These are the pics of the gun I was inquiring about earlier in the week before the discussion was hi-jacked. Sorry for the delay. beagledogxxx [img]http://s253.photobucket.com/albums/hh55/beagledogxxx/?action=tags&current=gun01[/img]

B/D you posted the thunbnail, you need to open the regular large photo and use the img tag on it. If I want to post more than 1 photo , I paste them to a file in M/S Word, then paste them to the page here. Here is 1 of your photos full size.

Jim

Was afraid the pics full size would take up too much room but if you click the link above them you can view them all full size. Sorry for the confusion.

I was informed that this is a Darne copy made between 1905 and 1939. It has the St Etienne stamp but no Darne name anywhere. Still a beautiful gun in need of a new stock, so that is next. thanks

Beagle, all I can tell you from the photos is that your gun has the normal (single) St. Etienne proof (it's quite common for Darnes to have double or triple proofs) and 2 1/2" chambers. Ted the Darne expert will probably be along to add more. Good luck putting that old girl back into shooting condition!

It is a Darne copy all right-model R, but, can't be sure if it is 1894 or 1909-I can't see the lower metal clear enough.

I have never seen that exact name on a sliding breech gun, and I thank you for posting the photos.

I'm going to be candid. The gun will not be worth anywhere near what it costs to put a new stock on it. It is very easy to end up, as the car dealers put it, "backwards" into a gun like this. This is by no means a high grade gun, and unless it has extreme sentimental value to you, I'd suggest you leave it where you found it. Low grade Darne R clones are a very tough sell, and, moreover, a Darne is an aquired taste. Make no mistake, those that love the design make very good use of them, but, a Darne is by no means everymans gun. While you may be fascinated today, that feeling won't last once you shoot 0 for 25 on skeet, sporting clays, or, whatever, and have more into it than you can ever get out.

Have you ever used a sliding breech gun? Do you like/enjoy/shoot very well with same? Now is a very good time to think about that.

With a bit of looking, a similar, shootable, if not perfectly fitting Darne or clone of same should turn up in the sub $1500 dollar price range. Sometimes, they turn up for a lot less than that. On a low grade, you can feel OK about having a gunsmith work the stock up or down, or extending the buttstock to fit you. Restocking, however, any good double gun, doesn't come cheap.

I wish you good luck in whatever you eventually decide to do.
Best,
Ted

Following Ted Schefelbein comment:
Why 1909, are you looking for barrel maker or "normal" stamp?
Something else ?
Thank you
geoffroy

Ted's comments about restocking make a lot of sense. I've handled a bunch of Darnes but only owned one. It had been beautifully restocked, friend of mine had it done by a stockmaker friend of his. Unfortunately, that stockmaker was mostly into trap guns. The result was a Darne that probably gained a good pound of weight from the original, and the balance was very un-Darne-like.

For hunting, if you're used to the normal tang safety, a Darne safety also takes some getting used to.

Geoffroy,
Position of safety-it is in the lower metal and a rocker style on an 1894 patent gun, in the breechblock, and a rotating lever on a 1909 patent gun.

I can't tell from the above pictures, exactly what type of gun he has. I also can't tell if it would be a two piece stock, or a one piece stock. Most 1894 patent guns use a one piece stock.
Best,
Ted

Beag,
Please allow me to apologize for Larry Brown turning your request for information into a venue for his personal "lesson teaching"...

Now that these guys have pronounced your gun "dead" in the water...would you like to finally know what your gun is? And the best course of action?

I hope that you don't think that I "hajacked" your last thread. I was trying to answer your question (I asked clarification of the mark, L, or no L) when someone got their panties in a bunch because I misspelled abeille. Suggesting that data was completely flawed because of a grammatical error. He screwed you...the chances of any other researcher coming forward with info after that unjustified attack is zero. I hope he apologized to you formally.


Did you think that it was I who hijacked your thread?

Do you still want to know more about your shotgun?

Should I give more time for them to put the nails in the coffin, before I explain what your gun is?

Perhaps you've lost interest by now....

Some people just never give up
Casey

hey, not my gun I would like to know what his gun is.

Ted, here is a picture of my Halifax to help clarify the patent issue, one piece stock, rocker style safety in the lower metal:


JC

Casey,
Once you take over the thread with any alternate motive, especially something ego driven, you should have the answer at hand.
Besides, when a customer of Dave Weber's comes here for information (usually about a gun that they own), they have a right as consumers to at least read the information available. Larry and Ted have pretty much told him his gun is dead and to "leave it where you found it" ...that it's not worth having it restocked....Larry says "Ted's comments about restocking make a lot of sense."

About the only nugget of real information that can be taken to the bank so far is that sliders sometimes came with a one piece stock and somtimes a two piece stock.

It hasn't even been determined if the gun is of Darne or Charlin lineage. You can't just say It's a "Darne" (based on an inflated opinion of myself/yourself), you should say, it's a "Darne" because only the Darnes had a particular feature that's right there on your gun. If no one else can counter your observation on a Charlin, then the customer comes away with info based in reasoning and knowledge.

It just doesn't seem right that the guy wanted to know more about his gun and all he got was "it's dead, don't touch it" ...and "pay no attention to the other members who speak out of turn, we'll teach them a lesson"

And Beag goes off never learning about his gun...

Face it, Beag is just collateral damage to you some of you guys...you don't even care if he gets a truthful answer...tell me I'm wrong...did anyone other than myself even try to address the question Beag presented ...Who made this gun?

Now I stood back and allowed these guys to speak first, second, third, and tenth...unless there is some sort of further pecking order censorship, perhaps I could go back in time two weeks and finish addressing the question...

Would that be alright with you Casey? Have you got some information to offer about Abeille? I have 10 bucks that says that you don't have one bite of info about Abeille and your just here to shore up the pecking order. Prove me wrong Casey...please...tell everyone what you know about Beags gun.

The gun has been pronounced "dead" by both of the French wizards at this system...how damaging can my lowly opinion be?

JC,
Thank you for helping to clarify the patent issue, I too will post in response to your photo...probably the most valuable bit of info I have to contribute to the patented model concept is unfortunately contrary...it's an old Caunier catalog that clearly shows what's currently accepted as a 1894 patent Darne but made by Charlin. If the whole 1894 patent notion is correct, why the would Charlin be manufacturing guns of anothers patent?

A good many pieces of the puzzle are still apart in the Darne story...too many for any member to squelch another contributing members voice...especially for spelling

First off, I don't mind the banter between members in response to my questions. Actually I find it amusing, until the subject gets locked by the administrator. That just means I have to start over again with a new post. No big deal. The stock is one piece. The safety is not the rocker type. I believe it is the rotating type. One of you showed me an example of a gun which had the exact safety as mine...right down to the SUR written on one side of it...just can't seem to locate the pic. Robert, and anyone else who cares to give their two cents: any info you have would be greatly appreciated. Thank you

Beag,
Glad you didn't go away without the info that you came for, as happens quite often at this system. Pecking order often trumps accuracy right into the ground around here.

I'll start preparing the photos after I shovel the snow, although it's dark here (5:15)...photo's are better in daylight...

Again I apologize for what happened to your thread, I was truly trying to address the question of your gun...I didn't realize that I had misspelled the name...The underlying truth is, it had nothing to do with spelling, I spoke out of turn....I hope that you got to see the "L'Abeille" photo that I posted...the one Larry challenged the existence of.

Now if the thes guys will allow it...I will try to address the question of who made your gun...believe me, if I make the slightest mistake they'll have a regular roasting...

Robert, if you have a different opinion than the one Ted posted (and I think Ted has pretty good credentials where Darne/Charlin shotguns are concerned), why don't you just express it? No need to get confrontational about the whole business. If you do, I do not intend to go down that road with you again.

And there is no "pecking order" here. Good information is good information, whether you come up with it, I come up with it, or Ted comes up with it. That's what this place is all about: an exchange of information. As for the question of Beagle restocking his gun . . . well, I do have experience (not good) with a restocked Darne. Fortunately, I did not pay for the restocking, and ended up buying the gun for less than the cost of the stock work. I think Beagle should know that restocking any gun isn't cheap, and restocking a Darne can be both expensive and fraught with problems. That's my opinion, based on my experience. I won't speak for Ted, but I expect that's also where he's coming from. And opinions may be freely exchanged here without any concern for "pecking order".

And please, Robert, don't start misquoting me again. I never "challenged the existence" of any photo of a "L'Abeille" shotgun. I did ask to see proof that a shotgun called "L'Abielle"--which is what you claimed you had, in about 3 different posts--actually existed. You see, I don't think I know everything. I've seen stranger stuff than two makers' names (like Parker/Barker, you know) only one letter apart, so I thought there was some possibility--however slight--that might be the case with Abeille/Abielle. Turned out there was no "L'Abielle", which is fine with me. And if you had simply said at that point, "Woops, I had the wrong spelling", well . . .that would have been the end of the story. As it is now, as far as I'm concerned.

Merry Christmas to you, and to you a good night!

Jeez, Chambers, give it a rest. Have your mom give you a time out or call your shrink...If you have something to contribute, do so......If you want to excercise your paranoias, try nutcase.com Some of us are actually interested in this stuff...

The gun isn't a Darne-it doesn't say Darne on it. That nugget is a freebie, since, every catalog I have on Darne guns going back to 1909 trumpets the fact that Darne guns always say Darne on them, somewhere.

And, if a gun with a sliding breech isn't marked Darne, it is a clone. That is nugget two.

Nugget number three is, it is not a Charlin. A Charlin does not have an axle that passes between the sides of the sliding breech. The reason it doesn't have an axle, is, a Charlin is not toggle locked, and the opening lever doesn't need to be mounted to the breechblock, and, is not-it is mounted in the lower watertable metal that mounts the stock, and allows the breech to slide on. I have seen (in France) one Darne action that was marked Charlin, which, the Bruchets assured me was most definitely built by Darne in the early 1960s. They owned what was left of Charlin by then, having purchased it in 1955.

While I'm sure there are people that believe a large treasure trove of information exists/ will be forthcoming in a book about French guns, this ignores the basic fact that France has suffered through two periods of unfriendly occupation right in the middle of the golden age of gunmaking. Records were lost, destroyed, stolen and outright obfuscated during both periods of occupation. I tried some basic research at the libraries in Lyon and St. Etienne when I was there, and almost nothing I could use was to be found. I wish I could tell you exactly who built this gun, where and at what time frame it was built, but, I can't, and anyone else who might is AWOL, at present. Until that guy shows up, we can endlessly speculate about the above, or, delve into some simple facts about low grade sliding breech guns in general, low grade clones, in particular, of which no one should argue that this gun most definitely is, and when quantities of money that involve things like restocking should be thrown at those guns.

Routinely, I get calls from people that have already purchased basket case guns of various sliding breech manufacturers, wanting to know, how much they should have paid (late for that train) and how much it will cost to get it barrels, a new breech, or a new stock, or, what have you. It is always a sad thing to inform them that most of the time, you just can't get there from here. It is inpractical, almost universally so, to spend the money it takes to repair a low grade slider with the above problems.

Can it be done? Why yes. But, it usually shouldn't. One can find functional, low grade sliding breech guns for not a whole lot of money.

Since our hero has taken it upon himself to rescue this gun, actual facts about who built it, when, and where, will be, at this point in the guns history and condition, no more than anecdotal-there is, no warehouse in France, fillled to the brim with new, fitted, checkered and finished Abielle stocks, ready to bolt on to his gun, allowing him to go hunting after a friendly visit from the UPS man. The above facts, which our friend Robert takes such glee in pointing out that no-one has provided, would be interesting-and, useless to the rescue of this gun.

Got that, Robert? Knowing who built it, where, or when isn't going to help get him a 25 straight patch with it. The man said he wanted to use it. That, to me, is the most relevant part of this discussion.

What might be helpful, would be providing a bit of guidance on the economic realities of attempting to put a gun like this back in service. That, is what I did. I don't want a call from anyone with a low grade Darne clone, that says Abielle, Schmidt Frerés, Charlin, or boogity, boogity, boo, for that matter, on the opening lever, who has more than parts gun money into it, anytime in the near future, looking for a stock. Or barrels. Or a sliding breech.

Because I get those calls. And I hate it. Because someone always ends up disappointed. Hurt and disappointed if a dealer put the screws to them, which, happens more than I like, also. More than I hate not being able to tell him those interesting, but, as I pointed out, useless, to the task he is considering, facts that you are so hung up on, and can't provide, either.

In the event that the discussion continues on a civil note (past experience tells me it will disintegrate shortly, but, hope springs forth, you know) I would very much appreciate it if you could provide the Charlin patent pertaining to sling swivel attachment on plume barrel guns, which, you offered, but, haven't provided.

I'd like to see it. It sounds interesting.
Best,
Ted

Now that was funny!!! First no name gun that I buy is going straight to the engraver.-JB

Well ok then...Ted...

The question of civility always rested with you guys...I didn't wait my turn because I wanted to, it was because you guys forced me to. The fact that I grumble about being forced doesn't mean the responsibility of civility lies solely with me. We'll all see how you guys behave for the remainder of this thread.

So just so that all the readers are on the same page let's start with the Darne toggle axel. Is this the toggel lock axel that your speaking of?

To quote Ted...

"While I'm sure there are people that believe a large treasure trove of information exists/ will be forthcoming in a book about French guns, this ignores the basic fact that France has suffered through two periods of unfriendly occupation right in the middle of the golden age of gunmaking. Records were lost, destroyed, stolen and outright obfuscated during both periods of occupation. I tried some basic research at the libraries in Lyon and St. Etienne when I was there, and almost nothing I could use was to be found. I wish I could tell you exactly who built this gun, where and at what time frame it was built, but, I can't, and anyone else who might is AWOL, at present. Until that guy shows up, we can endlessly speculate about the above, or, delve into some simple facts about low grade sliding breech guns in general, low grade clones, in particular, of which no one should argue that this gun most definitely is, and when quantities of money that involve things like restocking should be thrown at those guns."

Is anyone buying this nonesense? The French lead the way in catalog collecting...There are several books on Darne and Charlin just over the horizon...

As for Ted's denial of any forthcoming book...he missed the boat...twice...the 320 page reference book on the guns of Regis Darne is already in the second edition...the title is...Les Fusils de chasse de Régis Darne...by J.C Mournetas...


then there is the less comprehensive book titled "Le fusil Darne 1974-1979" by L. Forissier. 85 pages ...

not to mention all the other French books where Charlin and Darne are covered in the book but not in the title...

I can't address beag's question with these gale winds of disinformation blowing in....

I don't think they're buying it anymore Ted, but that's only my opinion...

Here's the Charlin patent number that you requested...FR995122 ...I'm pretty sure I found an earlier reference to plume barrels buried in another patent issued to Regis Darne in the twenties

So that everyone can move on...is that the toggle lock axel that you refer to or not? yes or no

The problem with references on French shotguns, such as those mentioned above by Robert, is that they're written in French. Most people in this country neither read nor speak French. Not only are those references in French, but they are full of gun terminology, which is not the kind of French you learn in school--as I can verify, since I have both a BA and an MA in the language, and have taught it myself at a couple universities. I've learned a decent amount of "gun French" simply because I'm interested in guns and already knew French to start with. But generally speaking, for the reasons cited above, good references on French shotguns are not readily available to your average American with an interest in shotguns in general, nor French shotguns in particular. Example: When I first saw the term "les ailes" in reference to a side by side, I thought to myself, "What in the hell does that mean--a shotgun with wings?" Finally figured out, on my own--because it sure as hell ain't in any French dictionary I have--that the term referred to sideclips. And I have seen (I'm sorry to say) translations directly from the French, literally, that simply don't make sense to native speakers of English who know guns but don't know French.

I even have a copy of a great French reference on shotguns and ballistics: "Tir des Fusils de Chasse" by General Journee. Problem is, it's full of a lot of technical engineering and mathematical terminology, and my background is literature--so even for me, it's very tough sledding. Now if I had degrees in both French and engineering, I might be able to render some of that text into decent English.

But to get back to Beagle's situation, Ted's points are very well-taken--even if he did transpose the i and the e in "Abeille". Is this really a gun in which Beagle wishes to invest in order to end up with a "shooter"? If it has some sort of sentimental value, perhaps so. Otherwise . . . well, back in my early days playing with doubleguns, I forked over the cash for some very nice Bishop wood and had it put on a Stevens 20. Gun looked great afterwards, much better than a Sterlingworth or a Trojan, but it was still a Stevens--and God knows it didn't handle like a Sterlingworth. So regardless of who made it and when, the issues are: 1. What's a decent restocking job going to cost? 2. What will the gun be worth with a new stock? And finally: 3. Will it handle like a Darne (or clone) did as originally stocked, or will it handle like a Stevens with a sliding breech?

OK...this conversation is moving on without TED...

here's catalog photo of a 1929 Charlin with the toggle lock axel...The axel appears in the Charlin patent drawings as far back as 1904 GB29433...


I really have no time to address all the mis??? disinformation ... I really don't want to spend any time proving that Ted has his hat on backwards...but if I don't, and simply answer the question at hand, the experts will denounce my information as "wrong" without a single bit of evidence to back it up.

When the catalogs of the era and the patent records of the era don't match up with the notions of this boards most esteemed members...what am I supposed to do...alter the data to fit their notions?

I'm not saying that I'm correct in my assessment of Darne/Charlin history...but the patent record and the catalogs can't just be ruled out...

Are you starting to see why it's so difficult to post data at this system? After you've done all the work of researching, and all the work of posting...these guys come out and say "naw, that's wrong" and walk away...

There's no harm and no shame in addressing the truth...when someone takes the time to set the record straight after several heaping helpings of "oats once through the horse" have been left behind, it's hardly the time to complain by saying "I don't like the tone of your words"

It's OK if you don't like my tone, I don't like your oats, and that's OK too

in other words, when you're activley stonewalling someone...to say that you don't like their tone is like adding insult to injury...and you know it

Beag,
What they forgot to mention was...That one piece sliders are perhaps the easiest doubles to restock. The action inletting is only slightly more complicated than a fore end iron of near any other shotgun. Shown below is a barreled action that I bought for $125...I inletted the action with my beginners inletting skills...when I got to the tough part (the fore end escutcheon) I paid a local stockmaker...it turned out so well that I also paid him to inlet a skeleton Niedner butt plate, but you don't have to go that far, a regular buttplate will do.
I'll bet there are 25 guys right here who would gladly buy your barreled action should you choose to not restock it...

As you can see, I haven't checkered the gun yet, but at under $250 investment, it feels as though I'm probably "safe" in my investment.








The whole action is like one big fore end iron...as you can see from the pictures

To quote Larry Brown..."And finally: 3. Will it handle like a Darne (or clone) did as originally stocked, or will it handle like a Stevens with a sliding breech?"



I'll let the scale and the readers be the judge...it's a 16ga


Here's another photo that shows the gun hasn't been cut down and still weighs just over 5 1/2 lbs...the barrel length is 26 3/4 inches with 14 1/2 LOP and 42 1/2 over all length

That's great, Robert . . . assuming Beagle wants to do the work himself and has the skills to do so. But that's a bit like me assuming that you can translate passages from "Madame Bovary" into English. I can, but I would not assume that anyone else can, without knowing something about their background in French.

And where'd you get the wood? Carve the stock yourself, from scratch? Can you point Beagle to a source of semi-inletted Darne/Charlin stocks, assuming he wants to go that route?

It's still a question of what's out there on the used market with a stock already attached, for how much, compared to how much the wood would cost (assuming there's a source of semi-inletted stocks, like you can get for most American break-action doubles), whether Beagle can do it himself, etc. A few years back, in Dijon, I could've bought a very basic Charlin 16 but very nice condition--sorry, but nicer than yours--for about $800. Wish I had.

C'mon Larry,
This entire quagmire is of your making...you could have just let me continue to converse with Beag two weeks ago ...now you say all I had to do was say ooops, I misspelled something...everyone knows that in fact it was you that needed to ask a point of clarification about my misspelled word...you see Larry, as is usually the case with misspelled words, the writer often doesn't realize that he misspelled the word.

Yet you still continue to get in the way of the transfer of information...I tell Beag of an alternate way that I resurected a slider, in hopes that he may find his own alternate route, and all you can do is stand on the brakes and cite your credentials.

I have an idea...how about you contribute something constructive to this thread...seeing how you've already damaged it beyond recognition...maybe press those rusty French skills into service and help determine if his gun is of Charlin or Darne descent. I think you owe Beag something pretty substantial at this point.

I'll tell you what Larry, if you make a constructive contribution (premium oats)... I'll donate and mail a well seasoned bastogne walnut stock blank to Beag...

The bigger the contribution that you make, the higher the grade I will send...hopefully I'll have to send him two...one to learn on and one to keep...

Larry,
There's no reason whatsoever for you, Ted, and I to be seemingly opposed to one another...in fact the exact opposite is the case...darnation is trying to build an electronic bridge between French and American collectors...I would like to see him achieve his goal...if the French bridge builders even smell used oats, it won't go well for the bridge...

I have a proposal to offer you...I'll send you every patent that I have associated with Darne/Charlin (less than 50)...you crunch the French the best you can and tell us all who should be credited for what...(I suspect Santiot to be a key player, no pun intended).

In the mean time, I'll continue to ransack several European patent offices to see if any new patents have been added to the databases in the last two years.

You can get Ted to help you, it has to be better than talking about Lowell's underwear...

If you agree...everyone will win...Beag will get additional info and the stock blank...Ted will get the info he sought at the library in France...You, the readers, and I will get a crash course in sliders...and we'll all be better prepared to use to use the bridge.

Very interesting Charlin catalog.
I do not want offend anyone by misunderstanding some aspect of this long conversation.
Should I understand than Charlin copied the Darne R model ?

Beag,
Larry brought up a point I hadn't considered..."And where'd you get the wood? Carve the stock yourself, from scratch? " as he put it...

Carving the outside of the stock the easiest part once you determined and layed out the buttplate. These few rudimentary tools make it possible to rough carve the outside of stock in a few hours. The carbide burrs cut allow you to rough shape the wood with ease. The squirrel tail plane is an invaluable tool and can be had for had for around $20, but any small block plane will do...the die grinders are less than $20 and you don't need two...

Now I know that you may not be a woodworker, but wood carving is not a cost prohibitive hobby...in fact it's alot more rewarding than buying a gun for 200 and selling it for 400...the almighty ($) bottom line is not the only way to enjoy this Abeille that you've found down on her knees...If you want to nurse this gun back into the field, I say, go for it...if not, I say sell it to me...

Darnation,
That's not exactly what I'm saying. What I'm saying is...it's too early in our collective knowledge to know who copied who...and who licensed who to build their design...and when the patents expired and it became public technology, as happened to Verney Carron with the Helice action.

We don't know yet if Darne incorporated design changes that first appeared on Charlins...or the other way around...

Would you like to share in the collective project that I've offered Larry? Perhaps you have space to post them for everyone to examine.

I'm actually a pretty proficient wood carver and I don't think the project would be difficult at all. I can take a chunk of 2x4 and carve you whatever you tell me to carve with just a pen knife in a short period of time, so I am sure I can make a one piece gunstock...especially when I have one right in front of me to use as a pattern. I will have to locate the wood though.

Beag,
Does the name Jim Aireman sound familiar? Viet Nam vet with one leg and a rough attitude? I hunted grouse with him along the western Pa/Ny border back in the late 80's...he had a hunting partner name Beagle..Jim lived in Wellsville...broke his good leg grouse hunting and died a few days later at the Buffalo VA hospital...

Is there any chance that your the same Beagle? (so named for his incredible hunting skills)

Sorry, but no. I'm near the Pa/Wv/Oh border, about an hour or less from Pittsburgh.

Robert, I'm only interested in seeing Beagle get his Abeille up and running. Or get rid of it and find another one, stock already attached, whichever he chooses to do. If he can (and wants to) make his own stock, then the only investment would be for a good, well-cured walnut stock blank. And perhaps getting it checkered, if he didn't feel that's a job he wanted to take on. When he's done, I hope it looks, feels, and handles like it did with its original stock. And serves him well, and . . . "stings like a bee".

Translation . . . I will certainly be glad to "gist" anything, IF IT'S FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION ON THIS FORUM. I won't promise a complete, word for word translation. I learned my lesson on that when I translated "The Will of the Marechal de Belle-Isle" (an 18th century French general) for the French liaison officer at Ft Leavenworth. Ran to about 30 pages. He then wanted me to translate the French equivalent of the Army Operations Field Manual, which was at least 10 times as long.

And finally, on the "Abeille/Abielle" thing . . . to paraphrase "Star Wars", "Let go your anger, Robert!" Abeille/Abielle, had there been two such similar makers' names, could have been of the same nature as making sure people don't buy a Barker when they're looking for a Parker. Turned out the problem did not really exist. Next issue . . .

I have a similar catalog from 1929, Mr. Chambers-but, it is from a retailer that sold BOTH Francisque Darne and Charlin models-and, it has a page very similar to the one you have shown. That illustration, by the way, is an 1894 patent style gun, which, anybody was free to copy, after Regis Darne began building the 1909 patent guns.

While Charlin may, or may not have, built exact, Regis Darne style sliding breech guns, they DID in fact built their own rendition of the sliding breech gun, that is the Charlin that is almost always encountered. It is one thing to show an ad, patent or a photo of something, quite another to procure an example for all to see, quite another still to say that such a gun was the main product of a company like Charlin, or, even a design that was available-no one has seen a Tobin hammer gun, but, they were cataloged.

Why? Who knows.

The main Charlin gun, their gun of fame, the money maker, the gun of the great majority of future Charlin catalogs ( I have a few) has no axle through the breechblock. It is an over the center device, non locked breech sliding breech double. They made lots of them, and it it the sliding breech gun design they promoted.

I can say this, because the very great majority of Charlin guns I have seen and owned, here and in Europe, saving a rather interesting O/U, were the typical, non locked breech Charlin. It is the only gun listed in the Charlin catalogs I have. And I have a few Charlin catalogs.

Since you brought it up, is there a chance we could see a photo of the whole page that shows that 1894 Darne patent gun, and mentions the Charlin? I'd be interested in seeing it, and, Larry would provide pretty good translation for little or no money, I think.

A nice clear shot of the whole page would be quite enlightening-and, it would be nice to see that other Charlin patent, regarding swivel attachment to a plume rib barrel that you offered before the last post was locked down, so to speak.

Thanks in advance.
Best,
Ted

What a deal. Beagledog gets a free stock blank or two from Robert. Larry gets the benefit of Robert's European patent research for free. He can translate it and write an SSM or DGJ article, or maybe a fat book deal, and Ted (and the rest of us) can read the article. Robert gets his research published (and gets to find out what it all says, in English), Larry gets another good publishing credit, and Ted can still be our premier French Backslider expert since the Bruchets have probably already told him all this stuff anyway. I can't wait to see this happen???...Geo

To Robert.
Could you scan the full page of your catalog ?
Thank you

I can't figure out how to post Adobe Acrobat files (the patents)...does anyone know how...otherwise I may have to print each and every page, photograph each page, then post the photos

Mr. Chambers, on page 16 they show the Regina shotguns and at the bottom it says "look at the Charlin shotgun on the NEXT page"

It is my impression the Reginas are not Charlins, but what do I know.

JC

It look like the Caunier catalog from Bordeaux. Probably Caunier was a gundealer or a store selling at least guns.
On the left page there is two grades of the Regina. Not a Darne production. I do not know the Regina. It look like to be a nice copy of the first R.
Bottom of the left page an invitation to go next page to see the famous Charlin.
I guess it is not a catalog with only Charlin product. ? question.
On the right page they speak of "the Charlin " as if the catalog is not presenting exclusivly Charlin product.
It is hard to imagine Charlin doing a copy of the R . And not to be able to make a visible improvement 30 years later.
Sorry to believe what I see.
Ready to see more.

Charlins are curiously stocked. At least this one is.

jack

Could be...though all the other sliders listed are the Charlin sidelock looking models... I can't read French...they also name the other models...Le Leievre..Tigre...

To the private messager....

I reponded to your message but recieved an error page..so here it is again


I haven't been to BIPO in about 2 years...the search utility wasn't functioning well, as they were under construction, and you would continually be redirected to espacenet...I'm sure they are still under construction as is every other pre-1900 database including the US...back then BIPO used some unusual plug-in instead of Adobe files like espacenet and depatisnet (Germany), hopefully things have gotten better. Incedentally, depatisnet is closed all weekend for changes....hopefully there will be new never before seen (electronically) patents added to the database when they re-open on Monday

I'll recheck BIPO and see if the old plug-in still works or if they've switched to Adobe and let you know

"Lowell's underwear," is starting to look better and better - eh Robert!

WANTED

Darne made by Charlin

Do yOu prefer French long underware Lowell ?

I prefer nothing French, good ol'j0e!

I'm with JC and M. Gournet on this one. It would appear that either the "Regina" is not a Charlin product or, if it is, it certainly wasn't the only gun they were making. Looks to be the catalog of a gun dealer in Bordeaux. In fact, the language of the 2nd page--about the Charlin--pretty much verifies that: "nous nous sommes assures la representation" means that the source of the catalog is a Charlin dealer or retail outlet. That wording means, without doubt, that the catalog itself could not have come from Charlin.

The photo of the 2nd page isn't quite as clear, but goes into great detail about the advantages of the Charlin, the kinds of patterns it will deliver--and how many pellets in a partridge or a hare.

Reference the Charlin: "In summary, this shotgun--absolutely without equal--is a weapon that possesses all the improvements one could possibly ask for in a shotgun."

I'd also note that the other gun, the Regina, is sold with a two week trial period, and is guaranteed against any material defects for 2 years.

Interesting discussion, gentlemen!

Mr. Chambers, could we see page 15 of the Caunier catalogue?

Thanks in advance,

JC

For the catalog, go to page 3 of this topic to see the excellent cropping of the gun cut "Regina" and "see next page".
There is no doubt that all this was a good joke. I may serve it back to you for April first.
Happy Holidays

To the top this must go!
Where's Robert hmmmm?

Geoffroy, good observation, convenient cropping on page 3, but...

Indeed, où est M. Chambers?

JC

Great catch, Geoffroy!

M. Chambers est-il hors de combat??

Now I get it. The photo in Bob's post #896 (p. 2 this thread) is p. 16 of his catalog but cropped to remove "Regina" and "see page following" while leaving "Charlin fixed barrel". So much for scientific rigour. Robert, il est fou!

jack

By the way, Robert, that is a beautiful job you did on that stock. Is that also a Darne copy? I can't tell from the pic, but it looks like there is a swivel on those barrels right about where mine has one. The way that gun turned out, it gives me renewed hope for mine. Thanks for the pics

So much for Robert's academic pigeon poop!

Think I'll reserve judgement and wait for Mr. Chambers' response. I'll be surprised if he has intentionally tried to mislead anyone. He has said he doesn't read French. Since he hasn't responded, I'd guess he is appalled at this development. And Lowell may be enjoying this a little too much...Geo

The addition of text captions and arrows (pointing to the toggle axel [sic]) to the Regina illustration would make it appear that Robert believed the gun to be a Charlin or Charlin-manufactured and incorporating R-Darne build and presumably Darne patents, expired or otherwise. I have no basis for knowing who built "bees" and "queens but I have a notion that it is always open season on the rectitude of the habitually querulous. Cf. description of "Ferrous Brain" in the hilarious link "Flame Warriors" recently put up here by another member.

jack

Well stated.

We....Weee

It will be misleading to think we have been misleaded. How could you even think about that !
It's a funny forum .

The thing is here we are being patronized with information gleaned from catalogues that are not understood by the owner.

Mr. Chambers with all his treasure trove of gun literature is a case of "God giving nuts to the toothless". Pity. If he shared it humbly surely a book could be written with all that he has.

JC

If this material was tampered with for his own gain - to beat members over the head with...there can be only one outcome.

OK ...had to go away for the day ...but I will post the rest of the Charlins in the Caunier catalog...

Darnation...the reason for the cropping was so that the axel could be seen clearly....I was trying to graphically make a point in asking Ted if that particular hingepin was in fact the pin that he was referring to..as can also be seen in Charlin patent 29432 Dec 31, 1904...If I could figure out how, I would post the drawing.


I didn't think it was possible to point out the pin in a whole scan or photo

Lowell,

Take your racist, quasi sexual postings elsewhere...do you really think these guys don't know how you've created a marraige of shotgun talk to phone sex, right here at the Doublegun BBS.

This isn't Lowell's gunporn column...if you want these guys to talk you "off", start a new thread about you underwear (again). Don't bring that monkey sauce around here you freak.

Whatever degree I have misinterpreted...whatever degree Larry Brown is just being ignorant (he owned a Darne once)...the last thing any of us need is your psycho-sexual nonsense added to the thread...

Thank you Robert for your contribution.
I have to say your numeric-patent approach is a little difficult to understand for us. It is difficult to understand which drawing fit which number.
Thank you again.
g

Mighty nAsty stuff..don't yOu think.

Nuts to the toothless, J.C.? Boy does that fit? However, I can get my dentures around a bit of the Indo-European with just a bit of help from context. It's hard enuf to gum some of this stuff in the point-counterpt. format (for instance Drew's 400+ response thread on the "decorative arts" wellsprings of taffy-barrels) without having the evidence manipulated. Ted S. has stated before that Regis Darne (or Bruchet, not quite sure in my toothless condition) manufactured some latter-day Charlin sliding breech doubles. I've always assumed that those guns would have the over-center tensioner on the toggle and the "pineapple" safety lever. Our neighbor in Easton cuts to the core of the matter: whatever a paper chase thru the patent offices may allow in the way of speculation, must find Charlin-produced Darne gun to make that speculation more than smoke and mirrors.

Is there an illustration of "the Charlin" in your catalog, Robert. Like to see it as physical protruberances and pins mean a good deal to yokels such as myself.

Yes Joe, more than nasty enuf!

jack

What?

Robert, "what" about your gracious offer to provide your patent research to Larry Brown and give Beagledog a bastogne stock blank suitable for restocking his "Bee"?...Geo

Darnation,

Here are the folowing two pages from the Caunier catalog...after that the rest of the shotguns are of the more conventional type.




Geo,

I'm trying to figure out how to post them so that anyone who wants to follow along... can

Right now the only way I can post them is to print each and every page...just so I can photograph each page, correct the gamma, and upload the photos to photobucket, so I can post the images here...I'm hoping someone will tell me how to post PDF files...I would rather not print 400 pages, but I will if I have to...

As for the stock blank...I found a lovely piece that was so red, that I cut the flich with a one piece Darne (mine) in mind. The cutting was laid out so that the grain would be exactly correct for a PoW Darne...I was worried back then that my first (and only) Darne re-stock job might crack upon firing...but that test is long past and I've final sanded and finished the gun...

I like the red look on a French or Belgian gun because it looks more original...The tree came from the Clarence Library when they built a new annex (8 yrs ago)...the Dutchman and I cut it into fliches and solar kiln dried them before we cut them into blanks (5 yrs ago)...

Larry Brown has yet to complete his end of the bargain though...but I assume he's a man of his word...

Beag will have to send me his address...

Robert's offer still sounds to me like a good deal all around...Geo

Sounds like a great deal to me! Robert, that gun you made the stock for is a Darne, not a copy? As I said earlier, it sure came out nice.

[quote=Robert Chambers


Whatever degree I have misinterpreted...whatever degree Larry Brown is just being ignorant (he owned a Darne once). . .
[/quote]

Well Robert, I'll let the readers decide for themselves on the subjects of your misinterpretation and my ignorance by summarizing this thread, to this point:

On p. 1, you offer to Beagle to "explain what your gun is".

On p. 2, you refer to an "1894 patent Darne but made by Charlin" (of which you later post a photo).

On p. 3, you refer to a "catalog photo of a 1929 Charlin" (seemingly the same 1894 Darne patent gun).

On p. 4, Ted agrees that the photo is indeed of a gun built on the 1894 Darne patent. So you and Ted agree on that much. But . . .

On p. 5, we finally get the full page photos of a sliding breech gun called a "Regina". Not only is there no indication ANYWHERE on that page that the gun was built by Charlin, but on the bottom of the page, it clearly reads: "See the famous Charlin shotgun ON THE NEXT PAGE"--which would certainly seem to indicate that while the Regina is an 1894 Darne clone of some sort, it was probably not built by Charlin. Likely just another of the many non-Darne built, non-Charlin built, Darne clones.
And on the next catalog page--the one with the REAL Charlin, clearly identified and described as such--we learn that Caunier simply REPRESENTS Charlin (as a dealer--much like any dealer that sells more than one make of gun), and we're not talking about a catalog that deals exclusively with Charlin shotguns.

So your research, Robert--assuming you weren't trying to lead us all down the garden path and celebrate April 1 either a little early or a little late--runs into the significant obstacle posed by your not being able to understand what's written on the pages you posted. (Although it's awfully convenient, I'd say, that your first photo of the catalog page with the Regina/Darne clone both left out the name "Regina" and the rest of the sentence which told us that the famous Charlin was on the NEXT page, not the page we were looking at.)

So other than giving Beagle some advice on making his own stock (and maybe helping him find the proper blank), we've pretty much ended up back where we started: He has a Darne clone. Built by Charlin? Maybe, but likely not--because, as M. Gournet points out, we still have no evidence (although we did take a very interesting trip around the block, ending up back where we started) that Charlin built any Darne clones, let alone Beagle's "Abeille".

Just a suggestion, but you might want to post information in French that you don't understand, and ask for the help of those of us who do, before you try to beat Ted or me or anyone else over the head with your "evidence". No harm done, however . . . just another "woops" moment.

As for the patent research, I'm not sure where the difficulty lies. As long as you have a drawing (which you should have, for anything gun related), a date, and to whom the patent was assigned, what more do you need?

Very interesting....

OK Larry,
What's the meaning of Regina? What does that mean? Was there a Regina factory somewhere? was there a "Abeille" factory somewhere?

Of course not...your just being obstinate...it appears (do you know what "it appears" means???) It appears that all across France sporting goods dealers carried sliders of Darne and Charlin descent with their own trade name and sometimes another generic name...IN MUCH THE SAME WAY THAT HARDWARE STORES WERE ABLE TO HERE IN AMERICA...AND IN THE SAME WAY THAT BELGIAN MAKERS DID. It's strange how you seem to understand how the trade worked in some instances, yet you go into denial when you choose not to understand this fundamental marketing strategy..

You obviously understand the way the "hardware store" gun worked in France, yet you couldn't just say that to Beagle...

I wish you would just stop playing both sides and simply tell Beagle that his gun a unmarked Darne or Charlin hardware type gun. NOT A CHEAP CLONE...what's wrong with you?

Just because a gun is marked Tryon, doesn't mean it's a Baker clone.

Finally we are at the crux of the problem...I am sickened by the way the so-called experts tell every hardware Darne owner that his gun is some sort of "cheap" clone....as though it is a "knock-off" copy...that crap woulndn't fly with hardware store Meridens or Bakers...why do you think it would fly with Darne and Charlin guns...(because the guys at this board don't know enough to call you on it)

But I know why...because when you're selling, it's a treasure...when you're buying, it's a cheap copy (especially Ted)...real nice

How can I ever forge an alliance with anyone who consistantly demonstrates this behavior?

Now straighten up and fly right...this quagmire is completely of your making...and you won't give it up.

How can you even think you're a Darne expert, when you've only owned one, and you haven't taken the time to review (own) any catalogs, or Darne/Charlin history? Prove me wrong, post those Darne catalog photos tonight...not Teds, yours.

I'm not even a Darne collector, but it's clear to me that your even more a beginner than I...

I've owned 3 Darnes 1 Charlin plus the one I have now...I've restocked and repaired the one I currently have...I own several catalogs and c50 patents related to Darne...and I'm still a Darne beginner in every sense of the word...I just don't understand why you've placed yourself in such a lofty position.

Every time someone labels a Darne hardware store gun a "cheap clone"...I'm sickened by the shark like behavior...because I've been around gun collectors long enough to know why some collectors do this...to slight or "poo-poo" the other persons gun...there is no other reason...

Before you come back with some new twisted (re-thought)perspective...bear in mind...many readers have already been the victim of this type of behavior from other gun collectors...they know this game intimately...and they'll know if my words ring of truth...

tWo chea....

Robert, I give you credit for a cogently argued and--given the comparable "remarquing" of both British and American guns--plausible hypothesis concerning the origin of all these bees and queens. Sometimes I wish you would state your seat-of-the-pants intution about how the world works first before you cook the evidence!

jack

It is Latin and means "Queen." The way this topic has gone south again I guess it is only a matter of time before that word is used in a name-calling post.
There was some interesting stuff on this thread but wading through the pitiful abuse over arcane minutiae is sickening. Pity, it could have been enjoyable.
Before I leave this topic for good, was it on an Abeille that I once saw a bee worked as a safety? was I dreaming? Polite answers welcomed.
Km

Jack,
Special rules apply to me here at this BBS...I'm not allowed to go right to the point....Larry couldn't stand that I was addressing Beagles question...he thought I needed to be thought a lesson for doing so...

Mr. Chambers, your first faux pas was saying you had an Abielle gun that you could photograph as proof. Instead of politely accepting you had misspelled the name you ended up with a shut down thread.

Now you said that you had proof in a catalogue that Charlin made Darne 1894 patent clones. Oops again. From what we saw on the pages of the referred catalogue you have posted, all Charlins are present and accounted for between pages 18 & 19 (with prices ranging from 995fr to 3700fr). I would still appreciate to see page 15 if possible, where details of the Regina/Darne R clone may be found.

JC

JC,
Actually I said "L'Abielle" that I had in fact misspelled... the actual name was L'Abeille...I was talking "L" and Larry played on that with my mixing of the e & i...He found a chink and played it for all he could...

Every post has a post number at the top/right...could you please tell me what post number that I supposedly said "Now you said that you had proof in a catalogue that Charlin made Darne 1894 patent clones". If you can't find that post, you're motives will be questioned. I don't buy that "clone" nonsense AT ALL...it's just another way to belittle someones contract Darne.

With all the crap Larry stirred up over and i & e, why would you begin misquoting me?

And you may be correct about Caunier selling both Darne and Charlin...but that hardly negates used oats that Ted and Larry piled on...all that high faluntin' nonsense about the gun being best left where it lay...clone...backwards into the gun..leave it where you found it ...then Larry backing him up like it was sound advice (which maybe it was sound advice if Beagle was some shark just looking to make money on the gun)...

They speak with surity and conviction....as though there is no other perspective than theirs...

When I told Beag the alternate route that I used to resurect a one piece stocked slider...Larry completely denounced it...

When Beag said Hey I'm a pretty decent whittler...he did a complete about face...sayin' all I want is Beag to get his gun up and running...post #71785...

Larry can defend his own position...the last thing he needs right now is you making things even more complicated with misquotes.

I think I know why they called them Darn shotguns.

why?

Post 71542: "it's an old Caunier catalog that clearly shows what's currently accepted as a 1894 patent Darne but made by Charlin.

No ulterior motives. Could I see page 15 please?

JC

Hey, J.C., at the very least we're getting to be really hot html'rs. Maybe next time SuperBold in Gold? Except you've got a black sheep "n". The moving finger writes and then moves on. Gotta be quick to catch it. I'm glad my Charlin says so right on it; that way I know what it--du-uh--is. I'm real tired out from he said he said; believe that I must go to baid.

jack

This thread has made me pull my hair out...hope I don't go bald.

Tch Tch, such obfuscation! We're starting to sound like a bunch of lawyers getting paid by the hour. Guns not fights...Geo

Here's the last pieces I have time to offer before I switch to patents....

Beag, Don't forget to send a mailing address...

JC,
Here's Caunier page 15 that you requested (I've already posted 16. 17, 18, and 19)...all other pages are more conventional guns


George,

Just to let you know...I've probably owned (currently own or already horse traded for Belgian catalogs) about 25 French catalogs over the years...they're pretty hard to come by...almost everyone carried some sort of slider (Darne, Charlin, and a contract gun), Some even carried both Darne and Charlin but no contract gun, as can be seen in this Courty catalog...


Most catalogs show a contract slider...just as Rivolier sold the RPF slider...everyone had there own trade name it seems...It's highly unlikely that a company like Darne (who is already tooled to the teeth, and holds most of the patents) would allow these "clones" to dominate the market...unless it were to turn out that the arsenal at St Etienne or Chaterault actually produced all the rough actions to be finished by artisans across the region (including Darne) as they did with the St Etienne boxlock actions...

So it is possible....but...like I said before...Our collective knowledge hasn't yet reached that level of understanding...not even on the St Etienne boxlocks.....

My point is...I just assumed that Caunier had a business relationship with Charlin...why would anyone sell a Darne based gun while touting the prime competitors name on the same page?
Given how little we actually know about the Darne/Charlin evolution, I still say Charlin played a hand in the making of some of the one piece stocked guns...until someone show definitive proof otherwise...

This last photo is from another well known French supplier/maker Rouchouse...they call their gun "Le Wonder"...and you don't have to read French to know that double verrou means two locking points.

Beag, I hope you're reading this...because this is most likey what you have...a contract gun...probably, most likely a Darne (as Ted pointed out)...it IS NOT a knock-off or fake or "cheap copy" as many have suggested by labeling it a "clone"...anytime someone shows up with something these guys don't understand, they trash it...it's really nausiating the way they enjoy it so much....any Belgian gun that has no name is given a "used oats" label of "guild gun" even when the makers touchmarks are present on the barrels or action flats.

Pay no mind to the guys who downplay your gun...they trash anything they don't understand. Not 10 months ago, a kid showed up here (fishinghole I think) with 1 of 5 known "Marks Special" L C Smith trap guns with lots of case colors...they told him it was essentially some $150 piece of hardware store junk...he still doesn't know that he owns one of the rarest Smiths known...search it out at this forum, you'll see...fishinghole was his name (I think)




I may not be correct in my views of the French doublegun industry, but we will all find out together (about fixed shotguns (sliders))...one patent click at a time

Thank you. No info pertaining the "Queens". Only advertising a gun made by the Cauniers.

JC

JC,
To quote yourself..."Post 71542: "it's an old Caunier catalog that clearly shows what's currently accepted as a 1894 patent Darne but made by Charlin."

Who said that I accept the 1894 patent Darne concept? I was refuting it, not as though I knew it to be false, but from the perspective of a "Devil's Advocate"...all I wanted was some technical reasoning...or something to substantiate the concept...like a catalog or a book reference or insight from a real Darne collection...if you can't substantiate it...it's not a nugget.

Did you say that Cauniers actually made the gun on page 15? I can't read that...but that's definitely the St. Etienne boxlock action that I mentioned earlier...If what you say is correct, that would make Caunier a finishing house as well a vendor.

Beagle,
I know it's unlikely but we still don't know if the company "L'Abeille" used the trade name Abeille on their contract fixed guns or not...I've been trying wangle a L'Abeille catalog from a guy for a year and I may get it (he knows I have a 16ga)...if you stay in touch, it may shed some light on your gun...this is about the closest my info is going to get you in understanding your gun, but keep an eye on the new patent thread, for clues to your gun, as we dissect the fixed barrel evolution one click at a time

Great, now I want a Darne/Charlin/Regina/Abeill, whatever (French Backslider); and I haven't even satisfied my Manufrance Ideal fixation yet. Life was simpler when all I wanted to do was assemble a modest collection of low grade American classics...Geo

Well we're talking about French guns or at least pictures of same between outbreaks of paranoia and textual analysis. I think that's good, an alloyed good but still good. The stump drummer should be happy he's no longer a prophet without honour. The "gun scribe" should be happy to have a little companionship in the ivory tower. I guess I'm happy to have Buffalo Bob stir things a bit? It's so hard to tell sometimes.

jack

Well, I thought the page showing the 1894 Darne action, and the word Charlin looked familiar, and, it should have, since I have the same catalog-and, I was pretty much on the mark, the catalog is from a French retailer that sold both 1894 patent copies and Charlins.

I was told I was full of second round horse oats over it, as well. I expect I'll get over that.

Robert, you have made a very amatuer error in the above photo posting. The gun shown with the Charlin IS NOT a Darne.

When you own up for the above, I'll tell you who made the 1894 copy YOU believe is a Darne.

Hint-go to your junior high French book and look up the word "Fils".

By the way, calling a Darne 1894 copy a "clone" is NOT calling it cheap, or poor quality. It is simply acknowledging that the patent was owned by someone else. Wonderful copy guns exist, surpassing the quality of the originals, proof being the gold medal awarded in Lyon, in 1914, to the company that produced the copy illustrated in the photo Robert put up.

That is another hint, Robert. See what you can dig up. If you need help, I'll happily give you my once through the horse opinion, OK?

Beagledogxxx, if you have a stock for your gun, it should go to a good stockmaker, who can tell you if it can be saved. I don't know if you have a stock, but, you would truly be astounded at what a good wood guy can do with even shattered stocks, if he gets all the pieces.

While Robert is sure that they are simple guns to restock, some very good stockmakers over here refuse to have anything to do with them, for whatever reason. You won't be getting a stock job on a Darne from our own "crossed chisels", for example.


Good luck with your gun. Don't sink a lot of dough into it, though. And have a good gunsmith have a hard look at the barrels and action before you spend a penny on new wood. Kirk Merrington is your man for the mechanical exam, by the way.
Best,
Ted

Jack,
My apologies for the for the crap...It would have been so much easier if they would have allowed me to address Beagle's question 2 weeks ago...I would have still posted the same data...you guys would still have got the same data...

I waited...I gave them first, second, and tenth crack at addressing Beag's gun...they completely f'd it up...just like the Marks Special L C Smith guy went away with bum scoop...now I may misinterpret the data, but at least I base my answers on data rather than notions...you will never catch me passing bum scoop unless I believe it myself. You'll never see me apologize then insult the guy on the way out, as Larry has done to me.

To quote Ted...."Robert, you have made a very amatuer error in the above photo posting. The gun shown with the Charlin IS NOT a Darne."


Well EXCUSE ME...how foolish of me to lump Francisque (Darne Fils)with his father Regis...you got me again Ted...You're right... Darne Fils made guns are not Darnes at all...

Based on Ted's reasoning,if the guns made by the son of Regis are not Darnes...then Bruchets made half a century later are definitely not Darnes (don't quote me on this JC, I don't buy it myself)

Jack,
Are you catching this? Do you see why it's so difficult to answer anything directly? What's next? Maybe I misspelled another French word...maybe they'll get me on punctuation next...

I've scanned through all 10 pages of this thread and while I don't have a dog in this fight I would like to suggest we settle it the old fashioned way - a duel.

Better yet...take a vote on this new (latest)line of resistance to the transfer of information...How many think Ted is correct when he says..." The gun shown with the Charlin IS NOT a Darne"...???

If Ted wasn't simply running resistance, he would have offered it up in a manner that shows that he was actually contributing to the thread or understanding.... by saying...(for example) actually Darne Fils was somebody else trying to cash in on the Darne name...or something of the like...but that's not the case here...

Regardless of what they say...what they're trying to do is bitch their way into fixing it so you guys will get no Darne data unless they issue it to you...and anyone else who offers Darne data gets shredded, even for spelling errors...why else put up so much resistance? I already have the data...they're only trying to block the other readers from getting it...Why? Who cares where the info comes from as long as it's verifyable?
Verifyable...now there's a word to contemplate....

Reminded me of this thread...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDKBJxRh_UU

Hello
There is in these 10 pages some very good information. It is difficult to find it.
Thank for the good catalog.

Don't apologize to me, Robert. It's pretty obvious I'm a member of the lazy-eyed peanut gallery. IMO, you made an attempt to advise B-dog on the feasibiity of restocking and the identity and value of his gun in good humour and good conscience and your posted photos indicate that you have the experience to give your opinions as much weight as the next man's. I don't always see in condescending words and behavior the sinister intent that you appear to see. I think sometimes condescension is a habit that works so well with women, children and animals that it looks like a good bet with every manjack out there. At the currect juncture, we're all breathing hard but still conscious and I don't think anybody associated with this thread is in need of a cut-man and that includes you. If we must act like tykes in a sandbox, Steve Martin is a better model than Lenny Bruce and sarcasm more palatable than personal slander. JC isn't the only one always learning. It's a chore that can't be put off forever. So X-QQQQQQQQ MEEE too.

jack

Darne it....

I don't know who to vote for.

Darnation,
What do you say? Is this gun a a Darne or not?



If not, please explain why...

Mr. Chambers, on the lower left hand corner of page 15 it says:
"Entirely made in our own workshops (We always have some guns in the making that we can show our incredulous customers)" (Maybe they were thinking of you when they printed the catalogue,:-))

Please take the trouble of going to http://www.freetranslation.com with the following text:
"voir page suivants le celebre fusil Charlin a canon fixe". You can copy/paste it. The result is not perfect, but you'll get the idea. In other words, nowhere does it say the Regina was made by Charlin. The only reference I have been able to find about Regina is that it was registered by Edouard Schroeder in 1903 (littlegun.com)

I still think you have valuable literature, but until you realize you cannot base your knowledge on just pictures and brand names, you will have to concede you may sometimes be wrong which is nothing to be ashamed of.

Thank you for sharing your literature.

JC

Hey Beag,

Do you have any pics of the stock and it's problems? I'd be interested in returning it to reasonable cosmetics and shootable condition. Within reason, using the existing stock parameters, your shooting dimensions may be applied, if the materials will allow. The only fee would be for material and return shipping.

The obssesive, unremitting, predictable, uber-defensive personal acrimony is getting tedious, hence any casual gentle reader may consider this offer as an exemplar of a BBS Christmas Goodwill contribution. Peace of the Season to one and all, with a nod to the wisdom and spirit of Bill Wise, and the compassion of his beloved Rosalie.

Send direct to my E: marshgurl@aol.com

John Meeker
West End of Lake Erie

Robert, the above shows clearly where your difficulty lies, both when it comes to understanding gun dealers and in the search for "proof".

I'm looking at Stoeger's 1961 "Shooter's Bible"--back in the days when the Stoeger people dealt in a wide variety of guns, both foreign and American-made. I turn to the section featuring sxs, and I find Spanish (Sarasqueta-made) Zephyrs, Sauers made in West Germany, the SKB Royal, and V. Bernardellis. Stoeger had a relationship with all those firms, all of which made break-action guns, all of which more or less competed with each other. Some (like the lower grade Zephyrs) were less expensive than many of the others. So why is it any less logical that Caunier would offer a Regina, likely a less-expensive sliding breech gun, as well as the more expensive Charlins? Why wouldn't a French dealer do business in the same manner as an American dealer--offering a variety of options to their customers?

And as to your sentence about proof . . . well, you've got it 100% bass-ackwards. You can't prove a negative. Impossible to prove that Charlin DIDN'T make one-piece guns using an expired Darne patent. But it is very possible--simply by showing us an example of said production--that Charlin DID make the guns you "still say" they made. As M. Gournet said, just show us a Darne-patent gun made by Charlin. The ball is most definitely in your court on that one.

As for Beagle's gun, what he does with it is up to him. You've given him some advice, assuming he wants to make his own stock. Ted has given him some advice. Ted has already pointed out to you that "clone" does not mean "cheap". In the case of a "Darne clone", it simply means a gun not built by Regis Darne, but built on his patent. That'd be like a Helice gun not built by Verney-Carron--of which there are lots in France, many of which carry no name at all, but which may still be solid "shooters". It's just that they're not Verney-Carrons, even though they copied the V-C patent action. So I'm not commenting on how good a gun Beagle has, but rather on what it is--and what it is not.

But, since you continue to say that Charlin "played a hand in the making of some of the one piece stocked guns", I'd say that you have your research cut out for you. All you have to do to prove that point is . . . find such a gun. And show it to us. Preferably without the misleading French cropping you tossed our way the first time around. Until you do, seems to me we've wasted enough of our time on this subject. When you catch the wild goose, let us know. Then we'll have something interesting to discuss, other than unsupported conjecture.

JC,
I know I can't read French...but as is generally accept by American collectors, any fixed barrel guns by Regis Darne, Francisque Darne and even Bruchet...are considered Darnes.

Could you imagine if I had made such a statement...like any gun made by Lefever after Dan Lefever died is actually NOT a real Lefever...that's bull

It's the same as catagorically saying that Tryon Bakers are "clones" or fakes...

Now maybe the St Etienne artisans had free access to the designs of Regis when the patents became public domain...that doesn't mean that Regis is not credited with the design..

If Ted wrote a book draft and I found a copy and copywrited and published it...that still doesn't make it MY book...

Francisque Darne made shotguns are true Darnes...whether Ted likes it or not...go to a gunshow and tell a dealer his Francisque Darne engraved shotgun is NOT a Darne, and see how far you get...

I guess the Remington Parkers are not Parkers either...and Marlin LC Smiths must not be real Smiths ...and Galazan model 21's are fake clones...and Tony Galazan is not even the son of Oliver Winchester...

If Ted wanted to make a constructive point about the way Darnes break down by maker, he would have offered it up from a constructive point of view...

Larry,
Nice try slick...all I said is "I'm not buying it" until you prove otherwise...that doesn't put your bull in my court. Until a few weeks ago Ted thought that Charlin came on the scene in the 1950's...now that he's up to speed a little he got new notions to dispell...

I think it's clear to the other readers that what you and Ted don't know about Darnes would just about fit in the Grand Canyon... You're certainly in no position to undermine the OVERALL credibility of another members post because of a spelling error.

Every time you make some statement that you can't verify, the burdon of contrary proof hardly lies with me...but nice try

What could have been interesting has devolved to merely tedious!

I'm confused....


But I'm vOting for Ted.

Dozier,

They could have been a little constructive with their posts...

In what world is a Francisque Darne shotgun not a Darne?

I gave them first second and tenth chance to speak first...

What is your opinion? Is a Francisque Darne made gun considered a Darne? What's your opinion?

After all is said and done, ultimately, they told Beag that his "clone" was essentially dead, don't touch it...I waited...

They post ambiguous information and argue the littlest detail of accuracy with regards to other members posts.

They can package and repackage thier strategy...it's still bunk.

Yes or no Dozier and Darnation...is a Francisque Darne considered a Darne or not?

Mr. Chambers, for the sake of a relatively sane dialogue it would be "fantastique" if you would address the issues I have mentioned, the Darne family not being one of them.

JC

JC,
Could you re-state what ever issue you would like me to address

Bear in mind this thread is still about Abeille (Darne)...If I venture off, these guys could get their panties in a bunch all over again.

Larry gambled his credibility when he thought (for sure) that I couldn't produce photos of a L'Abeille shotgun...he lost...which is really strange since he can't verify one bite of information that he posted...it's all opinion..and it's all an ego game to him...the only problem is, all the readers pay the price for his egotistical non-varifiable opinions and banter.

I didn't just give some dreamy opinion that Beag could resurect his gun...I actully did it...and I proved it with photos...Larry and Ted offer not one bit of varifiable information...

Beagle has gotten the information he came for, despite their monster egos getting in the way...but at what price? In fact they were fairly sucessful mirroring their nonsense toward me.

Larry even admitted his motivations were not to answer Beagle's question...he simply wanted to teach me a lesson... (admittedly offensive)

Mr. Chambers, the doctor is ready to see you. Please come along.

JC,
I spent 20 minutes trying to post, photograph, and re-photogragh page 15 for you...

I'm asking you point balnk...

In your opinion, is a Francisque Darne made gun, considered a Darne or not?

Yes or no JC?

Mr. Chambers:

-Thread is about Abeille (sliding breech, NOT Darne)
-Larry did not gamble his credibility when he thought you could NOT produce a photo of a gun branded L'ABIELLE, which you insisted you had (instead of recognizing your misspelling). YOU lost.
-You did show proof that Beag could resurrect his gun, which is something that has not been doubted, the only doubt being if it is economical.
-Beagle has not gotten the information he came for as he still doesn't know anything about who made his gun.
-Have not seen where Larry admitted to his motivations. Please give me the post number.
-The Cauniers DID make guns. (Page 15)
-No proof whatsoever that Charlin made the Regina or any other sliding breech gun on a Darne patent.

The Doctor is waiting!

JC

P.S.: I have not addressed the Darne family issue. There are better qualified members that may have reasons to say they are not. There is a similar issue with the Sarasqueta name. JC

JC,
Yes or no? You ask for a photo so that you can use them against me...and still I gave it to you...and now you want me to hunt up a post number...this isn't a one way street...

Yes or no JC...is a Francisque Darne made gun considered a Darne?

The original thread started out with me trying to find out about the sliding double with "abeille" stamped on it. Find out...i.e., Who may have made it? Where was it made? When might it have been made? Anyone ever seen or heard of such a gun? Anyone have any details on such a gun, such as which companies made such actions? I was only hoping to learn a little more about it, and to determine whether or not pursuing the restocking of said gun would be an option many would favor or would not favor. No offense to the masses, and while I don't know him personally, Robert has been a great help. There are others who have added important info. as well, and I appreciate it. However,several of you, in an attempt to criticize Robert, have contributed nothing whatsoever to this conversation, except to get Robert pissed off and off track trying to defend himself...something he really shouldn't have to do. Defend himself to you? I'm the one asking the questions here. If you have a question for Robert or anyone else, start you own damn subject. Those of yOu who have nothing to add but smart, cute little one liners in an effort to look cool among you gun-nerd buddies, find something a little more useful to do with your time, or start you own subject. Thanks again to those who chose to keep the conversation informative and positive.

Francique Darne is not a sub-quality product. It is very well made with different era and different owner more or less lucky in the quality. By and large very good.
But is is not a Darne, it is a copy made by his son who did not want to work with the father... Francisque could use the Darne patent as many other makers did. He have the same name than Regis Darne but that is not enough to make his gun a Darne.
I am sure there is many similar stories.
What ever you think you can say anything in this thread.

So gg, is there a possibility that this is what I might have, or are there specific markings associated with Francique Darne guns as well?

Mr Chamber...after reading many of your frenzied posts...I have come to the conclusion that you are a NUTTER.
You may well have a wealth of stuff on old guns, but the way you bicker n bitch just turns me off totally.
I'd much rather listen to good old Lowell pose a funny weird one than hear you rant & rave about pecking orders & who said what to who & when & why.....I just don't think you have the right "headspace"
to fit in with the rest of us.
Think what you like...I'll not respond if you get back to me...its just my opinion & won't be changed by anything you say.
Chill or Check out
nothing personal of course
Franc Otte

You have an Abeille for sure but you can dream of what you want. So many makers could have sold the action in the white. Not Darne.
It could be really what you wish. It could be Bonapartiste special order, their logo was the Abeille...maybe for a secret society trying to promote a coup d'etat.
So far I am really in the thread.

Geffroy, I mentioned the Sarasqueta name above because it is a similar case.

Don Víctor made fame for himself with good products, but there are several relatives with the same name that made/make sub-par guns. They may have the same name but they are not the real McCoy.

JC

So who are yOu voting for Ted or Robert ?

I do not want to wade into this. This is for beagledogxxx.

A search for L'ABIELLE Fusil turned up this catalog.
http://www.dustyoldbooks.com/cgi-bin/boo...logues&pg=1
Apparently this 1935 catalog says L'Abielle was a gun and ammunition maker. At least that is what I get from the description. They did make hammerless shotguns.... might be worth picking up if you have one of their guns.



A reseller for Verney-Carron, L'Abeille in Lamoraye, 33 Avenue de la Libération
http://www.verney-carron.com/pages-fr/liste-revendeurs.htm

A book on Darne no bees, but he does cover some interesting subject matter about non-darne darne's. (Currently only in French, but heck my French is limited and I stumble by.. )
http://cgi.ebay.fr/LES-FUSILS-DE-CHASSE-...VQQcmdZViewItem

A website with some Darne models
http://www.fusildarne.com/html/anglaisdarne.htm
Too bad there is not a website that documents all the models and variations,eg like the Fox, Parker or LC Smith sites. That alone would be a great help. (Hint, Hint)

And to be totally off the wall, L'Abeille is a work by Franz Shubert, a Masonic symbol and a symbol for the house of Medici, who did not commission Leonardo for this gun.

Pete

Please,
Before we all leave this thread, I think it's worth noting that JayCee made 12 posts on this thread...he did nothing to further the understanding of this subject (right or wrong) ...he did zero research...he posted zero data.. only a photo of his gun #71511...he waisted everybodies time with his posts which served only to agitate and incite (11 times on this thread alone)...he contributed nothing but to show off his gun and try to suck up to Larry's weak position.

There is no doubt that I'm probably the surliest member still willing to face these guys...Before we all move on, I think it's important that we all get a handle on exactly what caliber person JayCee truly is...don't take my word for it...go back and read his posts ...on this thread alone, he has proven himself to not only NOT contribute, but to consistantly fan the flames.

JayCee has shown his true colors...read it for yourself...

PeteM,
Please forgive me...I tried to honestly answer Beags question, and although I wasn't correct at every post, I based my answers in reason and verifiable source...unfortunately I was forced to defend every word tooth and claw.

Beag,

I got your mailing address and I'll send out the stock early next week...I'm especially sorry for the way these guys treated your thread...they do it to everybody...please don't think that everyone is arguementitive here...it's only a few...and I give it right back to them...I'll save your email address in case I come into any more Abeille info...Bob Chambers

ROTFLOL, talk about a straw man!

Adios Mr. Chambers.

JC

That makes 13 used oats postings by JC on one thread...wow..."LOL" is how he puts it...he thinks academic postings are to make sport of, and it's obvious in the way he conducts himself...He has raised being counter productive to an all time high at this system...unfortunately there's nothing funny about his brand of vandalism

Before you get away JC...do you have even the smallest bit of constructive information to offer this thread (Beagle's thread)?

Everybody is waiting for your answer JC...surely with 13 posts you have something constructive to say...let's hear it...we waded through 13 posts of crap out of you...so please tell what you know about Abeille or resurecting sliders...

Show everyone what you're really made of...or everyone will know that when you arrive on a thread, it's time to break out the hip waders...

Now let's hear your constructive contribution...

I liked JayCee's posts....

Now there's a fitting endorsement!

You know jOe, I also like Jaycee's posts, and yours, and Lowell's (usually), and I liked Walt Snyder's posts before I was informed he was a "research shark", and I've always respected Larry Brown's posts, and I've learned a lot about French Backsliders from Ted too. The list of the Flamed goes on and on and on.

I've tried ignoring Robert, but I do appreciate the good information he posts so I always end up going back to viewing his posts. And, he has shown a number of times that he can be incrediblly generous with both his knowledge and in other ways. He also seems to be wrong a lot and cannot abide with being corrected. I guess he did "cook" that catalog picture to try and make a point, but I don't think he intended to mislead.

I think he knows that he is going way beyond the pale of civility when he puts on his Flame Warrior outfit, and I'm satisfied that he just can't help it. Maybe he'll have a change of heart, or get some anger treatment or something.

I'm through with this thread though and I've clicked the ignore button on Robert again. Probably my loss, but I don't want to read any more of this...Geo

Once again, Robert . . . all you have to do to prove that Charlin made guns on the Darne patent is--produce such a gun. Then we can all agree, "Yes indeed, that is a Charlin-made Darne." Until that happens, there is nothing but speculation concerning the possibility of Charlin having produced any sliding breech guns other than under their own name and of their own design.

And M. Gournet has it nailed on F. Darne, or Darne Fils. No, those are not Darnes to "Darne collectors"--at least not knowledgeable Darne collectors. Is a Parker Reproduction a Parker? It is, after all, a perfect copy. But not made by Parker; rather, for Winchester in Japan. Same story with the Model 21's and Foxes currently turned out by CSMC. Collectors clearly recognize that those are not Winchester 21's, nor original Foxes. In none of those cases am I making any comment about the QUALITY of the "clones" in question, because that quality is often quite high. But it's a question of the gun being produced either by the original maker, or by a company that bought out the original maker and continued production of the same gun--which description clearly does not apply to the Darne clones, but does apply to Remington Parkers, Savage Foxes, and Marlin Elsies. (The latter except for the current Marlin Elsies, which are a totally different gun.) Bruchet bought the rights to continue to make Darnes, but they're often referred to either as just Bruchet, or Bruchet Darne--just as we refer to Remington Parkers, Savage (or Utica) Foxes, etc. It's a continuation of the same company rather than another company building guns on the same patent, once the patent protection has expired--which is what you have with the Darne clones, or with the non-VC Helice guns.

Some people call anything with a sliding breech (even a Charlin!) a Darne, just like we call facial tissue Kleenex, even if it's not made by Kleenex.

It's great if, through your efforts or John's, Beagle manages to resurrect his Abeille. That's certainly a positive outcome. But for all the bluff and bluster with which you entered the lists in this thread, you still haven't been able to tell Beagle anything about his gun--like who made it--that was not previously known. You made an effort to make a connection to Charlin, but that effort failed. So . . . we're still back to Square One on who made Beagle's gun. It's a Darne clone of some sort, maybe made by a company called Abeille; maybe by some St. Etienne gunmakers who chose that as a model name; maybe by Darne Fils. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with owning a French gun of "uncertain parentage". I've owned a bunch of them myself--non-VC Helices; some bearing no name at all; some bearing a name that almost certainly was not that of the maker. Some bearing somewhat misleading names, like a Petrik I owned marked "Gastinne Renette". That, for better or for worse, is the way it often works with French guns. And for that matter, it isn't all that different from British guns. In that case, they nearly all have names, but very frequently it's not the name of the real gunmaker. C'est la vie.

Well Darne it.

If that isn't just like you Larry...you've switched Remington Parker to Japanese Parker...

I don't believe a word you say anymore...you back up nothing with reference ...you flip your stance at the drop of a hat...you think that your keen understanding of French (the language) gives you some unparalleled understanding of French guns...

How about those books that aren't coming...you know, the ones that are already published...

Although I may be wrong about my interpretaions and spelling...at least I don't fabricate used oats to trowel out to these guys the way you do...errors beat bull every time...

I don't believe you ever owned a Gastinne Renette...I don't believe you worked for the CIA...and I don't believe that you ever worked for the Lockheed Skunk Works Team...prove me wrong, Larry...show us your entnac security clearance...I still have mine...I still have my diploma from US Army Intell School...and I can show it...(yes, although I was a US Marine, I graduated from an Army school)

C'mon Larry, spin these guys another yarn...roll that beautiful bean footage

What if yOu have oats in your bull ?

Believe it or not I used to be a brain surgeon.

I am no big fan of Larry Brown but the man can write cogently and he speaks French, a basic necessity to understand the available research material on French guns. So, although you heap disdain on his knowledge, I would give his arguments much more weight than your notions, buried as they are in toxic prose, devoid of spell-check, syntax and basic courtesy.
Imagine taking a guy seriously when he is pontificating on the handling benefits of the of an AC Cobra over a D-Type - and then finding out that he could not drive!!
You still have a few friends left here - they have tried to be kind to you, listen to them and go away for a while.
Km.

Kerryman...he could have just let me speak softly to Beagle and offered counterpoint, instead he thought he needed to teach me a lesson...he even admitted it...so he "took me to the mat" over a spelling error...

Tell me, who has the right to teach another member a lesson in manners? Now, who has the right to teach another member a loeeson in manners while troweling out unsubstantiated crap out of the other side of their face?



Darnation,
Thank you for answering directly, it wasn't the answer I had hoped for, but honesty trumps hopes...I wouldn't want anyone to answer untruthfully...so thank you...at least you answered with reason...we will never reach a proficient level of understanding unless we compare evidence (contrary or similar)

Supposing he decides to start teaching the members at GournetUSA/DarneUSA Forum lessons in manners...how would that be?

Larry needs to apologize to everyone...and without capping it off with a sideways insult, as he did last time...

He needs to know that it is not his place to be teaching manner lessons...

How many others has he done this to?

Geo Newburn,
Please please delete the part about John Mann...I had mistaken him for JMann who, along with MP and KCrowley, sent me off to some non-existant CIA history museum...John Mann says that I have mistaken him, other members took the time to email me assuring me that he could not be the same JMann...I was totally out of line...please delete Johns name from your post...he's an honorable guy...please

Darnation, Are you catching this? Some members at this board don't mind in the least that they cook up misleading evidence. They see it as funny or entertaining...I now lump Larry in with that bunch...his ego has allowed him to become a liability...

ENTNAC . . . that'd be an Entrance National Agency Check, Robert? Wow . . . please impress me with your military intelligence credentials. Well, I'll see your rookie ENTNAC and raise you one each major league TS-SBI. That'd be Top Secret, based on a Special Background Investigation. Still have my copy, Robert, amongst a bunch of other old Army papers. It's the last one I had, DA Form 873. Date final clearance granted: 6 Feb 92. Granted, like all other military TS clearances, by the Central Clearance Facility, Ft. Meade, MD. Had a TS clearance, continuously, from 1968-98, when I retired from the USAR.

And if you want to check the validity of your BS about my background, Robert . . . you can get some confirmation from public sources. Try "Army Intelligence in the Guard and Reserves 1948-1998", Morris Publishing, Kearney, NE. 800-650-7888. If you get a copy, check out p. 115, concerning the Joint Reserve Intelligence Support Element (JRISE). Concerning which: "Colonel Larry Brown, commander of the 469th Strategic MI Detachment based at Fort Snelling, Minnesota, was named as the Acting Director of Joint Operations." So there I am, for anyone to see, in a published (and unclassified) source.

As for working for the CIA . . . how about a letter from the CIA's Publications Review Board, regarding a draft manuscript I submitted to them (as required of all former CIA personnel), and in response to which they say: "The Board has identified information in your manuscript which, if published by you, could hamper the Agency's ability to perform its intelligence collection functions. As an acknowledged former CIA officer . . . "

By way of calling your bluff on my background, Robert, I'd be more than willing to provide copies of those documents (and others) to any neutral party participating on this board. Not nice to call someone a liar, Robert. Something all too common in cyberspace, I find . . . much less common in "real" space.

As for having owned a Gastinne Renette . . . in fact, I've owned two shotguns so marked. One the aforementioned Petrik, which I subsequently sold to a REAL French shotgun expert named Gary Murphy (who did an article on French shotguns for Double Gun Journal). The other a boxlock. I'm sure some folks here know Gary Murphy, who would confirm the Petrik provenance (which I got from New England Arms before they went out of business). I'd give you Gary's phone number, Robert, but I wouldn't want him to be bothered by you.

You talk about backing things up with "reference", but the "reference" you cite as proof that Charlin made Darne-patent guns doesn't say that at all. Once more, you want to PROVE that Charlin made guns on the Darne patent . . . show us a Darne patent gun marked Charlin. Simple enough. Just like the "L'Abielle" you claimed to have, which turned out to be a "L'Abeille". And once again, when you get it wrong, you can't bring yourself to simply say "Woops, I goofed". You've got to attack the people that straightened out your mistakes.

Robert, you're one of those guys who, when in a hole, asks for a shovel so he can keep digging deeper. You're in way over your head--once again.

Larry I like everyones posts on here...and I believe you.

wOOd you guys like to see proof I was a brain surgeon ?

Some people should be allowed to choke on their own vomit by themselves. Eventually it's quiet.

Well, Mr Chambers, the devil is, or would appear to be, in the details.

You have confused two different makers, who sold guns built with different features, different grades, different markings, different patents used and, produced at different times, in different factories.

You have failed sliding breech 101. Geoffroy graded your paper and awarded you a big, fat F, right after I did.

My book might not be your's, but you still get the same grade after all.

You have posted that I believed Charlin came onto the scene in the 1950s, which, clearly, I never have or would. Since, as I pointed out a long way back, I own the same catalog (among others) showing Charlins in production long before that.

I'd ask where exactly did you get that nonsense, but, I suspect it simply doesn't matter at this point. There exist too many windmills that need tilting at in your mind.

It is a long thread, but, do tell where I ever posted that Charlin came along in the 1950s. Another hint-you will be looking a long, fruitless time.

Inspite of the fact that the original gun of the discussion is quite plainly, a
lower grade copy of an 1894 Regis Darne R model, you would have us believe otherwise. You would have had us believe that Charlin produced 1894 Darne copys, but, you were pretty much busted wide open on that.

I thought I read/wrote and spoke lousy French. You, my friend, have no clue, and have proven it, over and over, in this post.

You would have us believe that a clone gun is always inferior to the original, when, the evidence from sliding breech guns received from awards at exposition reveals quite the opposite.

I've simply never claimed to be an expert on anything, but, I think it is clear from the lack of understanding you have of the catalog items you post, to the confusion of distinct and separate makers, to simply dreaming up information that others posted in your nightmares, and calling it fact, you have a lot more to learn than you even know, and might need more than just help with your gun study.

Best of luck. You really need it.
Best,
Ted

Just trying to cheer them up...

B-dog, topics are not holy scripture - they take on a life of their own...and for most, this subject has been zzzzzzzzzzz!
If you want sole ownership of a topic - start your own BBS.
Don't sell-out for a fifty dollar piece of wood!

To change topic, let speak Abeille.
I though interesting or even very good the information page 13 from PeteM about a big dealer named Abeille. It could be very well be our guy. Please take a quick look.On p 13 you can click on the dustyoldbooks website.
PeteM said:
I do not want to wade into this. This is for beagledogxxx.

A search for L'ABIELLE Fusil turned up this catalog.
http://www.dustyoldbooks.com/cgi-bin/boo...logues&pg=1
Apparently this 1935 catalog says L'Abielle was a gun and ammunition maker. At least that is what I get from the description. They did make hammerless shotguns.... might be worth picking up if you have one of their guns.


Quote:

L'Abielle: - L'Abeille. Manufacture d'armes de chasse. Munitions Exportation.
(Paris, L'Abielle, ND [c1935].)
Paperback, black lettering. 225 x 155mm. pp20. Illustrated. Magnum (mono, type 200, 210, 215, Grand Luxe, Magnum Kerne), Armor, Luxe, accessoires de chasse, fusil hammerless, carabines de chasse et de tir, carabines de tir de precision, pistolet automatiques, fusil Kerne, tir aux pigeons artificiels, lunettes de visee, munitions. £20.00

OK, I un-ignored you again and I'm glad I did, since I see your apology to John Mann. I'll gladly delete that part of my post. As for the rest of it, I don't know why I have bothered to try...Geo

LG, B-dog speaking up for his benefactor is a friendship in the making. Let it stand.

jack

Larry,

Do you still want to teach me anymore lessons? How many members have you done this to? I see you know how to use google. Try googling Darne books...you know, the ones that are never coming.

I told you I am not a fan of LB; I regard him as old spook (which I imagine he takes as a complement), bored-in-retirement, with a rather strange political outlook and an affinity to plausible denial. However, were I to meet him I would be quite happy to pass an evening with him; I would stay away from topics like CIA, US foreign policy, etc., and discuss guns and shooting, because he clearly knows his stuff and having read many of his posts outside this topic I guess he is enjoyable company.
Nobody is teaching manners. You, however, have "crossed the line" on more than one occasion (too many times in the view of many) and most, including myself, have politely suggested that you stop the whining, hectoring and little-girl name calling. Your arguments do not stack, you are unwilling to admit a mistake. Your rants have demeaned your position and whatever you post as an "expert" is - in my view- highly suspect due to your ill-mannered and ignorant behavious. I now regard your net contribution to this BB as not worthwhile.

Let's review here . . . in my case, for the final time:

We've been told that all guns made on Darne patents should be referred to as Darnes. Interestingly enough, if one goes back to the Caunier catalog information on the "Regina", the word "Darne" is never mentioned. Not "this gun is as good as a Darne!", nor even "this gun is made on the famous Darne system". So it appears that not even the French themselves refer to all Darne patent guns as Darnes. To me, it would seem wise to follow their lead in that area. In fact, what Caunier touts most on that page--in bold letters, no less--is that two models of the Regina are available at greatly reduced prices. Not the gun's action or design, but its price. Interesting contrast to the Charlin on the next page, in that regard.

The way we discuss the action of the "sliders" is, again, quite different from the French. We talk about what happens to the breech; they refer to what happens (or doesn't happen) to the barrels. ("Canons fixes" versus "canons basculants"--the latter phrase translated by Darne themselves as guns with "tipping barrels". Has a funny sound to it, but it certainly conveys the way a "conventional" double works.)

So . . . we're still left with the suggestion that Charlin made Darne-patent guns. I suggest that we await the well-established standard of proof before accepting that as fact. And that is, of course . . . someone actually showing us such a gun, or solid documentary evidence that such guns were indeed produced by Charlin. Until then, a Darne patent gun not made by Darne remains somewhat of a mystery. It would seem the phrase "Darne clone" is quite appropriate, carrying with it no comment--either positive or negative--on the quality of the gun itself ("buy the gun, not the name!"), but rather on the design of the gun and the fact that it was not made by the company founded by Regis Darne.

Robert, if I were interested in books on Darne, I would procure them--just as I would all the books on Parkers if I wished to delve into Parker history in that much detail, which I don't. But possessing the Darne books would seem to be of little value to someone incapable of reading them.

M. Gournet, that "Abeille" link might lead Beagle somewhere interesting, but I can't get it to work.

Kerryman, I do indeed take "old spook" as a complement. And I'm enjoying retirement because it gives me more time to hunt and shoot--although currently, an excess of snow and ice has rendered our local pheasant population far more accessible to viewing out in the middle of barren fields rather than to a hunter pursuing them with bird dog and doublegun. Sad to say, but this season may end with a whimper as opposed to a bang.

This thread has everything. Not only do we have the Three Stooges at the top of their game we have Abbott and Costello's famous "Who's on First Routine". It doesn't get any better than this.

Hello.
To Robert, you wrote to me:
"Darnation,
Thank you for answering directly, it wasn't the answer ..."
Thank you to speak to me directly. I do not get it all the time when it is done directly and when it is done with subtility as a lot in the thread I miss or misunderstand it.
Good thread never die.

To Beagledogxxx
If you sale you Abeille, do not forget to add this topic with it. It will bring more value.

Make sure you use only very low pressure shells in that thing. The locking bites remind me of clasp closure on old shed door in sleepy Belorussian village.

Rick nails it. Give the man a dollah!

He might even consider a top lever....allot less fUss.

Meanwhile, there's a very nice conventional French gun, Manufrance Robust 16, listed on the "for sale" section of this BB. I'm getting no commission from the seller, but it looks like a pretty good buy to me. I've owned several Robusts over the years. Solid guns--like the name--if a little heavier than many other French doubles.

To the PM,

BIPO is still not up and running as far as expired patents are concerned...you don't need any special plug-in anymore but it still continually redirects you to espacenet...

The espacenet search engine is so lame, only google can save them now...the search engine can't even search their own database by words in the title...try it with words like ejector, fusil, chasse...or anything and the results are beyond disappointing...when you do get a big results list (by entering F41 only), you only get the first 500 when all the old stuff that we're interested in is way in the back where you can't get to, because of the first 500 parameter...so I guess you really have to know the inpadoc family your looking for if you want to surf the European Patent Office...

It's not easy but it's not difficult either...you have my phone #...call me if you have trouble and I'll explain while we're both on the same website page... 10 minutes on the phone can explain it better than an hour of my typing.

There is a way through the back door to view the Belgian shotgun patents but it's hit or miss...once you're viewing the inpadoc family results list, when you click the patent title, it takes you to the classification page...on that page, you will sometimes see other Adobe icons under "also published as"...any number beginning with BE will show a Belgian patent...

There's a better way but it's a lot more time consuming...