Percussion Cape Gun (or combination)

[Teddydog]

A couple years ago I picked up this old gun from a dealer and acquaintance. He hunts in Africa every other year or so and had bought with the intent to take some game in a more traditional fashion (he has previously hunted with a Martin-Henry rifle), but for whatever reason changed his mind about using this gun. It was listed as a 12 ga side by side with one smooth bore and one rifled bore. I think it is actually not quite a 12 ga, though.

Here she is:

I've got lots of pics, so I'll put 'em all up for your enjoyment. I pulled the barrels today for the first time to check for any proof or makers marks. I did find pretty standard Beligian proof (circled ELG over a star) and inspection mark (crown over A) and a "40", but nothing like a maker ID.

The gun came with some lead balls, including .690 and .670 RBs and some "button" bullets that measure about .668 (pics). I measured the smooth bore at about .668. The rifled barrel is about pentagonal, so I couldn't really get a good measurement. Here's the muzzle shot and with a .670 ball sitting in the smooth bore and a .690 in the rifled bore.

More pics coming in the next post.

Rob

 

[Teddydog]

The stock is one piece with a very slim forend. I knew there was some damage beneath the right lock, but I had no idea how much until I dismounted the barrel.

I don't see any makers marks on the locks (I did not remove them from the stock) or on top of the barrels. The nipples are pretty beat up. There is a two-leaf folding rear sight.

 

[Teddydog]

The trigger guard and butt both appear to be made of horn (I think...kinda looks like wood).

And finally the rammer. It is a steel ram rod witha brass head and a threaded sectin at the other end with a neat reversible worm.

Rob

 

[Teddydog]

So...what do y'all think? When do you think it was made? One reference I have says the "crown over letter" inspector's mark were used from 1852 until 1877. Does that sound about right? How about "where" and "by whom"? How about safety for shooting? The seller was planning to shoot it and I know him well enough to know that he wouldn't have sold it as a shooter if he know of any problems with his (he owns and runs a respected law enforcement supply shop). Despite the repaired area of the stock/inletting, it feels very solid. The locks are positive. Probably need to replace the nipples.

Any thoughts about the caliber/gauge? Seems a little on the tight side for 12 gauge.

Any and all thoughts are welcome.

Whoops...almost forgot to post the "ammo" pic. From left to right: .690 RB, .670 RB, "Button bullet" top, bottom.

Rob

 

[Captjoel]

From your pictures Rob, I would say you have a Belgian made cape gun from the 1860-70 era. From it's condition, I would caution you to not even consider shooting this piece. Just from the muzzle end on the rifled side you can see how thin skinned the barrel has become. There are also signs of corrosion along the ribs that hold the barrels together. To become a possible shooter you will have to take everything apart for close inspection. Have you dropped a bore light down the barrels yet? If you do decide to shoot it I would remote fire it and proof test with double balled stout BP loads. It makes a nice wall hanger and not a shooter in my opinion. But cheer up Rob, this is just another nich in a learning curve that will help you to know what to look for in the next one to come along. :hatsoff:

 

[Dphar]

Looks to be a 16 bore to me. A 670 will fall right in a 12 and should go in a 15. So none of the projectiles are for that gun.
Its pretty generic and not a high quality gun and probably barely rates "good".
The problem I have found is that the flux used in some of these corrodes the barrels from the OUTSIDE under the ribs. If proved they sometimes will blow a section of the rib loose even if the interiors look good.
Even if the rifle barrel is relieved somewhat at the muzzle it would still be pretty thin.
Also Belgian proof levels were lower than British and some Continental barrels back in the day would not stand British proof according to Greener.

Dan

 

[BillinOregon]

Waiting for Gunsports from South Africa to weigh in. He has much experience with Cape guns.

 

[TFoley]

One reference I have says the "crown over letter" inspector's mark were used from 1852 until 1877. Does that sound about right? How about "where" and "by whom"?
Rob

ALL guns proofed in the Liége Proofhouse [that's what the ELG stands for, as I pointed out in another post about Belgian-made guns] had inspection stamps but there by the proof-house inspectors themselves. The letters - usually crown over N or crown over A - do not reflect the initials of the inspector. F-C J were the initials of M. Champiomont, for instance.

It would be nice to see the stamps, if you can do that.

tac

 

[Teddydog]

ALL guns proofed in the Liége Proofhouse [that's what the ELG stands for, as I pointed out in another post about Belgian-made guns] had inspection stamps but there by the proof-house inspectors themselves. The letters - usually crown over N or crown over A - do not reflect the initials of the inspector. F-C J were the initials of M. Champiomont, for instance.

It would be nice to see the stamps, if you can do that.

tac

Sorry...My question about "where" and "by whom" meant who made it and where and was not meant to be about the proofing. Sorry for the confusion as I see my post was poorly worded there.

Thanks for all the information so far. Any additions are still welcome!

Rob

 

[TFoley]

ALL guns proofed in the Liége Proofhouse [that's what the ELG stands for, as I pointed out in another post about Belgian-made guns] had inspection stamps but there by the proof-house inspectors themselves. The letters - usually crown over N or crown over A - do not reflect the initials of the inspector. F-C J were the initials of M. Champiomont, for instance.

It would be nice to see the stamps, if you can do that.

tac

Sorry...My question about "where" and "by whom" meant who made it and where and was not meant to be about the proofing. Sorry for the confusion as I see my post was poorly worded there.

Thanks for all the information so far. Any additions are still welcome!

Rob

Well, to tell the truth, I thought I'd answered your question. Guns made in Liége were and are proofed in Liége. The Belgian Proof Laws of 1834 required it. As for the 'where' Liége is, well, as I pointed out in that same last thread, it was then and still is now, in what is now called Belgium after it came into being - formed from part of France and part of the Netherlands. As the name implies, it is in the French-speaking part of modern-day Belgium, also known as Wallonie. In the other part of Belgium, where they speak Flemish, Liége is called Luttich. I can't be any more specific that that, sorry. :surrender:

As for the 'who' of 'who made it', unless you can furnish us with a name stamped on the gun, you've had it.

tac

 

[Fernando Keilty]

Hello

A. Baron Engelhardt "The history of European Proof Marks" says that any letter below the crown, it is the inspector's punch, and was used from 1853 to 1877, when the crown was changed by an asterisk (by confusion with V Testbed crowned London).

The "Banc d'armes a feu des epreuves", on their official website says that the list of inspectors of the nineteenth century, is "introuvable"

Fernando K

 

[TFoley]

Hello

A. Baron Engelhardt "The history of European Proof Marks" says that any letter below the crown, it is the inspector's punch, and was used from 1853 to 1877, when the crown was changed by an asterisk (by confusion with V Testbed crowned London).

The "Banc d'armes a feu des epreuves", on their official website says that the list of inspectors of the nineteenth century, is "introuvable"

Fernando K

Uh, thank you. I thought that was what I had actually written in my posts.

And for those who don't read French, 'introuvable' means that the name cannot be found.

tac

 

[Fernando Keilty]

Hello

The number 40 is the number of bullets per kilogram of lead, designation used from 1811 to 1889. From there forward, the size is expressed in millimeters.

Fernando K

 

[Teddydog]

Ah...the 40 is interesting 40/2.2 lbs/kg =18.18 balls per lb. So an 18 ga?

Rob

 

[Joel/Calgary]

Whoops...almost forgot to post the "ammo" pic. From left to right: .690 RB, .670 RB, "Button bullet" top, bottom.

Is that a Nessler ball (conical for smoothbores) on the right or is it a modern Lee "drive-key" slug?

Regards,
Joel