Bess compared with Bess

[Ike Godsey]

howdy folks,

with all that what was said about the different Brown Bess Replicas and if this or that is more HC/PC or s it the other”¦.? I thought I start up and try to figure out what are the differences in the two, most mentioned Bess copies. So here are some pics and they are comparing the following:

1) Pedersolis Brown Bess ”“ which by all means is a copy of a Short Land Pattern and so not to have before 1769 ”“ it s not useable for FIW and in the AWI it is a matter of year and unit (as I understand it) and not to use without making some changes.

2) a India made Brown Bess ”“ labelled as “Model 1730” so it is a Long Land Pattern ”“ that could be used in FWI and AWI ”“ but here also some changes need to be done.

please keep in mind, that here in Germany, we do not have the choice between lock markings and different rammers etc. ”“ we here are happy to have access to the 1730 Model LLP (the one shown here) the 1756 LLP (AWI style with straight lock”¦), a Short Land Pattern form India and one from Pedersoli, and a Napoleonic “India Pattern Musket” (the 39” variant) of course made in India.

the first look:

the india Bess is new, my Pedersoli Bess is from 1979. that makes the look of the India Bess a bit too “shiny”.

1st issue: the triggergurad ist attached with three screws. two behind the trigger guard ”“ the last one should not be there. It should be a pin in the stock that holds the guard in place. and the third screw is in the stock under the lock(!). well the third screw isn’t visible, so its not really an issue. the last one in the rear part of the triggerguard could be brass soldered and polished and a pin connection could be made to it ”“ not a big deal.

the stock of the india Bess is a bit “bulgy” compared to the Pedersoli Bess. But if you consider that on the original LLPs the stocks had an evaluation from “thick” to “slim” and ths India Bess is labelled “1730” it measurements are in a acceptable range (just my thinking).

2nd issue: the rammer! Ist of steel, but only 6mm dia., the ramrod pipe are drilled to 7,6mm ”“ point the muzzle down and ”žkling“ - grrrr!

here are some pic from both guns:

A) lock ”“ india Bess on top

B) sideplates: india is rounded, Pedersoli is flat ”“ both are HC!

C) the overal length ”“ india Bess on the right.

D) that is the front end of both ”“ again india Bess on the right.

E) rearstock ”“ as you can clearly see, the portion from the lock to the end of the stock is much longer on the Pedersoli Bess. not sure what is correct compared to an original LLP ”“ maybe someone here could bring some light in the darkness?

F) forestocks between the lock and the "entry thimble"

G) india lock outside:

H) and inside:

from time to time i always hear some one saying ”žI took a Pedersoli Lock and droped it into my India made Bess.” well, I took a lockplate of a Pedersoli Bess that I have on hand and put it into the mortise of the India Bess:

I do not think i have to commad that any further”¦

since I am an FWI and AWI reenactor I bought the 1730 Model LLP with the knowing that I need to make some changes to it. I would like to have a lock marked “Dublin Castle” but here it is impossible. maybe I have to order a lock in the US”¦ :idunno:
I am aware that I need to change the rammer to a wooden one (which I prefer) and therefore I need to order the pipes from TOW.
I also would put a nosecap on it, using a thin sheet of copper or brass for it. I also will sand the stock a bit to give it a unvarnished used look ”“ therefore I will also brown the lock, screws and barrel (I know that those muskets have been bright, but I will use it as a militia man, scouting for the british (FWI) so no shiny steel please also no bajonett!)

by all those issues that I was aware of before I bought the musket, I could be sure that this gun is safe to shoot! Since it its sold here in Germany, it needs to be proofed by a official German proof house. it has its stamps on the barrel showing that it is proofed and there was a proof document that came with the gun, reading that it is safe to shoot up to 12 gramm (not grain ”“ gramm!) blackpowder and 50 gramm(!) lead ball. that simply makes a safe feeling when you fire it :thumbsup:

all in one, the Pedersoli Bess ”“ if you buy it here today ”“ is 1100 euros (close to 1400 US$) and the india Bess is around 500 euros. for that difference, I can make a lot of changes ”“ I even can have a gunbuilder doing those changes, till I would reach the price of the Pedersoli Bess ”“ plus the fakt that the Pedersoli need to be changed also as I mentioned before.

thanks for listening :hatsoff:

ike

 

[No Powder]

Nice post.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Ike,

How much does the proofing cost at the German proof house?

You might want to specify the maker of your Long Land King's Musket. I have a later version (1756 pattern) from Loyalist Arms, and it has only a single screw in the trigger guard, which is correct and holds in the thumb escutcheon. The lock is marked "Tower 1753". It has a metal rammer and brass nose cap. The wood is of course, Indian, not a European hardwood.

The nose cap is a bit of a problem if I was going to play an American militia man in the F&I, as there is a problem with the date it was added as a regular part of musket production. The official date of the addition of the brass nose cap is 1756, but some arsenals were adding them a few years earlier. Either way the 1756 version would've been state-of-the-art and not found in the hands of Americans not serving with a regular British unit. In fact very few of the "new" muskets would've been found in America prior to the F&I. So as an American I wouldn't have it, but as I play a British Soldier it's acceptable; I would have brought it with me from England. Since I almost always play a British soldier in the AWI, it's the proper musket for that situation.

"Dublin Castle" King's Muskets (iirc) were iron mounted, so you probably shouldn't worry about having the lock marked as such.

You should also know that the conversion over to a metal rammer happened pretty quick prior to the Seven Years War aka F&I, beginning in 1748. No telling how fast it continued over to the colonies. Maryland maintained an armory of Bess muskets for the colonial militia, but so far as I have found, nothing mentions the rammers on their guns.

The problem with the Pedersoli Short Land version of the Brown Bess is that it's a mixture of the 1768 and 1777 versions, and as such probably would not have been seen in North America in the hands of anybody other than a few dragoons.

Are you not allowed in Germany to import "antique gun parts" or do you have to be licensed "importer" no matter how it arrives? I should think that as the Canadian company Loyalist Arms has to ship the muskets in parts in two boxes to qualify as gun parts with the Canadian mail system when we get them here in the States, you could get a Canadian version of the musket in German..., providing that's allowed.

There is an adequate, short article on the evolution of the Bess on line from the American Rifleman. It fails to mention the conversions to metal rammers of many of the 1742 version Bess, and it fails to understand that although "official" pattern of the Bess became the Short Land Pattern in 1777..., the first units to acquire these were regiments station in England, and full implementation didn't occur until after the AWI..., very few arrived in North America. The photographs with the article are pretty good though.

LD

 

[Ike Godsey]

Dave,

thank you for your responding ”“ I was in hope you’re around.

Ike,

How much does the proofing cost at the German proof house?

Well proofing is about 75,00 euros. But you also have to pay for the shipping ”“ and since this will be a long shipment, it is 30 euros each way. So we’re ending up 135,00 euros.

You might want to specify the maker of your Long Land King's Musket. I have a later version (1756 pattern) from Loyalist Arms, and it has only a single screw in the trigger guard, which is correct and holds in the thumb escutcheon. The lock is marked "Tower 1753". It has a metal rammer and brass nose cap. The wood is of course, Indian, not a European hardwood.

So there are flaws in it also? If your musket is a 1756 type, how could it be marked 1753? :wink:

The nose cap is a bit of a problem if I was going to play an American militia man in the F&I, as there is a problem with the date it was added as a regular part of musket production. The official date of the addition of the brass nose cap is 1756, but some arsenals were adding them a few years earlier.

Yes, I know. That is one of the reasons I was referring to a brass or copper sheet to make the nose cap from. I am going in the direction of the musket shown in Erik Goldstein & Stuart Mowbrays book “Brown Bess” on page 30. The idea is to make a “used look” musket out of this shiny piece o steel.
I am more concerned in the look of the frizzen. Since the frizzen shown in the book are borderlined, mine is plain. I need to talk to a gunsmith to see if he could help to change this.

Either way the 1756 version would've been state-of-the-art and not found in the hands of Americans not serving with a regular British unit. In fact very few of the "new" muskets would've been found in America prior to the F&I. So as an American I wouldn't have it, but as I play a British Soldier it's acceptable; I would have brought it with me from England. Since I almost always play a British soldier in the AWI, it's the proper musket for that situation.

The 1756 LLP is a type of musket that we can find more often in the stores around here.

"Dublin Castle" King's Muskets (iirc) were iron mounted, so you probably shouldn't worry about having the lock marked as such.

You might be right. That brings a question up: the lock of my LLP is marked “TOWER” do I need a date on it? Or have there been locks around without the year marked on it?

You should also know that the conversion over to a metal rammer happened pretty quick prior to the Seven Years War aka F&I, beginning in 1748. No telling how fast it continued over to the colonies. Maryland maintained an armory of Bess muskets for the colonial militia, but so far as I have found, nothing mentions the rammers on their guns.

True. And this is my “second plan” if I could not convert the current musket to a wooden rammer. The pipes of my LLP (as mentioned above) are too large for the steel rammer. So if for any reason I cannot go along with the wooden rammer, I might end up to do a real conversion in reducing the dia in my existing pipes.

"The problem with the Pedersoli Short Land version of the Brown Bess is that it's a mixture of the 1768 and 1777 versions, and as such probably would not have been seen in North America in the hands of anybody other than a few dragoons.

That’s the reason why I bought the LLP.

"Are you not allowed in Germany to import "antique gun parts" or do you have to be licensed "importer" no matter how it arrives? I should think that as the Canadian company Loyalist Arms has to ship the muskets in parts in two boxes to qualify as gun parts with the Canadian mail system when we get them here in the States, you could get a Canadian version of the musket in German..., providing that's allowed.

Flintlock arms are free to buy, own and carry if you are over 18 ”“ percussion arms are free to buy and own, but not to carry. Well I et 47 this year in October, so”¦. besides this, I have a “gunbuilders license” that allows me to “produce” every gun I want ”“ with the exception of submachine guns.

I have had contact with “Flintlock Repair”, “Military blabla something”, “Loyalist Arms” and “Veteran Arms” as well. The kindest people I found at “Flintlock Repair”. But we ended up not to deal with each other cause of the high shipping costs. The maximum length a shipment could be to have a price somewhere below 100US$ is 60 inches. That is way to small for a LLP considering the wadding in the packing to get it over here safely.

There is an adequate, short article on the evolution of the Bess on line from the American Rifleman. It fails to mention the conversions to metal rammers of many of the 1742 version Bess, and it fails to understand that although "official" pattern of the Bess became the Short Land Pattern in 1777..., the first units to acquire these were regiments station in England, and full implementation didn't occur until after the AWI..., very few arrived in North America. The photographs with the article are pretty good though.

I have seen this before, nice information but the pics in the “Brown Bess” book are far better :thumbsup:

LD

Thank you for all the information Dave, it is always a pleasure to read your posts. :bow: I am looking forward to more input and suggestions fro all of you guys. I am still learning”¦

Ike

 

[pargent]

Yes well there are lots of theroies kicking about on what the Pedersoli is actually copied from, there are some muskets out there that match the Pedersoli ,they are not what is considered a true Bess but something else , I suspect that the make up of the Pedersoli has more to do with manufacturing and meeting the needs of demand . Here are some comparisons with the real deal ,although of the latter type 1 India pattern .
1.The barrel on the real Bess is .775 cal. ,the Pedersoli is .75 cal

2. The barrel on the Bess is much thicker in the breech section then the Pedersoli .
3. A Pedersoli lock will drop straight into the mortice on this model (have tried this with a well worn unserviceable musket and on an OEM rough finished stock as well as later muskets owned by others )both handrail and baker type stocks .

 

[Silex]

Hi Ike,

Nice project!

As for the proofing, where did you intend to have it proofed? The smoothbore I brought over from the U.S. did not cost that much in proofing. Although I heard they wanted to up the cost towards the end of the year mine cost about 30 Euro this spring.
For the 30 Euro each way in shipping you can drive up to Mellrichstadt have it done and take her home with you. I did this. There was a very nice gentleman we made an appointment I brought her in, he proofed her and I was on my way. Just half a day including the roundtrip from Altdorf.

PM me I can give you the phone number.

Silex

 

[Ike Godsey]

Hi Ike,

Nice project!

As for the proofing, where did you intend to have it proofed? The smoothbore I brought over from the U.S. did not cost that much in proofing. Although I heard they wanted to up the cost towards the end of the year mine cost about 30 Euro this spring.
For the 30 Euro each way in shipping you can drive up to Mellrichstadt have it done and take her home with you. I did this. There was a very nice gentleman we made an appointment I brought her in, he proofed her and I was on my way. Just half a day including the roundtrip from Altdorf.

PM me I can give you the phone number.

Silex

thank you silex, but my LLP is already proofed. the price is from the proofhouse in Munich.

anyway, i prefer to buy a already proofed gun, cause if i buy an unproofed one, and anything goes wrong during proofing, i am on my own to get this fixed. if the dealer takes care of proofing, it is not my problem if anything goes wrong during proofing. point is, a german dealer cannot sell an unproofed gun to a private person in germany.
so to stay within the law, you'd better by a proofed one or one without touch hole.

ike

 

[spudnut]

great posts

 

[Loyalist Dave]

The date on the lock does not necessarily = the date of the make of the musket, this is why you can find lock dates before or after the official date a musket was accepted. The only difference really between the 1742 and 1756 are the nose cap, and the metal rammer, so a lock dated 1742 or later will work on my gun, as long as the lock has the exterior bridle on the pan.

You could add the cap or add just a reenforcing band at the nose of the stock. What the colonials did to keep muskets operational is a wide range of options.

I am currently going to try and retro-fit a Colerain "Dutch" musket barrel onto an Indian bess, to create a "committee of safety musket" for a chap. There is a nice article about colonial armories cobbling together bess and Dutch parts to make working guns.

I think one of the minor cosmetic concerns with the Pedersoli musket is the date on the lock. I think in you case you should have a date on the lock while the Pedersoli should not.

Interesting I serviced a Pedersoli musket yesterday with a serial number starting at 15000..., and I was surprised at the lack of quality of the work on the lock. The factory main spring had it's support tab protruding through the lock plate instead of being flush with the exterior surface. The interior surfaces of the pan bridle and the area opposite where the frizzen screw attaches to the lock plate were rough with casting marks, as well as the pan had casting imperfections. The frizzen spring finial extended below the lower edge of the lock face. I am used to seeing Pedersoli locks with much better attention to detail than that.

LD

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Yes well there are lots of theroies kicking about on what the Pedersoli is actually copied from, there are some muskets out there that match the Pedersoli ,they are not what is considered a true Bess but something else , I suspect that the make up of the Pedersoli has more to do with manufacturing and meeting the needs of demand . Here are some comparisons with the real deal ,although of the latter type 1 India pattern .
1.The barrel on the real Bess is .775 cal. ,the Pedersoli is .75 cal

2. The barrel on the Bess is much thicker in the breech section then the Pedersoli .
3. A Pedersoli lock will drop straight into the mortice on this model (have tried this with a well worn unserviceable musket and on an OEM rough finished stock as well as later muskets owned by others )both handrail and baker type stocks .

1601phill, a good and well thought out post, but we all need to keep in mind that the Pedersoli has been in production since first designed and brought out in about 1972 by Navy Arms in honor of the impending American Bicentenial in 1976. As such, it is one of the first factory-made reproduction longarms. At that time, there were major complaints from collectors expressing their concerns that the reproductions would be aged and passed off as originals to unsuspecting collectors, both beginning and experienced. As we all know this didn't happen and so the repops have been made as reproductions for many years.

Due to the concerns, there are variations that were built into the Italian reproductions that are absolute certain tells that make it dissimilar from any and all known originals. Shape and size of parts like the buttplate, triggerguard, locks and their markings, ramrods, etc. In other words, the Italian-made reproductions are not exactly like any original but they are in many ways much closer to the originals than any of the Indian-made imitation guns.

As far as caliber, originals were nominally .75 caliber but there was sufficient variation as new.

 

[Ike Godsey]

the lock of a 1742 could be droped in to your 1756 musket??
hoe could that happen, one has a banana shape, the other got a straight edge???

 

[Ike Godsey]

... In other words, the Italian-made reproductions are not exactly like any original but they are in many ways much closer to the originals than any of the Indian-made imitation guns. ...

do you have any backround on india made reproduction guns, that you can say things like this?

my india made bess is closer to a LLP than any of the pizza-made-bess. :v

 

[dave_person]

Hi,
I had the pleasure of handling several original short land pattern British muskets, a sea service musket, and disassembled and lightly restored a short land musket that had the barrel cut back. Moreover, my brother carries a Pedersoli Bess and I've seen several India-made short land Besses. All of the commercial reproductions need a lot of work to make them look and feel like the originals with which I am familiar. They simply cannot duplicate the quality and look of hand work. I intend to "defarb" and work over my brother's Pedersoli, which will require taking off about 30% more wood and reshaping the poorly formed lock panels among other changes.

dave

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

... In other words, the Italian-made reproductions are not exactly like any original but they are in many ways much closer to the originals than any of the Indian-made imitation guns. ...

do you have any backround on india made reproduction guns, that you can say things like this?

my india made bess is closer to a LLP than any of the pizza-made-bess. :v

Have ever handled one? No, can't say that I have but the photographs I have seen (a LOT on the web and the vendors' sites) say enough; the Indian guns have about a pound and a half to two pounds too much wood and are crudely shaped in the wrist, the butt and the lock area - especially the lock area. That's not including the more than course forearm. You may feel that your Indian "Bess" is closer than the Italian product but the barrel length is, in my opinion - worth what you pay for it - is the only thing they get right on the Long Land, Short Land and the India Pattern reproductions. The same can be said about the Indian repop of the Sea Service Pattern. And I'm not going to mention any of their other reproductions, the same thing is true. Sorry, not what you wanted to hear but....

 

[Ike Godsey]

... In other words, the Italian-made reproductions are not exactly like any original but they are in many ways much closer to the originals than any of the Indian-made imitation guns. ...

do you have any backround on india made reproduction guns, that you can say things like this?

my india made bess is closer to a LLP than any of the pizza-made-bess. :v

Have ever handled one? No, can't say that I have...

answer me one question, how can you say how a T-Bone steak tastes, when you never eat one?

i am really amazed how one can speak up and say things like you did without even touched one of the muskets your talking about?

Sorry, not what you wanted to hear but....

again, how do you know?

 

[Ike Godsey]

Hi,
I had the pleasure of handling several original short land pattern British muskets, a sea service musket, and disassembled and lightly restored a short land musket that had the barrel cut back. Moreover, my brother carries a Pedersoli Bess and I've seen several India-made short land Besses. All of the commercial reproductions need a lot of work to make them look and feel like the originals with which I am familiar. They simply cannot duplicate the quality and look of hand work. I intend to "defarb" and work over my brother's Pedersoli, which will require taking off about 30% more wood and reshaping the poorly formed lock panels among other changes.

dave

thank you for the sharing of your "in sight". :hatsoff:

i am aware that the india made besses are far away form what we would call "correct in all details" - but the india bess, especially if its a LLP, is for its money, a good base to come close to something that looks more HC/PC than a short land pattern (like the Pedersoli or japan bess) for the french & india wars.
with a litte work - well i am not sure if "little" is the right term here, but still - it will turn out a good repro LLP - better as the ones comming out of the box (from india).

i prefer to reenact with that 500 euros india made piece of steel and wood - instead of spending 2300 euros (which what is the price here) for a TOW Bess.

no harms :wink:

ike

 

[pargent]

If you have the book The Brown Bess you will have noticed the marked difference between the real thing and your Indian gun , I would only consider the Indian gun a kit in the rough at best. You will find that those who use the Indian guns spend some time on them to bring them up to standard at least in looks and mostly shoot blanks where as the Pedersoli guys myself included shoot live rounds a lot , in competitions , hunting and some blank work thrown in as well ,FYI mine is 1981 production and except for the 4"shorter barrel and flat side plate passes muster for a pattern 1756 or with out the Grice date on the lock a pattern 1769 , bear in mind that you are conversing with a couple of guys that are very,very well schooled on this subject matter. In a historical context and as users of the Brown Bess originals and repros in different countries where these muskets were predominantly used for over 120 years .

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

answer me one question, how can you say how a T-Bone steak tastes, when you never eat one?

i am really amazed how one can speak up and say things like you did without even touched one of the muskets your talking about?

Huh? :rotf:

I would hardly call ground beef a T-bone steak but maybe your taste is different? :idunno:

How do I tell the difference? Listen, it is quite simple, I have eyes and more than enough experience handling originals over the last 40 years as well as seeing and handling many quality reproductions. The Italian repops are not high quality like those made by makers like Mike Brooks or any of a dozen others I can name but they are certainly better the the clunky, half finished muskets out of India. And it's sad really, the Indian makers, even though they work under poor conditions and are paid very poorly, are capable of doing better work, they are talented craftsmen in general. It's the buyers that demand low price so why would they waste their time building an item that their primary customers don't want or appreciate? Are we beginning to see the difference in the reference to T-bone steak and ground beef?

And, there is the fact that, according to Indian Law, as set forth in their Indian Arms Act of 1959, these are manufactured as Imitation Firearms. See:
http://www.abhijeetsingh.com/arms/india/laws/act/chapter_1_2.html

under Chapter II, Article 6 quoted below:

6. Licence for the shortening of guns or conversion of imitation firearms into firearms

"No person shall shorten the barrel of a firearm or convert an imitation firearm into a firearm unless he holds in this behalf a license issued in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder.
Explanation.---In this section, the expression "imitation firearm" means anything which has the appearance of being a firearm, whether it is capable of discharging any shot, bullet or other missile or not."

So, they are not manufactured to be fired. If they were they would have Indian government proof marks visibly stamped on the barrel and would be exported as safe to fire. As a matter of fact, it is specifically against Indian law to convert one to shootable condition without a license only given to those who qualify as specified in the documentation linked above. The maker is not responsible for your injuries or those caused by you to others since the imitation firearm is not, as sold in India to parties taking it out of the country as manufactured, capable of being fired. After conversion in another jurisdiction, you are on your own.

The fact is, we do not know that any of the makers use a quality steel in their manufacture or, if they do, is it consistent from one production run to another? One batch may be okay but the next may be flawed - there is no documentation. They build these "guns" to a price point, nothing more. If it works when someone outside the jurisdiction of Indian law, converts it to a "real" firearm, fine. If it blows and injures someone, also fine since you can not take them to court in India (or anywhere else) because, you have broken Indian law by converting it - or having it converted - to function as a real firearm, something it was not meant to be.

 

[dave_person]

Hi Ike,
With a lot of work you should be able to improve that India-made gun. I would remove the buffing wheel polish on the lock by stoning, which will crispen up the dished out screw holes. I would weld over the sear screw hole because model 1730 LLPs show only the sear screw hole behind the cock. I would reshape the tumbler bridle and clean up the inside of the lock plate. The frizzen and cock need a lot of cleaning up with files and stones. The frizzen in particular needs to be thinned and refined. I would re-engrave them. Unfortunately, the outline of the lockplate is very clumsy compared to original early LLP muskets but you cannot reshape it because of the lock inlet. The poor shaping causes the transition from the barrel tang to the wrist to look much too heavy and inelegant. At least reshaping the lock panels should help that issue a lot. Next, I would completely strip off the finish and reshape the stock. About 25-30% more wood can come off in virtually all dimensions except length of pull. There is enough extra wood to completely file off the lock panel moldings and beaver tails and reshape them properly so the lock area looks about right. The flat moldings around the lock should be no more than 1/8" wide and can be less. Hopefully, there is enough wood under the ramrod hole so you can reshape the bottom of the stock such that there is only about 1/4" of wood thickness between the lowest edge of the lockplate and the trigger plate. I would then re-inlet the trigger plate, reposition the trigger and drill a new pin hole (filling the old one), and then re-inlet the trigger guard. When looking down from the top of the barrel, you should see no more than about 1/8" of wood thickness on either side of the barrel. I would scrape finish the stock and use some sort of oil-based varnish if the teak will have it. These are some of the things I would need to do to fashion a pretty good repro from that India-made gun. I am curious, does the screw for the forestock sling swivel pass through a lug soldered or brazed on the barrel? I've not had one of these India guns apart in my hands to know.

dave

 

[Ike Godsey]

So, they are not manufactured to be fired. If they were they would have Indian government proof marks visibly stamped on the barrel and would be exported as safe to fire. As a matter of fact, it is specifically against Indian law to convert one to shootable condition without a license only given to those who qualify as specified in the documentation linked above. The maker is not responsible for your injuries or those caused by you to others since the imitation firearm is not, as sold in India to parties taking it out of the country as manufactured, capable of being fired. After conversion in another jurisdiction, you are on your own.

oh well - here we go again. i really wish you would read the things i wrote before that might help. :shocked2:

the gun i bought IS proofed for live firing by a official german proofhouse. that is shown by two different things:
1) official german proofmarks on the barrel
2) an official document with serial number, caliber, loading datas etc. telling you that this gun is safe to shoot with live rounds.

The fact is, we do not know that any of the makers use a quality steel in their manufacture or, if they do, is it consistent from one production run to another?

can you be sure of any other maker in the world? i mean, when you buy a gun form one of your US builders (he would maybe buy his barrels elsewhere) can you be shure that the quality of his barrels is always the same? and if yes, how do you know? and again, if yes, is he (the maker) in charge if your guns blows up?

and what about italian makers? Pedersoli for example? can you be sure the barrels are from a "quality" steel? its about 9 month ago when a brand new out of the box, italian proofed 1766 charleville musket made by Pedersoli blows up at the first shot - and nobody knows why.
do you consider this "safe"?

on the other hand, my Pedersoli Bess is from 1979 and it has many many many life rounds through it - nothing went wrong since then.
my friend from the reenactors club uses a Pedersoli Bess as well - and his got the third barrel in it! the other two had damages by shooting blanks!

so what does it tell you about "steel quality"?

One batch may be okay but the next may be flawed - there is no documentation.

is there any from italian makers? what do you think why so many voices could be heard from not hardened frizzens on Pedersoli guns? or main springs that broke, or barrels that blow up?

They build these "guns" to a price point, nothing more. If it works when someone outside the jurisdiction of Indian law, converts it to a "real" firearm, fine. If it blows and injures someone, also fine since you can not take them to court in India (or anywhere else) because, you have broken Indian law by converting it - or having it converted - to function as a real firearm, something it was not meant to be.

well that is your point of view and it is OK with me if you see things like this.
i see it different. as i stated eralier i have a gun builders license and i can asure you that no matter which gun blows up - you are always on your own, no matter if the gun is from india, italy, the US or even germany.

that is the reason we here do have an insurance that you have to pay everytime you will life shoot - here life shooting is only allowed by the law or a licensed and proof tested place.

you see the things are not only black and white as you might see them.

but you're right on one point - as i stated earlier - i bought this gun for a low price and the point was to have a "reenactor" gun. will i live fire this one? maybe - just to see how it performes. but the improtant thing is, i bought it with the knowing what i will get - a 90% finished kit in which i have to put work in it to make a LLP out of it that has a used look, browned steel parts, and is - because of its longer barrel - OK for F&I war period.
and thats what i have - not less, not more.

here is a pic from my rocklocks, yu can see that i know about the difference in quality. from the top:

the india made LLP - my Fowler 12GA made out of india made parts plus a spanish barrel - 1734 TVLLE de Grenadier made for the Canada parkservice - Pedersoli Bess

no harms :v

ike