18pr upgrade 2Pr upgrade and 18pr marking question ?

[Gspragge]

I upgraded my MK1 18pr for one with original paint, I had a fuze for it. Also improved my 2pr shot.
This 18pr marking, why are there letters in front of the date and or what do they mean.
I expect to have the now duplicate projectiles at the show here April 2nd.

 

[Darkman]

Gordon, I’d keep both 18Pr projectiles as one is Canadian made, the other British. Also your original shell is a Mk II and the new one a Mk I. Very unusual that your Mk II is dated 2.15 - this is a very late date for a Mk II shell. Other Canadian makers were making Mk V or VI shells by then.

I think the letters DM in front of the date are the Canadian style lot code. Usually placed under the date, but they ran out of room.

Graeme

 

[Gspragge]

I have caused some confusion; - the two projectiles side by side are both MKl VSMs - which I have (2/7/06 no paint and 6/11/06 with paint). I don't have the MKll --- as yet hence my question regarding what does seem to be a very late manufacturing of the style by D.A., Though I have no idea when they started making them.
Having looked, I don't have a MKll at all ~ :tinysmile_cry_t2:

 

[Darkman]

OK Gordon, I see what you mean now. The stamps on the LHS projectile of the two are hard to read. But personally, I'd still keep both. 1906 dated Mk I shells are not exactly common.
Graeme

 

[Gspragge]

If any one is interested in the spare MK1 18Pr it's $200 cdn plus shipping. The fuze is on tight and I haven't tried to
shift it. Both projectile and fuze dated the same, 2/7/07 & 7/06.
Spare 2pr also at $45 Cdn.

It's more a matter of affordability, especially if I want to go after the MKl-MKll 1915 Bollocks. Though of course if no one buys it and so on it would linger longer ~
Does any one have a good image of a MKll 18pr , I would presume pre ww1 dated ?

 

[Darkman]

Gordon, if that 18 Pr shell could be posted to Australia (unfortunately it can’t) I’d be all over it - that’s a really good price for a rare early shell with fuze.

Here’s a couple of photos of my VSM Mk II shell dated 2.2.08

Graeme

 

[Gspragge]

So the MKll had the crimp groove, then it's the MKlll that doesn't ~ I don't have the specs for either. The 1915 Stores book shows Mks 1-lll as being available though this really reflects 1914 as no 18 pr HE is present.

 

[Darkman]

Here’s another Mk II shell I found, this one by RL. Also a rough condition Mk III dated 1913 that confirms the crimp groove was discontinued by then, with a change to the driveband that allowed the cart case to be coned over.

With your 1915 stores book, are you sure it’s not referring to Mks I -III cartridges (the complete round), rather than just the shells? I have a 1915 handbook that indicates shrapnel shells up to Mk VIII in use as well as both Mk II & III HE shells. The Mk VI & VIII shrapnel shells used the US made No. 85 fuze (adapted from the Scovill m1907) with the retaining groove near the mouth for the fuze cover. The Mk II HE shell had the 3 indents around the top for fuze staking (although the solid skirt No. 100 graze fuze was employed at that time?); whilst the Mk III HE had the rebated/stepped lip to allow use of the No. 80/44 fuze (with protruding skirt) in an AA role.

 

[Gspragge]

Here is the reference. The book 1915 list of stores is on BOCN in it's entirety for everyones use and there is a lot in it,
not just artillery.

 

[flak18]

Must be getting old...the last photo in the original post looks like it says QF 18 Pr II.....albeit the first I is lower than the second. Was it converted to Mk II ?

 

[Gspragge]

More likely sloppy hand stamping ?

 

[flak18]

Yes, possibly sloppy stamping....to signify it as a Mk II ? Or something else ?