Proof & View Mark Question

[davec2]

Ok....I'm not completely uninformed about applying stamp markings to metal surfaces.  I use a hammer and I sometimes use a press to apply my maker's mark like this:





But I am completely bumfuzzled by how a 3D mark, like the following proof and view marks, can be applied with enough force to make them stand out clearly and yet not collapse the bore.  They can't be applied hot.....and they sure as heck weren't done by EDM.  Was a mandrel inserted in the barrel before marking ?  And even then, wouldn't the bore be dimpled to some extent ?  I have no idea how these marks were applied.  Does anyone out there know how marks like the ones below were done?

[Mike Brooks]

I do mine with a 4lb hammer, usually about 6 strikes.

[WKevinD]

I do mine with a 4lb hammer, usually about 6 strikes.

Mike, how do you keep the stamp aligned so you don't get multiple edge images?

Kevin

[davec2]

Mike,

OK....so you smack the bejeeses out of it 6 times with a 4 pound hammer.....so how do you keep from distorting the bore ?

[Dennis Glazener]

Not sure how Mike does his but I made an alignment tool that I clamp to the barrel flat then my stamp fits tightly through a slot I milled in the alignment tool. Then I whack the stamp several times with a heavy hammer.

If the barrel is dimpled I have not noticed it.
Dennis

[Mike Brooks]

I do mine with a 4lb hammer, usually about 6 strikes.

Mike, how do you keep the stamp aligned so you don't get multiple edge images?

Kevin

Carefull replacement of the stamp before every restrike. Not for the faint of heart....

[Mike Brooks]

Mike,

OK....so you smack the bejeeses out of it 6 times with a 4 pound hammer.....so how do you keep from distorting the bore ?

Never had a problem. Just stay away from the breech plug area.

[smart dog]

Hi Dave,
Consider that the iron used was soft.  Even the famous stub twist barrels were just made of iron of different density.  The steel barrels of today probably make that job much harder.

dave

[Acer Saccharum]

An up-close stamping on a 18th Cent American gun, on oblique the flat across from the lock. Most likely an import barrel, as it's a crown motif. The stamping is so deep, I can only envision it happening while barrel is still hot. It looks like the fibers of the iron are broken at the surface of the barrel at the edge of the stamping; or it's erosion of some inclusions of the metal.

[Goo]

I have been Placing hall mark stamps inside ring shanks for approx 35 years for the first 5 years I had trouble with the stamp bouncing and double marking the impression because I was hitting it too hard.  Now/since I have changed my technique and use light hits repeating the strikes until the stamp sinks the mark into the metal. Usually about 10-12 taps into precious metal I have found the 12L14 barrel steel to be very soft and I have never hallmark stamped a barrel but it would be inclined to use a smaller hammer lighter strikes repeated numerous times to get results like what I see in the photos.

[James Rogers]

I do mine with a 4lb hammer, usually about 6 strikes.

Mike, how do you keep the stamp aligned so you don't get multiple edge images?

Kevin

Carefull replacement of the stamp before every restrike. Not for the faint of heart....

Followed Mike's advice a decade or more ago and found it to work for me. I don't hold the stamp flat to the barrel but start at an angle favoring one corner of the stamp to the surface. As I continue my whacks I work down to flat and over to the other side of the stamp.
Now I have an arbor press I altered to accept my stamp and I have a sleeve over the top where I pound on it. This works good for brass but I still prefer the former method for barrels.

[tallbear]

Dave

The late Chris Altland studied this quite a bit as he stamped a lot of barrels with proof marks in his kit business.He felt a bore sized rod was inserted so as to not collapse the bore.He studied a bunch of originals on which he based this conclusion. He turned a bunch of rods to use in his barrels when stamping them.Chris  used   hydraulic pressure as you do when stamping.We always surmised that they may have used a fly press.......but have no evidence to back that up.

Mitch

[David Rase]

Hi Dave,
Consider that the iron used was soft.  Even the famous stub twist barrels were just made of iron of different density.  The steel barrels of today probably make that job much harder.

dave

That has kind of been my thought as well.
David

[rich pierce]

Not to be a skeptic for the sake of skepticism but I’ve not found wrought iron to be softer than the steel commonly used on ML barrels. Not easier to hacksaw or file. If it was so soft I’m not sure how wrought iron nails, horseshoes, or wagon wheel tires functioned. I’ve seen talk of it being so soft one could slice it with a knife. That’s lead not wrought iron.

[davec2]

OK....But there is a difference between the "raised" details in original marks I show above and "incised" marks like the ones I recently put on the blunderbuss I made....like this....



It takes much greater applied force to generate a "raised" detail mark than it does to make an "incised" mark because of the amount of metal that must be displaced.  Mike, if you can make a mark that looks like those original marks with a 4 pound hammer and with no bore distortion, I'd love to see a tutorial video of how you do it.

And Mitch,

I can only believe that what you noted about Chris and his stamping of barrels is correct...that a mandrel of some sort was inserted into the barrel for stamping.  If the proof marks were applied after the barrel was finished, they could not have been done hot.  If the barrel was completed, proof fired, and then marked as having passed the proof test, it must have been done cold and with the barrel in its final configuration.  Even multiple lighter strikes that can move that much metal almost have to effect the bore.

As you can tell, I'm still not clear on how this was done so well and so often.

[Clark Badgett]

Looks like original barrels pictured above had the stamps placed where the powder column would be when loaded. Don't know if this is a valid observation or not.

[Mike Brooks]

It takes much greater applied force to generate a "raised" detail mark than it does to make an "incised" mark because of the amount of metal that must be displaced.  Mike, if you can make a mark that looks like those original marks with a 4 pound hammer and with no bore distortion, I'd love to see a tutorial video of how you do it.

I'm sure you must have seen my English proofs on my English guns on my website. James Rogers describes the process better than I can. Big hammer, multiple blows until you like what you see. Carefull placement is what it's all about.

[Pukka Bundook]

The mandrel thing could not be the way it was done at the proof house, asthere is no way they could keep enough mandrels in stock for every size they woulkd need.  It has to be remembered that barrels were proofed and it didn't matter what bore they were. I have an old 20, and one barrel is 18 and one 19 bore . 

I think the key is as Mike and others say above. Shock, rather than pressure.  Shock will affect the surface, whilst pressure will work deeper.

DaveC2,

Can I ask who the gun is by with this mark?  (see photo).
Is there a dot between the I & the H?
I ask, as I have a sporting gun with a very similar mark, that isn't Joseph Heylin.
(see 2nd photo)

[davec2]

Thanks to all for the help.  I will practice...

Pukka,

My apologies but I do not know where I came up with that picture.  I did a Google image search for 18th century proof marks and that picture was one of a bazillion that popped up.  I tried to find it again for you, but no luck.  Sorry.

[Mike Brooks]

I stocked up a pair of pistols with original English Dragoon barrels. The bores were dented where the stamps were. I doubt this was a concern back in the day. Since it's in the powder chamber I don't worry much over it either. As a side note, those dragoon barrels both had bushed touch holes.

[smart dog]

Hi Richard,
I looked at my copy of Blackmore and I wonder if it could be one of the John Hawkins who worked from during the first half of the 18th century?

dave

[Pukka Bundook]

Dave C2,

Thank you for trying to find that image again, very kind of you!
I can't tell if there is a period (dot ) between the I & H on your photo, but otherwise they look identical.

Dave Dog,
 John Hawkins seems close, and it may well be one of them, as we only have one mark recorded in Blackmore, and I think four makers of that name.
It would appear that the period is to differenciate between makers of the same name, so am sure you are on the right track
Thank you!


Please pardon the tangent post, DaveC2.

[Mike Brooks]

Dave C2,

Thank you for trying to find that image again, very kind of you!
I can't tell if there is a period (dot ) between the I & H on your photo, but otherwise they look identical.

Dave Dog,
 John Hawkins seems close, and it may well be one of them, as we only have one mark recorded in Blackmore, and I think four makers of that name.
It would appear that the period is to differenciate between makers of the same name, so am sure you are on the right track
Thank you!


Please pardon the tangent post, DaveC2.

Didn't Hawkins make a bunch of 1/2 stock plains rifles?

[Pukka Bundook]

Michael,

Go and stand in the corner!

[Mike Brooks]

Michael,

Go and stand in the corner!

Oh, that was probably little Jimmy Hawkins....