It has had a rough history and I am disappointed by the damaged hammer in particular. From what I could tell there were plenty made that were even plainer than this one was. But at the same time, there were several models much more ornately decorated than this one. But I also did not have the best information, so I may well be wrong. But much of the detail is faded on this one.
As for wall thickness, chamber length etc. I took it to Rehfisch in Ballarat who confirmed it is 2 3/4 chamber length and the flats do have the choking and maximum load marked on them (do not remember it off the top of my head). It is on face, there is still (just barely) room between the barrel flats and the action so it just needs the bight tightened a little and it should be fine in that regards. But help with checking the wall thickness would be appreciated. Do you know if the gunsmith that Rehfisch uses is any good with antiques?
I am more interested in firearms for their individual history than overall significance if that makes sense? So I quite like this one just because in its own way, what makes it rough and ugly also makes it interesting. Plus I am sometimes disappointed when a firearm is in particularly great condition because to me, it feel in some way like it never got to live a full life. I mean, if a firearm isn't being fired, it isn't really fulfilling its purpose.
One day I would like a more ornate collection in better condition. However this one I would like to do some minor restoration, look after it but have it as an interesting piece that I am happy to still use for clays and maybe foxing.
