Enfield max load

[torn moc]

Thank you Zonie! :thumbsup:

 

[TFoley]

KanawhaRanger:
I agree with everything you said except for the comment "Given the fact that none of the imports made today are proofed...".

All of the Italian, Spanish and English guns are proofed according to the laws of those countries.
If the manufacturer stamped those proof marks on the barrel/frame/cylinder without being in compliance with the laws of those countries they would be put out of business by their governments.

So are ALL German-made black powder firearms, and there ARE a few - the Feinwerkbau Remington replica comes to mind. And on the cartridge-arm front, so are all weapons made in Finland, Sweden, Switzerland and the former Soviet Union.

And every firearm made in the USA that comes into any of these countries has to be proofed in accordance with the national proof acts before they can be sold to the public.

tac

 

[Tumblernotch]

You're right Zonie. I had my head up my butt there. :redface: My Whitworth has the Birmingham proof marks and the Italian guns I used to have were marked as proved. I've never seen a Japanese barrel with proof marks though. And of course I've not seen any modern American ML barrels marked, though there may be some. All original contract musket barrels were supposed to be proved and inspected by government inspectors, but I've even seen some of those completely devoid of any.

I still wonder just what kind of inspection and proof some of these new barrels go through though. It appears that they do OK. About all the news we hear about blown barrels are the result of use of smokeless powder or barrel obstructions (mostly shortstarting). I know that unless they've relaxed their standards, the British were very strict with their proofhouse standards.

 

[TFoley]

Calumny, Sir, to even thing of suggesting that the British have relaxed their LAW on proving ALL weapons made or sold in the United Kingdom or those made there for export. Fie, and double fie, Sir, on you!

The Birmingham Proof house is not some tin-pot shade-tree make-weight and fly-by-night invention, but an organised institution, set up by Act of Parliament in 1813.

The Proof Acts -

The provisions of the Acts apply to all small arms, whether of present use or future invention, within certain fixed limits of bore size and projectile weight (with the exception of some military arms made for the use of H.M. Forces). Air guns, are exempt from proof by Proof Act.

The Proof Acts lay down that no small arm may be sold, exchanged or exported, exposed or kept for sale or exchange or pawned unless and until it has been fully proved and duly marked. The Maximum penalty is £5000 for each offence, but with provision for higher penalties where, for instance, the sale of a number of guns constitutes one offence. Alteration to or the forging of proof marks is a more serious offence.

Arms previously proved and bearing apparently valid proof marks are deemed unproved if the barrels have been enlarged in the bore beyond certain defined limits or if the barrel or action has been materially weakend in other respects.

The offence in dealing in unproved arms is committed by the seller, not by an unwitting purchaser.

Foreign proof marks -

Until June 1980, there was reciprocal agreement for recognition of certain foreign proof marks by international agreement. Since June 1980 when the United Kingdom became a member of the International Proof Commission ( the CIP), the United Kingdom has recognised all the proof marks of other member nations and reciprocally they all recognise United Kingdom marks. [note that firearms made in the USA do not bear ANY proof marks of any kind - they may well be safe, but have not been PROVEN to be safe.]

Rules of Proof -

Rules, Regulations and Scales of Proof, a schedule to the Proof Act, are the working instructions of the two Proof Houses. The rules specify the pressure to be used in proof, standards of view and the marks to be impressed on guns which pass proof, together with much detail as to bore and chamber dimensions, proof and service pressure.

The latest Rules of Proof, those of 1989, were approved by the Secretary of State to come into force on 1 November, 1989, but proof under earlier Rules of 1875, 1887, 1896, 1904, 1916, 1925, 1954 and 1986 remains valid provided that the barrel or action has not been materially weakened or altered so that it no longer conforms with the proof marks.

Submission to proof -

Any individual may submit arms for proof or reproof direct to either of the Proof Houses, but it is more usual and generally more satisfactory for all concerned that arms be submitted through a gunmaker.

Primarily this is because the majority of old guns require attention prior to proof. Proof regulations require that shotgun barrels shall be “struck-up” and smooth and that insides shall be clean. Pitting should be removed so far as is practicable, bulges knocked down and dents raised. Actions should be in good, safe working order and tight on the face to resist the increased strain of proof pressure. Since stocks, and particularly those with unusual “bend” or “cast”, are not designed to withstand the heavy recoil of proof, it is customary for the wood to be removed. Indeed, the Proof House do not accept responsability for damage to stocks resulting from proof.

It will be apparent that to fulfill these requirements the preparation necessary will best be undertaken by a gunmaker who is accustomed to submitting to proof.

Rejection -

In the event of a proof reject, or failure to withstand the proof test, guns may be repaired if possible and resubmitted. On final rejection, that is when the submitter accepts that further attempts at repair are unlikely to succeed, the existing proof marks upon the barrels and/or action will be defaced or barred out. It is unlawful for a weapon to be sold with defaced proof marks, except where later reproof marks have been impressed. It is recommended that such a gun be deactivated, to ensure that it can never be used by some person unaware of its unproved condition.

I hope that serves to set your mind at rest with regard to the requirement for firearms of all kinds to be submitted for proof. :wink:

What you do in the USA, where hundreds of thousands of firearms are made every year, is entirely up to you, but please note that every firearm made in the USA is submitted for proof before it can be sold here in UK. :thumbsup:

tac

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

My dear old Parker-Hale Enfield proudly carries its Birmingham proof mark for all the world to see! A bit like a birth mark on a lovely lady. I've often wondered why we here in the colonies did not develop a proofing system. I've never received a good explantion for this oversight.

 

[TFoley]

My dear old Parker-Hale Enfield proudly carries its Birmingham proof mark for all the world to see! A bit like a birth mark on a lovely lady. I've often wondered why we here in the colonies did not develop a proofing system. I've never received a good explantion for this oversight.

Dear Mr Frizzen - I am told by innumerable American persons, who surely know better than I do, that it is becasue of the sheer numbers of arms made by US manufacturers that individual proof does not take place. This vast number makes the cost-effective and individual proving of arms impossible to attain.

However, I am further informed by US manufacturers that they DO test a certain proportion of their product, and therefore assume that all others made of the same material and to the same specification will likewise be safe to shoot. :hmm:

They 'stand' behind their product, it is said, and will replace any and all arms that fail in use, should that use be due to poor or inadequate workmanship on their part, rather than stupidity on behalf of the operator [as seen in another thread, where a substanitally-built BP arm has literally disintegrated from the use of nitro powder].

However, I for one would not like to think that the weapon I trusted with my life had not been proofed and therefore found wanting.

As they say, sh*t happens, but I would not care for it to be me to whom it happens.

My $0.02.

tac

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

I'm sure they do test a firearm now and then, and the materials are of high quality and most never fail, but I don't believe they make so many firearms that they couldn't proof them. And, as has been stated, when required to proof guns for overseas sales, they seem to do so without difficulty. I think laziness perhaps plays a part--or maybe arrogance.

 

[Jumpshot]

I've often wondered why we here in the colonies did not develop a proofing system.

Youtube is our proof house. :grin:

 

[bingo1952]

My 20 year old EOA Enfield has 3-1/2 Drams maximum load stamped on the barrel. I only shoot 55 grains of 2f powder in it though and have taken several deer with that load. I shot a doe (the first deer taken with it) with one of the Lee "Ashcan" minies at 50 yards and it penetrated her from stem to stern and cut a nickle sized hole all the way. She dropped on the spot and never kicked.

 

[torn moc]

The "Trashcan" Minnie packs a huge Wallop! I guess it is due to the flat nose.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

Thanks for that bit of info, 3 1/2 drams is 95 grains.

 

[Tumblernotch]

Whoa there, tac! I just said that "unless the British have relaxed their standards", not that they did. I know that England has had the strictest proof laws in the world for centuries. But you know as well as I do that things change, usually for the worse. Honestly, I don't keep up with the more recent laws and standards and I didn't know if there had been any changes.

Wow, you go away for a few days....

 

[poordevil]

As far as I know all euro. imports are proofed. Look at all those little stamps on the rear end of the barrel

P.

 

hey guy,welcome from the great white north,i shoot the 3 band and the 2 band muskatoon,i know the service charge for the 3 band was about 65grs but i got tired of bullets bounceing of the ground, so i upped the charge to 100-120 grs 2f goex,my hunting load is 100grs,maybe overkill but the deer didn,t complain,dropped a lot of deer with that load then a buddy introduced me to rocklocks a few yrs ago,mistake;;;;now those guns are semi-retired,bring them out once in awhile,got a shooting range of to the side of my house, a roundbale at bout 70 yds,don,t reply much on this forum just lurk,waiting for the snow to melt,but you guys sure are a great bunch to listen too

 

[JasonUK]

I've often wondered why we here in the colonies did not develop a proofing system.

Youtube is our proof house. :grin:

I just read that and nearly blurted coffee over the screen when I guffawed! :rotf: Thanks for making me laugh. Ah Youtube - the place which proves Darwinism is alive and well! :haha:

 

[BPBill]

I am new here but figured I'd chime in. I just went to the range today with my PH p58. It is an older English made rifle. I used 60 gr of 3f Goex under a 596 gr minie. The bullet began life as a 510gr lyman, I made different baseplugs for it untill I got the accuracy I wanted; ended up with a thick skirt, shallow base cavity and weighed 596 grains. I also keep my bands loose, there are two tiny screws in front of the bands to keep them in place(ala Finnish Mosin Nagant). I found that to aid in accuracy too. Anyways, back when my eyes were sharper I could keep it under 3 inches at 100 yards,my best was 1.5 inches. Nowdays I can keep it around 2 inches at 50 yards. The weapon hasn't changed but my firecontrol director has degraded. It is one of my best weapons, modern or archaic.
My chono is on the fritz but by figuring the differncet in rear sight hights when I go from 50 to 100 yards and running it through a ballistics program I estimated the velocity to be about 920FPS.

 

[CUMMINS]

Seems like a few people were upset by my original post for some reason, just to let you know I asked for academic interest only, I don't even have an enfield.