doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com 1890 John Ross Ejector patent “19395”

Is anyone here familiar with this type ejector mechanism? Looks to be an odd mix of a Deeley box and southgate system. Any known issues-quirks-etc with this type system?

https://patents.google.com/patent/US491270A/en

Looks like something cogswell and Harrison would use

Dustin,
Perhaps reach out to “gunman”, I’d bet he knows it off the top of his head. The only guess I’d have is a variation of the more well known “box” ejector systems.

Was a Perks box system somewhat similar? Sorry, when I have a question about English stuff, I ask you, usually.

Best,
Ted

What’s that supposed to mean?

Hey Ted. I’ve got some inquiries out to some really knowledgeable guys in the trade. So far….Bupkis.
This is not like a Perkes. Perkes uses very complex (aka nightmaresish) springs of varying design.

This system is somewhat complex, the “wings” you see are the “rotary sears”. A friend who looked at the system, says it reminds him of an LC Smith action cocking system. I can see the resemblance. It’s obviously very well made and took real mechanical ability to even come up with the idea, let alone make the damn thing. From my reading up on John Ross, he was a worker in the trade, and highly regarded. He possibly even did action work at a few of the big London names. I’ve seen some guns bearing his name while doing some research and they all seem to be of very high quality.
Charles Osborne, prolific maker to the trade must’ve like his system, I’ve seen a few guns that use this unique ejector work while I’ve been researching the system.
I can say It still throws empty cases with authority after 110+ years with no sign of being repaired. I guess that’s a win even if Cogswell & Harrison made it, which they didn’t.

A friend has a John Ross marked sle. It is of the quality in fit and finish equal to my Purdey. Some time ago I tried to search about John Ross, and possibly I remember that there were two gun fellows with that name.







From Internet Gun Club======
In 1890 he registered three patents Nos. 1955, 14886 and 19395. The first patent covered an ejector mechanism which was cocked when the gun was opened. A T shaped lever positioned on its side in the fore-end and pivoted transversely had a friction reducing roller on its downward leg which rode over a cam on the knuckle. This raised the forward limb which engaged with and compressed the ejector spring. The third limb was the extractor cam. No know examples exist. Both patents detailed two ejector mechanisms and a number of tripping mechanisms.

Good info Daryl. Thank you.

Cogswell and Harrison had a unique ejectors system of I am remembering correctly

Yes, they did. The Avant Tout box. This is nothing like that.

Yes it's much more complex with a lot of parts at the time the Southgate and deeley ejectors were available Southgate with a spring and tumbler deeley with six or so parts good luck on your quest for information

Thanks for the thought . I will admit I do not know who's patent this is ,had it in my mind that it was Perkes but never had that confirmed .
Seen a few of these and some variants ,as a lot of designs were basically improvements , simplifications or combinations of other designs as a a way of getting round patents .
Like so many functional ejector systems they all ( house style not considered such as Cogswell's or Boss ) were surpassed by Southgate /Holland , Deeley box and Baker , probobly for there simplicity or availability in the case of Deeley box's which could be bought in complete

I did send you a PM regarding this system. Thanks for responding here, though. It’s much appreciated. You’re definitely not the only full time (retired or not retired) gunsmith who’s not familiar with this system. Osborne, being a fairly prolific maker to the trade, I would’ve thought more gun workers would be somewhat more familiar with this system. It must not have been used for very long at all.

Dustin

So is this ejectors so complex because it is an assisted opener?it's a shame so much information is gone about the English trade I tried doing research on some mfg.of English guns and just hit a dead end good luck.mark

My hunch is simpler mechanisms were adopted because of ease of manufacture, simplicity and reliability . Like mentioned earlier, the Deeley box, southgate, bakers etc are much simpler to manufacture than this system or even a Perkes.

This system (The Ross) uses 4 total springs (two big V springs and 2 flat springs), and also has the complex rotary sears. The rotary sears themselves look like a real chore to manufacture and fit up. In addition to this system are two blades that are connected to the tumblers in the action that trip & cock the rotary sears. Whew.

The Osborne gun is not an assisted opener. This ejector system provides no means of mechanical assisted opening that I can see.

Dustin