British Ordnance Collectors Network
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
3 pounder shot
- Thread starter tigbrand
- Start date
Hi Tig,
With reference to the two holes could they be marks left by a hardness tester ? The marks are left by an indenter.
Cheers
Gary
My thoughts: WWI solid were not AP and tended to have a flat tip. I've a solid flat tip WWII shot MK I/L no tracer. A pointed unmarked solid no tracer. Also a WWII MKII NT/N flat tip and tracer. I've not tried to see how hard they are. From the band patina and rounding of its corners I'd say its WWI practice. Only ever used VPN hardnes checking so dont know if the marks are Brinell? and how hard they might indicate the metal to be approx. I'll have a weigh of mine but not for a little while, will let you know. Sorry TIG no real help.
Cheers for the replies chaps. Gordon, over here in the UK Iv'e found the earlier stuff in 3 Pounder at least to be poorly marked! I think it's ww1 myself, but much larger than the British MK I service practice shot. Its those marks to the base?? Cheers Tig.
Tig, are you sure those aren't Brinnell hardness marks, as they look like indents from a tiny sphere and about the right size. It's hard to see in the photo, but I do know Brinnell used a tiny ball, and Rockwell a cone.
alternatively, could someone have removed the primer and knocked the projectile out of the case with some kind of rod, and hammer ? Long shot, my money is on Brinnell.... Are there any similar dents, possibly smaller on the Ogive ?
Rich
alternatively, could someone have removed the primer and knocked the projectile out of the case with some kind of rod, and hammer ? Long shot, my money is on Brinnell.... Are there any similar dents, possibly smaller on the Ogive ?
Rich
Yes I always thought practice types had a small flat tip, these pointed unmarked 3pr are a bit odd in that way. But
if meant for an AP solid shot I would have expected some markings ? Maybe they aren't Navel at all ? have we considered
the Army 3pr tank gun in the 20s ?
if meant for an AP solid shot I would have expected some markings ? Maybe they aren't Navel at all ? have we considered
the Army 3pr tank gun in the 20s ?
Thanks for the extra input chaps, the marks are definitely deliberate to the base. I have now weighed it and compared with a another British practice shot of WW1 vintage and both are the same at 3Ib 1oz(give or take a few drams).The only differences are no flat tip and lack of marking. Pretty sure its an early practice shot predating the intro of the Mk 1 service shot. I think this came in about 1916??? Cheers all. Tony.