doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Who REALLY built most of the English guns.....

Wasn't ther an actual gunmaker named Reilly that was located in Ireland? What about Jos. Manton? I was under the impression they made their own guns.
Jim

What I thought would be neat and tidy (it isn't proving to be so) is to get a feeling for the number of gunmakers who actually did most of the work on their own guns. I realize this is going to be fuzzy at best due to the nature of the trade but perhaps it's worth the effort. Seems to me if the action was made by the shop they probably made the barrels and stock too.

Dave, if this criteria were applied to todays makers I imagine the list would dwindle down to a single hands finger count.

I gather from the advertisements that Cogswell & Harrison was well-known for the "keeper" gun and exports to the "overseers" of the colonial Empire--and certainly with their name on them. How is the "best gun" germaine to the question here. I don't believe it is.

jack

Ah, but that is fun of research! If it furthers knowledge, then it is worth the effort.


Joe,

Why assume that without evidence? The most expensive part is the action. Most American companies during the early part of this period were outsourcing the barrels. Why would this not be true of English companies? Stocking seems to have been done mostly in-house.

Pete

I'd be interested to know the source of your information, jack. Over the years, C&H produced a wide range of firearms, from London Best guns like the Extra Quality Victors, and bespoke SLEs and Avant Tout boxlocks, to plain jane Moorgreys, rifles and even (gulp) Sten guns - but I don't believe they were particularly known for 'keeper' guns or exports to the Empire, as were Army & Navy and some of the Brummie gunmakers.

Better things are always how we judge Rabbit. Be it maker, or retailer. Stuff by the truck load, is stuff by the truck load.
Real makers like Scott, Greener and Westley Richards would have supplied WalMart these days.

jm:

. . . "or I could be wrong". Let me check if this was off the top of an empty head. Maybe Bonehill. I'll get back to you.

jack


LG:

Do you actually understand the Brum trade? In a highly stratified society based on birthright, everyone can't be at the top and certainly not temporarily altho maybe some simple plutocrats crash their way in. Given that the fluidity of the Gatsby/climber scenario was suppressed and the occasion, acreage, and birds to show off the "best gun" also limited, why wouldn't the price point for a civil servant or some third or fourth son who's bought a commission in India matter as much to the trade as the high end?

jack

If that is indeed the case today, then there must be as many or more Spanish makers capable of and making that best quality gun today, as well as a similar number of Italian makers also capable and doing the same.

Dave

Jack, I mispoke concerning C&H. A misreading of Baker's Heyday of the Shotgun, a book whose chapter headings are very much organized along the lines of class stratification. Perhaps Bonehill's "Interchangeable" and Charles Lancaster's "Colonial Quality" hammerless better fit the description. However, Baker does say that C&H had a "brief flirtation" with the lower end of the market with production marketed thru the Victoria Small Arms. Co. of Gillingham St. (same premises as C&H factory). Baker also mentions C&H in the connection of being the one london maker who followed the Brummies into product diversification in bicycles and bike parts.

jack

The Manton brothers were originally gunmakers and set a new benchmark for perfection in guns that eventually evolved into the British best gun via their apprentices. However, the companies devolved into trademarks as far as I can see.