Valuation please BSA METEORS

[mel h]

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?

[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?

The toy/firearm thing makes sense as well. I can't see the pics at the moment (work computer) but, are they "Nitro Proof" marks, or just "inspectors' stamps"? I recently got an SMLE back from the proof house after a rebarrel. It hadn't even been fired; clean as a whistle.

[mel h]

The toy/firearm thing makes sense as well. I can't see the pics at the moment (work computer) but, are they "Nitro Proof" marks, or just "inspectors' stamps"? I recently got an SMLE back from the proof house after a rebarrel. It hadn't even been fired; clean as a whistle.

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.