I need some help on this fowler...

[rabjr]

Had this little gem brought over tonight. It appears to me to be a early? Late percussion? New England style fowler? It has a nice Ketland marked lock still in very good working order. The top barrel flat has what looks like LONDON on it with a couple other proof marks. The barrel is 43" long and appears to be .20ga. It has what appears to be an inletted front sight similar to those that were done here in New England. I can't weigh this atm but I don't think it weighs 6 lbs! Its a dandy thin and light gun. At some point the stock was fixed with a very nice splice. I'd very much like to find any info at all on this gun. :thumbsup:

 

[rabjr]

Heres a pic of the proofs...typical British proofs for that time period??

 

[Zonie]

I can't find a proof mark that looks like I think those look in my books.

It may be just my eyes or something.

I found some sites that show proof marks. Maybe you can see what you have and dig thru them to find out who proofed the barrel?
http://www.scribd.com/doc/58610387/Proof-Marks

 

[rabjr]

Looks like a "D" and a "C" in the first one... :idunno:

 

[rabjr]

Theres a proof that has similaritys but the dates are all wrong. :hmm:

1868-1925Birminghamdefinitive black powder proof for shotgun

 

[Mike Brooks]

My best guess on proofs is post 1813 private birmingham'
I find the fish belly to be interesting, usually you'd excepct to se a slight to moderate concave curve on the bottom side of the buttstock for a CT area gun.. gun. Maybe a little club butt from MAss. influence going on there

 

[rabjr]

Cool, thanks Mike, now I have a little to tell the owner. :thumbsup:

 

[rabjr]

I disassembled the gun and took a few more pics.

 

[Marc Adamchek]

Nice find! Actually it's a B and a C, 1813 Birmingham proofmark. The crossed scepters was used for many years by "a leading gunmaker of Ketland" (Gerhard Wirnsberger quote).

 

[Mike Brooks]

Swampy, you need to PM JV Puelo about this gun, He's very good with these NE guns and knows his brit proofs. In fact he just wrote an article for man at arms magazine on british/ketland proofs.

 

[Marc Adamchek]

Swampy - Whatever happened with this?

 

[rabjr]

Owner doesn't want to part with it. I actually still have it here, he'll get it eventually. But now he knows more about it than he did...

 

[rickystl]

Won't part with it? Darn.

 

[Adam Lee]

Great reference pics, by the way!

Excuse my ignorance - I am a ML firearm "newbie" - but can you explain why this barrel does not have the "wedding band" detail at the octagonal to round barrel transition? Was this simply a stylistic flair, that added expense to a barrel?

Adam

 

[rabjr]

No idea about the barrel but it is kinda neat how it is different from most I've seen.

 

[asbrown]

:hmm: What reading I've done seems to suggest that the wedding band was a stylistic addition. As to cost I don't believe it was extra, but most of the military barrels transitioned like this one because I would assume it was less time consuming to produce and the wedding band doesn't add any strength. :idunno:
.......anybody got any hard evidence? I'm kinda cirious about this myself.......