doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Sauer'07,'24. Simson '27. Merkel'30 - on-line cat

Jeff Stephens' articles in DGJ pin down the dates of manufacture pretty well.

I got some doubts about it. And not only your case made me think so

When I tried to get date of making for an old Sauer hammer double I have, I was given a wide range of dates from various folks. Finally decided to use date given by old German living in Sweden -- at least he could provide me techinical informations about that gun, even a picture. Hope to learn more from documents provided by Geno.

Niklas

I think some of the serial numbers can be read in the catalog pictures. That is probably part of the rocket science that goes into figuring out dates of manufacture. Maybe Geno and Niklas should read some of Jeff's articles before they flame him.

Easy, eightbore. I think the confusion stems from the time of serialization to the finishing date. By 1890 the hankering for a 10 bore had wained/abated and by 1895, or the mid 1890s, for the most part they were all but a distant memory. True there are exceptions and someone may have ordered a 10 bore in 1907 and they had some tubes in stock. Does yours have 2 sets of "Eagle" "Crown" over "S" or any marks to suggest an earlier time frame?

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

Eightbore...the Sauer boxlock ten gauge doubles are not common and they are not listed in any of the catalogs that I have access to. I only know of a handfull boxlocks made in the big 10 bore.

I knew there was a reason I stopped by tonight. Lets go Geno...I will bite. Your note is clear and is intended to cast doubt with the group that frequents this board about my Sauer research and published articles. Do you have documentaion to refute the published material or just your opinion? (So far all I ever see is opinion) Please provide the basis for your "opinion" and the material or research that conclusively (and in every case) shows the published Sauer table is incorrect. I have been waiting for someone (anyone) to show that it is wrong but so far no one has. Jeff Stephens

Jeff, the friend of mine had hammer Sauer 20g and his uncle bought this Sauer in 1912 (don't remember exactly now) from factory and through the dealer. I remember I asked this question here when Sauer made according s/n and people say following your article gun made 2 years later, than this gun been sold.
Sorry, I didn't read your article, but let me ask one question, do you have any official Sauer' data or records or this list of dates is just your thoughts and calculations?

First, I'd like to see a pic of eightbore's boxlock 10 bore or some frame measurements to see if the frame dimensions are of a larger scale than the 12 bore, model 8, 14, or whatever it is. Some ground truth for the "discussion" is that in 2004 Mr. Jim Cate notes in his book that Sauer hammer drilling #118,735 was invoiced on September 21st, 1905 and that the serial number, price and description are on the invoice. Also, true Sauer A&D boxlocks look to be of post 1902 manufacture(someone feel free to correct me.)

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

I'm relieved that Jeff Stephens checked in to comment. Personally, I would rather rely on a serious researcher than to contact "an old German living in Sweden" (Niklas' words) when I have a question about a Sauer. My little 10 is a 1905 (not 1907 as I mistakenly posted) gun in the 118,000 series. It is a tight choked light duck gun, 26" Krupp barrels, total weight of gun six pounds, four ounces, yes 6 1/4 pounds, with very acceptable wall thickness. It is all original with ten gauge proofs. By the way, I have a frind who also was in possession of a heavier, also modern Sauer boxlock ten, but have lost track of it. I am surprised that my friend Geno is not familiar with the research of JS. Geno, is DGJ available in Russia at a reasonable price?

eightbore,

That "old German living in Sweden" just happens to be perhaps the most knowledgable in Sweden about old Sauer guns. Also, ALL the folks, him included, that provided information about date of making of my old Sauer had same cautionary statement to effect that remaining records are incomplete, even contradictory. Should Jeff Stephens have gotten everything straightened out, then, congrats are in order. However, given situation in Germany after WW2, and apparently even much earlier, I will reserve judgement till I learn of consensus amoung leading Sauer students.

Niklas