IIRC, the ones carrying proof marks were for the Australian market originally, because their laws required anything above .177cal to carry proof marks. The smooth-bores were primarily for the Irish and Indian markets, but were widely used in seaside/fairground shooting galleries. Some of the proof marked ones ended up on our market because BSA either made too many for the export order, or the order was cancelled.
I also seem to remember a batch of the smooth bore ones was stolen sometime in the 1970s (and I don't think they were recovered), could this be one of them?
For the Mk1, I'd say somewhere in the region of £70-£90, the fact that the smooth bore has no sights, and is on the rough side would put it in the £20-£30 range.
The South of England has 2 good things, the M1 and the A1. Both will take you to Yorkshire.
Very interesting , thanks for that Harry Mac .
Harry, interesting point about the Australian imports, first time that I've heard about a BSA having the proof marks, but I have heard the same of Webley Mk three's. I remember there was mention that they were done because of import duty being less for a firearm than a 'toy'. What I can not understand is why the proof house (with a strict set of rules to uphold) went along with what appears to be some sort of a fiddle. How could they legally nitro proof a barrel that has no means of being chambered with an explosive to do the test?
Last edited by mel h; 18-03-2018 at 04:20 PM.
The South of England has 2 good things, the M1 and the A1. Both will take you to Yorkshire.
I've spent a little time thinking about it. As far as I'm aware (my memory's not great these days), these are, a Crowned Birmingham Nitro Proof mark, a Calibre mark and inspectors mark. The thing that may be relevant is that there is no pressure marking, as found on firearms.
Being sensible about it, it's clear to any engineer that a tube with the diameter / wall thickness ratio that is seen here will be capable of withstanding a pressure of thousands of PSI and would never fail under the pressure created by a small spring. A visual examination may have been seen as sufficient.
The safe way of doing a controlled test, if it was thought necessary would be with a small hydraulic pump. Maybe the proof house had some sort of setup to do this if the demand was great enough.
Just a quick note to Mac (elanmac), sorry for hijacking your post but I find it an interesting subject. Mel.