doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Through lumps

A friend from the PGCA suggested that I post a question here regarding prussian Dalys and other early prussian doubles. I have seen numerous early prussian SxS without through lumps in the action body and some of the later ones with them. Was one design stronger than the other or what caused the changeover?

There's a thread around here somewhere dealing with the generic topic of this, but it more than likely boiled down to economics. From the Best Gun definition, a through lump version did not meet that. After QC by Lindner faltered, S,D&G was just another order to fill at the best price-point allowed.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

Ah, ha:

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=357968&page=1

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

It's not a matter of strength but one of production. It is easier and less time consuming to do through lumps than do hidden. Especially considering the older methods of using some form of shaper/broach, file, and chisel. It's not easy doing a blind hole...

That being said that method has been used in modern times. I recall a gunmakers facebook page with pictures of a build. He used hand tools and gauges/templates.

Based on Prussian doubles that you have seen, Lindner Dalys... post Lindner Dalys or other turn of the century Prussian doubles, does there seem to be a period of time when the hidden lumps were phased out in favor of through lumps? I am not speaking only of the higher grade guns here as I have seen numerous midgrade guns with hidden lumps and some beautiful guns with through lumps.

Jon Swindle and I spent an afternoon late last year measuring 20+ Prussian Dalys and other Lindner guns. I was not focussed on it, but Jon was smart enough to take note of whether the lumps pierced the action body. What we found was a pretty narrow serial number range where the change appears to take place. I say "appears" as it seems there is always an exception to absolutes in researching Prussian Dalys.

What we noted was that change takes place between serial #683 and #705 - i.e., guns below serial #683 did not have the lump showing and those after #705 did. Given these serial numbers, the transition would have taken place circa-1896.

It is important to note that I'm referring to second set of Daly serial numbers here - i.e., the series of serial numbers associated primarily with Lindner and marked with the "HAL" over crossed pistols markings, not the earlier guns.

Given the realities of making the guns, I would doubt that the break can narrowed to a specific serial number, but I would suspect the range identified above will be pretty close. Again, I am sure there are exceptions.

Hopefully this is helpful.

Ken

I again think it was centered around mechanization & economics. But um one may have to narrow the field by hammer & hammerless as well as H.A. Lindner & non-Lindner. I would have guessed that the Daly-Scott hammerguns would have been non-through lumps but even those I believe to be mixed? Will take some time to sort thru all the examples.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

Ken & Raimey,

Thank you both for your responses. They were very helpful. I will continue to look for differences outside of the serial number range provided and also try to determine if the grade of the guns has any bearing on their configuration.

Ken,
In measuring the actions, did you notice a difference in the "thickness"(depth)of the actions? It would seem that a action with lumps that pierced the action could be made "thinner", therefore lighter.
Mike

I think Ford may have a point & I'm curious if all the Featherweights had through lumps.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse