Sam Shiller, the confidant and agent for Cyril Adams, sent this advertisement for a 4 bore SxS under-lever Reilly shotgun SN 15625 (dated per my chart to 1869). This is George L's shotgun from this board advertised a few years ago at $50K! And this gun is almost unique. It was originally a pin-fire converted to center fire:
https://www.invaluable.com/auction-...bore-sxs-double-rifle-in-292-c-045433c87


The starting bid price is $4K, almost unbelievable.

Here is the DGS line about the gun:
https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=550059

And here is the 2009 thread when George L. bought it...look at the West Tennessee guy's insulting comments at the time - he was a jerk then, he was wrong then, oh well....no change.
https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=181400&page=1

I'm wondering about George's health. Haven't heard from him for awhile...he was selling off his collection a couple of years ago after the death of his daughter.

George never wanted to sell it at the time. I recall he had 7-8,000 in it after the restoration. The estimated value is 8-12,000. His 50,000 I think was as much a joke to himself as to many others. There was a lot of discussion about what it started out as and if it was safe to shoot. Always a subjective and personal thing to me. Hope it does well. It was well worth restoring from its sad state.

Bad link....

I think you should buy it...

https://www.invaluable.com/auction-...ore-sxs-double-rifle-in-292-c-045433c875

And, no I won't bid on or try to shoot that monster. I value my reconstructed right shoulder.

It's interesting that it is advertised as a rifle. George L. was very clear in the initial line that it was a shotgun and always was a shotgun.
https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=181400&page=11
Destry: My Reilly began life as a shotgun not a rifle, according to Jim Kelly the gunsmith who restored it. The chamber walls are over 3/16 inch thick (I wouldn't call that "super thin" by any stretch of the imagination)Do I detect a bit of envy here?

jOe was a jerk, and wrong then Argo44??? I read the thread, and his comments, and it appears jOe was the first to accurately question the originality and the present configuration of the gun. The consensus among those knowledgeable about these things is that it wasn't likely that this gun started life as a 12 lb 4 oz 4 bore shotgun. jOe also was the first to note the original looking stalking safeties, which would be very unusual on a wildfowl gun. Other knowledgeable folks seemed to agree with him and his observations. Even MarketHunter agreed with him, and they never saw eye to eye on much.

To this day I don't know why old George never provided a picture of the proof marks or at the very least described them. That in and of itself speaks volumes.

I tried to ask the auction a question about the proof marks. The auction house doesn't seem to allow questions on this item. However, from blow-up of the water table, the one I can make out is a crown over "V" looks like standard London proof mark for the era.

And the gun is definitely a shotgun, not a rifle as advertised.


Going through the original line, George L. said he bought the gun for around $5000 and spent $2500 in restoration. He was questioned repeatedly on the weight...as I recall he finally weighed it - 29 lbs. You don't see these...There was one offered a couple of years ago without engraving for $45,000...see the Reilly line where I pictured all known Reilly 4 bores. Frederic Selous did write in the late 1800's that after firing a 4 bore in Africa, he developed a firing flinch that he had great difficulty getting rid of.

I haven't heard from George for quite awhile. He had a tendency to ask the same question several times and I notice his business is for sale. I think the death of his daughter hit him hard. Parents should leave this earth before their off-spring. He posted here a couple of years ago about selling off his collection. But,I have a feeling that this Reilly was one of the last guns he would part with. Raimey tells me is is now quite deaf.
https://doublegunshop.com/forums/ub...;Main=41282&Number=506740#Post506740

..

Built as a smoothbore stopping gun for ball likely?

Gene, George was hard of hearing many years ago when I first met him at a Charlotte Hall gun auction in Columbia, SC. Even more so a few years later at the Southern Fall Classic at Georgetown, SC. Many years have passed since, yet George struggles on it seems. Life is not always kind to us in our autumn years. My best wishes to him.

The Reilly is a puzzlement with it's thin chamber walls and safeties.

Stan

Thanks for bringing that thread back up Gene. Too bad Destry no longer posts here, it was always enjoyable reading about his Waterfowling experiences, he does post on several fb groups I am in.

Yes it is. That is why a simple photo of the barrel flats would have saved over a dozen pages of nasty back and forth a decade ago.

Shotgun or dangerous game gun? I lean towards shotgun just as Jim Kelly, the gunsmith who worked on the gun, concluded. The 36" barrels seem to tilt towards that conclusion. The Reilly dangerous game guns both rifle and percussion smooth bore seem to have the 26" or shorter barrels. (I will add that normally a Reilly gun with a pistol grip was originally a rifle. There are very few exceptions to this conclusion after looking at 600 Reilly's - and all of he exceptions are 8 bore or larger wild-fowlers).

EDIT: I have just gone over photos of 600 existing Reilly's from 1829 to 1912 and looked at all of the guns 10 bore or larger. In reviewing the photos, there is not a single certain instance of a Reilly shotgun of any bore using a pistol grip or a trigger guard extension which aped a pistol grip. There are about 6 large bore Reilly shotguns with pistol grips...I suspect all of them to have been originally rifles.

Here are the extant Reilly 4 bores and 6 bores in my database (in addition to George L's gun); Invaluable Auctions will simply not let me ask a question - a pity:

SN 18860 - 1874
http://jamesdjulia.com/item/1363-396/
4 bore, U-L hammer gun, wild-fowler shotgun. 42"? barrels. 18 lbs 12 oz (Note the Safety)


SN 15964 - 1869
https://www.gunsinternational.com/g...m-quality-condition.cfm?gun_id=101245285
4 bore, Back-Action U-L hammer-gun, express rifle; 26" barrels, 18 lbs 10 oz.


SN 4573 - 1842? (JC - Outlier SN)
https://www.rockislandauction.com/detail/76/400/engraved-jc-reilly-percussion-sporting-gun
6 bore percussion dangerous game gun (Owned by Terry Buffum)


SN 84xx - 1847
http://www.simpsonltd.com/product_info.php?products_id=42593
6 bore, percussion smooth-bore with 26" barrels.


SN 8578 - 1848
https://auctions.holtsauctioneers.c...320++++509+&refno=148046&image=0
6 bore percussion single-barrel wild fowler, 42" barrels


SN 7802 - 1853 - JC "7000" number series
http://промкаталог.рф/PublicDocuments/0523722.pdf
6 bore percussion wild-fowler - 42" barrels


SN 10315 - 1857
https://www.proxibid.com/aspr/REILLY-LONDON/22392022/LotDetail.asp?lid=22392022
Percussion single barrel 6 bore wild fowler - 38" barrel


SN 11937 - 1861
https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/14918/lot/52/
4 bore, center break U-L, hammer-gun (converted pin-fire) wild-fowler, 39" barrels; 15 lbs, 2 oz


Dave getting kicked and back-blasted by an 8 bore Reilly Rifle (note pistol grip - 26" barrel). (Note: Eyes closed? Hair flying. Is that pain? )

I went directly to Charlton Hall Auctions rather than the world-wide information site Invaluable. I've posted a question about the water-table and barrel-flats, barrel proofmarks. We'll see what comes of this. I'm as curious in an academic sense as everyone.
https://www.charltonhallauctions.com/auction-lot/-045433C875

I requested more condition photos from CharltonHallAuction and they were very responsive. Photos of barrel flats, barrel proof marks, water table are now on the site. I looks to have 1855-1875 standard London proof marks. The bore is "7" indicating it has been bored out to "4". It could have been a 6 bore rifle bored out to a 4 bore shotgun. If so, it was not reproofed and the chamber was lengthened from 2 1/2" to 4". With the pistol grip stock, that's what I think. Defer to the experts.








As noted from the beginning pitting on the barrel flats and around the face of the bore. Barrels and water table look good. It looks shootable. The engraving and exterior condition of the gun looks good.

Come on fellows.- everyone who talked about the gun on the original line who had opinions:

I judge it to have been a 6 bore rifle rebored to a 4 bore shotgun, chambers lengthened from 2 1/2" to 4" but not reproofed. Everybody has cogitated about lack of proof mark photos. etc. All sorts of opinions have been offered including some contentious ones.

So now it's all revealed and....and...crickets. How about some opinions about whether this is in the ball park. The reboring doesn't matter...lots of rifles were so converted. It's still unique.

Not too many options other than that.I note that the auctioneers description says `no back sight`,does this indicate that there is provision on the barrels for one?? That would confirm the rifle theory.

It it was likely originally a 8 bore brass case gun chambered for at least a 3&1/8" cartridge. None of my books show an example of a 6 bore cartridge gun. It may very well have been a smooth bore ball gun, the 36" tubes would be very long for a rifle. The bolted safeties look original to the gun.

Do we know the actual weight of the rifle? I believe 29 pnds is incorrect.

Steve

I've asked the auction for the weight of 15625.
-- 15964 - the 4 bore rifle with 26" barrels weighs 18 lbs 1 oz
-- 18860 - the 4 bore wildfowler with 42" barrels weighs 18 lbs 12 oz - it has original stalking safeties

Donald Dallas tells me (posted above) that he has never seen a UK cartridge longer that 2 1/2" in the 19th century.

If it were bored out, I'd bet it was done in the USA long ago, probably the reason for no reproof marks. Note the $260.00 hand written on the label.

Bill Flemming "British Sporting Rifle Cardtridges A Summary of case types, Headstamps, Bullets, and Charge Variations" 1993 Armory publications



I have an original 8 bore Eley gastight cartridge in my collection and it measure 3&1/8" with the roll crimp in place.

Interesting. I may forward this to Donald.

I George still with us?

I assume he is. His last post here is April 2018. His company is for sale. His guns are being dispersed.

But the advertisement for the 4 bore Reilly mentions "being sold for a Southern Gentleman"...and there is no obituary in South Carolina for him. Raimey has his phone number and talked to him last year. But it's difficult..he can't hear. We will all go down this road and hope he is ok and doing the best he can.

Charleton Hall Auction reports the gun weighs 11 lbs, 8.6 ounces. This lets out its having been at one time a rifle I believe. All the Reilly rifles I have recorded have barrel length under 28." It also seems light for a big bore rifle (see the weight of 15963 made almost at the same time as this gun, which weighs 18 lbs 10 oz).

I went through my database looking at 8 and 10 bore Reilly's and unfortunately almost none of the advertisements recorded their weights. 8 bores seem to range (from limited data) from 9 lbs to 16 lbs. 10 bores from 7.5 lbs to 10 lbs. There are a couple of Reilly owners where who own Reilly 8 bores who might provide the weights of their guns.
-- 12bore owns 14983, the first extant Reilly gun with 2 rue Scribe, Paris
-- GaryD007 owns 30295

I can't contribute any more than this. There are collectors here who own big bore 19th UK shotguns who can opine more on the subject. Still it's an unusual gun.

Here is the Reilly gun in my database which most closely resembles the specs for 15625's - 18688, 8 bore SxS shotgun, 36" barrels, pistol grip stock (no weight mentioned)(and with that pistol grip, it might have had a 2nd matching rifle barrel to go with the shotgun barrel).
https://www.rockislandauction.com/detail/76/3417/em-reilly-co-double-barrel-shotgun
SN 18688, 8 Bore SxS Shotgun, Reilly & Co., Edward M. 36 in solid rib.


But 15625 looks more robust (15625 was originally a pin-fire, now converted to center-fire) so I'm wondering if 15625 also had a separate matching rifle barrel)...there are a couple of extant Reillys with a pistol grip stock but with both rifle and shotgun barrels:


Hummm another one...15255, 10 bore SxS pin-fire shotgun....no weight mentioned but with pistol grip.
http://silverhawkauthor.com/small-a...shotguns_610.html?printable_version=true

Gene, have you ever found a consistent reason why some Reilly underlevers have a ring-tip, and some don’t? Was there a difference between Reilly-numbered guns and guns sold by Reilly?

Steve, it's one of those details I've never really looked at. I have this database....a lot of the sites are no longer available and I find I didn't copy out important data or keep important photos. But this is for sure....Reilly only serial number guns he built, and they all had London proofs (originally).

I have a database of about 30 guns that have EM Reilly on the ribs but no SN. I'll go through them and see if any pattern turns up. But for now, I can't explain why some U-L had ring-tips and some not. Reilly made what would sell and it seems to have changed weekly - monthly.

Edit: Scrolling through the under trigger guard Under-Lever Reillys from 1859 to 1883....I can find no pattern for ring under-levers or solid filled-in under-levers. Solid started out being standard (Lefaucheux style)...ring U-L predominated in the 1860's-70's (but there were always the solid rings mixed in).. mid 70's solid rings took over but always there were open rings. On the pin-fire line, I'll post what I've got in a collage.

I gotta weigh in here.
Last year I purchased a double rifle on GB that had made a circuitous route from an original introductory post on this here website back in 2010 by George L. As with another double rifle he owned and tried to sell two years ago, very little of what was claimed about the double rifle I bought could be verified. For example, I contacted the Jim Kelly gunsmith claimed to have restored the double rifle I ended up with. Mr Kelly said to me on the phone they had no record of that gun and he himself could not recall having worked on it. I could go on and on about this gun and the other, but the lesson I learned was that some people make big claims in the hope that it’s too big to question. This same person also placed outlandish values on his other guns, all of which sold at auction (Charlton Hall) for multiples less than what he said they were worth. He did not like to answer questions or to provide basic facts, such as photos of proofs etc. And the guy who ended up buying the other rifle returned it because it was not as advertised.
Some people just live on the edge, and they always have a story to tell that just disarms prospective buyers and gives some sort of cover for why questions are never answered.
Buyer beware.

$75000

Proof photos are posted at Charlton Hall.
https://www.charltonhallauctions.co...ly-4-Bore-SxS-Double-Rifle-i_045433C875/
Shows provisional and final London marks, at 7 tons, which would be shot-and-ball range. That would explain the stalking safeties. Current price is $4,000. Expected range on auction site is $8,000-$12,000.
Buyer beware

7 bore diameter in this period of time, these proofs pre-date ton markings.

Is it a 4-bore or a 7-bore?

The gun I believe was originally an 8 bore brass case gun which was proofed at 7 bore(not at all uncommon), then later in life reamed to a 4 bore.

As I speculated, the rebore might have been done here in the USA which may be why there are no reproof marks. In fact the gun may have come over here in the 19th century. There is $260.00 hand-written on the label. $260 would be about £54 in 1900...about 49 Guineas. Reilly advertised top end shotguns about this time period for 40-50 guineas.

And this manhandled antique frankengun is supposedly worth $75,000?

Argo, what is your thinking on the inherent safety of an 8-bore rifle being bored-out to literally twice the bore size, a 4-bore? All that metal being removed? Given that the barrels were originally struck for the 8 bore, do you think that after significant thinning they would then be safe for something so much more powerful than the original load? I mean, wouldn't a re-proof be a worthy and logical investment before assuming this gun is safe to fire? Having a chamber burst in your face from a 4-bore load is guaranteed facial destruction, if not death, lingering or instant.

How this once-wonderful gun got so badly butchered and then hyped for sale is a mystery. But part of the answer is its seller, who seemed to have an awful lot of heretofore incredible antique firearms that had suffered some major indignity, only to be discovered late in the auction process or afterwards. It may be simple ignorance and nothing more than that. But the unwillingness to answer questions or provide photos of critical areas demonstrates a desire to hide facts until a sale has been consummated.
Buyer beware.

Pm...George L never would answer the questions straight. But the auction house will to the best of their ability. I wrote to them and they immediately put up pictures of the water table, barrels, proof marks, barrel flats, chambers, etc. I subsequently wrote to them and asked about the weight.

The gun rests with Charlton House. It would be nice for somebody to arrange to have an expert go over the gun. But it's up for auction tomorrow. I should have thought of that. (I don't think George is in the picture any longer - and the barrels were bored out long before George got the gun; Can't blame him for that, even though he has dissembled a lot about the gun).

In any event, I'm not in the market for anything larger than a 12 bore. As I said I value my reconstructed shoulder. However, historical curiosity remains. We all thought this might be an original center-break SxS Reilly 4 bore. Outside of this gun, there are only three in existence, that I know of, 1 SxS wildfowler, 1 SxS rifle, and 1 single barrel wild-fowler. So, it was curiosity that led me to post this. If anyone knows an expert in South Carolina who can go over to the auction and take a look at the gun, it would be a boon.

Argo,
excellent answer, thanks. One thing that comes to mind is this Jim Kelly of Darlington Gun Works, who is said to have worked on this gun. Wouldn't a gunsmith of Jim Kelly's experience, standing, heck, just plain old honed sense of self-preservation in the face of potential liability like this, make some sort of statement about the shootability and safety of a bored-out gun like this? On literally every rifle that I have seen come out of this collection there is some lingering question, some bigger issue. Not about Did Mabel put that scratch in the barrel, or did JimBob, but Is this gun safe to shoot? Or Why is this critical aspect altered?
I am not trying to be a d#&k here. My experience with the collection this gun comes out of over several years taught me some lessons, and I would be very unhappy if someone on this chatboard with the best of intentions bought this thing, fired it, and was maimed or killed. Or discovered that their investment is very poorly placed.
I will end by saying that we don't know who bored this out. A hundred years ago who would have bored it out, a market hunter seeking a bigger punt gun? Possibly. It is hard to say. But I would firmly say that it is very unusual to see fine, rare foreign guns like this be so badly altered in their own time, when their worth and value were known. It probably wasn't until much later that some enterprising person said "We need to go hunting elephants in Upstate New York, and a four bore is much better than an eight bore." And "a four bore is worth a lot more than an eight bore." Somehow the seller arrived at his own wacky $75,000 price tag for this gun, so he knew something about its rarity. He had something vested in its rarity. Somehow noted gunsmith Jim Kelly missed the constellation of safety questions orbiting this big ol thing when he supposedly worked on it.
OK, PA over and out on this subject. Good luck to whoever purchases this thing.

This shows why our Proof laws exist!!! That gun would be unsaleable and so it should be.

I know Jim Kelly well. There is no reason to think he "missed" anything concerning the safety of this gun. He certainly has the expertise to know safe from unsafe. I can think of reasons why Jim's expertise in these matters was not brought to light, but will keep them to myself. He is an honorable man with impeccable character, as evidenced by the way he told the owner of Bo Whoop what he had, when the owner had no clue about the provenance or potential value of the gun. He could have made a very attractive offer to the buyer for it, bought it, and resold it for a fortune himself.

The bigger question is, how do you know Jim didn't tell George of the potential danger of the thin chamber walls?

Ahh, really? Red flags went up the moment this gun was posted here over 10 years ago. The information regarding the proofs that was FINALLY provided proves what most of us suspected then.

Flint, I should have said, "I 'hoped' this might be an original center-break SxS Reilly 4 bore." So my bad. At least I got the truth out of the auction house to make up for it.

I wasn't around 10 years ago. When I first began compiling the list of extant Reilly's, 15625 at the time was the earliest serial number with 2 rue Scribe on it. It was originally a pin-fire. So I did read the line in December 2015. I should have paid more attention but at the time did not know the players here. Also, the dialog was so contentious that really I just abandoned reading it after I got the details of the gun. I always wondered, though, why it was so difficult for George L. to post the weight of a gun.

Stanton- I spoke with Jim Kelly and another person working in his shop last year, and he / they had no record and no recollection of another gun that came from this same collection said to have been worked on by Jim Kelly. I wrote about this above.
If a gunsmith noted the thin barrels and chambers to the owner, and that warning was not conveyed with the gun, then there are all kinds of ethical and professional issues swirling about here. This all seems obvious.

Looking more closely at the online photos of this gun, the extractor and surrounding metal is heavily pitted. Yet the chambers and bores are like new. This points to a very recent re-bore, probably because the original 8-bore bores looked like the extractor, all pitted. Which made the gun a lot less attractive. None of this is disclosed or even hinted at in the auction description. Buyer beware. What a lesson

Ten years later and this gun still generates a lot of “discussion “. Jim Kelly was given a task of repairing or stabilization on a gun with rather major condition problems. If it were a common 12 bore, of any maker, I suspect he would have declined the job. He did a good job of making the gun presentable. It is a interesting gun. It would be so even as a 8 bore. History should not be lost just because it got damaged by use or neglect but should be enjoyed. I’d love to own that gun just for display purposes. I am not shooting it and for that matter what game could I shoot it at today. Maybe a turkey in a few states. Overkill for that or any other clay target.

I doubt George every had any serious interest in shooting it with anything greater than blanks. His selling price was a pie in the sky, attention getting, price as far as I was concerned. I think it was removed from sale listing because George knew the price was not ever going to be made and close inspection would diminish this gun interest because it was a much altered gun in rough condition.

In some ways this gun reminds me of a Lefever Optimus that surfaced about a decade ago. It was thought to be a true basket case. One buyer took a chance and bought it. After more than a bit of work it was brought back to acceptable condition for light use. And as he pointed out he owned a shootable Optimus while most wanting one will never get the chance own either one for display or to shoot. It was a nice looking gun, in better display condition than this.

As to what Jim said about it, we can’t know but I am certain he did not say shoot it with full loads because it is as good as new. I would expect him to remember this gun but he might not want to discuss what he said to the owner because that conversation was between them and not the entire world. Some here are thinking a condition report once given should be free for the entire world to see. Does not work that way. You pay Diggory for one you think the next person asking him will be told ask Jon or be given it for free? Information has value.

Every gun like this that has a condition report is sold with the report. Unless the report contains information damaging to the seller’s goal of moving something inferior under cover of deception or darkness.
If people here know Jim Kelly so well, they should call him up and report back here.
My bet is this is not a good shootable gun, no more than a wall hanger, and yet it is being hawked right now as a “rare 4-bore,” which it ain’t. It started life as either a 7 or 8 bore, and was rebored in recent years to eliminate a pitted bore and possibly to make it an even more rare bore size. Without any disclosure now. Nothing “oh golly, guess I missed that” going on here.
“C’mon, man.”
This kind of deception should not be facilitated or covered up.

For history sake and for future of the gun with whomever buys it, someone here should call Jim Kelly. And it would be nice if one of the S.C. members could go over the Charlton and take a closer look at the gun. I'm sure the auction house will respond quickly to whatever request is made of them. It's just that I didn't think of going directly to them until last week.

And it is an unusual gun. I date it now to 1869 - firmly - now 152 years old. Originally a pin-fire and probably originally an 8 bore with good engraving (SKB turned out to be dead on and I really think its closest contemporaries are the two Reilly 8 bores I pictured above). Shame it's been reamed out this way.

Any insight into the safeties on a shotgun? Normally only see them on rifles!

It was a rifle, is now a shotgun after being reamed out from 8 to 4 gauge. It sold for $7,500 a couple hours ago. I took some screen shots of the Charlton Hall page because there’s a chance the new owner will object to a description missing the crucial word “re-bored,” and the inclusion of false descriptors like “rare four-bore.” This happened two years ago with a Charles Lancaster double rifle that the same seller failed to disclose a bunch of flaws about. The happy new owner returned it to Charlton Hall for a refund in order to become happy again. Anyhow. Onward

I really don't think it was a rifle PM. I think it was an 8 bore shotgun. Barrels are too long to have been a rifle and weight is off. If it were an 8 bore rifle, weight would be up near 16 lbs.

Example: SN 22068, 8 bore Rifle sold on a French site. Barrels are on 28" chambers 3" Weight is 7.8 kilos = 17 lbs 3 oz
http://www.piasa.auction.fr/_en/lot...elephant-a-percussion-79041#.Vr0MznhQoqY
8 Bore Reilly
Carabine double pour la chasse à l'éléphant à percussion centrale par Reilly à Londres et Paris,
à deux canons en table en damas étoilé mis en couleur tabac avec large bande de visée antireflet gravée E.M. Reilly & Co New Oxford St London & Rue Scribe a Paris, avec hausse fixe et quatre feuillets gradués jusqu'à 200 mètres, épreuves de Londres sous les tonnerres, extracteur (Long. : 70 cm, cal. 8, poudre noire, chambré 80 mm, poids : 4 725 g). Platines “arrière” jaspées à chien extérieur avec sûreté bleuie au demi-cran d'armé et signées E.M. Reilly & Co. Bascule avec clé anglaise. Crosse pistolet en noyer quadrillé (Long. : 37 cm), bride de renfort, pontet bronzé noir gravé du numéro de série 22068, plaque de couche en fer, longuesse quadrillée avec embout en corne.
Long. : 114 cm - Poids : 7 800 g environ.

Here is a Reilly 4 bore wildfowler 18860, with stalking safeties. It apparently was proofed as a 6 bore and has 4" chambers which Donald Dallas says should not exist on a 19th century UK shotgun.

http://jamesdjulia.com/item/1363-396/
Morphy has disabled all previous jamesjulia info on the web unfortunately. but the description of 18860 is interesting - i.e. proofed for 6 bore black powder:
MASSIVE FOUR BORE E. M. REILLY HAMMER WATERFOWLING SHOTGUN IN HIGH ORIGINAL CONDITION.
SN 18860. Cal. 4 bore. 4” Chambers. 42” Dovetailed stub Damascus bbls are engraved “E. M. Reilly & Co Oxford Street London & Rue Scribe. Paris.” on relatively narrow concave top rib. Bottoms of bbls are stamped with London black powder proofs for 6 bore and with SNs. Large nickel-plated Jones underlever action with non-rebounding peninsula back locks have round bodied serpentine hammers and back sliding safeties. Locks have four positions; fired, 8th cock, half cock, and full cock. Safeties engage at 8th cock. Action and locks are completely unadorned except for makers name on the tail of each lock. SN is on trigger guard tang. Lightly streaked and figured European walnut straight grip buttstock measures 14-3/8” over nickel-plated buttplate, and has classic point pattern checkering with mullered borders at grip, and a vacant silver oval on toe line. Matching splinter forend has shaped steel tip, and attaches to bbls with sliding side bolt through oval escutcheons. It appears this gun was made before chokes were invented. Diameter at muzzles is .952. Drop at heel: 2”, drop at comb: 1-13/16”. Weight: 18 lbs. 12 oz. LOP: 14-3/8”. CONDITION: Excellent, very close to new. Bbls retain nearly all of their Damascus brown with only slight silvering at muzzles, and some overall flecking. All other major metal parts retain nearly all of their orig heavy nickel plating, with only a few scattered knocks and a small bit of peeling at toe of buttplate. Action and trigger guard screws retain most of their orig case hardening color. Minor pins and safeties retain most of their orig fire blue. Stocks have nearly all of their orig hand rubbed oil finish with scattered marks and scratches, checkering very lightly worn and dark. Mechanically excellent, but triggers and locks are somewhat sluggish due to congealed oil. Bores are excellent, with some light scratches. Action is tight. Waterfowlers such as this are seldom found in this condition, because they are usually heavily used in salty environments. A superb condition example like this is a great rarity. 51401-5 MGM170 (20,000-40,000)

If, that's the key word in your sentence. What you've done is make assumptions and post conjecture. You don't know if Jim commented or not to George about the shootable condition, and if he did you don't know what George's reply may have been. Again, it's all conjecture.


Why put it on somebody else? You call him, again. You're the one with your panties in a wad over it. You insinuated you were through with the thread five posts ago, but you can't leave it alone. Whatever. I could care less about this whole affair, including the Reilly. I only posted to stand up for my friend Jim Kelly. That's my only intent.

Rave on. I'm through with the matter and I assure you I won't be back.

Stan

I already spoke with Jim Kelly about one gun from this same collection, and the claims made in Jim’s name were enough for me. He disavowed them and so I’d prefer to let someone else go through that this time around. Whoever bought this gun probably will. You are not defending Jim Kelly, SH, you are saying no one should ever hold any standard you don’t approve of. Jim Kelly will do just fine without you. Especially since no one here questioned him. The gun was worked over, not disclosed, etc If this venue isn’t the place to discuss things like this, then no place is. If you are not comfortable having these conversations, then I recommend Ladies Home Journal for you. 👍

REILLY 8 BORE, NO. 25363, 28" STEEL BARRELS. WELL USED, BUT STILL TIGHT AND FUNCTIONS AS IT SHOULD. THE STORIES IT COULD TELL !!


star wars clone trooper wallpaper

Steve, already agree with you that 15625 was originally an 8-bore shotgun and have posted two Reilly's close o 15625 to that purpose.

But that gun 25363 has been in my database for a couple of years. It was serial number in mid-1883 - then repurposed from a rifle to a shotgun post 1903 and rebarreled in Birmingham.
https://www.rockislandauction.com/detail/80/288/engraved-edward-m-reilly-co-8-bore-hammer-shotgun
25363 - E.M. Reilly & Co., 295 Oxford Street, London*. 8 bore, SxS Shotgun*. U-L hammer gun., 28” steel barrels (*rebarreled/repurposed from a large bore rifle after 1903)

Now here's something I mentioned above that needs to be contemplated. There is that authentic Jules Julia sold 4 bore wild fowler above 18860. It's all original and in amazing condition...nickel plated and all for salt water - dated 1874 per my chart, 42" barrels... But it's proofed for 6 bore black powder. with 4" chambers and no reproof indicated and sold in UK. So WTF?

-- You've said there are no 6 bore cartridges from that era.
-- Donald Dallas has said he's never seen a UK cartridge for shotguns longer than 2 1/2" in the 19th century.
-- The UK guys say a 4 bore, if it were rebored, had to be reproofed.
So why the "6" on a 4 bore? Sold without a whimper by a noted UK auction house?

Something's amiss...I need to be educated.

Morphy has decided to erase all James Julia History. 18860 was here:
http://jamesdjulia.com/item/1363-396/

Fortunately I've kept the original advertisement:

MASSIVE FOUR BORE E. M. REILLY HAMMER WATERFOWLING SHOTGUN IN HIGH ORIGINAL CONDITION.
SN 18860. Cal. 4 bore. 4” Chambers. 42” Dovetailed stub Damascus bbls are engraved “E. M. Reilly & Co Oxford Street London & Rue Scribe. Paris.” on relatively narrow concave top rib. Bottoms of bbls are stamped with London black powder proofs for 6 bore and with SNs. Large nickel-plated Jones underlever action with non-rebounding peninsula back locks have round bodied serpentine hammers and back sliding safeties. Locks have four positions; fired, 8th cock, half cock, and full cock. Safeties engage at 8th cock. Action and locks are completely unadorned except for makers name on the tail of each lock. SN is on trigger guard tang. Lightly streaked and figured European walnut straight grip buttstock measures 14-3/8” over nickel-plated buttplate, and has classic point pattern checkering with mullered borders at grip, and a vacant silver oval on toe line. Matching splinter forend has shaped steel tip, and attaches to bbls with sliding side bolt through oval escutcheons. It appears this gun was made before chokes were invented. Diameter at muzzles is .952. Drop at heel: 2”, drop at comb: 1-13/16”. Weight: 18 lbs. 12 oz. LOP: 14-3/8”. CONDITION: Excellent, very close to new. Bbls retain nearly all of their Damascus brown with only slight silvering at muzzles, and some overall flecking. All other major metal parts retain nearly all of their orig heavy nickel plating, with only a few scattered knocks and a small bit of peeling at toe of buttplate. Action and trigger guard screws retain most of their orig case hardening color. Minor pins and safeties retain most of their orig fire blue. Stocks have nearly all of their orig hand rubbed oil finish with scattered marks and scratches, checkering very lightly worn and dark. Mechanically excellent, but triggers and locks are somewhat sluggish due to congealed oil. Bores are excellent, with some light scratches. Action is tight. Waterfowlers such as this are seldom found in this condition, because they are usually heavily used in salty environments. A superb condition example like this is a great rarity. 51401-5 MGM170 (20,000-40,000)

As we all know 12b barrels were often bored tight to make them shoot well at range ,so you could have 13b barrels at proof.Perhaps with larger bores this needed to be tighter to achieve the same result ie 4b tubes bored at 6b .If someone was still alive that built these things,we may have more of an insight!!!!

The case wall of a 4-bore paper case is relatively thick, perhaps twice or more than that of a paper 12 bore case.

I think you will find that, to better match the interior diameter of the case to be used, 4 bore guns built for paper cases were made with smaller bore diameters than 4 bores which were built for brass cases.

Gene,
The two gents that posted before me put up some good info. Paper cases often had smaller bore diameters than brass case guns of the same gauge. This is why the 4 bore you referred to had a 6 bore barrel. Longer cases certainly existed in the 19th century, that is why the LC inside the diamond proof mark exists, LC stands for long chamber which is anything over 2&1/2" in a 12 bore. The 3" 12 bore cartridge was used in this time frame, not for more powder or shot but more wadding. The 10 bore 2&7/8" cartridge was also being made during the 19th Century. This has been an interesting thread.
Steve

Ok, here's a 19th century shotgun shell chart (can't actually date it) showing Kynoch shells from the period but since it has pin-fires and center-fires it has to be around 1870:


Diggory just published an article on cartridges...but he doesn't mention time periods or dates" (and it is somewhat confusing...does 2 1/2" also encompass 3" pigeon loads at the time?)
English guns will have nominal chamberings of 2 1/2”, (note that the actual chamber length may be 2 5/8” or 2 7/8”), 2 3/4” or 3”. The last two normally reserve for wild-fowling guns and guns for live pigeon trap shooting.
https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/chambers-chokes-and-weights

Above Steve mentions an "LC" in a diamond indicating "long-chamber." I cannot find that symbol anywhere in 19th century proof-marks. I'm sure it must exist...but in 1869? It's not on 15625 or any of the big bore Reilly's from the 19th century. Could someone post an example please. (I am here to learn as always).

Gene

Edit: Lagopus in the pin-fire line states authoritatively that this is like from the 1882 Ely-Kynoch catalog. Well...that's pretty definitive.

If 15625 were originally an 8 bore pin-fire, and it sure looks like it was, then it likely was originally chambered for 3.25" 8-bore pin-fire shells (unless someone in the 1860's was making longer shells before Kynoch came along - which is also possible; Reilly at the time was making his own shells). Kynoch center-fire 8 bore shells were the same length as the pin-fire. Thus when converted from pin-fire to center-fire, no need for reproof?

It now has 4" chambers. Anyway, learning a lot...always a pleasure.

I would think converted to central fire during the 19th century and I am unsure of the proof rules at the time. Today that would require re-proof, back then maybe not.

"Paper case " 4 bores are only nominally a 4 gauge.These are generally stamped as a 6 bore (0.919"), although strictly speaking the" standard bore" diameter of 0.935" is closer to a 6/1. The diameter at the lower end of chamber is 1.035" - ie there is 0.100" constriction leading from chamber to bore. The wall thickness for a paper case, Eley Kynoch, is 0.045 "(... compared to 0.027" +/- for a 12 bore paper case.)

Brass case 4 bores are true 4 gauge in the barrel - 1.052" - which according to Greener will carry an equivalent load to the paper case 2 bore. Accordingly these guns will not carry the same amount of constriction from chamber to bore if they are designed for thin brass cases. I think that the smooth bore rifles used thicker walled brass cases and were likely in the 6 gauge range of dimensions.

Obviously there was much variation of bore dimensions in the four , eight and ten gauge categories -apart from chamber lengths !!

Additionally, many 8 bores and not a few 10 bores have undergone chamber "adjustments" - carried out by the trade to the request of later owners, an often ill-advised procedure.

Very interesting observations and food for thought. I now need to look at the three extant Reilly 4 bores to figure out wether they were 6 bores or truly 4 bores. I suspect the rifle....though also made in 1869 may be a true brass case 4 bore. It's also in the best shape.

I just checked the advertisements for the other two Reilly 4-bore center-break guns:

11937 -This was an original 1861 4 bore muzzle-loader single-barrel wild fowler converted to center-break, center-fire. No details, no proof marks, etc but it has 4" chambers and the buyer offered 20 Eley 4 bore cartridges to go with the gun. No telling what it was originally.

15986 - 4 bore rifle from 1869, originally a pin-fire. There is not enough details in the advertisement to separate fact from fiction from modification to alteration.

Re your query about chamber length stamps at Proof in 19thC - Greener in Modern Shot Guns 1888 refers to designation of "chambers longer than three inches" - these should be stamped with LC and gauge in a diamond. I think that he is referring to 12 bore guns here and probably not to the eight and four bores. This remark was made after his referring to the newly revised Proof Law - 0f 1887

This is a big-bore learning curve for me. Here is an non-serial-numbered 4 bore Reilly (no SN means Reilly marketed it but likely didn't make it though it has London proof marks) on Guntrader.UK - 36" barrel, extra-full choke, 12 lbs:
https://www.guntrader.uk/guns/shotguns/reilly-em/hammer/04-gauge/single-hammer-200910143431002





Comments:
-- Trigger guard tang that apes a pistol grip.
-- Original center-fire
-- Weight indicates it is an original shotgun
-- 36" barrel length would seem to tend to 1870's.
-- Original London Proofs 1855-1875 for a 6 bore.
-- Full choked barrel (post 1875) but no "not for ball"? (Might the 6 bore barrel in itself = "full choke?"
-- Reproofed after 1989 as a 4 bore. (Might "23.4" be 6 bore in mm?)
-- Chamber 101.4 mm (4 inches)
-- £6,900 - a lot of money

So is it a 4 bore or a 6 bore, or a 4 bore with a 6 bore barrel in the 19th century, and why a full choke with no "not for ball"? So many mysteries and such a great place to have them explained.

6 BORE has internal diameter of 0.919" (Burrard)
23.4mm = 0.921" when measured at re-proof, the owner presumably decided on having it proofed for Nitro powder.....ie the gun is still a 6 bore - as constructed.
At re-proof, 4 in diamond was struck, to show that it is chambered for the 4 gauge cartridge. So in answer to your question it is a true Six bore although it is loosely termed a 4 bore- because that is the dimension of the cartridge for which the gun was built.
You will note that the level of proof is 800 bar which is well below that of the modern 3 1/2" 10 G. Sadly the other Proof House caused not a few tears for those 4 bore owners who sent their gun for nitro -and which subsequently failed (sometimes irreparably) when subjected to test pressures calculated from CIP rules .....!! Let this be a warning to any owner of these old guns.

Much appreciate the above and very interesting. Still there are two question swirling about:

-- There were no 6 bore cartridges in UK in the 1870's...at least that's the premise posted by SKB and per the extant cartridge catalogs. So is the gun chambered for 4 bore but using a 6 bore barrel? That's sort of the conclusion all posited about SN 18860 above. Opinions were that this was a sort of "poor man's choke" permitting tighter patterns. (Or did I misunderstand this)?

-- How can the shotgun be billed as "beyond full choke" but without the "not for ball" proof stamp? (i.e. Greener popularized chokes in 1875 and the proof marks were changed in Summer of that year - so if it's choked, it should have the stamp? - (unless using a 6 bore barrel on a 4 bore chamber constitutes in and of itself a sort of choke?)

-- Is a Shotgun's "bore" size for sales judged by the shells it chambers, or the bore of the barrel. (Obviously "bore size" indicates the latter; but there seems to be some slippage and confusion in advertisements (there are several "12 bore" shotguns but with 13 bore barrels that I've seen) and if it's chambered for 4 bore, certainly UK auction houses advertise it as "4 bore"..

-- Are there any "true" 4 bores (4 bore chambers, 4 bore barrels) or were they all chambered for 4 with 6 bore barrels? If so, what do you call them?

May I suggest that you read, if available, the section relating to paper vs brass case shotguns in The Modern Sportsman's Gun & Rifle by J H Walsh (Stonehenge)...the author goes to some length describing the dilemma of bore - gauge classification at that period.

A 12 G gun which is chambered to take the standard 12 G cartridge but has the barrel bored on the narrow side would have been stamped as 13, a narrow bored 16G would be stamped as 17 and so on. Basically the gun was stamped with the barrel diameter as per the definition of bore size for muzzle loaders. As you know the cartridges for each gauge were identified with a headstamp signifying the chamber size of the gun. After the "chamberless" gun for brass cases was introduced there arose considerable confusion as to which cartridge type was appropriate to use in a gun which may only be stamped as , for example,"12". Latterly the cartridges had head stamps to clarify the problem - a chamberless 12 which accepts a 12G cartridge but with a barrel bore diameter matching that of 10G- those shells would be head stamped as 12 / 10.

Back to the issue in hand:
a muzzle loading 4 bore will have a true 4 gauge barrel, based on 4 lead balls of that calibre weigh 16 ounces.
a thin brass case 4 bore also has a true 4 gauge barrel , give or take a few thou.
a paper case 4 bore generally would have a 6 bore barrel although labelled with the misnomer of 4 - ie paper and brass case guns will have similar chamber dimension but different barrel diameter. The ballistics given by paper case shells in a chamberless/brass case gun were notably weak, the use of brass case shells with their heavy load of powder and shot in paper case guns was not recommended! ....until gunmakers started to manufacture (wildfowl) guns bored specifically to handle both types of cartridge...progress of sorts?

Thank you sir, an elegant explanation of a very confusing topic.

Stan, thanks for private message, which I just saw and responded to. Two weeks ago our deep freeze finally lifted in northern PA and we were able to unleash dozers and skidders and move timber and lumber and i have been busier than a one-legged man in a butt-kicking contest ever since. See my message back to you about people invoking Jim Kelly's name, which I sought to protect, because my experience is that particular seller who invoked Mr Kelly's name was not straight about any of his guns. Everyone keep your powder dry
PA

Have not received any private messages from you, pamtnman. Not since Jan. 1, 2021, at least.

Stan