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
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 members (Birdog),
1,189
guests, and
3
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,469
Posts545,142
Members14,409
|
Most Online1,299 Apr 26th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,563 Likes: 70
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,563 Likes: 70 |
I am looking for help on the date this gun was manufactured. The stamps on the barrels and action differ. Is the gun proofed in 46 or 59. To confuse things further I found a list online that showed the maker number to be 22? https://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-f...39&cdn_bp=1
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185 |
Appears the tubeset & water-table wear a date of 1959. Cheers, Raimey rse
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185 |
46 - Josef Schonlieb, so he must have made it for Josef Hamsbrusch or acquired the concern?
Cheers,
Raimey rse
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185 |
If Jani doesn't have knowledge, I can do a bit of diggin' to see what may have occurred.
Cheers,
Raimey rse
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185 |
Too, there should be a preliminary datastring higher up or further out on the lower rib. See if you might obtain an image of that.
Cheers,
Raimey rse
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,533 Likes: 169
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,533 Likes: 169 |
USAF RET 1971-95
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,763 Likes: 8
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,763 Likes: 8 |
This 1959 Hambrusch #1040 was a two barrel set. The other barrel was proof number 3246.
Cheers, Jani
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,563 Likes: 70
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,563 Likes: 70 |
OK 3245 is the proof number. 46 ( not 22 ) is the Maker number and 59 is the year.
Jani, I did see a 1 on the barrels and wondered about that.
I appreciate all the info!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185 |
Ah, a 2 barrel set. I didn't even read the text. Lovely sleuthing there Jani.
Cheers,
Raimey rse
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,763 Likes: 8
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,763 Likes: 8 |
Mark, Not quite. 3245 is the proof number of the barrel number 1. Barrel number 2, not a part of this sale, should be proof number 3246. The proof number on the water table (action/receiver) is a combination of these two numbers. 59 is the date of proof 1959 of course. I can see no maker's code, which was not mandatory by 1959 anymore; the maker choose to apply his full name on the rib instead.
Cheers, Jani
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,563 Likes: 70
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,563 Likes: 70 |
Now that makes sense . Thanks for the clarification . This is why I still come here!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,982 Likes: 106
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,982 Likes: 106 |
x
Last edited by buzz; 03/05/19 07:59 AM.
Socialism is almost the worst.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185 |
So >>3245-46.59<< where the - denotes inclusion not a datastring. 3245 - 3246.59; so on a 2 barrel set why abbreviate that and not just stamp 3245 - 3246.59 to show it was inclusive. By the way, what year did the Brit issued Ferlach maker's number drop by the wayside. Cheers, Raimey rse
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185 |
Proof number is a way of masking the actual maker in order to prevent preferential treatment @ the proof facility.
Cheers,
Raimey rse
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,763 Likes: 8
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,763 Likes: 8 |
Why shorten the long stamping? Less work, of course The Brit left after a decade. So about 1955 and afterwards some makers kept the old system while others dropped it. Cheers, Jani
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185 |
Less work, of course Indeed, less work. But just as the title of the thread suggests, much confusion. Serbus, Raimey rse
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,784 Likes: 185 |
Josef Just 3 barrel set. I wonder if an example w/ more than 3 exits? Cheers, Raimey rse
|
|
|
|
|