Dear Campero and Lagopus,
I note from the current Eley Shooter’s Diary ( Eley Hawk having at last stopped emblazoning the misleading and embarrassing title ELEY HAWK SHOOTERS DIARY across the cover) that there is a note which reads:-
“*Please note that the British Proof Authority will not give guidance on pre-1954 marks and recommends re-proof of such guns”.
No doubt a policy motivated more by liability concerns than a desire to generate more business.
A gun submitted for re-proof could be blown up, but it might also be rejected for such reasons as not having chamber dimensions which do not accord with the latest dimensions. If rejected it becomes out of proof and unsalable.
Campero, by all means as Lagopus suggests ask the Birmingham proof house for an opinion on the marks.
Should they suggest submitting it to re-Proof, either there or in Spain consider those risks.
If it was my gun, and the bore is not seriously pitted and still measures between .579 and .587 inch at 9 inches from the breech, I would not let it anywhere near a Proof house.
Your gun bears on re-proof the post-1954 marks, and I believe that was when the lozenge with the chamber size would have been impressed and corrected.
Bear in mind that the bore sizes go up in steps (.710, .719, .728/9 and .740 or 13, 13/1, 12 and 12/1 in the case of a 12 bore) and that when it was re-proofed the actual internal diameter at 9 inches may have been exactly .579 or a few thousands of an inch more.
