doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion Classic & Custom Single Barreled Sporting Rifles @ doublegunshop.com Elmer Keith's Owen?

[video:youtube]https://video.search.yahoo.com/sear...d8bf56dbb15e36ad05f7445&action=click[/video]


The auction is now over, Dan and I have been discussing the "Elmer Keith Owen" and wondered what others think about this rifle. It is the first rifle in this video.

Well, it's a beautiful rifle, but.

First, why would anyone remove the original Lyman 48 and replace it with a later version? And then the filling of the sight cut. At least, it can be corrected.

Another thing that has me scratching my head is the barrel. It seems like someone decided to drop a bundle on a new rifle and then save some bucks keeping the military barrel. Or maybe the military barrel shot really well so they kept it, but they could have at least polished the markings off, having them partially obscured by the front sight adds nothing to the rifle.

And the front sight, the rifle deserves a better quality ramp than what was used, I think.

I get the feeling the scope was a later addition, which may have prompted the removal of the original rear sight and the grinding of the bolt handle. That probably accounts for the filling of the cutout for the magazine cutoff too.

I think the placement of the swivel studs is somewhat unconventional. Keith was used to shooting with a sling, the front stud seems too far back to use the sling comfortably, but I could be wrong.

Something about the trigger guard seems wrong to me, the inletting and contours of the guard itself, the engraving isn't done to the level of the woodwork.

I also get the feeling the rifle was hot blued, at a later date. The wood got a new finish after the cutouts were filled, I think. Do you know if the pad is original?

Other than that, it is a nice rifle, well it's an Owen, it should be.

Well it's a Springfield, need I say more.

I don't understand the reason for swapping the sight and plugging the cutouts. It's a nice rifle and should be mint inside since one can't imagine Keith shot it much being a pistol guy

If he did take it hunting much, I would guess that the rifle has been completely refinished, because it does not look like it has gotten past the garage yet.

I would rather have Townsend's Wundhammer than Keith's Owen, just for the history and patina.

What did it sell for? The Griffin and Howe on the next segment of the video is no slouch of a rifle either.

$4750

So what do you and Dan think?

Well, Dan knows a lot more than I do. But this is what I think, I don’t think that stock was made for that action, but rather for another 1903 that had an early long slide Lyman 48 that was mounted a bit forward. At some point, someone decided to but that action on that stock and had to fill in were the original 48 was.

Fred

Did Owen work with American black walnut? Seems an odd choice given his access to the best European walnut available at the time.

Here's what I think, Owen never built that rifle, it has none of Owen's features on it, not one. The barrel marking to me is bogus, a very poor fake. I have never seen an Owen with those big letters, it reminds me of a G&H that RIA sold some years ago that had the same kind of big lettering on the barrel. I know that one was fake because I own the G&H with the number on the barrel and I had bought it from RIA years before that. They had a G&H letter because all you had to do to get the letter is send them the number on the barrel. RIA did give me a copy of the G&H letter and the funny thing was that the letter description didn't match the features on the fake rifle but did match my rifle.
Also, the floor plate engraving is pretty crude and I doubt that Owen would have sent out anything like that.
About the above comment about using the military barrels, I would say most of the early sporters 100 years ago used the issue barrels.

I think everyone is overlooking 2 things found in the description alone. What Town was Owen from again???? "num" ???