doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Daly Damascus color?

Ken:

As I stated earlier, if we can arrive at some sort of consensus, then we can look in that direction. I truely believe in quid pro quo and there's nothing argumentative about this thread. For the advancement of the collection of info on Lindner Daly guns, if you don't agree, say so & why.

The presence of the "HAL" marks don't bother me that much but the serial number and number near the forend lug do. I didn't look there on the Heinrich Scherping, but didn't know too. I think a lot of the questions that arise here force us to look in a different direction or look at a series of marks differently. In 1897 Heinrich Scherping sold his business to the brothers Heinrich Eckebrecht & Johann Eckebrecht and they both expired with a year in the very late 1930s. Were they masters, I can't say. Heinrich Scherping expired just prior to WWI and met the requirement that a firm have a master, so Heinrich was at the least one of the masters at the firm when the Sauer-Facil Princeps was made. From looking at several other Heinrich Scherping, Hannover examples, he sourced heavily from Sauer and offered a Rigby style forend latch, which is typically seen on Vienna examples, on all but a few of his models. I doubt very seriously that Heinrich Scherping put much effort into the Facile Princeps longarm. It had "Krupp Spezial Lauf Stahl" tubes and in 1894 Krupp offered 4 steel types thru Krupp. So the Heinrich Scherping was made between 1894 and 1912, which I consider to be during the same time of the Daly in question. Jeff Stephens guesses that circa 1900 that the technique was abandonded, http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbt...=30&fpart=3 .

What did I learn? Well I need to take better notes and without a doubt take a image saving device. It's akin to going to the Vintagers and thinking you'll remember all the German guns there. Also all marks need to be noted and scrutinized.

On the Daly of question, considering the "HAL" marks and serial number, what is the minimum effort Lindner would have performed on the example? Or conversely, what effort by Sauer is noted by their marks? The only Sauer mark missing is a caveman perpendicular to the bore direction in the position of the Crossed Pistols over HAL, unless I've missed one.

So would you go as far as to say that Lindner finished this one in Sauer's shop???? About the only way to gain knowledge is to make a reasonable premise, research along that line and when data proves a very low probablilty, acknowledge that it isn't a possiblity, heading in yet another direction.

From this Vintagers, GGCA get-together, examples and such, I've learned that I've just scratched the surface and don't know nothing. We've a long row to hoe. Also the name Rudolf Sauer and initials "R.S." are pressing on my mind. But Sauer had a forge or something of the like in Steinsfeld, which I think to be close to Meiningen, where they had a satellite office, which is where Robert Schlegelmilch performed his art. But I don't know when the forge came online, but was active post WWI.

We could probably do this by email as you, I and possibly a handful of other hardcore Daly fanatics may be the only ones reading this verbiage.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

Raimey, your conclusion about the readership of these Lindner threads is incorrect. When Owleye was participating, I started printing these threads, hoping that I could be there when some of these mysteries were solved. I haven't been as diligent at the "print" button since Ken took over the database because I assumed he would publish more than he has. Don't bury all this research in emails, please. I didn't participate in the research done by Ken and others at the Vintagers, but I did stand with my hands in my pockets and my ears open while those more versed than I discussed what we are discussing today. Please stay on this forum and don't go to the email function to discuss this interesting stuff. Bill Murphy

Raimey,

I always appreciate your insight. Trying to figure out the delineation of work on this gun is tough. Obviously the barrels are totally Sauer made. It is very likely other work was done by Sauer also (in addition to providing the original rough forging), but I'm not sure how much or on which pieces. Sauer was obviously capable of producing top quality work. But I am stuck in the original question "loop" of why are Lindner's marks on the gun? Sauer produced Charles Daly drillings and the model 80 did not bear Lindner marks. If Sauer was commissioned to make a high-grade Daly shotgun I would not expect to see Lindner's marks at all.

Was Lindner merely the "quality control" man in the production of this gun (one side of the spectrum of possibilities)? Or did Lindner make the gun and happened to decide to use the latest, highest strength barrel/rib arrangement which came exclusively from Sauer? I'm guesing the truth is somewhere in between, but I'm struggling with where?

Eightbore,

I also wish I have had more published to date. Work, family, and life conspire against my best intentions. That said, I have done 5 or 6 articles from the German Gun Collectors Journal, and I have a few more in the works. I have had a long article in the hopper for the DGJ for quite awhile, but everytime I think it might be closer to publishing, new discoveries are made which bring me back to square one - like the gun in question.

Ken

Raimey,Ken,Eightbore,
I agree please don't bury this discussion into private e-mails, I for one am guilty in that I have done so myself with Raimey when I first saw this thread as I was intrigued with his knowledge & research capabilities. I have been collecting & researching Heinrich Scherping guns for sometime now and in what I am learning from you guy's amazes me & to see the ties to Sauer as with the Daly's, it opens the eyes as to how many smaller makers were out there producing fantastic firearms without trying to reinvent the wheel. Makes sense that a smaller maker would source the raw components that he did not have the capability to make from one of the best of the larger firms, then bring them into their shop & tweak & embellish to fit their customers desires & retail their own finished product that differed from others. I wish I had more knowledge to share on the subject but feel like a rookie, but I do have quite few examples of Heinrich Scherpings guns and am certainly willing to add anything I can in learning more on the Suhl trade of the time.

Best Regards
Mike

Eightbore:

Thanks for reading and calling my hand. It isn't that a more sanitatized verision wouldn't be posted, but I tend to think that folks might get a bit distracted when lengthy diatribes on abstract thoughts are posted. And everyone I've had the pleasure of meeting or had email contact with seem to ask for more. So with that said, I'll tell you what I think.

Jesse Thompson, or another authority on German target arms, interviewed Helmut Schlegelmilch, whose grandfather was Gebhard Helmuthhauser(I think his mark to be a star over H), both which worked at G.C. Haenel. Buchsenmacher Helmuthhauser told an account of Herrn Aydt having a set aside room where he personally inspected as well as tested every Haenel Aydt action German target arm they produced. I assume that he had some sort of stamp of approval. I think this not to have been odd, but the norm for contractors. Heirs and assigns give that the high cost of patent renewal forced Herrn Aydt to let the patent expire after 20 years in 1904. Herrn Aydt insisted that each example be composed of the highest grade steel since other similar, inferior, cheaper ones were possibly made of cast.

I've read and heard of a special room at the Sauer facility where the highest of grade guns were inspected and finished. Consider that Heinrich August Linder had about 1/2 dozen journeymen at his basement shop. Using the Bohemians as a benchmark, and I realize they are not German but are still craftsmen on par with the Germans, such a shop would turn out maybe 2 dozen and possibly 3 dozen longarms per year. With economics in mind, which is directly equated to time, now consider as per the 1907 catalogue, and let's digress back 7 or so years for effect, the stated fact is that it takes 6 months to complete a Model 500. So lets say that a Model 275 takes 3 months to complete. Continuing along the same lines, let us say that the Model 135 and Model 118 take a month to complete. If anyone has real number please feel free to correct me. I'm not positive of the yearly production numbers, but let's say over a year Heinrich Lindner gets an order for 3 Model 500s(you could insert Model 375), 5 Model 275s and 2 dozen Model 135s and 118s together. From 1880 to WWI was the peak of order and production. So how is Heinrich August Lindner going to fill these orders? Well, let us say he spent 2/3rds of his time in his basement shop supervising the completion of the Model 135/118s(could easily include the Model 225s) from components and 1/3 of his time in a special room at the Sauer plant as a quality control fella and apparently performed the task of fitting the tubes to the action in the ongoing process. It's just pure conjecture, but I think it is a start.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

Fellas:

I failed to add the question of why in 1914/1915 did Sauer purportedly produce a top quality promotion gun for S, D&G as serial #167317? I think the answer is that Ernst Lindner was drafted and either Heinrich August Lindner embraced the possiblity of the loss of his son, who fell in fierce fighting against the Brits at the site of the Bellewaarde Spur Attack on June 16th, 1915 or he lost interest at Ernst's death. Ernst Lindner was born on July 6th, 1883 and should have been a master by the time of the 1907 S,D&G catalogue. If Heinrich August Lindner waited until the loss of Ernst, how could Sauer have produced a masterpiece so quickly, i.e., they were doing it already with Heinrich August Lindner assistance as a quality control specialist.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

Raimey,

Good point on the production numbers. I have thought about the Lindner production numbers quite a bit as they are an integral part of working through the Daly serial number sequence. While I am sure it varied considerably during the 40+ years Lindner produced or helped produce guns, a production figure of 100 guns/year is decent working number.

While Lindner had a shop of only 6 or so men, he likely used a number outworkers for some parts/tasks as was the norm for the Suhl trade. This bit makes the production calculus tougher.

Best regards,
Ken

"Production Calculus", you may have coined a new term and I'm fond of it. True he did source components and tasks but I don't think he strayed far from his relative network and Sauer. Sources give he was termed as a "rucksack gunsmith", which was a bit demeaning but I'm sure they were jealous of his connections. Forget not that during the same period, the Bohemians sourced the Belgians for components and really weren't even able to approach the 100 longarm examples per year.

I will say that I have read from several sources that he really didn't make any guns, but I don't think that to be the case.

Any yearly production numbers for the 1890 decade as well as the early 1900s?

Today, I have wrestled with the serial number and stamped number near the forend lug. Sometimes it's 200+, more or less, and sometimes it is -200, more or less. It must have something to do with payment; to whom I can't say.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

There was a question at the GGCA get-together at the Vintagers(2009) raised by Mr. Mann as to a stamp of a "S" in a star on the butt of the stock of a Lindner Daly he had worked upon. For now, I guess it to be Christoph Lebrecht Schilling with a lesser probability of Friedrich Schlegelmilch, both which were master stockers from the mid 1800s on. If anyone else has such a stamp or a different one from a Daly, we'd be pleased as punch if you'd post it.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

Here's a Georg Lindner 10 bore double for Charles Daly #47 listed at Cabelas, http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/conten...erarchyId=11653 :


There looks to be a set of initials next to the "154", but I can't say. The form was there before Heinrich August Lindner added his mark, including the forend bump. So was Georg Lindner and his 1/2 dozen craftsmen making all of Charles Daly's gun inhouse; I doubt it. Where ever Georg Lindner was sourcing, Heinrich August Lindner contiued the tradition. I'm still unsure where Georg Lindner was an apprentice.

Sauer Daly as listed by Cabelas, http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/conten...erarchyId=11653 :


I'm curious if the DRGM around the cocking indicator is from the 1890s.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse