Mills No23 Restored

[Missileman]

Thought I'd share this with you good folk.

This is a No23 I bought from a VERY well respected member and collector. Chromed back in the day at some time it had developed a nice Patina over the years. In fact all the chrome had worn off almost completely. Not only this, but a pice of the casting on the top left side where the hinge point of the arming lever rests had been broken off and was missing all together.
I wanted to get the grenade back to some kind of 'trophy' condition as it had been intended for when chromed many years ago, and get the damaged area repaired.

A trip to a local motorcycle maker I know confirmed that he could indeed build up a bit of weld to replace the missing nib on the top of the main casting, which he did. Then the grenade had to go off to a machine shop, where the welded area was carefully ground back to match the other side.

After all this, the patina where the repairs had been carried out had been taken off and rather than leave it, I took the grenade to a local plating company.

Chrome plating wasn't really available in 1916 when the grenade was manufactured, which is why a lot of old vintage cars have nickel plating and not chrome, so the only thing for it was to get the casing nickelled.

This is the end result. Personally I'm really pleased with it. I didn't want it re-shellacked because the casing had already been ground smooth on the whole from the original chroming process and it just wouldn't have looked right, and as it had been plated many many years ago, I saw nothing wrong with re-plating it again for the next 100 years of it's life.

It has a new centre tube because the original had to be removed before plating, and unfortunately it broke up on removal, so I fitted it with a period brass one as a replacement.

The striker, lever and ring pull are as they came with the grenade and have also been plated.

The pics aren't in any specific order, but you'll be able to recognise the two pictures which show the grenade before it was restored

Thanks all

Mike

 

[spotter]

very nice,,hope you dont mind me asking but what did the replating cost.

 

[Snufkin]

Reject castings were used as training devices, for throwing practice at the bombing schools. One way, especially from late 1916, that some were identified for training was by electro zincing and electro nickeling. From the "before" photos it is probable you had a good example of a training grenade.

The base plug is a very nice example of an early 23 MkI, with a good brass colouration.

Photo shows a nickel plated training Mills. The casing has a blow hole, hence it's rejection and use for practice.




Tom.

 

[Missileman]

Spotter....Thanks. The re-plating cost 120...cash. I've had a FLH No36 re-chromed as well which was originally chromed as a factory gift. The base plug on that is dated December 1940.

Tom....I hear what you say and thats a nice example you have there in your attached pic. I wouldn't touch that as it's great as it is. My No23 wasn't a factory reject and it wasn't nickel plated to start with, it had been chromed. You can't see from the picture but there was one small patch of chrome still left on it, (which had a bloody sharp edge on it!). Also, I believe the grenade came from a collection in Belgium originally where it had been recovered shortly after the war.

It has a lot brighter sheen to it than can be seen in the pics, because it has reflected the colour of the wood table it was sat on when I took the photos.

Cheers

 

[Snufkin]

My No23 wasn't a factory reject and it wasn't nickel plated to start with, it had been chromed. You can't see from the picture but there was one small patch of chrome still left on it, (which had a bloody sharp edge on it!). Also, I believe the grenade came from a collection in Belgium originally where it had been recovered shortly after the war.

So it was recovered just after WWI and went into a collection? At some point thereafter, the owner of the collection chrome plated it - we can assume not until the 1920s when chrome plating became a bit more commonplace. However, even though in a collection, it must have then had some very rough and prolonged handling to remove most of the chrome - even bad chrome plating sticks tenaciously to the underlying copper-nickel plating. Interesting.

I do have several nickel plated Mills items and components which are far brighter than might be expected for nickel, and to the casual eye would be mistaken for chromium. Also on both a lever and another Mills body there is loose plating, which is deceptively sharp.


Tom.

 

[Missileman]

My first thought was that it was indeed nickelled and not chromed, but the plating shop confirmed that it was chrome and a poor chroming job at that, so the assumption it was chromed after the 1920's is likely correct, but by whom is anyone's guess?
As for it's exact history up until a few years ago, who knows? I don't doubt what I was told by the chap I bought it from, he simply told me it had come from Belgium and because of the damage to the casing he bought it for spares. All I'm sure of is that it doesn't have a history as a training reject, it is a battlefield relic, not that it makes any real difference.
Assuming it came from a collection is maybe too strong an assumption, it could simply have been a one off mantelpiece curiosity which was later chromed to keep the wife happy? Who knows?
Maybe the chap I bought it off can shed more light on it if I ask him, or he might see this thread and chip in, I'll leave that to him.
Like all my grenades though, I find myself looking at it and imagining what they have seen and where they have been throughout their lives and in most cases.....we'll never know.