doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Advantages of the top rib extension bolt

Really?

It would be hard to get much lower grade than my model.8 in that lovely picture down below that Fuse and Ted hate so much. It has two under lugs and a cross bolt.

You will have to remind me where I said I hated your picture.

I feel sorry for your dogs, and your neighbors, but, that is totally different.


Best,
Ted

So why all the sorrow? Dusty is having a grand time in the snow right now.

I hadn't thought about the 200 & 300 series Merkels until they were mentioned, but the whole 200-204 series only have the Kersten crossbolt with no Purdey underbolting, whereas the 300-304 series have both underbolting and crossbolt.The 203E & 204E are considered pretty high grade guns. This thread also reminded me of a Churchill Premiere XXV 12 two-barrel set I have that has the Smith easy opening action with no top fastener and only a single bite on the rear underlug, and it was built in 1961.It's London proofed for 2 3/4" loads and weighs in at 6lbs. If it passed 2 3/4" proof with one lug, it's good enough for me. Regards, Sandlapper

This idea that you can't have too many locking mechanisms probably stems from when the Nutty Professor blew up his Rock Island built Springfield Model of 1903 rifle with an apparent careless handload.

He probably should get checked for remaining shrapnel embedded in his skull, which might explain irrational thoughts about anthropogenic climate change, an affinity for anti-gun Democrats, and this paranoid idea that Ted and Lefusil hate his tagline photo.

Just to add detail to Mr Hause's post, the first Westley Richards top rib extension bolt, his 'Doll's head,' was indeed patented in 1862 (patent No. 2506 of 1862), but it had a pull-lever, not the swing-lever described by Greener. Westley Richards' swing-lever patent was in 1864 (patent No. 2623 of 1864). Both use only the top extension as the locking lug, there are no bolts engaging the lumps under the barrels, which only serve to hook with the hinge pins.

Here is the 1862 pull-lever version:



And here is the 1864 lateral-lever version:

Interesting that the 1864 seems to have the evolutionary vestiges of percussion lock drip bars.

I am not sure what point is being made in this thread. That low grade Merkels and very early Richards have no under lugs - is the consensus that these guns are as good as high grade guns with three locking points? I usually do not look to the lowest quality guns to set benchmarks for anything like what is the best set of features. I know Greener was a real pro at marketing his guns. On the other hand, I do not think he made his crossbolt 3rd fastener as simply a marketing ploy. It is even more doubtful that all the Germans and other British makers that have copied that crossbolt (and presumably paid handsome patent royalties for the privilege) invested all of that expense and time in labor and licenses imply for as a marketing ploy. No doubt there are many great guns without 3rd fasteners, but I see no reason to believe that makes the third fastener superfluous either.

The single attachment of the Westley Richards guns was sufficient for the black powder loads of the day, even under substantial use, and Westley Richards' highest-grade guns did not have extra locking points. But I expect double and triple locking systems to be stronger and therefore, in greater demand by a shooting public rather obsessed with the strength of breechloader actions. Most early actions had a single attachment point, wherever it was. It looks like by the time gun actions were heading towards a kind of standardization dictated by market forces, double and triple systems were the norm.

I think that at one time Winchester removed the bolting from an M21 and proceeded to fire multiple loads through the gun, successfully. I wouldn't swear to this but I can't imagine that I would cook that up on my own! Maybe some one here knows?

To Steve Nash' point. A LeFevre Nitro or any 311 variant with their rib extension/inclined slot lock up will stand up well to just about any reasonable abuse one might offer. Guns made in somewhat recent times, built to a price point.

Chief

I disagree that the added locking points have anything to do with necessity and that added locking points were added because one locking point was not sufficient. Many examples of single locking points that are sufficient have been shown.