My search for a Purdey 12 gauge continues. I have located what appears to be a nice gun at Steve Barnett Fine Guns. The gun is from 1926 and is a self opening ejector gun. The gun has 29" Whitworth steel barrels with 2 1/2" chambers.

My one concern is Purdey states the original stock as having a LOP of 13.5", but the stock is now 14.75". While having a gun that has been restocked is not a big concern, the restock was not done by Purdey. Below is a link to the gun. What do you guys think of this gun? Does anyone have any information or history about this gun? What do you think of the stock?


http://www.stevebarnettfineguns.com/asp-bin/Detail.asp?ID=4455#


Thanks.
Ken

I'm no Purdey expert, though I do lust for one in my dreams.

I will say this though, no matter the quality of the gun, I do not like the grain flow through the wrist on that re-stock.

http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/conten...erarchyId=11655

Check this one out...it's a little cheaper in price.

Price rockets with high original condition.
These subtle things can put you into the 40-50k and beyond range in a blink of an eye.
Expensive guns, for rich guys and not much wiggle room for the bargain hunter.

If I had to pick between the two I would pick the Steve Barnett gun. It looks a whole lot better. If, that is, you can get past the re-stock job. Which, if done right, should not hurt the gun at all. The Cabelas gun has funny looking sideplates on the pics. It looks as if the engraving has been polished out a little or something. They just dont look "right " to me. I also dont like the bright orange pad.

I saw the gun at Cabelas it is very tired.

What LOP do you require?

I need at least a 14" LOP but 14.5" or longer would be better. I am 6'2" and have long arms. I do not want a gun with a 13" LOP and a 2" pad since that looks silly.

Ken

The gun looks to have been re-stocked pretty well. the shapes of the tear drops are correct and the overall style is fine. It does look to have quite a high, straight comb with a lot of drop from top of comb to grip (it may be the angle of the photo). Also, the lined butt should be chequred to be really spot-on but it is not a big deal.

Small Bore: What do you think of the wood used and the grain?

Ken

I think the butt is checkered Dig,....what you are seen is the effect you get when you look at well executed checkering from the side.
IMHO the gun looks to have been well stocked

CJ

Cabels gun is very tired. The problem with looking for a top name gun is that even worn examples are rare and tend to have unreasonably high prices. If this was Scott, or other second or third tier "name" the price would be less than a third of what it is. Not often that you come across a name gun in any shape for not a fairly high price. See Parker, Boss, and other colectors hopt named guns.

I passed on a Boss cross-over gun about a year ago. Had it not been a cross over it would have been four or five times the asking price. In hind sight I should have bought the gun. It would have cost $8-10,000.00 to correct the coss over to regular configuration. For that much money the gun would still have been a bargin, not a steal but a very good bargin. Oh well, if you own them all you will not have enough money left to shoot them.

Tired old guns across the board are priced on their condition.
Purdey sidelock guns will always be on the high side.
A rich man's game, a rich man's gamegun.

I had the Purdey shipped to my gunsmith for an inspection. I will be personally inspecting the gun later today. Hopefully this is a keeper. We will see.

Ken

IMHO that is a terrible restock job. The proportions are all wrong. It looks huge at the toe and heel, the wrist is wrong and the "walls" on the stock horns are way, way to broad. I think I owned a Woodward that was stocked by the same guy, from Texas.

That said, send it to a guy like Toby Leeds and have him correct the proportions and you might have a nice gun; although I suspect $1500+ will be the cost of correction.

The gun did not past inspection. The barrels were resleeved and had other major problems.

Ken

Ken, I sure am pulling for you on your quest to find a $50 grand Purdey for $15,000 but I am afraid you are just expecting too much candy for your nickel. Why not "settle" for a lesser Brand Name gun with all the quality of a Purdey. I don't have one to sell you, but I'll bet somebody does. Your business of course, but just a thought...Geo

Geo:

I am not trying to purchase a $50K Purdey for $15K. This gun was $25K which should purchase a nice Purdey to use in the field. I do not expect to get a $50K Purdey for $25K. I expect to spend $25K for a $25K gun. I think this is a reasonable goal. Everyone I have spoken to has indicated that $25K should be able to get me a decent and honest Purdey. The problem is I have yet to locate such a gun.

Ken

They are out there, dont stop your quest. Keep looking and be patient, you know what you want.
Steve

ken - sorry this one didn't work out. A restocked sleever is not a $25K gun. Hang in there - they are out there.

GN - $50K should get you a virtually unused Boss; I'd expect a Purdey to go a 'lil bit cheaper. $25K gets you an honest gun with a good deal of OE finish.

Wow - it's sleeved! Sorry to hear that.

Did he say how he spotted it? Were the seams visible on the outside of the bbls? Were the bbls marked "sleeved" and reproofed?

And what did he say about the stock? Was it as off as it looks in the pics?

OWD

The seams of the sleeves were welded to hide the sleeves. The barrels were NOT marked sleeved. Whoever installed the sleeves intended to deceive future purchasers. In all honesty I do not believe Steve Barnett knew the barrels were sleeved. My gunsmith said in England criminal charges would have been filed based on the condition of the gun.

The stock was done by an English restocker, but the services of a finisher were not used. The stock was not up to the standards of a Purdey gun. I was quoted $7,500 to $8,500 for a new stock. My gunsmith said the stock was OK, but not up to the standards of a top tier gun.

Ken

That stinks.

I wonder who sleeved it - maybe it was done over here? Does anyone in the states offer seamless sleeving?

You're lucky your guy caught it.

In the past, I know some dealers used seamless sleeving as a way clean up bbls and pass them off as original. This was before seamless sleeving was common, so most people were fooled by it. I bet it fooled (and fools) a lot of 'smiths.

BTW: another shady thing some dealers would do was re-bbl a 16g down to a 20g, then pass it off as original - especially British O/Us and top-tier stuff like Purdey SxSs. Of course, this was back when 16s were cheap and maker's records were hard to access.

OWD

I have heard that Merrington sleeves guns but doesn't mark them as sleeved as the proof house would. A bad practice to my eyes.

kdross: Sounds like you have a good gunsmith. If you are in NJ, you cannot be too far from me. Are you willing to share his name? (Not that I have any particular need at the moment, but it is always good to have someone in line.)

There is no way anybody can fault Steve Barnett in this situation. He is a gun salesman, not a gunsmith and he is as honest as they come.

Max: I already stated that I believe Steve Barnett had no knowledge of the sleeve.

Newlyn1: Send me an email at kdross@msn.com

Ken

I certainly didn't mean to criticize Mr. Ross for trying to purchase a $25k Purdey and I'm the last guy on this board to ask what kind of a Purdey one should expect for 25k. Heck, I've never even seen a Purdey. I admire him for upping his original ante from 15k to 25. I'm just surprised that it seems to be so tough to find one in good condition for that price...Geo

KYjon, tell me something about the crossover Boss. I have been looking for a proper, high condition Best crossover gun for years. Purdey, Boss, Woodward would be nice. I have several crossover guns, but not a Best. The manufacturers have told me that my chances of finding one in their hands are not good because they convert them back to straight for the big buck. Who had the nice Boss? Feel free to email me at wilmrph@verizon.net Thanks, Bill Murphy

Here is a thought. How about going to England and attending an auction with Dig (for instance, or have him pick one out for you). This way you can possibly get one without all the various markups (other than his fee) and get more bang for your buck.

Or, maybe even better yet, go New York, see a show, have a great meal and buy a nice Holland and Holland Second Hand from Dave Cruz at the Holland and Holland store. That way you have the actual maker standing behind your purchase. Last I checked they had a few guns in the 20 to 30 range.

Erik-

I would not begin to suggest that Kirk Merrington in ANY way does anything but proper work. The guns he has sleeved for me are marked as such and I have never known him to be anything but honest.

al

I find it hard to believe a sleeved gun could pass the eye of a gun man undetected.
Let's see if the price goes down ?

Some of you guys are to hung up on Purdey and Holland shotguns. I have personally owned one. As long as you are not going to shoot them much they are ok. If you plan to shot it alot, it will be in the shop alot. I have a guy that I am friends with and we hunting together each November. He owns several Purdeys and Holland, not beaters either, some of the Purdey o/us he has paid over 6 figures for. (O/U small gauge set)Generally he has a least two in the shop for repair work, because they stop working. This was also the same for a personal client I knew in Mississippi. He shot mucho bang bang! Everyday. As he had a small vineyard and range on it. James Flynn (gunsmith) had Purdeys and Hollands of Chris in his shop on a regular basis,for repairs. They just do not hold up well on heavy shooting. Kind of like the old joke about the olderer English cars. You could tell if someone owned one by the old slick in the driveways. Now Chris shot alot but the guy I hunt with, does not shoot everday. But on a regular basis. If you buy one I can certainlly give you the names of two good gunsmiths who can keep the working!! John

I have had a lot of good guns, but I have not had a lot of good gunsmiths. John, you are a lucky man. I won't ask you the names. Every time I get a name, he get sick, dies, gets way far behind, or starts hitting the bottle. Don't bother to give me any names. It is the kiss of death.

John:

Ditto on the English doubleguns.
Regarding the cars, I believe you are referring to a Jaguar. You have to have 2 in order to be able to drive one: one for parts and the other to drive. I have a Range Rover and if it is running, it is bleeding fluid of some sort.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

So, I guess y'all are saying to pass on the H&H Range Rover?

kd:
If you would consider a Holland & Holland I recently saw a nice backaction 12 with 2" chambers. I know the smith that has the gun and he already has received confirmation from H&H that the gun has original wall thickness and has not been altered. It is proofed for 15/16 oz and weighs 5 lbs 9 oz - the weight it was when it left the factory 75 or 80 years ago. Maybe 50% case color left. I want to say the fellow is asking $17,500.

Nice gun if the shot charge and backaction works for you.

Chicago Mike

They don't hold up well on heavy shooting?

Please - tell that to the people who used to put thousands of rounds a week through them shooting driven game back in England's golden era.

Back then, those old guns were being shot more in a single season than we shoot today in ten seasons.

The problem with most old Brit stuff is that it has been messed with by incompetent 'smiths, ignorant owners, and greedy dealers.

And btw - where are all the 75 year old Spanish & Italian guns? Hell, where are the 50 or 30 year old ones? Some are out there - Berettas, etc - but not many. Why? Because most of them don't last that long.

OWD

Some of those old guns were shot that much. Driven shooting with a name sidelock has always been a very expensive proposition in England, and one that has been available to commoners only since the very end of the industrial revolution. Those that were shooting their guns that much unquestionably had access and the financial means to consult the actual builders for the required yearly service, not just the corner gunsmith.

There are, of course, 75 year old Spanish and Italian guns, that have lasted that long because they were good guns, just not many of them are here. Further, wars on the continent tended to be affairs that involved the overrunning of countries involved in them, and the Spanish had only sorted out their civil war as the festivities from WWII grew heated. Neither of these bode well for a long, uninterupted civilian gun making history. Yes, the English may have built more, but there are wonderful 80 year old Italian and Spanish guns, as well as Prussian, French, Russian, Austrian, Belgian and what-have-you. Deny this, and look foolish at one's own risk.

The blanket assesment of the English sidelock being in disrepair all the time is one I have heard before, but, might be unfair labeling from this part of the world. The very great majority of those guns in service in this country may never have seen the correct ammunition or a decent gunsmith. Further, a self opening ejector sidelock of game gun dimensions is a complicated design that may have been forced into service here for which it wasn't intended. The duck was king in north America at the turn of the century, and freezing overnights in a saltwater sinkbox, loaded with potent waterfowl loads, was the last place an English, sub 7 lb self opening ejector gamegun needed to be.

In fairness, I have heard the same thing about Spanish copies of English sidelock designs. I imagine the same factors could apply.

Kirk Merrington is not required by US law here to mark a gun as sleeved-he does do it if the customer requests it-the customer is the inspector here, not a proof house. That debate aside, I have no question that any sleeving work he has done would pass English proof, including the visual inspection, since the man was apprenticed at Hollands as a barrel maker, worked the trade for years over there, and has a firm grasp of what will pass English proof, and what won't. To imply that his work here in the US should always be stamped or labeled with nomenclature related to English proof laws is unrealistic-the customer determines that. Barrels sleeved by Kirk here in the states are not required by law to be marked, or to pass English proof, so why should they be marked with any form of English required proof house stamping? That action implies something that isn't the case. His barrel work is more than good enough to stand alone.

You may want to keep that in mind, Eightbore. I doubt Kirk is going anywhere, anytime soon. One of the best, quick turnaround, sober, and he is all ours. I can report that he is just as good on other quality guns from Europe, in addition to English made-although, in my case, he may have fixed a French gun or two with clenched teeth, the work was always superb!
Best,
Ted

There is a 12B Purdey hammergun on the new arrivals page at Williamlarkinmoore.com that might be worth a look.

"There is no way anybody can fault Steve Barnett in this situation. He is a gun salesman, not a gunsmith and he is as honest as they come."


"Honest as they come"...LOL... that speaks volumes.

Remember - Steve is a dealer. That means when Steve buys a gun, he is an expert. When he sells one, he is just a schlump selling a gun. For all he knows, it might as well be a lawnmower or a lamp.

He probably is a reputable dealer - but I'm sure he uses the Veil of Ignorance to his benefit when it suits.

The London sidelock ejector gamegun was made to be shot.
...and they did so year after year with some proper up-keep.
These chaps just didn't hit the field in bib-over-alls, corn cobb pipes and a chipped-beef sandwich in the back pocket!
They paid for the best - and got the best.
Those who drag their heels at this, never spent seasons hunting 'em.

Ellenbr: Your right on the Jaguars, but do not forget the MG's


JOhn

Gee, too much chapter 9 pp.63-72 from 'Lock, Stock, & Barrel' by Adams & Braden?

They say a Flodman O/U game gun can go 80k rounds w/o seening a gunsmith. There are others out there in used racks, but I want to purchase a few at LOW price, so there is no need for me to give you boys heads up about them.
Going back to what OWD said, I wonder how many old continental guns are in service in say Sweden. A neutral country to which MANY were actually IMPORTED long ago.

Now there's a gun... http://www.williamlarkinmoore.com/images/P8102261.JPG

That is a beautiful gun, but I am looking for a hammerless gun.

Ken

http://www.champlinarms.com/Default.aspx...0&GunID=269

Here's one they say remains honest ?

What about WLM's Purdey Pigeon Gun? A little overpriced, but full of condition and features. And built heavy for long use. I would buy it in a minute if I could use bad guns instead of cash to pay for it.

JoE, 123 year old gun with 89mm chambers and polished up bores. Gee, do you think it's been re-proofed? Obviously not.

Not so sure it's overpriced. It's SLE marked J PURDEY & SONS. You know, a Winchester 21 in equal condition with a few "squigles" can set one back 15k, and this English piece is at leat 3 x the gun.
Now that 90K 20br 2&3/4" is How much does a new one cost? I would rather have SPJ initials in pink gold on the trigger guard. I don't give a .... about WOCJ.

For those that are meant to be shot, are sometimes too old to be shot.
The world is full of nice coffee table guns, which is okay.

Well, jOe, since you accused me of being on commision when I put one of Champlin's guns up here, what is your excuse? At least that ten isn't marked "sleeved" like some others we have seen...
Best,
Ted

Ted just trying to help you out bud...It's nice to know a gun is worth the price of sleeving and reproofing or Tegue lining.

Jager:

Have a gander at H&H's site where as advertised there are some 12 bore Royals which begin in the lower end of the 20K range. They will probably be a good investment.

Kind Regards,

Raimey
rse

http://www.stevebarnettfineguns.com/asp-bin/Detail.asp?ID=4455#

The price still stands.

Some people care a bit too much about "proof". I proof mine with a wall thickness gauge and a bore micrometer. If the ten bore with 89mm chambers had reproof marks, that would mean a palm full of spit without measuring to see if the walls were OK. Guns with .018 wall thickness make proof, but should we be buying a gun like that? Thousands of guns with proof marks and reproof marks have been incompetently struck afterwards. By the way, the Pigeon Gun at WLM would have a half dozen buyers the first day if it didn't have 28" barrels.

jOe, you can have your Teague-ing, sleeving, and reproofing.

News flash-you can't put the cherry back.

I have a gun that is out of proof. But, it had short 25 1/2 inch barrels that were .035 wall when it was new. The French do stuff like that. It has been backbored to a measley .027 wall.

When I suggested to the manufacturer that we have it reproofed, they laughed at me. "It's not English, don't worry" they said.

You can say things like that when your regular proof of guns is to 1375BAR, instead of 850BAR.

My turn to laugh at you. Next time, just buy a better example-you will save a bundle and a LOT of hassle. What, you are going to buy a junker gun here, and go through all that nonsense you speak of?

Shipped any guns overseas lately, jOe? Easy to BS about it, quite another to do it.

Best,
Ted

I will go out on a limb here and say that the ten is a screaming deal if a reasonable offer is accepted. I don't think I could ever wear it out. The gun has been for sale for a long time. I have been tempted myself.

What in the heck are you talking about Ted ?....maybe you could explain it so a sane person could understand.

Al,

When did he do your gun? I know that guns that I have looked at, claimed by their owners (not sellers) to have been sleeved by Kirk but were not marked sleeved.

There is no criticism meant of the quality of Kirk's work. He is a very good gunmaker. The reason I ask "when" is that the guns I saw were done in the 1999-2002 period. I have heard others critize the practice of not marking, so maybe he has begun to do this in which case "hat's off".

Ken, check your private messages here.

I don't get it - why is the gun back on his website with no mention of the sleeving?

If I were a gun dealer my ad would be sure to mention something like sleeving. Maybe that's why I'm not a gun dealer.

Kdross could provide a list of guns that he has paid to have outed for various issues and most no doubt are still on the dealers racks with no mention of those issues.They all await another less savy buyer who does not have the good sense to have them checked.I hope he can find one soon but this makes me even more uncomfortable with buying from a dealer and mental list of questionable ones even longer.Real Estate and guns both markets that are less honest due to "professionals" involved in them.Collector to collector is the best way to go.

Erik330

I do not see any messages. Please email me at kdross@msn.com

Ken

If I were looking for a top tier maker I would hit the auctions. Obviously this has its risks- but if you do your research and then go have the guns inspected in person, you can get a steal. Case in point- just recently at an auction there were a number of guns- including 3 Hammerless 12ga Purdys and one Hammerless 12ga H&H. The Purdys sold for $4,000, $1,600 and $5,200 and the Holland and Holland Royal Hammerless Ejector sold for $7,000. Its just a matter of finding them.

I'm so tired. Greg, who is "he" who has a sleeved gun not described as such? Seven pages is a bit much to review. I just can't keep up.

I presume the only way to detect a hidden seam sleeve job is by seeing the seam on the inside of the barrels. That's assuming the welding and finishing were perfect. That might take a super careful examination maybe even using one of those bore scopes that let you see a close-up of the barrel wall. How many gunsmiths have one of those expensive toys? I've only seen one in a high precision machineshop's inspection dept. and that was 30 years ago.
nial

You can see it if you look. You have to pull the luggers (extractors) to do it. It's a good idea to check this on any English gun you're checking out.

Of course, some guys welded up that seam, too. Then its' real hard to tell.

OWD

This is it 8bore.

Not to confuse things but Kdross could you go over the other ones you had checked ?One was from RB in PA out of proof correct,then was there one from IB in Kalif,or was that a cracked frame someone on here found?
I think like others here I am pulling for you to suceed in what would seem like a reasonable search and a bit suprised at what your finding after inspections.

Email sent. Thanks Ken.

Update.

I just received an email from Steve Barnett. Despite the barrels having been sleeved which he was not aware of, he has issued a full credit and has removed the gun from his site. I would recommend Steve Barnett Guns to anyone looking for a nice gun. Steve was very pleasant to deal with. Just be sure to have the gun inspected by a qualified gunsmith since Steve is dealer and not a gunsmith.

The search continues.

Ken

All my work by him is in the last 3 to 4 years. I have not asked him when he marks and when he does not. He is not required to mark by US laws and he may have some clients that request it not be marked.

I will make a point of asking him next time we talk.

al

Marking a gun "sleeved" is not neccesary in my opinion. It is UK law or custom and doesn't have a thing to do with what goes on over here. Marking a gun "sleeved" is akin to marking a gun "reblued". If I can't see it, it must be good.

If you cant see it it must be good enough? Try that line when you go to sell your 25K dollar sleeved gun to someone with a real good eye.
The gent is looking for an honest gun for honest money, not a sleeved gun at top dollar. I too feel they should be marked on the flats. I get the feeling you dont care for many things British 8bore, is that possible? It reminds me of your ealier comments on this thread about the value of proof. I think the Brit boys have a pretty good system, one that is much better than our Bubba gump proof houses out in the back 40. I also fell that Ken is much sharper than the average buyer, good for you Ken, and good luck in your quest for a good Purdey. I'm pulling for you.
Steve

Sleeved tubes 1200.00-1500.00, original and sound barrels priceless.
Besides 8b has said, guns with non-original barrels are just "toys."

It looks like 8bore said "sleeving is okay as long as he can't see it" and "it's not marked".

In my humble oppinion...any Gunsmith that would sleeve a gun and not mark it....will be involved in crookery weither that was his original intent or not.

Ballista non grata at Barnett's. Where will it show up next? Better do a mix-n-match on the monogrammed case.

jack

Sure it would be nice if all sleeved guns were marked, but they're not, so we have to be able to identify them with a magnifier or by some other means. If you insist that all sleeved guns be marked, how do you justify refinished guns that are indistinguishable from original, but not marked as such? I'm sure the rest of you are aware that Lowell's last statement about "what I said" is probably bogus. I have many guns with non original barrels that I don't regard as "toys". By the way, SKB, I own and shoot several British guns, don't belittle British Proof, only realize like you should that proof marks don't guarantee that the gun has not been bored or struck since those proof marks were applied. A wall thickness gauge trumps British Proof every time. Every one of the guns in UK auctions with the caveat "wall thickness below recommended minimums" bear proof marks. Proof marks are useful for policing makers of new guns. Once the guns have been out there for awhile, only a wall thickness gauge means squat.

There's a notable difference between sleeving and refinishing.

That being said, the last thing any of us need are more regulations and requirements as to what we must do with our guns.

Sleeving a gun detracts from its value and (usually) visual appeal because it is non-original. Putting further stamps on it would just worsen the situation.

Eightbore, you are comparing apples and oranges. A "refinished gun indistinguishable from new" has nothing directly to do with safety. A sleeved gun is one in which the barrels were chopped off near the breech and new tubes welded in place. That means that the barrels no longer are as proofed. That has a LOT to do with safety. While we may not require a sleeved gun to be reproofed in the US, a buyer ought to at least have the benefit of such a major change be made known to him. To do otherwise is an attempt to decieve, in my opinion.

APS, I think we all would appreciate you asking Mr. Merrington about this. Thanks.

I'll disagree. I feel a re-finish and a sleeve job are vastly different. A hidden sleeve job to me is akin to restamping the numbers on a replaced Corvette motor to match the original frame. The work is being done to fool the general public....not very ethical in my opinion. A wall thickness gage is of great use, no doubt. There also is more to barrels than just wall thickness. Things like rivelling, loose ribs and bulges, which slip by many many shotgunners. The gents running that proof house inspect barrels all day long, year after year. I tend to think they may have learned something over those years. Your comments about what may have happened to an old gun since its last proof have merit. I still feel that the Brit proof system combined with some knowledge and a few gages can tell the real story. I've heard you mention poorly struck barrels in the past. I find this to be very rare. You have to really go out of your way to remove that much metal from the outside of the barrels. Most tubes that have poor wall thickness ended up that way by being bored out.
Steve

A bit confused on the subject of sleeving?

Proper sleeving has no welding involved in it. Monks patent No. 1222 of 1881 makes mention of soldering, brazing, or shrinking the tubes in place. The most commonly used is simple low temperature solder.

Welding would be a bit intense for typical gun barrel steel, and downright scary on damascus.

The guns that have been for sale on Kirk's website in the past always noted "sleeved" if that was the case. "Buyer beware" shouldn't be morphing into "gunsmith beware for buyer", unless you pay the gunsmith for that service.

If Kirk did indeed do the sleeving, safety isn't an issue.
Best,
Ted

Ted,
you need to get up to speed....the old techniques used soft solder. Nowdays with a good tig machine the seam can be eliminated completely. Many people who offer sleeving use this method as it is cosmetically superior. A good Tig machine is not too intense for the job and is actually suited to much finer work. Ever hear of micro welding? My machine can weld tin cans together without worries of burning through the thin metal. My how technology has changed.
Steve

SKB,
Kirk doesn't use a welder. When David McKay Brown had time to sleeve guns, he didn't use a welder. Westly Richards doesn't use a welder for sleeving either, and their guns must still pass proof.
Kirk's seams are invisible to the naked eye, but, you could see it with a 10X glass or so.
No offense, but, I'll take Kirk's sleeving work on guns over welding hands down.
Best,
Ted

Ted,
I believe John Foster sleeves many times the amount of guns Merrington does...all his pass proof, and he uses a tig machine as far as I know. There is more than one way to skin a cat. I just thought maybe you might like to know how the rest of the world has progressed since 1881.
Steve

I'm quite aware of progress, but, the discussion involved Mr. Merrington, and how he does the work (skins the cat) sent to him.

Perhaps you should pay attention to the discussion?
Best,
Ted

I thought the discussion was about a Purdey shotgun. Maybe I was mistaken. Were you not the gent that suggested some of the board was confused as to methods used for sleeving? I believe I can read such a statement just a few posts back.
Steve

It started about a Purdey, what 9 pages ago?

True enough, welding is used today, by some. But, the last page seems to have centered around Kirk's work, and guns not stamped with sleeved nomenclature on them. Kirk doesn't weld tubes into the cut off breech.

The very great majority of sleeved guns in the world today are going to have been sleeved the old fashioned way, and it will be that way for a long time to come.
Best,
Ted

Steve, there's no use in trying to argue with Ted. He knows everything.

The other problem with sleeving is that VERY FEW sleevers apparently bother to strike the new tubes to achieve the original balance. This comment is based on handling hundreds of sleeved guns over the past 8 or 10 years. Maybe 10% felt like they did when they left the works.

http://www.bsaltd.com/EnglishGuns.htm

Give Charles a call, he may be able to help you find what you seek.

Ted - welding has to do with cosmetics, not safety. A carefully welded and struck seam is near invisible. The issue with this work is that some may pass it off as OE barrels, knowingly or unknowingly.

E330 - Most sleevers would, as far as I can determine, prefer to make some extra money with the striking you refer to. However, most customers are aware of the reduction in value of sleeved guns and specify a cheap job (unwilling to pay for careful striking or more than minimul bore work). Note that very few guns handle today as they did when they left the works. Most, especially the sleeving candidates, have thinner tubes. The sleeves move the weight up, balance forward, and increase the swing efforts; unless the owner spends money to have additional work done on them. That can be good or bad, depending on the handling "fingerprint" desired by the gun owner.

Good point, Don. It may be the customer, not the sleever doing making the decision. Some of the OLD WR sleeved guns were horrible, the ones I've seen in the past few years are terrific. Some doubt I've heard as to which WR was doing some of the sleeving.

I once had I gun I gave to Nick Makinson. The balance was all wrong (restocked/sleeved) by someone else. I said "You know what it's supposed to feel like, make it feel that way."

He did.

E330 - I think you are comparing older sleeve jobs done on the cheap for salvaging cheaper guns to more recent sleeving jobs done to relatively more valuable guns. In the current case, more customers are willing to spend more money to salvage a gun. However, it remains real iffy to recover the cost of sleeving at the time of gun sale. This tends to drive down quality in an effort to keep cost down. $2000 spent on the barrels of a $1000 gun in hopes of making it a $3000 gun is risky; $1200 to make it a $2200 gun is a better gamble in most peoples' math.

One thing I do know is that the welded up barrel Purdey in question was rejected out of hand by our hero, and, presumably, by his very good gunsmith. Further, the reputable dealer has pulled it, lock, stock and welded barrels off his site.

There were a few issues along with those barrels, but, in and of themselves, the welded tubes were hardly a selling point, it would seem.

Reputable dealer could send it off to Kirk, and have a good and proper sleeving job done (Kirk will mark it sleeved, if they request) and re-offer it for sale. Kirk has always made it a point to maintain original balance on the guns he sleeves.

Eric, just concentrate on keeping 12 gauge ammunition in 12 gauge guns, henceforth-that has been a troublesome issue for you in the past, as I recall.
Best,
Ted

Yes Ted, once I dropped a stray 16 ga shell into a 12 ga gun during a flurry. I neither dropped a 12 ga shell on top or it nor tried to close the gun. If this is the best you can do, give up.

You know what you know (French guns) but you don't know anywhere nearly as much as you think you know (a fact which you have been proving by demonstration on bulletin boards for, oh, what 8 years?).

That is exactly correct and the point I was making about the India WR sleevers, particularly those done by the Missouri branch of WR USA, not the Clodes.

E330 - I understand that there is only one WR - past, present, and for the foreseeable future. They are ace machinists and engineers, among other skills. However, they did some cheap sleeving of cheap guns in the, oh, say, '50's and '60's. They needed money. Who would have ever imagined that the world would ever care about some boxlock that could be bought for a few £, put back in service for a few more £, and sold for a few £ profit. Yet, guns that have moldered for 50-100 years are suddenly valuable. I'm not aware of any sleeving work done in India or Missouri. What information do you have on this?

Ted - far as I can read, Ken rejected the Purdey based on #1 - he wants a highly original gun with as much OE finish as $25K can buy, #2 - the price and thesleeved barrels didn't go together; appears that SB agrees, but we will see how that works out. Don't see where anyone said it was a bad/unsafe sleeving job. Maybe it was too good to be left unmarked as the average Purdey buyer would not detect it. I'd bet there has been at least one snippy call from SB to whoever/wherever he bought this gun!!

No Don, not so. The FORMER (in Missouri, not to be confused with the EXCELLENT current Montana US branch) did some things "on their own" that were particularly bad.

Maybe....but they never did a sleeving job in Springfield.

E330 - I'm not defending the MO WR store, just agree with BB that sleeving was not done at that shop. Far as I know, WR sleeving was all done at WR in the UK. Work sent out by the MO store would not be WR sleeving unless they sent it back to WR. As I recall, they did have an assortment of good, bad, and ugly. No surprise that they might have had some bad and ugly.

WR Missouri was getting guns sleeved that had nothing to do with sending them to WR/the Clode's in England is my point. We all generally agree. Good, bad, and ugly in both places, but uglier in Missouri.

That was exactly how it was done.......guns were sent to the UK for sleeving and any other major work. There was an in house smith that could do some minor things (but, in my opinion, not that well). Simon was in house in Springfield every few months...it was totally his operation and, as I understand it, mostly his money. One of the big problems, again from my prospective, is that they allowed their junk to be picked up cheap and resold on the internet by a gent who was sometimes less than honest. He often referenced WRA and their smith in his auction descriptions. I always felt that that reflected poorly on what could have generally been a quality operation.

Let me try this in English. The WR Missouri store sent guns to a sleever that was NOT WR in England, the Clodes, or anyone associated with either. I saw guns and invoices at another sleever with paperwork from WR in Missouri and some of the finished product before being shipped back and they were horrible.

That is NOT to say that some of the work done BY WR IN ENGLAND was not great either, which is what I tried to say in my earliest post on the subject.

E330 - We agree, only I don't know about the other firm in the UK doing work for them. Could have been that SC was using Springfield as a junk outlet - although I don't remember seeing much that was really horrible on the shelves there. Maybe I just don't remember as I wasn't much interested in junk.

http://www.gunsamerica.com/976938037/Guns/Shotguns/Custom-Shotguns/PURDEY_PIGEON_12_GAUGE_SXS.htm

Seems she still is on the market...without mention of the hidden barrel sleeving.

Do what? That's not the same gun as the Steve Barnett gun. The Barnett gun had a checkered butt and was restocked. It was a 2 1/2" game gun without side clips, not a heavy proof pigeon gun with side clips and third fastener.

Maybe I'm missing something, but that's not the same gun.

Curl

That is a different gun....I guess I'd had been drinking Lowells mOOn shine when I ran across it.

Well pass the Mason jar then!

Curl

j0e, you've be hittin' that jug again.
Say, you didn't buy that old Purdey under it's spell did you????????

No but I've been offered double my money by more than one that saw it in person...

I let one SxS man at the club shoot it...he remarked that it shot its self.

You've been seeing double?

I'm a bit late for the Sleeving twist in this thread.....but I always wonder how folks can REALLY tell that the balance of a Sleeved Gun is not as original,when the original bbls are long gone?
I realize that perhaps the Sleever might skimp on the bbl striking/
balance thing....but how can you know for sure?
It's a personal thing,Balance
I have a nice old 1901 WW Greener Hammer Pigeon Gun, with Jones Underlever ,sleeved & reproofed etc... with the 30" bbls a tad weight forward on this 7 3/4 LB, isn't that how it should be?
Who knows....I like her just fine.
Hope you find yer Gun for the money, mate
cheers
Franc O

The scholar who chastised me for bringing up wall thickness gauges as a trump for eighty year old proof marks also made a comment about "Very seldom is striking the cause of bad wall thickness. Drilling 'em out from the inside is usually the reason." (I just assumed it was the same guy, I didn't check) That is so much BS. I can measure and examine the inside to determine what has been done in there. The hidden cause of bad wall thickness is eighty years of incompetent UK striking. Bad behavior in the bore can be detected with a ninety dollar bore micrometer. I will stick to my opinion that proof marks are worth nothing if you don't measure. "Sleeved" not marked on a water table does not take the place of close examination of the barrels with a high powered glass. Sure, it's nice if the mark is there, but if it isn't there, you had better get out your glass before you get out your checkbook.

Eightbore, yes and no. I do not think that I have EVER seen an English gun that has had externally restruck barrels. However, I've seen a boatload of them with proofmarks of 12 or 12/1 with .740" and larger inside diameter barrels.

Your point about proof marks meaning little (except as a guide) and measuring for yourself are spot on, but I disagree about the bad wall thicknesses being due to bad striking.

I can only say about the balance thing: If you have handled a lot of British guns, you don't need to see the join on the barrels to know whether it's been sleeved if it was sleeved badly. That said, I have handled sleeved guns that handled like originals, where someone paid attention to balance and dynamics.

It's much like what you feel when you handle a Best gun with 26" barrels. With your eyes closed, I DARE you to tell that the gun has "short" barrels, because the dynamics are as if they had 30" barrels.

Of course you havent seen many guns with restruck barrels, thats lots of hard work, and my point exactly. Except in the world of Bill. See Bill has no experience actually working on guns. I'll bet he has never restruck a set of barrels and measured them along the way. If he had, he might know the difficulty in doing so. I've done and I know. Its much easier to hone from the inside and that is also the location of most barrel problems, hence thats where the metal is usually removed from. You dont even need to polish barrels to reblack them, thats why you see pitting under many reblack jobs. As to the marking of sleeved guns, I've stated my opinion. Sleeving a gun like that without marking it so is done for one purpose and one only, to find a sucker and rid him of his hard earned money.
Steve

Right. I've never struck a barrel, but I know a bit about machining, and no one in his right mind would restrike the outside of barrels unless it was ABSOLUTELY necessary.

What you are saying is that all of those guns in the British auctions that carry warnings of "wall thickness below recommended minumums" had badly pitted bores that needed to be drilled out but the outside surface of those barrels was so pristine that they didn't need restriking? Yup,OK. The auction house warning about bores drilled bigger than proof is "Gun is out of proof."

Eightbore, I think you might be a bit confused. Do you know what striking is? It's FILING, by hand. Can you imagine the amount of material that has to be removed by filing the entire length of the barrels around their diameter, vs. simple boring or honing of the I.D.? You can polish external pits relatively simply, but a gun that has major pits inside the bores from lack of proper cleaning/lead fouling, primer or powdwer corrosion is far more common and requires a lot more material removal, generally.

And not "drilled" but bored or honed.