I have an interesting one to cut my teeth on. It is an Aug. Lebeau Courally as marked on the bottom of the action. Barrels are numbered to the gun (at least the bottom rib is) but the maker's name does not appear on the top of the barrels as I would have expected. Looks like J. Niauet and Arqer Liege?? Hard to read.
A load is listed, however, and is given as 57 over REL 15 which is over 347G. I assume that it is calling for 57 grains of Reloader 15 and a 347 grain bullet. Caliber is marked as 10.75x73R for which I have a set of dies from RCBS. I have been trying to research this caliber and the best I have been able to figure out is that it is the measurements for a rimmed version of the 404 Jeffery. I am a little skeptical that this is the original chamber and there is not much on a rimmed version of this caliber. The gun is a small, light rifle and this is a lot of case that can hold a lot of powder so it seems a little overboard.
With all of this said, I intend to start with 347 grain bullets ( I have Woodleigh's) and some RL 15. I assume I will have to use something to take up the extra space in the case. I am also hoping that the RL 15 of today is the same as it was when this gun was stamped with these numbers.
Thoughts? Am I on the right path? Anyone out there heard of a 10.75x73R? Thanks, JB

There are several issues that I would take care of first if I were going forward.

1-examination and interpretation of the proof marks as stamped on the barrel flats and on the barrels. First consideration of viewing the proof marks is to look for nitro proof mark or marks. If you are not familiar with the proof marks on the barrels and action, then look them up on the www

2-Make a chamber cast before you do any loading.

Sometimes it's the simplest suggestions. I have posted some pics. I will check my proof book later today when I get home. JB

Rl 15 is what I use for my 470 NE,I have had to adjust my loads with my latest batch,from 87 to 90 grains,however I have only experienced this once.

A starting point website for European proofmarks is: Damascus-barrel.com
Then click on the tab "Free Extras"

Your pics didn't come through.
As for what to use IF a powder charge does not fill the case, is foam insulation rod. Do not compress it; cut off a piece just long enough to fill the case.
Unlikely a double rifle would be marked with a load using RL15 from a French made double rifle, from the factory.

I am betting your rifle was rechambered from 10.75x68R.....probably due to lack of brass or ammo some years ago.
The 10.75x73R is easily formed from 450/400 3” Jeffery.

Why? Well, the noted 347 grain bullet as well as the noted charge of 57/RL15 are very mild loads for either the .450/400 3” Jeffery or the .404 Jeffery. That load mirrors the original weaker 10.75x68 (and by extension, the rimmed version)

Is this load info 57/RL15/347 grain actually stamped on the rifle? You might just find that this is a load that regulates and is equivalent to the original 10.75x68R loading. This way whomever rechambered would probably not have to have re-regulated the rifle.

NOTE: RWS did show such a thing as a 10.75x68R case but no load or performance data

Trying the pics one more time. I am able to see them on laptop and on phone...

If you are able to see the pics you can see that the barrels have been stamped with the load data.
10.75x68R makes a lot more sense to me. I wondered the same thing. Thanks for the foam insulation rod info. I will look for some.

Sorry, no photos showing with your post.

Stephen

quote:

.....(snip).....the barrels have been stamped with the load data.
10.75x68R makes a lot more sense to me. I wondered the same thing. Thanks for the foam insulation rod info. I will look for some.

OK, it pretty much HAS to have been rechambered outside of Europe or the UK (basically here in the USA) if it has no updated proof marks, AS WELL the stamping of a current “RL15” load would not be the usual protocol in Europe or UK. Nice touch tho.....helps eliminate guessing.

So.....try some RL15 with what is called “foam backer rod” from the hardware store, Home Depot, or Lowes. Get the 1/2” and squeeze/roll it gently between your fingers so it can slip into the case mouth. Twist it and push into the case at the same time, seat with the eraser end of a pencil. I personally cut it so that there is about 1/16” to 1/8” compression of the foam by the bullet base. Keeps the powder from migrating....

PS: You have a PM

- Mike

Oh yea, using RL15 you can also successfully use Dacron or kapok for stuffing the case. A wad sufficient to pack fairly firmly so the powder cannot move around and no “loose” airspace.
This technique just makes a mess in front of your firing point.......
- Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Redstone:

quote:

.....(snip).....the barrels have been stamped with the load data.
10.75x68R makes a lot more sense to me. I wondered the same thing. Thanks for the foam insulation rod info. I will look for some.

OK, it pretty much HAS to have been rechambered outside of Europe or the UK (basically here in the USA) if it has no updated proof marks, AS WELL the stamping of a current “RL15” load would not be the usual protocol in Europe or UK. Nice touch tho.....helps eliminate guessing.

So.....try some RL15 with what is called “foam backer rod” from the hardware store, Home Depot, or Lowes. Get the 1/2” and squeeze/roll it gently between your fingers so it can slip into the case mouth. Twist it and push into the case at the same time, seat with the eraser end of a pencil. I personally cut it so that there is about 1/16” to 1/8” compression of the foam by the bullet base. Keeps the powder from migrating....

PS: You have a PM

- Mike

A prudent individual does not shoot a rifle that has been "rechambered" and not reproofed, until that rifle has been proofed for the cartridge that is is suspected to have been rechambered. It is possible that the person who rechambered this subject rifle "proofed" the rifle by loading and firing cartridges that caused chamber pressures 25% or more greater than the service pressure of the 10.75x73R cartridge(whatever this cartridge is). However this appears not to be known.

At this point it appears that it is unknown even if the chamber is reamed for the suspected 10.75x37R cartridge as marked on the barrels. Proceeding without making a chamber cast to determine if indeed it is the suspected cartridge size is unwise.

+1
I did not address that issue you brought up, and at a minimum a chamber cast is a good idea unless previously fired brass came with the rifle.

As to proofing up to actual 10.75x73R (.404 Jeffery Rimmed) at this point I have to wonder if it is really worth it since there likely are no available rimmed factory loads that could be loaded and fired.

This rifle is essentially now a wildcat type handload only proposition and as long as the owner treats it as if it were the suspected original lower pressure and performance 347 grain loading I would expect that things will not come to grief. It is a good thing that it was stamped with what looks to be a RL15 load equivalent to the lower power original.

I did offer to the OP to use my IMGUR to enable posting pictures for him. It would be interesting to see all the proof marks and barrel markings.

The German 347 bullet structure for the 10.75X68 bolt rifle was the reason that caliber got such bad reports. I presume taht the Woodleigh bullets would perform better.

You can also used cast powder coated bullets for cheap trials.

Redstone;

I agree that the viewing and interpretation of the barrel proof marks should be done. There will be a Belgium year date mark on the barrels which might help in understanding the likelyhood of whether the barrels are made of modern alloy steel.

I looked up the .404 Jeffery Rimmed in my QuickLoad virtual ballistics (which lists it together in one line on the chart as both the British.404 and metric size of 10.75x73 rimmed.

Using his stated loadings the chamber pressure is low, much lower than the 52,939psi listed for the max service pressure. If it were my rifle I would make cases for it and proof it myself with two shots per barrel at around 65,000psi, but it is not my rifle.

“If” the original chambering was 10.75x68R, the working pressure would have been the 47,862psi of the rimless 10.75x68 or possibly a bit less as seems usual in the Rimmed versions intended for break open single and double rifles.

I would certainly be curious as to what the estimated pressure of a 57 grains of RL15 and a 347 grain bullet would be if loaded into the 10.75x73R (.404 Jeffery) case? Quickload?
Were it close to the old load 47,800psi then 20% above that is 57,434psi.

I then would take that pressure for proof loads if it were I.
No sense subjecting a vintage double rifle to a 65,000psi load if one is never going to use full power 10.75x73/.404 Jeffery type loads.

With any luck the original proof marks were not totally erased and the original chambering might be discovered.

OP says he is attending upcoming SCI so he may not be back on here for a few days......
- Mike

I sent Mike some pictures, maybe he will post for me. I posted the others using google photos so you may have to view in a chrome browser to see them. Not sure.
I do know that this gun has been fired. I have some spent brass and old load data along with the dies. Of course the data is simply the same as the load that was marked.I understand the concern with firing an older gun that has had the chambers messed with and not gone through reproof. I will have to give that some additional thought.

quote:

Originally posted by Redstone:
“If” the original chambering was 10.75x68R, the working pressure would have been the 47,862psi of the rimless 10.75x68 or possibly a bit less as seems usual in the Rimmed versions intended for break open single and double rifles.

I would certainly be curious as to what the estimated pressure of a 57 grains of RL15 and a 347 grain bullet would be if loaded into the 10.75x73R (.404 Jeffery) case? Quickload?
Were it close to the old load 47,800psi then 20% above that is 57,434psi.

I then would take that pressure for proof loads if it were I.
No sense subjecting a vintage double rifle to a 65,000psi load if one is never going to use full power 10.75x73/.404 Jeffery type loads.

With any luck the original proof marks were not totally erased and the original chambering might be discovered.

OP says he is attending upcoming SCI so he may not be back on here for a few days......
- Mike

Mike;
QuickLoad predicts 20,119 psi, 1881 fps, 2726 ft lbs energy, 63% filled case. Measuring the muzzle velocity will indicate if this virtual data is to be about the actual, as propellant burn rates need to be adjusted inside the QuickLoad software to get a better indicator of chamber pressure.

Got the pictures of barrel flats and in front, and proof marks from the OP.
Will get them posted later today.

The good news is that the proof marks appear all in order and do have the crown/R mark for "reproof" as well as !0.75x73R stamp. No indication left of the original chambering.
- Mike

That sounds promising and safe to shoot.

Is the Crown/R with 10.75x73R a UK or Belgium proof house mark?

quote:

Originally posted by Redstone:

The good news is that the proof marks appear all in order and do have the crown/R mark for "reproof" as well as !0.75x73R stamp. No indication left of the original chambering.
- Mike

With UK proof, Crown over R suggests Reproof.

With Belgian proofed guns, Crown over R is not a Reproof mark.
It is the Belgian mark for 'Rifled Barrels'.

Photos of the barrel flat stamps as well as barrel stamps just forward of the flats, should tell the story.

Well, I mis-spoke, Crown/R .....not used to Belgian proof marks, I'm a Brit kind of guy.....NOT a reproof mark.
A mark indicating "rifled".

So this one is still an enigma......

Here's the pictures that I got:



Julien Niquet...Liege, Belgium

From the photos I see that the rifle has been proofed for a rifle caliber in the past. However, I believe that the caliber markings of 10.75x73R were not done by the Belgium proof authority, and the proofing pressure limits of the rifle currently are unknown.

I am going to have to do some research on what the "10.4" barrels marks represent (I think that it is the original bore in millimeters).

Further to my post about the QuickLoad virtual ballistics (chamber pressure, velocity and so forth) for the 10.75x73R. Disregard what I posted as it cannot be relied upon. I went back and looked at the cartridge that I used in QuickLoad and it is listed as: ".404Riml.(10.75x73R")" I take this to be rimless NOT RIMMED as I first thought it was.

quote:

Originally posted by Transvaal:
From the photos I see that the rifle has been proofed for a rifle caliber in the past. However, I believe that the caliber markings of 10.75x73R were not done by the Belgium proof authority, and the proofing pressure limits of the rifle currently are unknown.

I am going to have to do some research on what the "10.4" barrels marks represent (I think that it is the original bore in millimeters).

Yes I would agree that the calibre markings are definitely not original.
You are also correct that the '10.4' is an approximate (mm) bore diameter.

I don't see any date stamp in the genuine proofs on the barrel flats, which is where it is usually included.
I think Belgian Proof dating commenced in 1922.

It does not seem as though there are many 10.75 calibers listed. 10.75x68 really makes a lot of sense. Lengthening the chamber to make use of available brass also seems logical. The brass I got with it is 45 basic 2 7/8 which just happens to be 73 mm.

quote:

Originally posted by bghntr416:
It does not seem as though there are many 10.75 calibers listed. 10.75x68 really makes a lot of sense. Lengthening the chamber to make use of available brass also seems logical. The brass I got with it is 45 basic 2 7/8 which just happens to be 73 mm.

OK, now you NEED to do a chamber cast.....and get your vernier caliper or micrometer out.

Something does not add up here because the base and rim diameters of the .45 Basic versus a "normal" 10.75x73R (ie: .404 Jeffery Rimmed) are grossly different. Even the rim thickness might be a bit different.
.45 Basic Base .505" Rim .608"
!0.75x73 Base .548" (Rim .625"?)

There are other more obscure 10.75 cartridges, there was a 10.75x65R Collath that was a rimmed case, slightly undersized to the .45 Basic.
http://www.cartridgecollector.net/1075-x-65r-collath
And then the 10.75x70R Mauser
http://www.cartridgecollector....magnum-barella-stahl


Do you have any of these .45 Basic cases that are said to be fire formed in the rifle?
Loading Dies?

Now if the .45 Basic 2 7/8" actually fits? Well then you have to do a bit of research, because it is not the cartridge you/we think it is.
Not to say that the rifle is not shootable, just that it may essentially have been rechambered into what amounts a wildcat 10.75

Gentlemen;

There is more concerns generated by the photos than the issue of what is the chamber size; and that is: what is the actual bore of the barrels now? A 10.75MM diameter bullet shot through a rifle bore of 10.40MM diameter could potentially cause the shooter to be a candidate for a complete face transplant or worse.

Slug the barrels to determine their bore; and make a chamber cast as well.

quote:

Originally posted by Transvaal:
Gentlemen;

There is more concerns generated by the photos than the issue of what is the chamber size; and that is: what is the actual bore of the barrels now? A 10.75MM diameter bullet shot through a rifle bore of 10.40MM diameter could potentially cause the shooter to be a candidate for a complete face transplant or worse.

Slug the barrels to determine their bore; and make a chamber cast as well.

Transvall/Stephen
You are confusing "Bore" diameter with "Groove" diameter.....common thing for American shooters language usage as to barrel bore/groove description.
European proof measured and stamped the barrel with the actual "bore", ie: top of the lands as the largest size pin gauge in 1/10's of a millimeter steps that would fit in the barrel. This is not the same as what size the grooves and actual bullet would be.
The proofed "10.3mm" or "10.4mm" (.4094") BORE is correct for a 10.75mm cartridge. Proofed "Bore" and actual cartridge were/are two separate markings.

That said, the OP really needs to get a chamber cast with throat and groove.....
- Mike

Redstone;

Thank you for informing me about the Belgium bore diameters listed at proof.



Stephen

quote:

Originally posted by Transvaal:
Redstone;

Thank you for informing me about the Belgium bore diameters listed at proof.

Stephen

De Nada as they say.
German, Belgian, Brit, whomever on the other side of the Atlantic proof at "Bore" top of the lands. this also accounts for the Brit cartridges names such as .303,.242,.318 having nothing in common with actual bullet diameter.

Riml in my mind spells "rimless". but first of all temporarily disregard all posts and take a chamber cast and go from there!! always! That gun has been tinkered with big time is its quoting a fairly recent powder such as RL-15 and 57 grs. is about 2 grs below my 404 load with a 400 gr. bullet..Imo its pretty close to a 404 Jefferys, but again I would certainly go with a chamber cast before I did anything. Then slug the bore, always slug the bore on any double from across the big pond.

I have not yet had time to do a chamber cast but I do have an empty case that was fired in the rifle. Not sure if this is good enough but a 404 jeffery reamer was not used to produce this chamber. Dimensions match the 10.75x68 in several areas. Location of the shoulder, diameter above the rim is within a few thousandths and diameters just before and after the shoulder match. The shoulder is slightly longer than what the diagram I was able to find for the 10.75x68 shows. Diagram only shows a .026 shoulder which is REALLY short.

Looks like the barrels measure .420 maybe .421 from groove to groove.