doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion Double Rifles, Paradox Guns & Gauge Rifles @ doublegunshop.com H. Scherping 9.3x72

Yeah, I am confident that Stephan Schilling did most of the tube work after the initial stroking & reaming and then knitted the whole works together.

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Said effort is a trip, or 2, to Suhl and get to the bottom as best we can. Most collectors & authorities on these fantastic smokepoles from the >>Glorious Age of Gunning<< have 60+ years and I just am not convinced that the next generation will be addicted so....

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Stephan Schilling was compensated and took liability for 2 separate tasks.

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

A trip or two is on my list, I would love to. I’m in my 30’s but you are right, most of my friends who are interested in this genre are 30+ years older than myself.

I'll book you a room then....


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Raimey,
Is this rifle yours or Themauserkid's? Great photos but no ID of the owner. The 118,35 is the bore (not groove or bullet) diameter expressed in gauge measurement, dating the rifle between 1893 and 1912. In my experience this bore diameter most often equates to .358-.359" groove diameter. This suggests the possibility of using the Tesco style bullet, 35 Rem. (180 or 200 grain, the new Flex tip for the Remington) or several different cast bullets. Is there a proof load shown on the side of the barrels? If so, bullet weight? Important for regulation.
Mike

Oh Ford, not mine for sure. I was just rendering aide by posting fotos.

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Thanks for all the help and info. No, this one doesn’t have a proof load on the barrels.

Yeah, the load data didn't come along to later . But there was some confusion on >>Service Load<< & >>Proof Load<< that led to real issues. I think most Jägers didn't have any idea what to stick in the hole of the chamber & they relied on the firearms merchant. Too, there was a voluntary load data stamp that warranted an extra fee and you know the effort Lead Dirigibles(Balloons) have....

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Raimey,
In addition to the confusion caused by showing bore diameters in gauge measurement and not addressing the cases, one of the main reasons for the 1911 improvements to the 1891 proof law is the confusion you mentioned. If a rifle was proofed with a "strong powder" the hunters were hesitant to use ammo loaded with a greater amount of powder, even though it may have been "weaker". After the change, they typically didn't show the weight or type of powder but did the weight and type of bullet.
Mike