Hi all, Say, when was the Konor model made (what years)?

Also, any comments on this model would be great.

Thanks as always!

Greg

Not sure how long the Konor was made, but an ad from 1960 describes the Konor as a new model of best quality.

Greg, the Konor sold for $532 in 1963. Can't give you a range of years for production, but I think they'd all fall within that period when the Brits were using the "tons" proofmarks (1954-89).

C&H get the prize for their description of false sideplates. They call them "ornamental strengthening plates".

Webley's were making them up into the late 70's . Supplying barreled actions in the white and later hardening and finishing some after they were stocked and engraved by Cogswells.
Earlier guns were built on the standared Cogswell and Harrison action if memory serves .Any other detail or few pictuers may help.

By the by I do not know what "false side plate" is . All side plates are real nothing false about them .

Hi all and thanks! I know the Konor is a later model, but trying to get some info on this model. Anyway, here is the only pic I have, sorry no bbl flats. Hope this may help.

Thanks again!

Greg

I note from my Blue Book (2006 ed) that Cogswell will (for a price) provide full provenance info on their guns.

Greg,

In 'Cogswell & Harrison:Two Centuries of Gunmaking' it says:

"In 1949 the Avant Tout series reappears in the form of the Konor (Avant Tout I), Sandhurst (Avant Tout II) and Rex (Avant Tout III)." ....... "The series was overhauled in the 1960s when the Konor and Rex were discontinued and replaced with the Blagdon ... which was no longer listed in the 1973 catalogue. The Konor survives the misfortune of the Blagdon box lock but has vanished by the 1978 catalogue.

Comment: that doesn't seem to make sense. If the Konor was replaced by the Blagdon, how can it have survived?

"The Konor was offered at 40 Guineas (42 British Pounds)."

Hope this helps.

Nigel

gunman,

False side plates are metal plates fitted to the rear of box lock actions. This makes a boxlock look, superficially, like a sidelock, and gives extra area for engraving.

Nigel

I took a look at a couple of Geoffrey Boothroyd's books and see he has a fair amount of information about the firm and the guns it made.

BTW, that is a beautiful gun.

"False sideplates" is a bit of a misnomer, as is "handling marks" on a gun. They're real plates, but they are not attached to sidelocks--which, I guess, have true sideplates.

Greg: I thought about buying one of these a few months ago and there is a thread related at that time. I was told and understand there is a weakness in the top lever spindle and they wear out much quicker than most. If memory serves me, I think Lefusil who is a Coggie fan talked of this. I think he said there is an easy remedy, but nevertheless the spindle may be an inherent weakness with Coggie's. Maybe Lefusil will chime in on this matter.

Hi Buzz, yep I remember that post.....I did it!! It was very informative. I forgot about that post until you mentioned it.

Thanks!!!!

Greg

nigel, I think Gunman knows exactly what they are...he means that if there are sideplates ,they are real sideplates, they aren't "False";;;its just called a "sideplated boxlock"..not a "false sideplated boxlock"
if you see what I mean
cheers
franc

Franc ,thats exactly what I meant. There is no such thing as a false side plate, its a sideplate and thats all.
The gun in question is built on Webley 700 action , It will almost certainly have B'ham proof marks and a date stamp . It may also have a Webley number on the loop .Looks like one of the guns that were made in the 70's .

If the gun in question is built on a Webley 700 action, would that not mean it uses the time-tested Scott spindle? And if it does, why would there be any more weakness in the spindle of a Konor than there is in the spindle of a 700, in reference to which I've never heard any comments re weakness?

Some of the old Cogswells ,built on Edgar Harrison patent, had a coil top lever spring that relied on a small rectangular protrusion on the shaft of the spindle that engaged with a plunger that fitted inside the spring . This went through a slot in the bolt and up in side the spindle hole. They were often a swine to get lined up to both install and remove . They also wore and did not engage with the spring to well . Is this the problem referred to ? If so it was not a factor concerning the 700 action .