 gauge with a chamber stamp "70".

The two are post 1910 because of the letter/number SN per GLS's chart; C692 with the cm chamber stamp would be between 1912 to 1910 assuming 1912 was indeed the changeover year in Saint Etienne from cm to mm, could it be that both of these gun barrels were completed in 1912? Perhaps the chamber size wasn't stamped until the barrel was mated to a gun, which might explain why the 20 ga has a lower SN but has a chamber stamp in mm?

It would also mean that Darne built some 2,700 guns between 1910 and 1912. Is this possible?

Argo,
Thanks, but, I consider myself only a student of the Darne. There is much to know, and much that cannot, from this juncture, be discovered.

In the early 20th century era, I don't believe Darne guns were serial numbered from a perspective of the number being useful for anyone outside of the production team/factory that built them. There wasn't a strict legal requirement that a sequential number be applied to finished guns in that era.
I believe the number was mostly useful for keeping production guns from having their pieces end up in guns they weren't fitted to. Although, I have demonstrated with my Halifax, that having a number on a part doesn't promise the numbers will all be the same, when everything is finished, for whatever reason that might be!

I'm sorry, but, I don't have an explaination and neat answer to your question. Truthfully, I don't believe anyone does. We don't know what the management of the factory was thinking or doing in 1910-1912. The French are great record keepers, but, twice they were occupied by Germans that forced their record keeping upon them. Did the factory records survive from that era? Hard to say, but, for what it is worth I spent a day in the larger public library in Lyon, and could discover almost nothing about the factory, the work, or the guns. Lots of stuff on Regis, who was a local hero of sorts.
Without a ledger of some sort, documenting what was going on, circa 1910-1912, we are pretty much in the same boat with the guys who pursue smaller American makers, Baker, Norwich, etc. I think it is important to only document what can actually be documented, so as to avoid "lore" which, is what existed when I first got into sliding breech guns about 30 years ago.

I'm sorry. When and if we can find some documentation, we will discover more. I am amazed at how much you have tracked down on Didier thus far.


Best,
Ted

I've just gone through 500 ads on Naturabuy.fr. and have come up with some more food for thought. For the few interested in French guns, I'll make three posts on findings (and it's probably already common knowledge somewhere):

1). Didier-Drevet continued to date his barrels at least through 1924 - probably much later (and this was after DD combined with others including Darne to create SIFARM). (example to be posted)

2). Not all French guns were chambered for 65 cm during this period. I've found a lot of French guns chambered for 70, 75, 80 mm (7, 7.5, 8 cm) from 1890-1930. and it looks like 1870-1890 more than a few of the guns I've looked at were chambered for 7.5 cm or 75mm. (examples to be posted)

3). Saint-Etienne guns up to about 1890 appear to be chambered in mm.. So they changed to cm about 1890 and back to mm about 1912. This 1890? change is very possibly the visible evidence of the change-over from the CGS system (centimeter, gram, second) to MKS system (meter, kilogram, second) in 1889 referred to by Wildcattle. This 1889 date is as clear a date-marker as the 1912 date.

and an observation:

4) I can find no evidence that Parisian or Belgian guns ever used cm for chamber measurements - if it's in cm - it's likely Stephanois.

1). Didier Drevet barrel dated 1924; 1924 - 2?871 (or 1?871 ??); gun number 1080 for gun labeled "Excelsior." (per other ads for Excelsior's in the period which are chronologically serial numbered apparently). 10 gauge ( 19.2); chamber: 75mm (chambered in mm)(3"). mod�le EXCELSIOR .
http://www.naturabuy.fr/Fusil-juxtapose-Artisanal-Francais-occasion-Calibre-10-item-2824879.html






Excelsior is a well-known brand created by DD and SIFARM about 1924. Here is a gushing publicity for it. It's funny - if you read the ad on naturabuy.fr above - the guy doesn't know what is Excelsior, has not looked at his gun and claims it was possibly exhibited in Paris in 1900 - odd for a guy asking 2800 Euros for the arm)(research shows he bought it in 2015 at another auction). I'm starting to think some gun dealers are like carpet merchants.

http://fcm25.canalblog.com/archives/2015/05/22/32098981.html

Argo,
Are you sure it was not Francisque Darne that was part of SIFARM?

My post war F. Darne catalog is marked SIFARM, but, I have never had a Darne catalog that indicated they were part of that organization.


Best,
Ted

Ted, you're right...F.Darne. My bad. I wasn't really researching Darne or SIFARM.

Per above: 3). Saint-Etienne guns up to about 1889 appear to be chambered in mm.. So they changed to cm about 1889 and back to mm about 1912. This 1889? change is very possibly the visible evidence of the change-over from the CGS system (centimeter, gram, second) to MKS system (meter, kilogram, second) in 1889 referred to by Wildcattle. This 1889 date is as clear a date-marker as the 1912 date. Here are a few examples:

-- notice that there is a gun chambered for 75mm and one for 80mm in this group.

1). from first page: 1878 Didier-Drevet fusil (damascus) date on the gun (not the barrel). 18.6 (11 gauge); 65mm Chambers. (Date on the gun).
http://www.tircollection.com/t18880-un-beau-fusil-de-chasse-sobre-et-elegant






2). Pre-1889 Fusil Darne rotary gun (the ad claims the gun is 1892 - this can�t be since the chambers are measured in mm; -- unless of couse as Ted pointed out previously the barrels were made pre 1889 and then mated to the gun several years later). 16.8 (17 gauge); 65 mm chambers; Ronchard Cizeron barrels. (makes me want to ask that Kansas dealer, who has two of these, for photos of their barrel flats - how are they marked - in cm or mm? and who made the barrels?)
http://www.naturabuy.fr/FUSIL-DARNE-MODEL-ROTARY-1892-item-3675740.html



3). 1885-1889 Manufance under lever hammer gun; 75mm chambers; 17.4 (14 gauge). Manufance was founded in 1885; the chamber is in mm thus 1889 or earlier.
http://www.naturabuy.fr/Fusil-juxtapose-...em-3799057.html



4). Pre 1885. Saint Etienne under lever hammer gun Martinier Collin; 19.6 (8 guage - ad says 10 gauge but I think 10 gauge is 19.2); 80mm chambers; (Martinier and Collin founded the company which was sold in 1885; Their assistants then bought the company which ultimately became Manufrance.);
http://www.naturabuy.fr/rare-fusil-juxtapose-chiens-calibre-10-saint-etienne-item-2376357.html



5) 31). Pre 1889: Artisanal Saint-Etienne under lever hammer gun; 18.2; 65 mm chambered in mm. Identified as pre 1889 by the use of mm.
http://www.naturabuy.fr/Fusil-juxtapose-item-3475156.html



6). Because I mentioned two pre-1889 guns from Manufrance and Matinier-Collin above, I'll expand the story for history's sake with this gun and a translation. Chambered in cm, it is post 1889 - and since it's proofed for "PT" probably 1900-1912 - but has a relevant story to it: -- edit: Well there's an obvious problem. Blanchon was Manufrance at the time this gun was made.- i.e. chambered in cm 1889-1912 So--the "Blanchon" on this gun can't be Pierre Blanchon. More examples of the carpet merchant nature of gun dealers - wonder if his history is correct?

Post 1889 Saint-Etienne under lever Blanchon: 18.2; 6.5 cm chambers;
http://www.naturabuy.fr/ANCIEN-FUSIL-BLACHON-SAINT-ETIENNE-COLLECTION--item-448377.html

Pierre Blachon arquebusier de m�tier � St Etienne fait la connaissance peu avant 1885 de Etienne Mimard fils d'armurier venu se perfectionner dans l'arquebuserie � St Etienne apr�s un s�jour dans le m�tier � Li�ge. Donc ils font connaissance �tant tous deux employ�s � la St� Martinier- Collin armurier � St Etienne. Cette soci�t� en 1885 est mise en vente et les deux hommes s'associent et ach�tent cette entreprise qui devient la Manufacture Fran�aise d'Armes et cycles de St Etienne, Etienne Mimard en est le Directeur g�n�ral Pr�sident du Conseil d'Administration et Pierre Blachon Vice pr�sident et c'est lui qui sera le concepteur technique des premiers mod�les produits par la Manufacture avec notamment l'invention du fameux Robust dont la commercialisation sera lanc�e en 1913 et qui en fera le fusil de chasse certainement le plus vendu au monde avec pr�s de 1 million d'exemplaires.
Pierre Blachon n'aura pas le temps de connaitre l'immense succ�s de son "Robust" puisqu'il meurt en 1914.

Pierre Blanchon gun maker in St Etienne a little before 1885 met Etienne Mimard, son of a gunsmith/gun dealer who had learned the gunmaking trade in St Etienne after an apprenticeship in Liege. They both were employees at Ste Martinier-Collin, gun makers in St Etienne. In 1885 this firm was put up for sale and the two men went together to buy it, It became La Manufacture Francaise d�Armes et Cycles de St Etienne (Manufrance), Etienne Mimard becoming the Director General, President of the corporate board and Pierre Blanchon Vice President. It was he who came up with the technical conception of the first models produced by the manufacturer with notably the invention of the famous Robust, which was first launched in 1913 and which became the most sold shotgun in the world with nearly 1 million examples. Pierre Blanchon did not have time to know the huge success of his �Robust� because he died in 1914.

Argo,
Wonderful history. Very sad that Blanchon died in 1914. Fransisque Darne, who held several unique patents related to civilian firearms, and modifications to sliding breech designs, died in 1917. There was a patent photo floating around the 'net of a sliding breech gun with removable sidelocks and more conventional hammers and springs, as opposed to strikers, with patent assignment to Francisque Darne. I have not seen evidence that this design was ever produced.
It would appear that both men were lost to history in the prime of their lives, and, no doubt left French firearms design and production the poorer for it.


Best,

Ted

Just experimenting with date identification. I picked this gun from Naturabuy.fr because the seller is a bit obstreperous and some write-ins in a manner uncharacteristically rude for the French, have challenged his identification:
http://www.naturabuy.fr/Fusil-Cal-10-Manufacture-Armes-Cycles-Saint-Etienne-item-2206991.html

The ad says it is a Manufrance Ideal Jones underlever hammer gun tested for PP Pyroxillees powder; SN 19416; Cal 10; "80 mm chambers." Barrels are �Ideal� Hercule 3 Palmes demi-bloc. The ad claims that it was only available by special order overseen by the director of the workshop himself and would date from the period 1906-1914. In subsequent queries the seller mentions it was stamped Manufacture d'Armes et Cycles de Saint- Etienne. He blurs some pictures and cuts others off - Barrel flats can't be read, etc).

As a test case, here is my analysis: It may date from 1892-1900 - probably closer to 1900;
� Manufrance - must be post 1885
� Ideal � must be post 1888
� Chambered in cm � must be1889 to 1912 (third picture of the forestock shows �Cal 10, 7.5 - belying his claim the chambers are 80mm).
� It is stamped with the �Cycles� address so must be post 1892.
� Proofed PP so probably pre-1900.

The problem comes with the SN - have no idea how many guns Manufrance made from its creation in 1885 but 19,000 guns in 15 years (assuming they were consecutively numbered - which may not be) seems like a lot. And I wonder about the "Cal 10": 10 gauge St-Etienne guns I've looked at over the last few months are usually labeled 19.2 or thereabouts, not "Cal 10." Might be on the barrel flats of course.

Any observations? Am I close? (I�m still learning).

Argo,
I believe only French powder PT is truly smokeless. The earlier powders PJ, PM, and PS were considered semi-smokeless.
The "Powder Pyroxles" may indicate proof with powder T, for sure 1900 or later.
Just a guess, as anything I know about Manufrance I learned by accident, trying to find out something about a Darne.


Best,
Ted

Thanks Ted...wasn't sure what "Pyroxillees" meant (smokeless?) and couldn't see the proof mark. So "PT"...post 1900 because of the powder; pre 1912 because of the chamber in cm. Pretty close to what the seller was advertising.

Edit, ran across this site on the manufrance Ideal:
http://www.gournetusa.com/ideal.htm

It dates an Ideal SN 21934 to 1903 and states that Manufrance was making 1500-2000 Ideal's a year. That would date the test gun above, SN 19416 to circa 1901, shortly after PT was introduced in St. Etienne.

The barrels came in different grades of Damascus or steel, stamped for the last one "ACIER HERCULE" followed by one to five pair of branches or palm determining the quality. If the Damascus were assembled with copper, the new steel was assembled with tin to keep lower temperature. Chopper lump, the technique used to assemble the locking lugs (dovetailed), are an integral part of the barrels. Chopper lump construction is believed to be stronger. The two lugs appear under the action and the model is stamped on the rear one. Here a "No 3R". The lowest grade is No 0. In 1187 were offered models 0 to 8. The letter R means that the barrels are compatible with smokeless powder and appeared in 1897. No 3R appeared in 1898. The barrels are stamped PS with a crown, a Saint-Etienne standard smokeless proof starting in 1901. There is on the barrels flat some indication of loading at proof and at regular use. Those barrels should have been proofed at 12,090 psi. The caliber available went from gauge 8,10,12,14,16,20,24,12mm and express caliber 500,450.375.303 british,405WCF,german 8x57, 600 Winchester and of course the 8 mm Label. The gun we have here is a 12 gauge chambered in 65 mm (very closed to 2 and half inch. Longer chambers, a 70 mm, were only available on a pigeon gun named "Perfection". It is a hercule steel 2 palms bored at 18.4 mm, 65 cm or 2 1/2 half inches. The rib is hollow, a typical feature of the Hexagone, they call it "canon plume" or feather barrel, and it weight XXXX. ..... Between the firing pin holes is stamped the serial number, 21934, year 1903. The average annual production those was 1500 to 2000 Ideal models.

Poudre pyroxylee, like poudre blanche, is simply a general term for smokeless powder. Does not refer to a specific powder, like PT, PJ, etc.

No, but, it does refer to smokeless powder, and only one French proof powder is truly smokeless.

Powder T.

Best,
Ted

I need to get some data-points on La Manu SN's - working on it through relatives in Saint Chamond. I've been gradually compiling others based on what you all have posted over the years. For example,

From Larry:
post-1924. The little squiggle under the PT, on both the barrel flats and the water table, looks to me like the "supplementary mark for definitive proof in completely finished state". That's not a mark you see on many French doubles, and it's one that is more helpful in dating the gun.
http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=292630

And:

The "Crown" over "PT" around 1900 was for semi-smokeless T powder and after 1923 was for a presure of 12k psi at the 1st pressure point with smokeless T powder. Are semi-smokeless T and smokeless T the same and when does the gun in question date? Last the barrel maker had to put his name on the tubes(post 1923??) or the proofhouse would stamp them as foreign tubes as ARME ETRANGERE.
http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=131197&page=1

I'm making all of this - your comments - into a chronological encyclopedia (including the Darne SN post - which is a lot better than nothing) and at some point will put out a compendium. (gadzooks - somebody might already have done this?)

Powder T wasn't introduced until 1900, and was always a smokeless powder.


Best,
Ted

Battle of Magersfontein on 11 December 1899 - Boers pin down a whole British army in South Africa during the second Boar War using Mausers with smokeless powder.

I'm continuing to compile a database of makers, barrel makers, marks, SN's etc 1880's to WWI. Here is a mystery for me. A "balance beam" trade mark on two different barrels. Any one have any idea what this means?

Example one, St. Etienne BLNE, 17.0 (16 ga), 6.5 chambers (in cm), double proofed for PT; SN is 23387 on gun, receiver, barrel. Here is the odd trademark: Above the "balance beam" TM appears to be the word "Depose"; below it (possibly) "Acier Comprese." It has to be post 1889 and pre 1913 (chambered in cm) and post c1900 (PT).








Example two: St. Etienne 18.2 (12 ga), 6.5 chambers (in cm), double proofed for PT. Ronchard Cizeron barrels (running rabbit mark on the barrel flats + the name). Gun SN on both receiver and barrel rib is 10,400. Above the "balance beam" TM appears to be the word "Depose" and below possible "Acier Tixphill"?? (second word unclear). It has to be post 1889 and pre 1913 (chambered in cm), and post c1900 (proofed for PT with the feathers). The gold medal could be the one given to Petrus at the 1904 St. Etienne exposition... meaning the barrel was made between 1904 and 1912 - or it could be one given to Ronchard-Cizeron in 1889 at the Universal Exposition (probably the latter since medaille d'or appears on RC barrels with Petrus's name).







There are two other identifying marks on this gun. Initial "D&C on the left barrel and "Choke Rectifie de Peuvel Petrus. Per this site, Petrus was a barrel maker, equipper, and barrel polisher before 1890. He received the Esoffier prize in 1895 and a gold medal at the 1904 St. Etienne exposition. He worked with Ronchard Cizeron and other prestigious arms makers.

https://www.pressreader.com/france/armes-de-chasse/20141216/281857231868305

Appreciate any help on the "balance beam" (or maybe a machine press?) TM. Thanks. Edit: The "Acier Compresse" is likely just a direct French translation of "Compressed Steel" which was used on the first Whitworth steel barrels in 1860's?

Found a couple of more Ronchard Cizeron barrels, first is 6.5 with the "balance" mark - looks like the words below are "Acier Comprime." Second is "65". (one pre 1912, the other post 1912). the mark does look like a press of some sort. I wonder if this is yet another Cizeron mark to go with the running rabbit?





Acier comprim� = proc�d� pour augmenter les caract�ristiques d'un acier donn� par �crou�ssage. On augmente surtout la limite �lastique au d�triment de l'allongement � rupture en consommant les dislocations et lacunes du r�seau cristallin. A l'�poque, on faisait ce traitement � chaud pour diminuer ou "supprimer" les d�fauts de compacit� du mat�riau.

I know there's not much more to say but I continue to plow ahead...with proof marks, dates, SN's etc. It's already been done but I think I can make it easier for future French gun shooters.

Here is a question...a Ronhard Cizeron hammer gun barrel, 6.5 (1889-1912) with the "Acier Comprime" press symbol along with with PS proof. http://www.naturabuy.fr/Fusil-chasse-saint-etienne-chiens-calibre-16-65-item-3628117.html



Another site discussing a different gun says this about PS: "The letter R means that the barrels are compatible with smokeless powder and appeared in 1897. No 3R appeared in 1898. The barrels are stamped PS with a crown, a Saint-Etienne standard smokeless proof starting in 1901.". http://www.gournetusa.com/ideal.htm

I sure thought smokeless powder came with the PT mark from about 1900. So what is PS?

PS was an earlier, semi-smokeless powder. It continued to be used after 1900, but, had been in use prior to that as well.

The only R mark I've ever seen was for re-proof.

Best,
Ted

Argo, here's some information on powder that may help a little with dating. From an article in Gun Digest by Lee Kennett:

PJ and PS were both used as proof powders from 1896-1914.
PM and PR, same thing from 1898-1914.
PT came into use in 1900, and was the only powder used for proof post-1914.

before the "T" powder there were the S, J and M, with the corresponding proof marks.
I have a Pirlet boxlock with all three stamps PS, PJ and PM.
The "S powder was deemed the hardest to pass and was used by la manu long after T was introduced.
The "R" only applies to Ideal model # as in "No 3R".
The poster is correct in that it was supposed to be used in conjunction with Nitro proof relative to BP proof. It stands for "renforce" e.g. reinforced.
Of course, this went away in the 20s, when nitro was the standard.

I think Kennett's reference to R powder likely comes from Baron Engelhardt, whose work he was basically updating. Engelhardt's original article shows the PM proofmark and says: "For barrels proved with smokeless R and M powders, adopted May 14, 1898. But it does not show a PR proofmark. He also shows only the PJ proofmark when referring to both J and S powders, which were adopted together on March 30, 1896. Looks like something slipped in the editorial process. Kennett's later article does show a PR proofmark.

there is no R powder!

Took a look in General Journee's "Tir des Fusils de Chasse". He doesn't list R, so it appears that Engelhardt was in error, and Kennett simply copied his mistake. Interestingly, Journee provides a chart which shows 4 different varieties of PJ. Only one each for the others (S, M, T).

Powder R? That is a new one on me.

Again, the only time I have seen the letter R on the flat of a French gun, is under a trident, in reference to reproof. The trident was at St. Etienne, and if under a crown, it was reproof at Paris.


Best,
Ted

We got the "no R" thing, Ted. But interesting in going back to Journee--which I don't do as often as I should--I found that there are 4 different varieties of J. In addition to just plain old J (or J-0--I can't do the sub-numbers), there are also J1, 2, and 3. According to Journee's chart, while they all have the same % of nitrocellulose, they differ in the number of grains per gram. T has the highest % of nitrocellulose: 98%, compared to 83% for the J's, 71% for M, and 65% for S.

"Were" four varities, Larry. Further, I'm going to suggest if the differences between them had been critical, it would have turned up in the proof marks.
It didn't. Proof with powder J is proof with powder J.
This seems to be one of those things that didn't matter for very long, and didn't matter all that much when it did matter.


Best,
Ted

Well I'm still curious about what Geoffrey Gournat is saying on this site referencing the manufrance Ideal:
http://www.gournetusa.com/ideal.htm

"The two lugs appear under the action and the model is stamped on the rear one.... Here a "No 3R"...The letter R means that the barrels are compatible with smokeless powder and appeared in 1897. No 3R appeared in 1898."

The photos in the article show none of this. So is the "R" the author refers on the lug? Is it only relevant to Manufrance Ideals as Wildcattle said or does it apply to other Manufrance guns? The number in front of the "R" looks to be equivalent to the Ideal model number as Ted mentions but what about that "R"? It's odd that there is a definitive statement made about an "R" but no photo and no-one here has heard of it or seen it.

And finally French blogs are full of knowledgeable posters dating early Ideals and Robusts based on Serial Numbers. It looks like Manufrance records of their SN's are intact and known. Is this true?

Gene,
It might be. The Manufrance building remains on Rue de la Convention, in St. Etienne, with the chamber of commerce building next to it, and the Darne works across the side street. The old Manufrance building stretches for more than a few blocks, and is enormous.
But, it has been divided up into retail space and shops. It had been out of business for some time when I was there, and I didn't seek out information on those guns.

Geoffroy speaks English as a third language, behind French and Waloon, and I have a bit of trouble communicating with him, and noticed much the same on his website. If you speak French as well as you write it, you could ask him yourself. He responds to email pretty much daily, in my experience.
If the folks on your French blogs are based in St. Etienne, they may well have been employed in the gun trade, or, moonlighted in it, and would have a depth of knowledge we here could never approach. At one time, a big percentage of the population in that town made their living, or part of it, in the gun trade.
As I have pointed out, Manufrance guns were not something I was, or, am, interested in. I'm sure they are superb guns. A friend owns an Ideal, a Costo and a Robust, nobody can hit anything with the Ideal, and the other two have been rode hard and put up wet, in addition to being hard to hit anything with. All three have pretty significant pitting in the barrels, not uncommon on old French guns, but, I've moved on from my pitted barrels phase. I was distracted enough with the Darnes, I guess.
Good luck.

Best,
Ted

Ted, my in-laws are down in St, Chamond. Their company has made parts for French Aerospace enterprises for 60 years. They're not In St. Etienne proper but are interconnected with the tech community there. We'll see what we can come up with. All of them talk about "La Manu"...Socialist France of the 1930's.

As for pitting in pre WWII French guns, a lot of those guns were buried during the occupation.

Of all the French bloggers..."Neltir" seems to be the best. He is irascible and grumpy but shares his knowledge.

French and Walloon are identical with a few idioms...now if you mention "Flemand"..that's another story.

Ted, there are dozens of identifying markers for early 20th century French guns..This line has been a great education for me...and I will compile what we come up with.

Gene,
I do need to clarifiy something. While I do struggle a bit to understand Geoffroy, the man has done outstanding gunsmithing and engraving for me, and has always followed instructions to the letter.
I've progressed over the years to the point I can do my own maintenance, light repair, trigger adjustments, and simple stock work on my Darnes, and only tend to bother Mr. Gournet for larger projects, and he has never disappointed me, either doing the work or overseeing someone else.
I wish I lived closer, I'd make it a point to take him hunting.

Yes indeed, many guns were hidden during the two occupations of France. But, I have seen so many pitted bores, not just on French guns, that it makes me wonder if there was a cult of neglect as well, in Europe. I come from poor enough stock that things had to be maintained, as you couldn't afford to replace them often.

But, not all my friends and neighbors seem to feel the same way.


Best,
Ted

Well Ted, we might say that powder J doesn't matter at all now, and hasn't for over a century . . . as far as proof goes. But those other varieties--which Journee explains were used in pistols or for hunting loads--were important enough for a noted French ballistician to include them in a work which delves much deeper into the subject than any source I've read. Sort of like ignoring the Dupont work from the 1930's comparing the pressure curve of several smokeless powders to black powder, showing that there's not nearly the difference that many more modern sources told us to expect.

When we ignore information from the past, it often seems someone has to go back and reinvent the wheel . . . unnecessarily, if only we'd paid attention to what we used to know and somehow managed to forget.

WC commented above: "Nitro proof relative to BP proof."

Curious about "BP proof." You guys know this but might clarify what this is and when it started ended. Edit: That's the mark for Jean Bruel..the barrel maker

Here is a line about Zapatto Freres gun with a BP on the barrel we never identified; is this the BP referred to? http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbt...2760#Post442760

Larry,
Proof with powder J, no matter the type of gun, or which version of powder J, tells you all you really need to know.

It isn't proofed with a modern, smokeless powder. You should adjust your loads and use accordingly.

I never suggested we ignore that. But, no matter which version was used in what gun, it was still marked, at the time of proof, as proofed with powder J.

And that is all you, or I, as non leading ballisticians, who aren't writing books on that subject, really need to know.

Best,
Ted

Ted, I'd suggest you write a letter to General Journee and tell him that . . . but he's dead. You have to remember that this is a worldwide BB. Suppose we stumble upon a Frenchman who wants to know what a load specifying J1, 2, or 3 means? Isn't that kinda like knowledge on all those different kinds of twist/Damascus barrels?

Argo, I can't find any French proofmark that used the letters BP. It'd also be very unusual to find a proofmark on the underside of the rib.

A Frenchman would contact the proof house in St. Etienne, and have more information than he ever wanted to know, or, needed to know, about proof with powder J, Larry. Nobody loads anything with powder J today, so, what difference would it make?

The proof mark was PJ under crown, Larry-NOT PJ1, PJ2 or, whatever. There isn't much more to know than the gun was proofed with an obsolete, semi-smokeless powder.

I have skillfully avoided any and all Damascus roulett in my sporting life, Larry. But I'm not a barrel construction purist, anything under abou .025 in a conventional steel barrel I pass on, also.

I'll leave Damascus barrels to those who want them.

Best,
Ted

Ted, why do we bother trying to compare modern loads to what was originally used in a gun that was proofed a century ago? So much of J1 or J2 . . . what does that mean NOW? Might be of interest to some folks that are into stuff you're not into. Just like Damascus.

Larry,
If there had been a big diference between the four varieties of J powder, it would have been marked on the flats of the gun which variety the gun was proofed with.

It wasn't. End of story.

We pay attention to modern loads in old guns because we like our fingers and eyes right where they are. The option, I suppose, is using something modern, but, even those fail, occasionally-I'm not chasing any K guns at the moment.

French proof, even with the old powders, was nothing to sneer at. If my Halifax had been proofed with powder J (it wasn't) I'd likely still feed it the 2 3/4" low noise and recoil Winchester loads. The wall thickness is a bit off the charts with that old gun, as it is on many old French guns, and I don't worry much about it letting go, but, it is over 100 years old, and a pound of prevention is worth a ton of cure, in this case.

I'd bet they exist, but, in the years I have been paying attention, I haven't seen a good photo of a blown up French gun. It doesn't seem to be a huge problem.
Powder J, M, S, or T.


Best,
Ted

This is an ad on the net now:

Manufrance "Ideal" grade "2R" in very nice condition!
http://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-fo...un_id=100903700

No photos of the "R," but re-reading Geoffrey and Wildcattle's posts, I think WC meant the "R" is a stamp on the lug of a Manufrance Ideal which is supplemental to the proof stamp meaning it has been proofed for Nitro...similar to the "BP" Biirmingham proof...i.e. it will be in addition to the PT, PS.. stamp(s)..and the Ideal model number will precede the "R". Haven't seen it myself but would like to see a photo for historical reasons....and to know when that started and ended.



And this ad for a book on Guns International answers my previous question about Manufrance Serial numbers - guess I should get the book and will do so next time I'm in France.

Le Fusil de Chasse "Ideal" by Jean-Claude Mounrnetas
Description:
This soft bound book is about the history and development of the Manufrance Ideal model round action trigger plate shotguns and rifles with many pictures and diagrams and the coveted serial number to date chart.
http://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-fo...un_id=100397050