any clues on a H Pieper

[Double Lab]

You got a good deal Rick. Nice stick of wood, interesting engraving and the dimensions look shootable.

[Kensal Rise]

Chances are those firing pins were never intended to have springs. Just clean them out/up. In such guns, the shape of the pin tip was supposed to cam the pin back into its recess.

And ... it took those barrels at least 150 years to get that aged look. Why tart them up if the rest of the gun looks OK? The pattern shows just fine to me.

[OH Osthaus]

thanks John, i have not had one that did not have springs.


and I agree about "tarting it up"- when I first saw it in dim lighting the pattern did not show, so the plan was to redo it. but a quick rub with a frontier pad and #9 to see how much was just dirt showed barrel color over almost the entire length. The whole gun just needs a good cleaning and some exercise .

[OH Osthaus]

well - took advantage of a nice day and set about removing what I thought was going to be oil from the stock. after removing the locks i discovered the inside of the inletting was bright and clean. so - some Murphy's oil soap and elbow grease and a very soft tooth brush in the checkering to remove over a hundred years of crud and i was very happy with the results. Nothing more needs to be done with the wood. A little more cleanup on the out side of the barrels with Hoppes 9 and a frontier pad and the pattern is even better, I may put a coat of Formby's tung oil on the barrels but that would be all.

John was right - no striker springs - just a fair amount of dirt and old oil making them stick.

i added some after pictures to the album, still just an old Belgium gun, but its not a bad looking clunker.

http://parkerguns.org/forums/album.php?albumid=548

[wayne goerres]

Nice bird on the lock.

[Stepmac]

I handled a Pieper game gun, one rifle barrel and one shotgun, not long ago at a gun show. I liked it. It was quite light. Guy wanted $450 for it though, so I passed. I think it was 38/55 and 16 gauge...least that's what the fellow said it was. Hard tell'n tho.

I see them in the pages of Double Gun sometimes. I think they are okay...maybe a Chevy vise a Caddy.

I hear mixed things about Belgium guns, some great some not-so. I do know that most of our damascus barrels came from Belgium, more from them than from the English. If the barrels were excellent then I suspect many of their guns were too.

[Stepmac]

I'd be happy to have it and I'd shoot the dickens out of it. I'd guess 1880ish. I think its neat.

[OH Osthaus]

Originally Posted by Steve McCarty

I'd be happy to have it and I'd shoot the dickens out of it. I'd guess 1880ish. I think its neat.

thanks Steve

1877 if I read it right

there is a mark that was used until 1877 - one that started in 1877 and no "NON POUR BALLE" as in "not for ball" in the tight left tube - and that started in 1878