Kafkaesque events put my drilling in a coma: it may never wake up.

Pine Marten

Well-Known Member
Some of you who have been around a few years may have followed my drilling adventure. In 2014 I jumped through a load of hoops to import a J. P. Sauer drilling in 7x57R/16/16 from Germany. I then had it serviced, a little work done by Alan Rhone, and had a few memorable adventures with it which I recounted here and indeed in the pages of Shooting Times. But the 1960 scope was showing its age, pretty much useless at low light, and I had long planned to upgrading the scope to a modern one. Well back in April, I finally took the plunge, bought a scope for it, and sent both off to Alan Rhone to be united. This was to truly make the drilling my Everything Gun.

A week or so afterwards, I received an email to inform me that the stamp indicating barrel diameter was missing, and that the Birmingham Proofhouse were insistant that this made it officially out of proof, meaning that no gunsmith could do work on it and release it to the owner, or sell it, until it was resubmitted for proof. Credit to Alan Rhone's professionalism, they tried to argue that it was daft to apply rules retroactively to proof marks from a CIP country when the standards had been different when the gun was made, in 1960. But the rules are the rules, and after telling me the risks, we agreed to prepare and submit the gun before undertaking any expensive scope mounting work.

Three weeks later the drilling was returned, having failed proof, officially due to a bulge in the shotgun barrels behind the chokes. The thing is, that these bulges couldn't be detected, seen, or measured. The tag from the proof house said "strike off and resubmit", but that's a repair that doesn't make sense. Especially for an imaginary bulge. A week later, on re-examination, these bulges were still undetectable, but something else became apparent: barely visible rivelling halfway down the shotgun barrels. The significance was that there was no way the barrels would pass proof if resubmitted. These aren't polishing marks.

And so, having gone to the gun hospital for a routine cataract operation, my drilling succumbed to the retinal scan exam, imposed because of a completely imaginary ailment. As a result though, it is in a coma. To all intents and purposes, it is a write off.

Now no-one is happy with how this has gone. That gun could have had another happy fifty years if the proof house hadn't wrecked the barrels because of a retroactive rule change. So Alan Rhone have kindly offered to keep it for 12 months to see if they can find another set of barrels sitting around some gunsmith's workshop in Germany. It's not impossible, the Sauer 3000 was the most popular drilling in the world for decades, but it's something of a long shot. As I said, it's in palliative care now. The only hope left is an experimental transplant.

Well, at least it had a last hurrah with me for the last four years if its' dotage....

Pants.
b880e4547b1f085da3b82643915707fa.jpg
 
Last edited:
thats a real shame. you put a lot of time and effort into that. have you got an alternative project in mind if a new barrel cannot be found?
 
Do the people at the proof house have no sense of what sorts of rifles and shotguns they have in their hands?
They need to read the manual, "Catch 22".
 
Do the people at the proof house have no sense of what sorts of rifles and shotguns they have in their hands?

Indeed they do, but the rules are the rules, be they fair and sensible or not...

Thank you for yourenquiry, it is a dilemma.

However the simple answer isthat the UK regards any arm that does not bear a valid bore size, regardlesswhether the has come from a CIP Member State, as insufficiently marked.
 
That is a complete and utter load of ********. When it came to fitting a new scope to my combination I had the rings sent to me and I fitted them myself. It takes time and patience, but its not the complete dark art that some do subscribe to. Frankly if you can avoid it I would never let a gun near the proof house, nor for that matter to a gunsmith who would wish to resubmit it for proof. If it did n't have the barrel stamp, why did Alan Rhone even do the initial work on the trigger and action. And if the bulging of barrels is undetectable, how can they be bulged. Somebody is taking the ****.
 
[…] nor for that matter to a gunsmith who would wish to resubmit it for proof. If it didn't have the barrel stamp, why did Alan Rhone even do the initial work on the trigger and action. And if the bulging of barrels is undetectable, how can they be bulged. Somebody is taking the ****.

He didn't want to actually. But neither did he want to do the work without the reproof as he would then be exposing himself by letting an out of proof gun leave his shop. He explained the risks, and on balance, I gambled and lost. You're right, there's no bulge. But there is rivelling. Alan did say that there were gunsmiths who would happily overlook the proof problem. But I decided to do things properly, and there you go. As for the trigger work, that was a few years ago. Recent new rules apparently.

What takes the **** isn't the gunsmith, it's introducing retroactive rules. Either that, or it's the lackadaisical approach to paperwork of some German guy in the Kiel proof house in 1960 who negligently failed to anticipate the changing requirements of the UK proof authorities 50 years later.
 
Some of the things in this country are becoming ridiculous, we have a car that has an engine management light on, tried changing various sensors etc at c.£100 a time but no solution. New MoT legislation now says that it won't be able to pass a test despite running perfectly well, meeting emissions regs etc. Before anyone suggests it, you can't just disconnect the light because this is checked. Basically we are going to have to scrap or sell/trade in for a pittance a perfectly good car for no reason whatsoever! Not condoning it but you can see why people don't bother playing the game with rules and regs etc.
 
He didn't want to actually. But neither did he want to do the work without the reproof as he would then be exposing himself by letting an out of proof gun leave his shop. He explained the risks, and on balance, I gambled and lost. You're right, there's no bulge. But there is rivelling. Alan did say that there were gunsmiths who would happily overlook the proof problem. But I decided to do things properly, and there you go. As for the trigger work, that was a few years ago. Recent new rules apparently.

What takes the **** isn't the gunsmith, it's introducing retroactive rules. Either that, or it's the lackadaisical approach to paperwork of some German guy in the Kiel proof house in 1960 who negligently failed to anticipate the changing requirements of the UK proof authorities 50 years later.

I feel bad for the gunsmith, presumably he is doing the right thing but stories like this will soon mean that work of this nature will quickly dry up for him, who is going to send a gun in for repair knowing that they may never get it back!
 
What is the "rivelling" of which you speak? Dictionary gives wrinkle.

Have either Alan Rhone or the proof house said what caused it? Was it there from new?

You referred to some pitting in the left shotgun barrel when you first acquired it, is that what turned out to be the rivelling?

Alan
 
I feel bad for the gunsmith, presumably he is doing the right thing but stories like this will soon mean that work of this nature will quickly dry up for him, who is going to send a gun in for repair knowing that they may never get it back!
OK, to be clear: at every stage of the process, I was told the risks. And I made the decisions to take them. No-one's guns are being destroyed without warning. But I'd advise you to check that your old guns have barrel diameters stamped in them...
 
What is the "rivelling" of which you speak? Dictionary gives wrinkle.

Have either Alan Rhone or the proof house said what caused it? Was it there from new?

Alan

Rivelling is a like a wrinkling in the metal, yes, like a micro-corrugation. What caused it? Almost certainly the fact that the proof house detonated massive great charges in the barrels.
 
What about having the barrel sleeved?
The complexity of doing that, reblacking, reproofing, with three barrels just makes the whole idea insanely expensive. If a new set of barrels can't be found in Germany within the next year or so, or indeed perhaps by 31st March 2019, I'll just have to write it off and buy something else.
 
Sorry bud'. That stinks.

There must be some way of preventing it from being destroyed?

As somebody else suggested, is sleeving an option - perhaps to 20 bore?
 
Hi

French Gamefair in a weeks time - being otherside may be an option to find a pre-owned/barrels...........

L
 
Back
Top