No need to be rude eightbore.
I am just giving my opinion based on experience.
Gun D must be sleeved as in the UK it will only be sold for such purposes because of the proof laws. Remember that sleeving requires re-proof and there is always a risk of a cracked action. Hence the lower price.
Gun B is functionally and externally as good as A. It is a more practical proposition than C for someone who actually shoots but cannot afford A.
Gun C is safe to shoot but dent it and you are in trouble. However, it is shootable and does not cost as much as A or B.
Just my observations. You don't have to agree but let's keep the 'web of deceit' BS down eh?
I am not arguing the case for or against proof here - (I will if you like) just observing the state of things.
The basic rule of thumb when considering two guns is Original Quality and Current Condition. Pricing similar guns is trading one off against the other. The most expensive guns are clearly going to be the best original quality in the best current condition.
Remember that a sleeved gun is not de-valued. It was sleeved because its barrels were so worn that they were useless and the gun therefore had little or no value prior to sleeving. Then it depends on the quality of sleeving - I can get a gun sleeved for 300 but won't. I often pay 1500 trade for sleeving - big difference!
Last edited by Small Bore; 01/18/11 08:23 PM.
