Are New cap & ball pistols test-fired by manufacturer?

[wiksmo]

I just joined the MLF this weekend, and have my first question. It is more a curiosity Q since I've never before purchased a BP firearm.

Whenever I've bought a new rifle or handgun, I know they are test-fired before being shipped out to distributors. Is that the case also with BP firearms? Just wondering if my new Trapper .50 cal I'm waiting to receive will need an up-front cleaning before I shoot it? I'm thinking that the answer I may get is a yes. TIA.

 

[TFoley]

All reputable small-scale makers of BP firearms are known to test fire their products under conditions that would likely cause some concern to the new owner - like a double charge.

All BP firearms made in Europe are subjected to the government-imposed proof test requirements. Each of the nations signed up to the CIP legislation - fourteen of them so far - are required by the LAW of the country to hand over their firearms to the national proof houses for test firing before they can be sold on the commercial market.

The process goes like this -

1. The arm is examined by a qualified [what else] firearms inspector for compliance with its stated description provided by the maker. This is called, in UK, primary viewing, but in any case, the arm gets stamped to show that this has happened.

2. It is then subjected to initial proof with the load it is expected to shoot by the new owner, and if it passes that, it usually gets a primary proof mark, or it is passed directly to the test proof level which will be somewhat higher. In the case of BP arms, this is often, but not always, around twice the in-service load. If it passes that, after having had another inspection to show up any faults that may have happened, it will either be returned to maker for scrapping if it has failed in ANY way, or get the full proof stamp. At all times the proof process - which has to be paid for by the maker - is at the maker's risk. If he makes a less-than-serviceable arm that fails proof, he gets the bits back, and the bill.

All these marks MUST be clearly visible on the arm. It can not be sold to the public in any of the CIP nations without having passed proof. To do so is a very serious criminal offence. So is removing such marks, commonplace in the USA and called de-farbing, to make the arm more HC. As the USA has no legally-binding standards of proof, and therefore no necessity to display them, this is no big deal. If you sell the gun, then proving that's it's safe is the seller's problem. Here in the CIP countries it is a serious offence. Older guns over here are often sold having been re-proofed, especially older shotguns. High or low-value, matters not a whit. They must be in current proof to be sold, or clearly sold as 'NOT IN PROOF'.

Without any evidence that a US-made firearm has ever been subjected to proof as per CIP regulations, in spite of having been test-fired by a cartridge that may or may not be a test-type overload, or, in the case of a BP firearm, a substantial overload, every US-made firearm entering the CIP nations MUST be subjected to proof in those country's own proof houses. Take a US-made Thompson contender as an example, which, when sold in the UK, will have been proofed at either the London or Birmingham Proof House. As such it will have British proof stamps/marks on it. All the CIP nations accept each other's proofs, easy since the standards are more or less the same. I say more or less as the standards for BP testing are not regularised, since right now only Italy is making BP arms in commercial numbers. Any gun made here in UK will have been UK-proofed before sale, in case you are waiting for your pair of Holland & Holland 12g shotguns...

Please note, before any hair is set afire, that the SAAMI documentation is NOT legally-binding, but a list of recommendations and standards derived from extensive testing within the society of certain arms manufacturers who may or may not comply. There is no LAW that makes them comply with those recommendations.

 

[springfield art]

TFoley; Interesting! You really have your information at hand. Thanks.

 

[TFoley]

TFoley; Interesting! You really have your information at hand. Thanks.

It's all in my head. There sure is room enough.

 

[wiksmo]

Appreciate the info, TFoley. Mostly all new-to-me stuff, and quite interesting. It will take at least another read to get it all together in my thinking.

All reputable small-scale makers of BP firearms are known to test fire their products … All BP firearms made in Europe are subjected to the government-imposed proof test requirements. Each of the nations signed up to the CIP legislation - fourteen of them so far - are required by the LAW of the country to hand over their firearms to the national proof houses for test firing before they can be sold on the commercial market.

The process goes like this -

 

[Loyalist Dave]

As such it will have British proof stamps/marks on it. All the CIP nations accept each other's proofs, easy since the standards are more or less the same. I say more or less as the standards for BP testing are not regularised, since right now only Italy is making BP arms in commercial numbers.

More like "less" as the German and British proof house standards are about 2X that of the Italian, and the Spaniards "batch proof" barrels while the Italians, British, and Germans proof individual barrels.

It should also be noted that in Germany and the UK, IF you possess an India origin musket with a drilled touch-hole, you the buyer must have submitted that musket to respective proofing house for certification testing and stamping.

That's one of the reasons it bothers me sooo much when I see a person who writes "I proofed tested (or proofed) the musket at home". NO, they "tested" it, they didn't proof anything. I also have problems with my fellow countrymen who think that modern American makers "proof" their barrels/chambers... while America has no CIP proofing house.

LD

 

[wiksmo]

TFoley ~~ This is my 2nd thx to you for answering my Q on test-firing a BP pistol. Actually, I learned more than expected.

I did re-read your post this afternoon, and also got an answer to a "mystery" engraving on my Uberti revolver replica. Under the barrel is the engraving, "CIP" with an "N" just below it. Finally, I know what that marking means per your explanation about the safety testing of these guns under the European regs. Very helpful info all-around for me.

It's all in my head. There sure is room enough.

 

[Stantheman86]

I know this......Ruger and S&W test fire their revolvers to assure function and accuracy. Ruger does every other chamber to save money on ammo.

There is no "proofing" as in, loading a double charged round.

How is a manufacturer supposed to "proof" a self loading unmentionable with a double charged round? You're just risking damage to the firearm.

I know Uberti does or did test fire cap and ball revolvers because my brand new 3rd Model Dragoon arrived with two dirty chambers and nipples. Two rounds test fired?

 

[FishDFly]

I know this......Ruger and S&W test fire their revolvers to assure function and accuracy. Ruger does every other chamber to save money on ammo.

?

 

[TFoley]

I currently have two Ruger handguns, a ROA and a Super Redhawk of the kind that we can have here on mainland yUK. Both were proofed here in yUK at the London Proof House, and bear the proof stamp on EVERY chamber web, as did the many other American-made handguns I used to have. Those I had bought whilst serving in Germany were also similarly proofed.

 

[TFoley]

How is a manufacturer supposed to "proof" a self loading unmentionable with a double charged round? You're just risking damage to the firearm.

I have just spoken to a very pleasant young lady at the Birmingham Proof House (44-121-643-3860) who advises me that unmentionable self-loading items ARE in fact proofed with a substantial overload, and if they fail, they fail. Needless to say, these days the failure rate of modern-manufactured firearms ex-factory is passing small - so small, in fact, that I've never ever heard of it happening.

It is usually older guns that are required to be proofed so that the owner can shoot them. Y'see, here in yUK, you CAN have antique guns of any kind, especially muzzle loaders, and those that would use an obsolete cartridge, WITHOUT ANY KIND of permit. If however, you want a rifle or carbine that fires a currently available cartridge, like a Trapdoor Springfield in .45-70 Govt, then that is a whole new nest of frogs, and it needs a yUK Firearms Certificate [FAC] for you to own and shoot. AND gun club membership, AND a whole scad of other stuff....

However, going back to older guns per se, IF you want to shoot it/them, or sell it/them to somebody else who DOES want it to shoot in vintage arms comps, then it MUST be proofed first - that is the law. It must then be registered on the owner/new owner's Firearms Certificate as a live-firing Section 1 firearm, if rifled, or entered on the shotgun certificate [a Section 2 firearm] if a smoothbore with barrels over 24" long. Less than that, and it 'becomes' a Section 1 firearm.

Of course, these days in yUK, only those lucky beggars domiciled in Northern Ireland are allowed to have modern handguns as a matter of course. Here on the mainland, we CAN have the so-called long-barrelled handguns, and ANY BP muzzle-loading handguns, but ownership of cartridge-firing handguns is VERY restricted indeed. And not a subject for discussion on this forum.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

I know this......Ruger and S&W test fire their revolvers to assure function and accuracy. Ruger does every other chamber to save money on ammo.

There is no "proofing" as in, loading a double charged round.

How is a manufacturer supposed to "proof" a self loading unmentionable with a double charged round? You're just risking damage to the firearm.

OK well first, in America, and in Japan, the company is responsible for their product and they Test fire their weapons for pressure. There is nothing, btw, that prohibits a manufacturer from testing to higher standards than that of a CIP Proof House. Winchester calls theirs "Winproof"..., but it's testing, and does not meet the legal requirements to claim the arm was "proofed". And YES they do over pressure them when testing. Since they have no control, nor does a CIP Proofing House, of the ammunition used nor the condition of the firearm ("antique" or otherwise) when it is fired. Proofing only tells the person holding the item it had passed the test when it left the proof house...not what it will do now if it's been abused. Too many Americans think a "proof mark" means the gun is forever safe, no matter what.....

LD

 

[Kansas Jake]

Back to the original question. Your new gun should be cleaned before firing. Your Trapper should easily be safe with normal black powder handgun loads. I’ve never “proof” tested a new black powder gun from a major manufacturer, but I also keep loads in the normal range.

 

[TFoley]

OK well first, in America, and in Japan, the company is responsible for their product and they Test fire their weapons for pressure. There is nothing, btw, that prohibits a manufacturer from testing to higher standards than that of a CIP Proof House. Winchester calls theirs "Winproof"..., but it's testing, and does not meet the legal requirements to claim the arm was "proofed". And YES they do over pressure them when testing. Since they have no control, nor does a CIP Proofing House, of the ammunition used nor the condition of the firearm ("antique" or otherwise) when it is fired. Proofing only tells the person holding the item it had passed the test when it left the proof house...not what it will do now if it's been abused. Too many Americans think a "proof mark" means the gun is forever safe, no matter what.....LD

Sir, ALL manufacturers of ammunition, including those outside the CIP aegis whose ammunition is imported into the CIP community are required to submit batches of ammunition for testing and approval;

The current (2015) C.I.P. member states are:

• 
  Austria
• 
  Belgium
• 
  Chile
• 
  Czech Republic
• 
  Finland
• 
  France
• 
  Germany
• 
  Hungary
• 
  Italy
• 
  Russia
• 
  Slovakia
• 
  Spain
• 
  United Arab Emirates
• 
  United Kingdom

Most recent member state:
The United Arab Emirates became a member state on 9 April 2008. Local companies like Caracal International L.L.C. and ADCOM Manufacturing will benefit from a local proof house.

Those ammunition manufacturers like Prvi Partizan Uzicé - PPU - based in Serbia, are one of those manufacturers from outside the CIP group whose products are sold widespread within it. Batch testing is not for the faint-hearted - a test lot of around 20,000 rounds of each type of ammunition is required, at the manufacturers' expense.

 

[Stantheman86]

I dont think a way to "Proof" a Blackpowder revolver exists , since even filling the chambers and leaving just enough room for a ball, and then firing doesn't amount to a "proof" test.

Whatever a max load in an 1860 Army is, say 50 gr of 3f, is likely to be unpleasant to shoot but isn't going to be dangerous.

If a "double charge proof load" is just that, then if I dump 120 gr of 2f into my P-H Enfield and touch off a Minie ball, is it now "proofed"?

As for "unmentionable " guns I believe Europe has a stricter standard for American guns that are shipped over. The test target for a pistol I recently bought states the number of rounds and brand of ammo on it, no mention of any 2x proof load.

In fact I still remember the "scandal" back in the 90s when a manufacturer I won't name got caught shipping out rifles that were never test fired, let alone "proofed".

 

[Stantheman86]

20,000 rounds is a pretty big test sample , and not cheap.

I forget the exact amount but Ruger itemizes its expenses and they spend something like $300,000 a year just on test fire ammo.

 

[TFoley]

I dont think a way to "Proof" a Blackpowder revolver exists , since even filling the chambers and leaving just enough room for a ball, and then firing doesn't amount to a "proof" test.

Whatever a max load in an 1860 Army is, say 50 gr of 3f, is likely to be unpleasant to shoot but isn't going to be dangerous.

If a "double charge proof load" is just that, then if I dump 120 gr of 2f into my P-H Enfield and touch off a Minie ball, is it now "proofed"?

As for "unmentionable " guns I believe Europe has a stricter standard for American guns that are shipped over. The test target for a pistol I recently bought states the number of rounds and brand of ammo on it, no mention of any 2x proof load.

In fact I still remember the "scandal" back in the 90s when a manufacturer I won't name got caught shipping out rifles that were never test fired, let alone "proofed".

You are right. As the chamber is open-ended, and can only physically contain so much powder and a ball, it's truly a self-regulating device. A rifle or musket, on the other paw, can be vastly overloaded in order to proof it, but I recall that here in yUK only a double charge is used - I could be wrong though.

Still, doubling the recommended 90gr of 3Fg in a three-band Volunteer rifle would get your attention, that's for sure.

 

[Kansas Jake]

Keep in mind the OP was asking about a Trapper 50 caliber which is a single shot cap lock.

 

[FishDFly]

Unfortunately the days of: "hold my beer and watch/listen to this are going away".

 

[Grenadier1758]

To answer one of the original questions, "Yes, it will be packed with all manner of preservative greases." The pistol will need to be cleaned. A small caliber cleaning tip will be needed to clean the hole that is through drilled in the breech plug to the touch hole.

The Traditions Trapper pistol is made in Spain by Ardesa. Spain requires all firearms to be proofed. There will be stamps on the barrel indicating proof certification. So, his pistol will have met proof test requirements.