doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Blanch Hammergun with extended top tang

Recently bought in this Blanch hammergun for restoration. Nothing to write home about: a Scott manufactured gun for the trade but tidy none the less and with great barrels.
However one interesting feature is the top tang. This has been extended and an additional screw has been used. Judging by the engraving, this was done before original sale but to what end, we will never know.
Only likely explanation I can think of is that the stock had a shake or crack and strengthening was advisable.




And the Scott patent stamp:

Very nice. Can you show us the stock and the barrels?
BillK

What year do you think that was made?

Toby, I have seen this type tang before, but failed to note where, when, or on who-done-it's gun. Nice feature.

DDA

BillK: Sorry the gun is now scattered round various processes, barrels are good quality damascus and the stock is a replacement with fairly good colour and figure.
Montana: On the basis of the Not For Ball proof marks, between 1875 - 1887. Assuming the Scott patent use number on the action flat is in fact their serial number (it is duplicated in several places internally), 25*** dates to 1879.
Don: At least there is one other out there! Did you get my email about the Form 6's?

Toby, can you tell for certain that it has been extended, and not originally made that way? Is there evidence of a joint on the underside?

SRH

Stan: At first I thought it was made as original but on VERY close inspection I think I could detect a forged weld just beyond the first screw hole. There is definitely no brazed scarf joint which I would have expected if the extension was a repair.
The metal of the 'extra' portion is a little different in grain structure and finish from the rest of the top tang but the engraving matches perfectly.
My guess is that it was extended at the 'in the white' stage and then finished off and engraved in one piece.

Sounds reasonable to me, too. The shape of the tang from the front screw hole forward just wouldn't look right if the rear portion were not there, IMO. Looks to have been filed with the overall length in mind originally.

SRH

Please do be sure to show us the finished piece once it is all back together now that you have whetted our appetite!! That sure looks like it is going to be a really nice looking piece once complete. Thanks for sharing thus far Toby. I believe you stated that the gun is in different stages of work? Are you doing the restoration yourself in its entirety?

That's the nicest tang extension I've seen. Depending on the checkering, it would be tempting to remove it and fill in the void if the stock were sound, although I realize that may not be the case.