doublegunshop.com - home Forums Thread Like Summary - Nitro Proof Damascus 2-1/2 inch

I have a Westley Richards Gold Name with nitro proofed Damascus barrels. The bore dimensions are marked 12 over1 and the bores both measure .739. Am I correct that 12 over 1 is .729 + .010 for a total of .739? The bore are bright and shiny. Is there any reason I should not use RST, Gamebore and B&P 2.5 inch ammo in the gun? How about Winchester 2-3/4" extra light?

BS!

I have a Joseph Lang non-rebounding hammer gun completed March 6, 1866 and rebarreled in Damascus by James Woodward around 1872.

I've shot over 6,000 of my reloads and RST cartridges in it since I've owned this gun with no damage to wood or metal and have made no repairs. And I will continue to shoot it in the future and fully expect to leave it in shooting condition to my grandson or granddaughter, whoever wants it the most.

Well made old guns will stand up to multiple human lifetimes of shooting, provided the gun is not abused by an idiot.

Drew;


I went back and edited my wording above to say that the original OVERBORE work from 13/1 was likely done in the mid-1920s according to the unreadable Birmingham viewers mark----Which is what I meant to write. Your complete analysis of the life of the barrels by viewing the proof marks is correct.

I much appreciate all the technical input. The other comments...not so much.

In viewing the proof marks on the barrel flat photo you supplied, I see the Birmingham viewers mark with the letter "E" on the left of the crossed sceptres indicating that this gun was re-proofed in the year 1954. There are other marks associated with this re-proof such as 2 1/2" and the 12 inside the angle pointed square. The 2 1/2 inch and the 1 1/8 oz marks leads me to believe the gun was reproofed early in 1954.

If you wish to be ruled by fear, so be it. Life will always have risks. My personal rule-of-thumb is 20-thousands and up is "safe" for modern shells provided the tubes are in good shape (no deep pits, no bad dents). However, IMHO the real risk of "modern" ammunition in old guns is the shock back through the head of the stock. 100-plus year old wood is unpredictable at best. If screws are turning and gaps are appearing then re-evaluate your use.

Go hunting. You’re good.

Best,
Ted

Yes, chambers are still 2-1/2". I will only use RST and B&P 2-1/2" factory ammo until I find a reliable low pressure handload.

Thanks Drew. Maybe it was a hit and miss thing with some of the marking. I know I had emailed the Birmingham Proof Master a few years back asking him about when the date mark stamping started re: post 1921, he said "in theory" the date marks were used starting in 1921. To me that meant maybe they were hit and miss until the new 1925-1954 Rules.

This is one of my other threads showing barrel flats 1904-1925 without the Max, Shot, Ounces, etc. Barrel Flat Markings

My understanding from the above UK Proof website link is that for Nitro Proof marking between 1896-1904, Max, Shot and Grains or combinations thereof were used. Between 1904-1925 only the load designation mark was used, ie: 1 1/8 or 1 1/4; Max, Shot or Grains were not used. Between 1925-1954 the load designation and ounce mark were used.

________
TC

This is from Dig's chart that you linked



The Supplementary Nitro Proof Revision of 1904 is here from The Gun and Its Development, 1907
http://books.google.com/books?id=3HMCAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA280
p. 291 mentions the 1896 Rules "Maximum" mark, and p. 292 shows the MAXm. powder grains and shot mark. I don't know when that was discontinued and only the "oz. Shot mark" was stamped.

https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/rules-of-proof-5-london-

This is an 1896 Lancaster marked “E.C.” (No. 1) 42 grains = 3 Dram with MAXm. SHOT 1 1/8 oz.



A Tolley 1896-1904 1 1/4 oz MAXm but not the grains



1904-1925 London Proof - no oz. SHOT
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/rules-of-proof-6-london-
1904-1925 Birmingham reproof - no oz. SHOT
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/rules-of-proof-8-re-proof-