|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 members (lagopus, Marc Ret, Argo44, 3 invisible),
290
guests, and
5
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,374
Posts544,001
Members14,391
|
Most Online1,131 Jan 21st, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 641 Likes: 3
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 641 Likes: 3 |
fallschirmjaeger - yes, it is a Gunbroker find. It caught my attention because I am a sucker for a lightweight 16ga SxS. Aren't we all!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,063 Likes: 563
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,063 Likes: 563 |
Shinbone:
Glad you're getting some of the info you needed here. Your gun appears to be a really good find. That weight is pretty spectacular, what is the LOP and barrel length? Also, if you have any questions about the barrels, bring it down to the shop and we can check wall thickness. I'm there Fridays these days. Our digital scale also easily converts to metric so we can see how the weight compares to the original stamping.
It sure reminds me of a VL&A Knockabout, but if it were a Francotte it would be marked on it somewhere.
Last edited by Lloyd3; 11/20/17 03:08 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,372 Likes: 103
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,372 Likes: 103 |
I see. So we need that 'date code' stamp for a positive date? You won't get a date code stamp on that gun. With the exception of a couple years (1922-23?), Belgian guns with the gauge over C in a diamond were made before date codes were in use. If this gun had 16-65 in a sort of sideways horseshoe (there's another term for that?), then it would date from 1924 or later and there would be a date code. The change from the gauge over C to the gauge/chamber length as a proofmark gives you a rough split in production date. Then you start looking for the date code, which will always be there on Belgian guns with the later proofmark.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 244
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 244 |
Lloyd - Thanks for the offer. I will definitely take you up on checking wall thickness. I am hunting this Friday, and so will swing by the next Friday (12/1). Dimensional info: Barrels are stamped 1238.6
Last edited by shinbone; 11/20/17 07:09 PM. Reason: photos added
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,522 Likes: 167
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,522 Likes: 167 |
Weight 1.2386 kilograms
or
2.73064558 pounds
for the barrels
Last edited by skeettx; 11/20/17 05:24 PM.
USAF RET 1971-95
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,021
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,021 |
Thanks Larry. Thanks Doc Drew. That explains it. I was beating my brains out trying to figure out why no date stamp. That gauge designation stamp used from 1898 to 1924. Looked right past it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,398 Likes: 307
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,398 Likes: 307 |
Larry's sideways horseshoe thingie (or 'Omega reclining' ) p = 1937
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 244
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 244 |
Just added some more photos, one showing the current weight of the barrels at 1179g. Barrels are stamped at 1238.6, which means 60g of metal has been removed from the barrels since being proofed.
When I do a quick calculation using an average density for steel, the thickness of 60g of metal removed from the diameter of just one bore of these barrels would come to 0.072 thousandths. Meaning a negligible change in wall thickness from proof.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,033 Likes: 45
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,033 Likes: 45 |
I'd be interested in more info on how you calculated that.
That's a 5% weight loss. Seems pretty significant to me.
Remember the barrel tubes don't make up the entire weight of the set.
Are we sure the stamped weight is after final striking?
"The price of good shotgunnery is constant practice" - Fred Kimble
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313 Likes: 378
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,313 Likes: 378 |
When I do a quick calculation using an average density for steel, the thickness of 60g of metal removed from the diameter of just one bore of these barrels would come to 0.072 thousandths. Meaning a negligible change in wall thickness from proof.
You might want to check your calculation again because .072" is .005" greater than the difference between a 12 gauge and a 16 gauge bore. That is hardly a negligible difference.
A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.
|
|
|
|
|
|