Oddly marked 1916 dated 18 Pounder case

[peregrinvs]

Hi,

Picked this up today and it's slightly odd: instead of the normal 'MkII' under the '18PR', it just has a single 'I'. Is this a stamping error?

Also grateful for a general markings translation.

Cheers,
Mark

 

[TimG]

Mark,

It's an 18PR Mark I case, made by Cossipore Gun and Shell Factory, India (CO).

TimG

 

[peregrinvs]

It's an 18PR Mark I case, made by Cossipore Gun and Shell Factory, India (CO).

Thanks. Learn something new everyday - I had no idea India made 18 Pounder ammunition. Are they scarce?

I'm slightly worried though that I can't see any sign of crimp marks which I thought a MkI case had? It measures 295mm which I thought was OK.

 

[Darkman]

Unusual for a mk I with such a late year - 1916. Perhaps the tooling at Cossipore was not updated for Mk II until much later than other places. The crimp marks on the case could have been removed (beaten out) for use as a vase etc.

 

[peregrinvs]

Unusual for a mk I with such a late year - 1916. Perhaps the tooling at Cossipore was not updated for Mk II until much later than other places. The crimp marks on the case could have been removed (beaten out) for use as a vase etc.

I've had a good look and can't see any sign it ever had crimp marks. I think I'll assume it's a marking error for the time being. Could someone confirm that a MkI case is the same length as a MkII case?

 

[Dandebur]

Hello everyone,
Thanks to peregrinvs for showing this case. I had never seen a 18PrMkI so late. I don't know if CO has made 18PrMkII.
I have two cases 18PrMkI made by the canadian firm CPR in 1915.
One lot 1.O dated 10 4 15 and one lot 2.C dated 28 4 15. They have also no crimps at the mouth. I think it is not an error of stamping because CPR has made then 18PrMkII with beginning at the lot 1.
I have an example lot 1.S dated 1.6.15. ( note the 11 in place of the II, but there is a II before the 18Pr).
But, some years ago, I was in a flea market when I saw two cases of 18Pr with crimps. I thought "two 18PrMkI, interessant". When I took them in hands, one was actually a MkI made by VSM in 1905, but the other was a MkII made by EOC in 1915.
It is curious because I have cases of 18PrMkII made by EOC in 1914 and they have no crimps. I am not interested by the shells, perhaps one type of them requires crimps to be crimped on the case? I don't know.
The difference between MkI and MkII is, I think, the weight. I have weighed the two examples of the photo 3 with a kitchen scales: MkI about 1.140kg and MkII about 1.380kg.
Photo 1: 18PrMkI CPR lot 2.C
Photo 2: 18PrMkII CPR lot 1.S
Photo 3: the two cases with crimps VSM on the left, EOC on the right.
Photo 4: VSM 1905
Photo 5: EOC 1915.
Regards
Dandebur.

 

[TimG]

CPR - Canadian Pacific Railway. The first company in Canada to produce 18 pdr cases using ordinary forging machines known as "Bull-dozers"

TimG

 

[Dandebur]

TimG
Thanks for the informations.
Do you know what means the symbol on the left over 43 (photo 4) and why there is no acceptance's date?
Regards,
Dandebur.

 

[TimG]

Dandebur,

I've no idea. Excluding the primer, there are no pheons (broad arrows) suggesting it wasn't accepted for service. Maybe manufacted by VSM for their own use.

TimG

 

[Dandebur]

TimG,
Thanks for the answer.
I join another photo of a 18PrMkI made by VSM in 1906. There is the same logo: letters HOG intertwined and no broadarrow, including on the primer.
Regards
Dandebur.

 

[peregrinvs]

Another Cossipore made MkI case with an unusually late date - but a 13 Pounder this time:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/141516207212?_trksid=p2060778.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

 

[Dandebur]

Hello everybody,
I think that the 13 Pounder MkII was introduced in 1914. I have an example of MkI produced by RL in1914 and an example of MkII made by VSM in 1914, but dated 27-2-15.
India is far away from England, that explains perhaps that MkI were still made by CO in 1915. The only examples of these I ever seen are all dated 1915 and I don't know if Co has made MkII.
I show one example of mine. It has been refilled so the primer is not of origine.
Regards,
Dandebur.