doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Bbl lumps showing, or not..which is harder build

Although I agree that the blind lump holes are the traditional stamping ground of the 'Best Gun', there are many exceptions to be found, especially in older 'Best Guns'.
One example is the J Blanch 'Best' Bar Action SLE. These guns break many of the traditions of the best gun: they often use the Webley Screw Grip action with top extension and often have at least one through lump. However, they were often engraved by the Kell workshops, were fabulously finished externally and internally, had the ubiquitous 29" chopperlump Whitworth barrels of the time and all the other embellishments of a Best gun.
Granted, Blanch are not traditionally considered in the same breath at the Top Four (H&H, Purdey, Boss & Grant) but they were undoubtedly using the same trade outworkers as them and as has already been discussed, getting a through lump to look good could involve as much work as doing a blind lump.

Toby...please explain Blind Lump Holes
Thanks..I'm not getting this.
Franc

Frankly, I'm with Franc on this one. A perfectly fitted lug on the underside of the action seems to be incredibly difficult to make. Also, it's easier to clean the action if there is a cutout for the lug. I suspect with or without was merely a mark of distintion of makers. Had there been a real benefit of a hidden lug the Birmingham makers would have adopted it. My guess is the gun with the cutout is slightly stronger due to leaving more metal on the lug.

To the very best of my recollections the only SxS I have ever owned without at least one through lump is an American Gun Co hammer gun, hardly what one would refer to as a "Best". It would thus seem to me there are a lot of factors of more importance in deciding upon a "Best" then whether or not it has through lumps. The Strength factor is of course one of the frame, not the lumps themselves, metal below the hinge pin cut adds nothing to the strength of the lump. When frames crack they do so at the juncture of the standing breech & bar, not across the hinge, so this would seem to be a point not worth arguing. The fact the normal boxlock has less metal there than a sidelock as well as having the tumbler axles hole drilled through the high stress area is point that has been argued for many many long years, in spite of a recent post to the contrare. Due to this many have contended a boxlock cannot be considered a "Best".

In theory, it seems to me that a properly fitted through lump could be made to cam the barrels back against the breech face. I have some that seem to do that very thing. If so, that would be a big plus to the design. The big theoretical minus is that actions can stretch with heavy charges and any additional metal between the breech face and hinge pin adds strength. Remember, this is a theoretical debate only--both designs are good and proven.

Hmm. I'd have to count the number of Holland Royals with through lumps I have in my notes. Not best guns? That's absurd.



Careful, Miller. That poster's ignorance of double gun history was "peer reviewed". You might not be on solid ground.

Perhaps ol'400 would provide me with a link to these Royals?
...not that I don't trust his "notes" eh!

The same old tired crutch thats says that double guns have to be "London Pattern" sidelocks (stocked to the fences, bar-action, no thru-lumps, etc...) to be "best quality" is applied as equally to double rifles as it is to shotguns. Here are a few Holland Royals.

http://www.schwandtclassicarms.com/

Click on double rifles, then the Holland .577. Stocked to the fences with a thru-lump.

Here's another .577 NE Royal Hammerless Ejector:

http://www.sitemason.com/files/d2Y5q0/Holland%20Royal%20.577%2030336%20f.JPG

It also has a thru-lump, and note that it isn't stocked to the fences:

http://www.sitemason.com/gallery/kEV1mg?id=23551

CptCurl has a lovely .375 Flanged Magnum Royal Hammerless Ejector, stocked to the fences with thru-lump:

http://www.rbsiii.com/collection/rifles/H&H_375flanged/H&H_375flanged.htm

Like other original Nitro-Proof Holland sidelock double rifles, these are back-locks, as Holland has never built them on bar-actions. Of course, Holland Royal shotguns are bar-locks. There are plenty of other Holland Royal double rifles that were built without thru-lumps. These weren't, and one of them is a flat-back. Does that mean they're not "bests"? Like I said, I think that suggestion pretty much defines absurd. "Best quality" is about quality, not form, and there are plenty of best quality double guns and rifles that don't fit the simplistic crutch definition.

Here's two more:

http://www.hollandandholland.com/gunrooms/london/second_hand_weapons/details/37/?cHash=b7c63edd57

http://www.hollandandholland.com/gunrooms/london/second_hand_weapons/details/189/?cHash=f1df2e96cd

I would consider these "Best" guns.

Absolutely. The little .240 is interesting. Holland says this is a Royal DeLuxe from 1926. Thru-lump and not stocked to the fences, just like the .577 Royal at Drake. "Royal DeLuxe" is Holland's very best gun. If that .240 isn't "best", then there ain't no such thing.