|
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
|
|
|
|
3 members (KDGJ, Lloyd3, SKB),
804
guests, and
3
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics39,501
Posts562,128
Members14,587
| |
Most Online9,918
Jul 28th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,185 Likes: 67
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,185 Likes: 67 |
Looks a bit more than low end, perhaps the middle of the pack? This particular gun is from 1881.  
My problem lies in reconciling my gross habits with my net income.
- Errol Flynn
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 171 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 171 Likes: 1 |
Graham Greener refers to- The Trap Gun- as inexpensive,10- guinea.His book also shows a 9-guinea gun (no engraving).I have a Trap Gun from 1887,they look identical,and it does not appear that the workmanship was skimped on.
I found mine in it's original case with the owners name,John G.W. Dunn ,(the son of a wealthy Philly Banker)engraved on the name plate.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,815 Likes: 4
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,815 Likes: 4 |
I HAVE ONE AND LOVE IT. MINE IS SERIAL 23024. MINE WAS IMPORTED IN 1881 THIS WAS DURING THE EXCITEMENT BOGATUS-KIMBLE TRAP SHOOTING ERA.
IS THIS ONE IN THE PICTURE FOR SALE?.
Last edited by Stallones; 04/05/10 09:34 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,672 Likes: 4
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,672 Likes: 4 |
I didn't think A & F started until the early 1900's.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,815 Likes: 4
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,815 Likes: 4 |
You are right, They started in 1892. I was told that a large NY dealer imported the guns and somehow misinterpreted that it was A&F.
'Is that gun for sale?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,593 Likes: 101
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,593 Likes: 101 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,164 Likes: 11
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,164 Likes: 11 |
I have a copy of W.W. Greeners book,"Modern Shot Guns,"
[ A special Canadian edition] published in 1888. This book contains an advertisement for the W.W.Greener "Trap" Gun. The add states that;"It is a new and improved model of this most popular gun.Designed specially to the requirements of American Sportsmen,and,in addition to the usual improvements formed on modern complete guns,has Treble Grip from the Top Lever,and is well and tastily finished and elegantly engraved.
The shooting of each gun is guranteed."
Price is given as 10 pounds 10 shillings for a 12 bore.
Your gun is the same as the illustration accompanying the add.
Price comparisons from the same book are as follows:
First quality hammer gun in 12 bore, 25 pounds .
Best Quality hammerless ejector in 12 bore 52 pounds 10 shillings.
Roy Hebbes
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,815 Likes: 4
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,815 Likes: 4 |
Correcting the earlier posting. I have two Greener"Trap Guns" one serial 23024 and 23405. Lets compare our serial numbers and see how close they are. [img:left]  [/img]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,185 Likes: 67
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,185 Likes: 67 |
The gun I pictured is 23866 but has issues I described in another thread, namely having been honed out of proof, from an original 13 bore to .737 &.744. If I get it will depend on price.
My problem lies in reconciling my gross habits with my net income.
- Errol Flynn
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 8
Boxlock
|
|
Boxlock
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 8 |
Surely 'proof' is a relative thing with these old guns.
At that time nitro proof was voluntary anyway.
That gun may be .744 in one barrel, but it may have left the factory at .728" as 13/1. The absolute essential number is the WALL thickness.
This thing about proof started on this BBS back in the late 90's and it always fails to make me see what relevance it has in the USA, as long as the wall thickness is suffienct to be considered safe. For example: the barrel with .737" bore measurement is hardly a concern, assuming it left the factory with .032 -.037 narrowest wall thickness, and it was just under .729, say ..727", there is still easily enough wall there..its all relative...its all about the wall thickness, not the bore diameter.
|
|
|
|
|
