Interesting article by Diggory in the March 2009 issue of "Sporting Shooter" in the UK. The article's title is "BORN IN THE USA". In explaining the USA gun collector he says:

"The typical collector in the US looks for a factory original, mint condition example of a gun by the likes of Le Fever (sic), Parker or LC Smith. The fewer made, the more collectable, the more original condition, the more it will cost. Quality hardly comes into it. A basic grade Birmingham trade boxlock surpasses all these in terms of mechanical integrity, design and manufacture. If you want to upset an American show him a high-grade Parker, then show him a Purdey, and watch him blather on about nostalgia and patriotism and grandpa's homestead.

However, not all American Guns are over-priced rubbish, and many American collectors have very impressive collections of best English guns and a surprising number are immensely Knowledgeable, haveing taken pains to eductate themselves about English guns......Bill McPhail is unusual because his collection focuses on real qulity from relatively unknown American makers (William Schaefer, T. Hasdell, E. Thomas Jr., D. Kirkwood, Joseph Tonks and Mortimer & Kirkwood). Some of these guns clearly emanate from Scott in Birmingham, having distinctive tower mark stamped on the action flats or the barrel flats. I suspect very few if any were fully American made.....The quality of guns in Bill's collection is comparable to British guns of the 1870-80......Traveling and learning are wonderful parts of my job and I love discovering things that unravel my prejudices. So now when someone dismisses all American shotguns as agricultural nonentities like the LC Smith, I can point them to a Tonks or a Mortimer & Kirkwood and watch them struggle to find fault with it"

Bless his heart....

I have a reply, but this isn't the MisFire forum!

Just posted same on the LCSCA Forum. Looking forward to a chat if deemed worthy at The Southern

Diggory is well versed in the old wive's tale about bad condition and refinishing affecting American guns more than British guns. He doesn't believe it all because he realizes that low condition and badly refinished British guns sell for much less than better ones. Unfortunately, many gun people have been fed this pablum for so long that they believe all Purdeys, refinished and ground down, or not refinished or ground down sell for the same money. It is not true and Diggory knows it. The Brits like condition and originality just like we do, and they pay for it just like we do. I can buy his Birmingham guns all day long for a very few hundred dollars in ground down condition. Find me a ninety year old mint Birmingham 20 gauge and it will sell for a fortune, just like a ninety year old mint Parker 20 gauge. Diggory's logic has nothing to do with anything except that there are way fewer shotgun collectors in GB than there are in the U.S. If there were as many people in GB interested in shotgun collecting as there are in the U.S., the search for condition in lower grade guns would be on the same level. An educated observer like Diggory should realize that the search for condition, which he disrespects a bit in American collectors (read the first part of his essay) is the right approach in collecting. He certainly leans that way in his DGJ articles about UK auctions.

as they say the truth can be painful.....most englishmen shoot o/u guns like the ubiquitous beretta. americans collect guns like others collect stamps or coins.

What I like is that he's not afraid to express his opinion. Dig would be welcome company in any gathering. He also knows that with-it publishers always look for some edgy stuff from the cognoscenti, something to keep reader juices jangling. As a newby to the fine art of American guns, I never heard of those relatively unknown American makers.

I think there is a fair amount of truth in his statements. I do not see why some field grade guns ranging from Parks to Remingtons (especially the ones)in poor conditions are bringing the price they do today. I see no shortage of them either.

he is one of the good enlishmen.

Dig is great fun. And, be assured he does know guns. I'm pretty sure Dig will be along to debate this with you.

I think Dig may have missed the DGJ article years ago about the Fox gun that lived as a rental piece at the English shooting grounds for most of 100 years. I seem to think Tom Kidd wrote the article, not positive, but, the gun held up as well, or, better than the English stuff did, was serviced right along side the English stuff, and was a favorite of English shooters on the grounds.
Anytime someone prattles on about Purdeys and quality, I think of Edsel (or was it Henry II?) Ford's matched set of Purdey's, from "between the wars" ( Uh, WWII and Korea) and what complete pieces of crap those guns are.
Best,
Ted

there isn't much to debate low grade birmingham made g.e. lewis blne was better put together then my stelingworth ejector and could be bought for $300 less.
american guns are not that bad just think you could be stuck with ole' german or belgian thingy with tight bores choked f/x-f that's good only for making "fist size" holes in woodern doors at long range! what makes english guns great is simple fact that one can actually hit something on the wing with them.

My Remington sxs must fit in with German and Belgian guns when it comes to chokes

Ah, but take a 1913 16ga Sauer Model VIII F/F and a gunsmith hunting buddy to open them to C/IC and look what you've got for the blind and bush: a pleasure to look at and a pleasure to shoot. Add those beautiful RMC brass and, Look Ma, I'm on top of the world!

Writers write for the readers enjoyment and many readers want to have their viewpoint confirmed in what they read. Bear this in mind when you read a article. Those which do not go with the flow seem to be rather rare. Hard to get published if the editor does not want to publish your work.

Dig makes a few real point and confirms a few solidly held views at the same time. It boils down to American buyers seem to like high original condition more than higher grade guns with heavy wear or lots of refinishing. It is like buying antiques. Original condition and lack of wear is king and heavily refinished or well worn will destroy the collectors interest.

One other thing that I think needs to be considered. Most Americans can easily own many guns, not just a single or a few. So we can afford to put a premium on condition over higher grades or quantity over quality of one high grade gun or several worn out guns. My gun room has multiple Lefevers, Fox, etc.... If I could own only one gun I might try to make it as high grade as I could. But given the choice of one 30-50K gun or many guns for the same money I like the variety. If I lived in a country where more than one gun was a real problem to own I might go for only a best gun.

KY Jon, good points about what people collect when they are allowed to collect. Quite a dig on the Brits. However, Diggory is trying to climb the wrong tree when he criticizes us for searching for condition "without regard for quality". We do not look for condition only in farmer grade guns. We look for condition in all guns we collect, just like the Brits do. Unfortunately, the Brits seem to enjoy abusing their guns with files and honing tools to such an extent that untouched examples are quite rare. He is the one who exposes the abuse of his country's guns in his DGJ articles. He of all people should praise the colonists for their love of average guns that are untouched by bad gunsmiths.

Good call Ben-T. I wouldn't know a Diggory from a "play your Diggery-Doo" nor do I care a whit about Limey guns- try and find 2&1/2" short shells at Mammoth-Mart during bird season-or cricket season. What "Da Dig-ster" forgets is: American boxlock ejector guns, at least the superior ones like the Fox, the Ithaca NID, the Parker and the "King of 4140 AISI" the great Model 21- all kicked some Limey "arse" in the John Olin test- the overpriced Purdey blew apart after 60 rounds, the M21 went 2000 (1000 in each barrel) then was stripped down and gauged for wear-Nope-NONE they could find, re-assembled and went right on a shooting. Ask the Limey's to build you a single trigger double- they'll defer with their olde "two barrels-two triggers" and the M21, even without Jack O'Connor's great "cheer-leading" is the ONLY boxlock ejector grade double I would buy with a factory single trigger, next the Fox-Kautsky--And old "Cactus Jack" wrote in 1965 The Shotgun Book- "A fine English made double, or even better, a matched pair- is a status symbol, like a yacht or a French mistress- We kicked the Redcoats out in 1779-status be damned, and American shotgunners/hunters favor heavy loads-game is still somewhat open to all, not a priviledge of the rich and inter-bred as in England, and we have "rough shooting", not a floosy grouse moor or a driven pheasant shoot with peasants doing the driving and Lord Faunteroy doing the shooting (or shooting at). Collecting fine British double guns is like the Matzloff-Ponzi recent stock market "crap game" rigged in favor of the "insiders" and the average Joe 12-Pack who longs for a nice used 12 gauge Model 21 to use afield is priced out of even that market by the "hustlers" and insiders-and the dead rooster your bird dog just retrieved for you doesn't much know if he died from a shotload from an 870 or from a Holland & Holland Royal-

purdey is shotgun for guy that is driven by rolls royce, owns jet or two, has several villas, wears patek philippe (or lange un shone), gucci leather, writes with gold cartier pen,...... i have examined sxs and o/u from them and for luv of god can't understand what people see in them. i pinched my nose when i had it in my hands and i felt the pain.

to some new purdey is not an expensive gun. it's sorta like me buying brand new cz-huglu.
basically it's a gun for hombre who was born with platinum spoon in their mouth (think bush family, kennedy family,....)or has someone else making money for them. lets face it most folks that work themselves for living will not be able to own new purdey, holland,....of course if you're us senator, bank executive, steal people's life savings (think enron), ,.....anything is possible.

The reason - the only real reason - people buy Purdeys is so they can lean against the bar, order a dry martini, and drolly mention that they just purchased a brace of shotguns. I don't think it is legal to use the term 'brace of shotguns' unless they are Purdeys.

wish i could relate, but at this point i'm praying that i still have a job few months from now. you know what happens when you loose health benefits and get seriously sick in america. cartboard box on side of the road, baby.

I am with Bill with his analysis of our respective appreciation of gun condition. However, I can only go so far with jingoism. My two favorite pigeon guns are an Elsie pigeon 32" and a Cashmore Nitro. The Elsie is a paragon of nostalgic virtues - the Cashmore is an extension of my hands. The Brits do have this fit thing down pretty well.

Both guns have their places, nothing is better than an English Sle for the field, nothing is more fun than the American brute.
Never a real fan of the standard Brummie - I'd take a AH Fox built Sterlingworth anyday.
Left out in the cold would be the Euros - they are neither fish nor fowl, wand or plow.

I don't see what the big deal is about Purdey and such? I have several American classics nothing to brag about but i sure is hell ain't going to kick a Optimus or A1 out of my bed for no Purdey or any other such gun.

I think i sense a bit of jealousy from reading Digs little writings! Me thinks he wishes they had more high original condtion examples. Too bad!

'Those that do, do it.Those that can't, write about it'
In my experience, journalists are the scum of the earth, a plague foisted on mankind to irritate and annoy.
Dig is an okay chap, who has chosen to swim with sharks, I hope he doesn't get eaten alive.
There are many fine American guns, ( let us all offer up a prayer for John Moses). There are many poor English guns.
The one deciding factor is that the British best is a work that has evolved due to the demand created by the Gentry in the pre-Great War (1914) and the live pigeon shooting fraternity where they demanded the 'Best' and so balance, function and form evolved.In the Frontier World at around the same time the operational word was 'Utility' and that I feel is what the American trade provided.
We have two entirely different products for two entirely different people.
Now let us not argue, let us all enjoy. Each to is own.
Diggory, you keep writing, I enjoy a good read.
Me? I'll just keep filing.

most of that ole' euro stuff with short cones, tight bores and chokes is next to worthless. london made sle is good for shootin' on the peg not available to most americans, but hardly suitable for our sport. engish snobs refer to our shooting as rough or rough shootin'. they dress better to go hunting then most of us wear to place of worship on sunday.
want to see something horrendous try english repeating sporting rifle DESIGNED and put together in england. their handguns suck too. their last truly great military rifle was the whitworth front loader, no?

A fella has to make a crust! I agree with him. Greener had this to say:-

The Gun and its Development (1910 edition) W.W. Greener ..

“In no country are better sportsmen to be found than in the United States of America, nor does any country posses keener buyers or better men of business, yet in no country is so much worthless rubbish of the (mass production) gun-factories offered for sale. The Boers are a race of sportsmen, but it is of no use to offer them rubbish at any price, and the author can hardly believe that the astute American will sacrifice everything to cheapness."
K.

I think there are some misconceptions here, re the importance of "originality" for the American vs British collector.

In the first place, it's far more likely that something like a Purdey got shot a whole lot more than a top of the line Parker, Elsie, you name it. Think driven shooting. And the Brits, especially with their "best" guns, generally took a different approach to gun care that we did on this side of the pond. After a shooting season, the Purdey likely went back to Purdey. If the bores needed a bit of honing or polishing, or the barrels reblacking, they got it. If the wood needed refinishing, it was done. Sort of like taking your car to the dealer for regular maintenance and checkups. American guns, on the other hand, tended to visit the village smith only when something broke. The result is that while the Brits certainly value guns in high condition, there is less of a deduction for guns that are "other than original", because the fact is, most of them are "other than original". But if they're still in original proof and if things like reblacking the barrels and refinishing the wood were well-done--and they typically would have been, especially on "best" guns--such a gun would suffer far less in the eyes of a British collector than a reblued and re-CC Parker or Smith in the eyes of an American collector. And even if a British gun had the chambers lengthened to 2 3/4" from the original 2 1/2", that's not a big deal either--as long as it has the proper proofmarks and passed reproof.

Ted, as for a Fox sitting around somewhere in England for 100 years . . . I don't recall that article, but if it was written very long ago, there'd be a chronology problem--since Foxes didn't appear until 1905.

The proof load thing . . . That got a lot of good publicity for John Olin and his Model 21, but basically all it demonstrated was how much that gun was overbuilt. You're not going to hunt ducks for several seasons shooting blue pills. If a gun can digest several dozen proof loads before it fails, does that somehow make it inferior to one that can digest several hundred? If the one that can digest several dozen weighs, say, a pound or so less than the one that can digest several hundred, then I'm still likely to favor the one that's not as strong, because of the weight and because it's certainly strong enough for anything I want to do with it. And in spite of the legendary strength of the Model 21, it's interesting to note that Winchester kept a stock of Model 21 hinge pins, in gradually larger sizes, that you could slip in when the gun got loose on the original one.

Battle, I wonder about you, and worry about your stock when you make comments like your Purdey comment above. Now, we all like our colonials, but there is a difference ol'man.
The reason we like condition, is that most were treated like crap and finding that pristine needle in a haystack farmer's gun is part of the game.

I have a theory that a lot of guns got loose from lack of cleaning. That is the grease and dust combined to make a lapping compound. I have a Browning Superposed that was purchased new by my Father and given to me several years later. I hunted with it for 20 years. It hasn't had 5000 shells through it but it is loose. They are relatively difficult to disassemble and I knew little about break-open guns and I didn't clean and lube the hinge pin and hook.

Best,

Mike

Interesting quote, especially in light of the fact that by 1905 British gun sales to the USA had dropped to only $20,000 a year. So is Greener decrying American buyers or the inability to compete because of his labor costs? Labor costs that could not compete with either the dying Belgian guild system nor the American factories.

Pete

Larry, the article is titled "An Expatriate Returns" and appeared in the winter of 1995 issue of the DGJ. My memory is good, but, short, and it was indeed Tom Kidd who wrote the article. The gun was an early CE 20 gauge Fox shipped February 3 1914. The gun returned in late 1993, after having spent nearly 80 years in England. It was noted on the guns surviving records that it would be shown and used around some of the most prominent gun clubs in England.
Boothroyd wrote an article about the gun for the October, 1992 "Shooting Times" magazine. Noted was the fact the gun was "highly regarded".
Best,
Ted

Dig is right on and American gunmakers have always known it.

That's one reason they backed Congress's passing of the McKinely Tariff in 1890.

It drove up the prices on imported guns by 48.4%.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McKinley_Tariff

I wonder if Fox, Parker, Lefever, and L.C. Smith would have had a chance on a level playing field.

Before 1890 Greener and Scott sold a lot of guns in America. I think the US was Scott's major market.

OWD

Appropriate observation of differences does not require arrogant denigration.
In 1908, the LC Smith Pigeon Grade with AE was $140, the Parker DHE $125, and Baker Paragon $75. How about a C grade Fox or D grade Lefever? Anyone with knowledge of the US price for a Purdey or Scott in 1908?
Let's say at Las Vegas a LC Pigeon went for $6000 and a DHE $8000, what would a comparable condition Purdey and Scott bring?

If you read some of Greener's more promotional prose, you will find that he had little digs to make about many Brit makers and their products as well as the U.S. products. In his eyes, only the Greener was without flaw.

I have a 12 bore Sterlingworth and a 20 bore DHE Parker that returned from the old sod. Both were built in 1925 and bear the appropriate English proof (London & B'ham) They obviously didn't sit around someone's closet al that time. I believe the Sterlinworth was a club gun that was well used & cared for. The English did quite of business in America in the 1920's and I'm sure some of our better guns made it over there as well.

Just My Opinion.....George

Why wounldn't an ol'cad be happy with a AH Fox Sterlingworth, if its good enough for the American farmer that is!
T'aint that much diff between a SW and a Brummie.

Run-with-the-fox's quote on the test is quite right but there is little to be gained from testing two guns that are not built for the same purpose; something like claiming a John Deere tractor is better than an Aston Martin because it made it farther across the ploughed field before it got stuck. English guns are made for high volume shooting, but not with magnum loads. It is testament to the Purdey that it managed sixty proof loads before failing. American guns are made with high volume factory assembly in mind and easy repair from spare parts that could be shipped to out-of-the-way places. There are not many places in Britain that are more than 30 miles from a Gunsmith. American guns are marvels of inovative engineering design. I think it was Kynochs that retired a Boss O/U after about 1 1/2 million rounds had ben put through it, it was quite sound and had only ever been cleaned and given minor maintainance. Lagopus.....

You are right about those "Purdey's" of "Hank The Deuce". years ago, as my wife, who grew up in Grosse Pointe Farms, I came to know the area well- there was a custom gunshop on Kercheval near the border (3 mile rd) and a former GM journeyman tool maker name of Byford McDaniel and his wife Lois that ran that place.

Mac told me once that "Hank II sent his chauffeur over" with the Purdeys, 3 days before the overbearing (When your last name is on the building, you can do whatever the *&^% you want to) Mr. Ford II was to leave for Scotland for driven grouse- He wanted "Mac" to drop other work, and strip and clean them- Mac told the "flunkie" NO Deal- but did look at the Purdeys-if he were here, he'd agree with you Ted- overpriced junk- or do the Limeys spell it "Junque" as they spell a check as a cheque??

And Hank's son tried to bribe the MI DNR to screen off the open section of the Pigeon River, so that the "lowlifes" could NOT see the Ford resort- MI has a "run of the river law" that dates back to 1928- a fly fisherman on the Pine River sued "Top" Taggart- the oil robber baron who established FSU in Big Rapids- and won in the MI State Supreme Court-

The rich are very different from us- they think the world is their "playtoy"- Purdeys, Peel shoes, Phillip Patek wristwatches, Porches, Perrazis- and the "beat goes on"..

My original decent quality American gun is a Sterlingworth Fox that was made in 1923 and I have owned if for 40 years. This was the only shotgun I owned for many of those years so it was used for everything from quail and duck hunting and I shot my first deer with it as well. This gun had digested great quantities of high base express duck loads before we knew any better. I shot hundreds of rounds of trap and skeet with it as well.
It has never required repair of any sort in all those years and the barrels internally are as nice as the day I got it.
How many owners of English guns can make the statements I just made about their "superior" examples?
Jim

We still have some misconceptions here.

First of all, prices: Drew, the equivalent of an Elsie Pigeon--Scott Monte Carlo B, also a hammerless sidelock--cost 44 pounds in 1906. Expect someone can convert that price, but I believe the pound was in the $4-5 range at that time. And that would not include, of course, the nearly 50% tariff mentioned above. As OWD said, that's why Brit gun sales dropped off significantly in this country in the 20th century, and why American doublegun makers did so well.

American guns were made for a different purpose than British guns. The Brits liked (and still do) light 12's as "game guns". The makers of American classic doubles sold far more 12's than anything else, but very few of them would fall into what the Brits would consider "game gun" configuration, mostly because they weigh too much. The British equivalent of something like a Fox, Parker, Elsie or Model 21 12ga would be a wildfowl model, designed mostly for shooting waterfowl. One of those will stand up to the same amount of abuse, with the same shot charges, as an American 12. Your light British game gun--of which I have a pair (nothing exotic--Army & Navy guns from the 30's, made by Webley and Scott)--are more the equivalent of American classic 16's. My guns, with 28" barrels, weigh a hair under 6 1/4#. They're proofed for 1 1/8 oz loads, but in fact, I shoot 7/8 oz through them for targets, and mostly 1 1/16 oz--the standard 2 1/2" Brit 12ga game load--for pheasants. (I sometimes use my own 1 1/8 oz low pressure reloads.) They're 75 years old and still in original proof. I shoot lots of targets with them, and since I got them over 3 years ago, I have killed something over 100 wild pheasants with them--not to mention some quail and prairie grouse. They will take it as well as will an EQUIVALENT American gun, when fed the proper ammunition. My guns are essentially the equivalent of about a Fox AE grade 16. Buy a couple of those and you'll pay as much--if not more--than you would for a couple light Brit 12's such as mine.

Dr. Charles Norris, who bequeathed one of his Purdeys to his friend George Bird Evans, shot Elsies before he bought his first Purdey. He praises them but says they're not as good as English guns. However, he also says that dollar for dollar, American doubles are the best value. On the used market, especially if you're talking high grade American doubles, I'm not sure that's true any longer. For one thing, if you get into the highest grade Elsies, Parkers and Foxes, there are not many out there. Rarity increases prices dramatically. On the other hand, after about 1900, everything Purdey made was a "best", as was every Boss, every Woodward, and every H&H Royal. So you've got far more high grade Brit guns to choose from than you do American guns, thus flipflopping the traditional price difference.

Thanks Larry. The oldest conversion that I could find was $4.866 per British Pound in 1930. Not a great year in the US. The LC Pigeon had been discontinued, but an Eagle with AE was $190 and a Parker CHE $215.

Larry.....i think you explained it quit well. However i don't think thats the point Dig was trying to make at all!

These ads give a good example of what was expected of an American gun. Brush, Trap, Field and Blind; strong yet simple and easy to repair; long, close and hard hitting. Much more that we would expect from a single gun today.







Pete

If i was fortunate to live back in the day(1898). And had purchased a Purdey/Scott and a Lefever/Parker and both guns was used consistently and the same for one hundred years. If neither gun had broken and or been apart for repair how is either gun any better than the other? Now if that Purdey had stood the test of time and that American made gun didn't i would say sure all British guns are superior, but thats not the case.

Pete- another point here, possibly overlooked- in America with many areas open to public hunting- the long range guns were favored- to "beat the other guy" across the marsh- read "Are we shooting 8 gauge guns" by Nash Buckingham--in England, no competition- the "unwashed masses" are not able to hunt, even rough shoot- that is a priviledge of the inbreed aristocrats- they have no competition- a gun writer discovered at a flossy London shooting school the Brits are taught that if you miss your bird with the first barrel, you wish him GodSpeed and find another bird for the second barrel- pleanty of birds in a drive for the wealthy, it's "bad form, Old Boy" to compete for the only Goose that might fly over a public marsh in the entire morning- Nash also described a top Limey gunner, raised on driven birds, and his first experience with flighting doves in a tail wind- believe Old Lord Muckingfutch with his proper "Best" sidelocked gun scratched down 18 for 100 shells fired-Tell you what- I'm no clays man, because the laws of gravity and inertia work differently on a clay disc than a startled game bird-none tougher to kill cleanly awing than a dove, true in Nash's day, still true today- I'll go up against your Limey Lad Mr. Sir Diggory on live birds in a wind- not clays- we each take 100 shells of our chosing- best % wins the pot for those 100 shells. He may use any one of his "fancy schmancy" double guns he favors- I'll use my "money gun"- the 1937 12 gauge Model 12 30" Full Tournament grade with solid rib-and being a "somewhat gentleman- for a working class Mick SOB- I'll only load mine with two shells, same as Sir Digmeister does his- as Nash recalled in one of his early srories about early days at Wapanocca- his father, banker Miles Buckingham, when he observed Nash using the old Irby Bennett "Gift gun" a 12 bore Winchester 1893- "You only load that with two shells when you are sharing a duck stand with a gentleman shooting a double gun".. Live birds only, and I shoot barn pigeons in flight and decoyed crows a lot in the non-Fall seasons-clays-fuggegaboutit!! RWTF

the best gun at that time was legendary wincherster 1897 pump.
some designers those englishmen were bested by farmers son from utah.

Some of you think too much of your farmer grades - think of the brace counts on the big estates shoots - think about the lack of game in America at this time.
No, best guns were made to shoot...and a whole lot.

this must be the reason why so many ole' 1897s have very little finish left but are still going strong eh?
if ole' 1897 was allowed those folks using game counters would have been overwhelmed! ladie, how many did i shoot. not sure sir, i ran out of dials!

In 1910, the Monte Carlo B sold for $175 in the US, it was a bit more prior to that. The $4 to $5 conversion seems about right.

Lowell....we don't think overly too much of them..........but FACTS ARE FACTS, and Annie Oakley out shot all the kings and queens and the Little Lord Fauntleroy's "noblemen" and "women" of the world with her OLD MARLIN LEVER .22-LC's-Marlin shotguns, year in and year out---during that time of which you speak !!! On the Continent and over here......farmer type guns don't you know !!!! Every and I mean every shooting match in the WORLD, they all tried and just couldn't beat her with their Purdies, Engraved Diddletwats and so on......FACTS ARE FACTS, LOOK AT THE HISTORY..............and yes, the old model 97's never saw the inside of a repair shop.......and they are still going.......

Different strokes for different folks I guess...and bye the way..all the engraving in the world, doesn't make a gun shoot any better...another fact, eh ???

Best Regards,

Best thread we've had on the ole BBS in a long time. It's good to be reminded why we're blessed to have an ocean between us.

Bad choice for Annie Oakley as she had a pair of Lancasters made and had shooting lessons at Lancaster's shooting school.

I was amused by Run-with-the-fox's idea of shooting in England. If you want difficult sport, try shooting wood pigeons flighting in to roost on a windy night. Diggory will tell you how testing they can be. I shot a load last week and the choice of gun was an Ithaca Model 37 12 bore; left the Purdey at home. I only bought the Ithaca so that I could test some steel ammo and for some reason I can shoot extremely well with it. I now use it most of the time for pigeon shooting. Lagopus.....

By strange coincidence I was out pigeon shooting yesterday... with a Purdey.

The "depreciation" on Brit guns runs a fairly steady 20X from "pristine" to "wall hanger." What does it run for USA made guns? Say a Fox Strilingworth and a DHE Parker?

Annie Oakley - my god man!
Now, I have both American and English guns and see merit in both.
One - is one of the best shooting machines in the world, and the others keep the chicken coop free of vermin.
So see!
Now off with you...SpongeBob is on!

It should be, why has the common Standard 12g Sterlingworth gone up 4-5Xs in value? They used to linger on the gunshow tables at 500.00 - now look at 'em at Cabela's.
They are on the heels of the overly-hyped(thanks to the PGCA) Parker Vh guns.

Some of the conceptions of shooting in Great Britain we're getting here certainly were not accurate 100 years ago. No, they did not have the vast areas of public land we had (and have) in this country, but there was a whole lot of "rough shooting" taking place. (That's why you see plenty of very plain Birmingham-made doubles without ejectors.) It was certainly not a case of "if you're not of the rich and titled gentry, you don't get to shoot". And at the same time--Nash Buckingham's writings remind us of this as well--there were private duck clubs and quail plantations in this country where one also did not shoot unless one were of the rich gentry. There were working class Brits, especially in the rural parts of the country, just as eager to go out and pot a duck, partridge, pheasant or rabbit as there were working class Americans. About the only difference is the gun they carried. You would not have seen many pumps over there, but you would have seen a lot of guns the equivalent of a Sterlingworth, Elsie or Ithaca Field Grade, or Parker Trojan.

"Better", where guns are concerned, does not necessarily mean more expensive, if you're talking better mechanically and more durable. Is a Parker A1 Special "better" than a VH? Not mechanically, and not when it comes to durability. So why would anyone compare a Purdey to a VH any more than they'd compare an A1 to a VH? The differences are far nicer wood, much more extensive engraving, considerably more attention paid to fit and finish--things that make the more expensive gun more of a work of art, but not necessarily a "better" gun in terms of reliability.

And Lowell, I don't think you'll find many $2K plus 12ga Sterlingworths. You'll certainly find 20's and 12's in that price range, but there are far more 12's, which makes them less sought-after on the market. In fact, there were more than 2x as many 12ga SW's made as 16's and 20's combined. But the same small bore premium is at work where Brit doubles are concerned, and for the same reason: Far fewer 16's and 20's made, in comparison to 12's. Almost certainly a greater differential than even with our American classics.

Seems a bit silly comparing Ford F-150s and Jaguar XKs (or maybe fancied up Land Rovers )
In the words of Theodore Roosevelt "Envy and arrogance are the two opposite sides of the same black crystal."

Just purchased another fine hunting adventure book from that source of all sources for old and out of print books ABEBOOKS.COM, excellant selection. Another hunter traveled to Africa in the early to mid 1800's with, of course, a brace of James Purdey muzzleloaders.
Geez guys give credit where credit is due... The English have been building and using these things under the most dangerous of circumstances for a heck of a long time!!!

Lagopus.....you need to read the history and understand what you're talking about.....Annie Oakley won more than 25 sanctioned shooting competitions with rifles and shotguns (against all the world competitors), BEFORE she ever went to the Continent with Cody and the Wild West show.......wherever she went, folks GAVE her guns for advertising......BUT she always used the Marlin's and LC's in her show routine......you know, the farmer guns.....plain Jane types......on the Continent she would shoot cigarettes and apples from the heads of statesmen.......on this side she used her dog with an apple on it's head......or her husband with a cigarette in his mouth.......

Bottom line is, IT IS the shooter, not the gun which wins in the end.......gun 10%----shooter 90%.........

Like the WWII North American P-51 Mustang....American Airframe, British Engine..........WON THE WAR..........just different styles and habits.........put them together and good things happen.....

Best Regards,

I don’t own D grade Foxes, A grade Parkers or Purdeys. In another venue, I would tell you a story about an elephant and a mouse. It relates to the ownership of exclusive possessions making up for other shortcomings. I own Sterlingworths Trojans, basic Levefers, basic Birmingham guns and other similar guns. I shoot them all and I don’t see any real difference in quality. I have high regards for both.

I grew up in High Point, North Carolina and one of the things I learned as a boy is that, if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything. I will say that, the way I grew up, we considered anyone who told us how much better it was where he was from, or how much better his gun, dog, or car was, as a jerk and we simply wrote him off as such.

Mr. Haddock is a writer and I am a writer. He makes a lot more money for what he writes and I’m sure has a lot more readers. I do understand that one way to get your name out as a writer is to say irritating things that entice folks to read what you write out of irritation. I will never be well known if I have to resort to those tactics.

There are a lot of guns out there that I don’t care for or I think they are grossly over rated but I see no need to urinate in someone else’s corn flakes.

We have a popular bumper sticker in the South that says “We don’t care how the He## ya’ll do it up North.” That bumper sticker is often interpreted to mean that Southern folks don’t like Yankees. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I married a Yankee and, if you read any of my writing, I will bore you telling you how great she is. My favorite relative is her brother and I have as many friends north of the Mason Dixon as south. None of them tell me how much better it is up there or how much smarter folks are up there. The folks that do, I count off as jerks just as I would those from the South that tell me how much smarter Southern folks are.

Everyone has his opinion and has a right to it. My opinion is that Mr. Haddock’s expression of his opinion that things British are better than things made in the USA says a lot about his character. Another thing I’ve learned is that you can never convince a horses a$$ that he is one. As my Mama said on many occasions, “you might as well save your breath to cool your soup.”

I would also say that I would hardly consider a man who can’t spell Lefever as an expert on American guns any more than I would a person making bold statements about Brit guns who couldn't spell Purdey.

Well said Mr. Jones.........
Some people just don't get it!

Nothing new about this debate. From 1907, a brash young Yank proudly shows off his Baker to an unimpressed British fop

Annie did once shoot a cigarette from Kaiser Wilhelm's mouth. Paraphrasing what she said later on "If I hadn't been such a good shot I might have prevented World War One".

Just Another Bit of Useless Information.....George

She shot Parkers, too.

I would be very curious as to the total production of double guns in the US as opposed to the UK in ,lets say, the years 1890 to 1930.I would also be curious as to the total numbers of hunters in those countries during that period.I dare say the opportunities for gunning are much greater here than anywhere in the UK at any level,not to mention the interest in pursuing same.

I rather suspect that Annie O. would have been as spectacular no matter the brand on the gun she was using.

PA24, I only read somewhere that she use a pair of 20's that were built by Lancaster and he fitted them for her at his shooting school, I have a picture somewhere of it. I think Doc Carver also won some big match once with Greeners and also owned a Cashmore pigeon gun.

I'll agree that that the Mustang became a true fighter once it got a R R Merlin inside. As for winning the war, I'm sure it did well but the Spitfire and the Hurricane had paved the way for it.

I don't decry American made guns; in fact I am trying to add one or two examples to my collection and they are hard to find here. So far I have six different U.S. made guns in the cabinet. I'm still after a nice Fox. I still like to shoot an old Winchester '93 and use it sometimes at black powder clay shoots - I do well with it too. Lagopus.....

Lagopus..........the Spit and the Hurricane did just fine, but only on the island or over the channel....no range at all for either of those machines......so they didn't pave much....only kept your island from being invaded, which was quite a big deal at that......but Bomber Harris needed something to escort the Lancaster's.....and when the U.S. showed up, we needed a B-17-B-24 escort machine...and the Mustang did the trick..."all the way to Berlin and back".......after that, the Luftwaffe was finished, as were the German's.................

The Spit and Hurricane had an altitude (height) problem, the ME-109's had superchargers, the English machines did not...so the 109's preferred to fight high, the Brits preferred to fight low....(where the Spit ruled).....kinda like the light weight, short chambered Brit double guns...?? Your best bragging machine was by far the "Mosquito"....a machine the German's just could not catch.......

I like British guns as well, just think they are over-priced when over-here.....don't care for all the "ginger-bread" (engraving...modest is o.k. IMO).......and I still think the "shooter" is more important than the gun.....

As mentioned above, A.O. would have done well with any gun I think....she was one of those self taught country girls, who shot to eat...and became quite good at it....you know, "shoot 'em in the eye to save meat"..........

Tallyho---

Annie Oakley also shot some exhibitions with an Ithaca Grade 4 single trap, which is not exactly a plain gun.

Mr. Jones, you might come off better on your criticism concerning the spelling of Lefever . . . if you'd spelled the English gent's name correctly. It's Hadoke, not Haddock.

Where does the Stevens 311 fit into all of this?

L. Brown:

Sure, she shot "WHATEVER" the gun manufacturers' GAVE her, and lord, they gave her some fancy guns.....(but for serious competition, she used the same old guns)......Mentioned above were Parkers and now your Ithaca......L.C. Smith gave her a very fancy gold inlaid double 20.....with her name, facial likeness engraved on the side locks.....this gun was way out there.......but again, it was "free"......she actually sold it later which upset Hunter Arms Co.......to say the least..... A picture of this gun in it's full glory is available to view in the Col. Brophy, LC Smith book-bible......

Regards,

i believe englishmen refer to such guns as 'poacher grade' or bottom of the rung if you will.

Not quite, Jager. Those would be "keepers' guns", I believe. The keepers are the guys who try to catch the poachers.

PA, on her 50th birthday, Annie shot 98/100. How "serious" that was I don't know . . . but it was done with an Ithaca Single Trap. But we've already gotten past the point about plain vs higher grade guns. A plain gun may be just as good mechanically and just as reliable, but to say--for example--that a Parker VH is the equal of an A1 Special . . . certainly not in value, and certainly not in attention to detail, quality of materials used, etc. Note that I'm staying strictly within the "pecking order" of American guns, even from the same maker; not bringing in British guns whatsoever.

You're right.........the more money you throw at it, the more "ginger-bread" you get...........to me, there is a "very" fine line between enhanced and GAUDY......just my opinion and taste.......the middle eastern oil tycoons like everything gold plated and no space without engraving....and like some others around the world, they have enough to pay someone else to CARRY IT as well...??!!??.....Whatever floats your boat I guess.......do you like whitewall tires or not......take your pick......

Bye the way...it could not have been too serious if she missed two.....Annies ability was 100/100 consistently......maybe she was not used to the Ithaca ?? Probably just her birthday party ??.................

Regards,

Pretty much every American gun is the same inside from one grade to the next. A Parker VHE is all the gun the company ever built it just doesn't have all the window dressing. I shoot Parkers almost strickly and wouldn't have it any other way, but that is the truth.

DLH

what is the point of owning stevens 311? quite recently i had a choice between ole' model 12 25" 20ga in 60% conditon and nearly new 311 of same gauge, but the double was over $100 more. i mean the thing is worse handling then a good pump gun.

Using the book "Buffalo Bill's Wild West an American Legend" by R.L. Wilson and Greg Martin, as a reference, If you look at page 131 you will see that Annie was capable of having a very off day.
At Charles Lancaster's private grounds (in London), while shooting at Blue Rock pigeons she hit 5 out of 20. Here is a quote from her about the experience:

"I shot with an American gun all bedecked with gold, showing a gold figure of myself in the guard. The gun was about a three inch drop, not bad at that early date for a target gun, but for those little blue streaks of birds that made for the high stone wall like greased lightning-never.

After I shot at a string of 24 I could have been led home easily by a lingerie robbon."

Soon after she had Lancaster make her a new side by side, six pounds of weight , made to her measurements. She characterized the gun "perfection".

Annie had many guns, American and English, for different uses.

Lots of people have talked about British vs. American guns. Why doesn't someone put them in context. Compare the prices of the guns here in the US on a certain year. Try 1885 or 1900 or 1910 or the years after the war. That should give us a better basis on which to judge.

The Stevens 311 was the first disposable shotgun. It was in fact the Bic of its day. You bought one never cleaned it or did any maintenance whatsoever and shot it till it quit then went out and bought another one. That's why finding a 311 in very good condition today is such a rarity.
Jim

Jim, I understand your humour about the disposable shotgun. Where I was raised , in Iowa on the farm, we did not have expensive anything. Everything we bought was "used" a lot. It is hard to find a higher grade gun there, but in New York, or California, or Michigan or Pennsylvania there were higher grade guns. I put a Stevens 375 on the For Sale section of this website, but people do not apparently know what a fine gun Stevens made. In 1885 there were British guns sold over here that were , maybe a tenth, the cost of an American one. Of course they were not the best the Brits had to offer.

Wallis.........you just proved my point.......WHEN SHE SHOT ANYTHING OTHER THAN HER 'EVERYDAY' GUNS, SHE HAD AN OFF DAY.....especially NEW and Different/strange guns, but when she shot her show guns, which were plain Janes....she seldom missed.........in your own book quote here, she is discussing the engraving, inlays and such as being a nuisance........just like most of us, let the birds fly with a strange gun and it takes one a while to get used to it.....so there will be misses at first....as famous as she was, they publicized everything....just like today..............

Thanks for confirming this fact....

Regards,

Well can we disagree without being too disageable - for my money a good French or German SxS is hard to beat, and durable too.

I only own one fair to middlin quality American SxS - a Remington 1882 - it ain't put together half bad.

I am not aware of which plain shotguns exactly Annie Oakley used in the shows or competition. Once again, she owned and used- many guns.I would be very interested to know what sources you are relying on so that I may become better educated on Annie Oakley as she is a hero of mine (and my daughters).

I do, however, have another quote from her in a article she wrote in 1893 (page 134-- same book as before):

"For field shooting I use a light hammerless 20 gauge double gun of the best make. Nobody should trust their lives behind a cheap gun--one costing less than one hundred dollars. I use the nitro powders, and have never considered them dangerous. They are all right if the shells are correctly loaded."

I assume she is referring to one of the pair of Lancaster 20 gauges she had made in England.

I personally have no real preference between British or American guns, plain or fancy (although I have always had a soft spot for Parkers). I just love a well made gun regardless of which side of the pond it came from.


The information I have on Annie Oakley is mainly from the R.L. Wilson book and her 1927 biography by Courtney Riley Cooper. I also have been a member of the Cody Firearms Museum for many years and receive their publications which sometimes have articles on Annie Oakley. Can you point me in another direction that would have more correct information?

Daryl:
This was part of growing up poor or frugal whichever you prefer in the Mid West. My friends were all farm boys and we hunted with whatever was available and had a ball doing it.
I scraped together $140,saving for months, as I remember it to buy a Sterlingworth in 1966 and felt like I had the finest shotgun available. No one looked down their noses at Stevens 311s at that time and they were considered a very desireable gun. The thought of owning an imported British gun of any grade was totally alien to all of us. How times have changed.
Jim

And Teddy's favourite was his "big stick"..a Holland double

that's "billionaire boys club" toy. if you're willin' to settle for poor neighbors one can buy a small house and few acres of land for what a new one costs.

Italian makes a good point.

For many of us during our teenage years a Stevens 311, Savage Fox, or dad's Ithica box lock were great guns! As we grew older and could afford more some of us began to appreciate better quality American guns (nothing against an Ithica). For me, my taste in SxS's broadens a little every year. While I presently do not own a British game gun I have come to appreciate them. When the right one comes along it will be mine. The Brit will then reside in my safe bteween my Parkers and LC Smiths.

A Stevens 311 was my dream gun as an Iowa kid. (By then, it was just about the only American double still being made!) But I did want to upgrade from the Stevens .410 single I'd inherited from my older brother, so I saved the money I made pumping gas. I was all set to buy a new 311 when my dad found me a better deal: Savage 420 OU 20ga. Cost me $65 with a pretty nice soft case. That was my first double. Bought a twin to that one not long ago out of pure nostalgia. I discovered that pure nostalgia only goes so far, and the darned thing still handles like a fencepost.

There might've been nicer sxs around on the used racks when I was a kid, but I'm like Daryl--I sure don't remember them, and there were at least 3 pretty well-stocked gunshops where I grew up. The guns I remember as high dollar doubles from those days were the Browning Superposeds.

We should probably start a 'Little Sure Shot' thread, but this is in Akehurst. She took instructions from H.A.A. Thorn, proprietor of Charles Lancaster when Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show visited England in 1887 and later wrote "Since using your guns, and receiving a few lessons from you at your splendid private shooting grounds, my shooting in the field has so much improved that I now always make a good score, even at fast and difficult birds. With many thanks for the pains you have taken in making me such perfect fitting and fine shooting guns."

Here she is late in life with a couple of her Parkers

I was given a Stevens Model 94 single at age 13 -- hoping to move up to a 311 someday. The Model 94 now has the "slackum" finish discussed on this board -- no kidding. Had to try it on something. Maybe the difference between American production doubles and the Birmingham boxlocks is that the Americans had to compete pricewise with very good repeaters, plus they were more creative than simply building the same Anson and Deeley gun with parts all sourced from the same place. In a way this has made the American double collecting world a lot more interesting.

Curious about book title. About the Nile? Visiting the Falls?
Thanks
K.

By the late 1860's the materials, designs, and craftsmanship were available to make robust guns, guns that would endure long chronological time spans and endure many, many cycles of the action. A very pedestrian boxlock can be expected to give prolonged service if it is well maintained, not abused, and meets with no misfortune. For all guns, there is a certain element of "luck of the draw" for wear and breakage of parts. There was probably a lack of durability in the extra cheap JABC and bottom end USA made guns. I don't know of a Brit made conterpart to these.

I have very little concern over the reliability of most any gun. The parts that are likely to wear of break are easy enough to fix. If I correctly determine the current condition of a gun, then I should discount it sufficinetly to be able to afford to repair it when something wears out.

All collectables , guns included, are subject to pricing according to scarcity and desirability. Very few top grade guns were made in America. Many, many Americans want them, for whatever reason. Ergo, the price is way out of line with natural utility; the gun may well be worth the price as a collector's piece, but not as a shooter. Birmingham boxlocks are plentiful relative to the number of people who want them. Their price relatively low. I don't know of a single collector who runs a rest home for tired old Burmmies. There are a lot of collectors who run "museums" of high original quality guns.

Getting in a snit over American vs British guns is a waste of good snits. They simply are not comparable; they are shot and collected for differing reasons.

Rocketman, I love the phrase "is a waste of good snits". Best comment so far, I think.

The 'snit' is over the needlessly arrogant denigration and condescension. A simple "I exagerated a bit as part of jounalistic hyperbole" would likely resolve things. This isn't about what Dig thinks about LC Smiths.

I thought Roosevelt's big stick was a .405 Winchester?

Yes, exactly what irks, and easily unirked.

I don't know if I should tell you Kerryman being that these books are out of print and I'm competing with everyone on the planet for the few remaining and readable copies!!!
Do I really need any more competition!!!
Teddy loved his Winchester but who doesn't love a Winchester!! However, when going after the most dangerous of animals he used the big Holland & Holland like any sane man would!!

Kerryman, my good man, a book I do have in my grimy mitts, I finally won an auction, was written by R Gordon Cumming, who went to Africa with a Dickson two groove, a James Purdey and a William Moore in 1847.
Regrettably both the William Moore and the John Dickson blew up after months of hard use. He had to finish up his work using his Purdey, even though the Purdey was used as hard or even harder than the other two, as he puts it "a faithful friend that has saved my life on many occasions from charging brutes"!!!
Let the others talk of shooting a bunch of stupid glass balls and clay targets!!!

577-bore express by M. Galand would have been just as effective.

I didn't realize Mr. Galand was chambering rifles in the 577 express in 1847.

GregSY, here are some quotes from T Roosevelt's journal concerning his trip to Africa,
"Roosevelt wrote to Kermit “I think I shall get a double-barreled .450 cordite… It is no child’s play going after lion, elephant, rhino and buffalo.” Perhaps acting on this knowledge, this rifle was built in 1908, and in January 1909 Edward North Buxton, a personal friend of Roosevelt and a well-known hunter, together with a group of 55 British zoologists and sporting enthusiasts, presented the rifle as a gift. In a note of thanks to Buxton, Roosevelt called the rifle “a perfect beauty. The workmanship is like that of a watch…I cannot say how delighted I am with it.”
Kermit Roosevelt recalled “it shoots very accurately, but of course the recoil is tremendous....so severe that it became a standing joke as to whether we did not fear it more than a charging elephant!” This monster of a rifle later acquired the unofficial nickname of “The Big Stick,” derived from Roosevelt’s famous quotation “speak softly and carry a big stick,” itself from a West African proverb."

The reference to no child's play reminds me of shoulder-fired rockets. It's not something they did every day and all that mattered was results.

Sounds very much like the stopping (more accurately,stomping)double rifle competition at the Vintage Cup. Quality of the day is judged by pain suffered during dinner. "Not tonight, dear, I'M the one with a headache!"

I think he exaggerated the recoil thing a bit !! Guys, don't you think this has all got a bit out of hand. Dig was perhaps using a bit of journalistic licence but all journos do that, they wouldn'y catch anyones attention otherwise. As Capstick said and I paraphrase from memory, "All journalists have to make a living and if some chap wants to write an article about how any solids other than those from a .470 or bigger just bounce off a Cape Buffalo like soggy lima beans then I'm not going to complain; only if he expects me to believe it will I have a problem". All said as a chap earlier mentioned they are different things, you don't buy an Astom Martin to plough a field,
best
Mike

Right on the money Destry- I traded a Parker SC 34" SBT and took a plain old non-engraved M12 Pigeon and some cash to boot (OK- the little birdie is "engraved" on the magazine extension by the sn)12 gauge Trap Gun mfg in 1948-solid red pad- "Olde Milled Rib" 30 inch Imp Mod. barrel of WPS-- That Parker had some fancy-schmancy engraving, some numbnutz had replaced the original factory pad or plate with a God-Awful Morgan adjustable pad, built up the cheek with an add-on check piece to resemble a "Monte Carlo"- thought that was a Chevy- like an IROC Camaro-had an Orre choke and a release trigger- if that Parker had a top tang safety, they would have most likely "boogered" that up too. As an old timer once said "All them chicken scratchings on the metal don't break you targets, Sonny"..

What is all the hype about barrel steel grades in Parkers- If I bought a CHE 12 in 1922, and my hunting pal bought a VHE 12 the same year, are my barrels "proofed" to a higher standard than those on his "Olde Reliable" just because I had deeper pockets and wanted a "better" gun. Utter rubbish-and I can't swing a Model 21 in this economy (whom of us can?) but at least those great doubles were all made from WPS-no variation that I know of.

RWTF, the proof on your Parker would have been the same, but the steel may well have been different. In fact, I think Parker used a whole bunch of different names for the steel in their barrels (as did LC Smith). Those names may not always have represented different barrel steels, but I think it's safe to say that the Vulcan Steel used on a VH was not the same as the Whitworth Steel on an AAH.

Thanks Treblig for the Cumming reference - I guessed wrong, I thought it could have been Frederick Barber.

FWIW, on the "big gun" - from my archive :-

" ............We got much pleasure from the visit of the Bakers in 1881......He was well over sixty, but it was easy to relate to that herculean frame the tales of his dominance twenty yars earlier, and the awe he had inspired in the lands of the Senoussi.......Baker used a heavy .577 Express with an unusually heavy charge, and he was still a very fine shot. But it required a man of his weight to stand the recoil of “Baker’s Baby.” I killed a wapiti with “Baby” and the recoil shook every bone in my body. "

Location of meeting was Wyoming.
Rs
K.

Somehow, English guns seem to equate to Purdey when these types of discussions come up. Strange. There are so many other guns to talk about. English (and the rest of Great Britain) guns have a diversity that American guns can't touch. As for quality and value, I think the English win hands down at most price points. Look at some recently offered Sterlingworths vs better English boxlocks at slightly more than half the money.

I keep looking for the right American double, and I keep finding they are much too expensive for what they are. That others think they are worth so much is fine. My money isn't going there. Perhaps my opinions are colored by being a user, not a collector.

Fun to see this old thread come up again. Some of the original posters here are now gone, sadly.

Not all will agree with me but besides a small bore Fox, I have a hard time justifying either the cost or the gun with most American makes. The other exception I have are Remington 1894. As finely made as a Parker with a classic A&D design. Too bad most you run across have been rode hard and put away wet.

I focus on Continental guns and British. And as far as value for gun goes, the Continental are typically better value than the British options.

Now, if I was "collecting" guns and looking for appreciation, that would be a different story.

As Lloyd says, many or several of the previous posters are gone. However, this is the most educational threads on double shotguns we have ever experienced. I have some points to make on gun quality and gun handling that I will post when I have time.

One point I will make on gun handling is that a bird gun is not a pigeon gun, end of story. Light British game guns at 6 1/2 pounds are wonderful for what they were intended. Slightly heavier British pigeon guns are a bit more to handle and weigh about 7 1/4 pounds. American pigeon guns are even more to handle at about 7 3/4 pounds, 8 pounds or less according to turn of the 20th century rules. A man of good physical condition can handle any of them without any problem, again, end of story. I like a good light British or American game gun for general shooting at birds or clays, and do well with them. However, an eight pound 30" 12 gauge also feels like a wand under the same conditions. I have, in my lap, a 7 pound, 15 ounce Parker, that Annie Oakley shot in the 1902, last Grand American at Live Birds, and would choose that gun for any competition at birds or clays that were more than 30 yards from me when released or flushed. I would choose a common game gun of lighter weight if the birds were closer or faster. One point that I am making is that any shooter in good physical condition can handle a 6 1/2 pound or 8 pound gun with equal comfort and skill as long as the stock fit is proper. Annie's Parker pigeon gun, which I don't think is a great fit for me, is factory built at Parker Brothers to her exact dimensions, to the sixteenth of an inch, per Parker factory letter, as fitted by Lancaster. However, it is a hoot to shoot, because of its historical provenance, regardless of poor fit, as mentioned by previous posters when discussing collectors of American guns. Yes, we collectors of American guns are an emotional bunch, even though the guns are junk.

As a younger relatively fit man, I fully notice that extra pound in the field when I am hoofing it for 3-4 hours at a clip. For that reason, I really prefer a 6 3/4 pound gun to a 7 1/2 pound gun under those circumstances. I agree at clays, there is no material difference.

Learned a long time ago that talking someone else’s gun down was not of much value.

Be it a Stevens 20ga SXS or a Purdey if the shooter handles it well it is a good gun for them.

Most if not all of us here like SXS guns. I know I do.

I am not a collector, what I own I intend to use. Which is why when looking at vintage guns I care more for condition of barrels and other mechanics than beauty of engraving or figure in the wood.

It is why I value a 1901 Boss SLE with new barrels in 1979 and .030 + wall thickness more than original condition.024 walls. I mean to shoot what I buy and maybe my grandson will too.

Putting a custom stock, which may not have great figure, but fits me perfectly makes it a dream gun.

I like figure in the wood and pretty engraving, but before that shootability is fundamental.

There are many high end guns that are seriously worn, but usable for another lifetime of some but not heavy shooting. It is really a trade off which comes down to the question is it worth it to you?

I know that each of us bring biases in terms of what we value, that said I argue for a positive spin.

DanS.W., I appreciate your post and your points, but you must realize that we, as wealthy shotgun enthusiasts, can own more than one gun. I don't take my pigeon guns into the grouse woods and don't take my grouse guns to the pigeon ring.

My pigeon gun looks a lot like a Remington 1100. My grouse gun looks like a Darne V19.

I like Don King’s definition of wealth. “ If you can count your money, you ain’t got none”.

Best,
Ted

My wife only allows two, which I concede reasonably keeps me out of financial and storage risk. I have usually split them between a modern stack barrel and a sleek English side by side, but somehow I always end up dumping the stack barrel and buying another side by side...

Your portfolio needs more diversification

I think I had two gun safes, mostly full when I met my wife. Both completely full+, now.

Not sure I grasp “allows” from my vantage point. But, whatever works.

O/Us are hard to beat, by the way.

Best,
Ted

My mother in law buys my shooting sportsman subscription every year and my wife encourages my shotgun habit,which I blame on her mother. I think one of my first 2 wives tried the allowed thingy. You only live once! You can always sell the ones your not crazy about anymore (I’m talking about the guns now).

I am actually not much of a collector by habit - I buy, interest wanes, then sell. No regrets about any past liquidations. They took me from an LC Smith, through a couple of boxlocks, a Parker, up to owning my current two "best" off-brand SLE's. A number of intervening stack barrels as well, along with hobby cars and motorcycles. I guess I have owned more than a safe-full, but I don't yearn for any of the ones that moved down the road.

The thing I am really lusting after at the moment is vintage Datsuns, or muscles cars, not really sure...just depends on the day I guess. Probably helps that the garage is closer than a sporting clays course as well.

I had three 240Z back in the day. A ‘71, a ‘72 and a ‘73. An almost perfect car.

Canvasback, that is exactly what I have been looking at, early Z's. Unfortunately, they are unit-body cars that are incredibly prone to rusting. Other than that, hard to beat in aesthetics and relative handling characteristics. Much like an English SLE:)

XK-140MC

LOL, all three of mine eventually just broke apart from rust. I owned them in the period 1976 through 1983 and for most of the time didn't have the cash to properly repair them from the ravages of rust. It's a bit shocking when you consider that they sold over 50,000 units a year of 240Z in North America and by the mid 1990's you hardly ever saw one. All gone to rust. I've owned and driven a bunch of interesting cars, but those early Z cars were in a class by themselves at the time.

In a way it reminds me of what Sir William Lyons was attempting to do with the Jaguar E-type in 1963. His stated goal was to outperform Ferrari in every way......looks and performance.....with a car costing 1/3 of the price. And he succeeded. Datsun/Nissan created a car that looked and performed like cars costing multiples of it's list price. But something had to give.

My son recently (last month) received a 1976 Triumph TR6 for his 18th birthday and high school graduation. That particular choice of car wasn't my idea. But as soon as I dug into it, I was reminded of what a pleasure it was to tinker with the 240Z and why I have a major distrust of any car maker who made a deal with the Prince of Darkness.

As an aside, the 4 cars I've owned that stand head and shoulders about the rest for enjoyment of one sort or another were:
1971 Datsun 240Z 2.4 litre straight six
1967 Camaro RS/SS 350 Convertible
1972 de Tomaso Pantera 351 Cleveland
1963 Volvo 544 2 sedan with B18 engine

Lucasifer.

These are all excellent vehicles and in-line with what I am currently considering. It is just finding the best deal on the least disastrous example. Whether that will be a 240/260/280Z, an AMX, a first gen firebird/camaro, or a falcon sprint is anyone's guess. I am particularly jealous of the Pantera and wish your son the best of luck with the TR6!

My first love, in a car, was my '56 Chevy two-door 210 sedan, bought when I was 17. Repainted, re-upholstered, carpeted, new headliner and custom hubcaps, with longer rear spring shackles, and glasspacks, it was quite a clean (loud) street machine. Guys loved it. My heart throb hated it, so I dated her often in my Dad's 98 Olds. Next came a new '69 Camaro SS 350/300, Aztec Gold with black hockey puck side stripes and trunk lid spoiler. Girl friend liked it much better. Married her in Nov. '71. In the "family way" by the spring of '73, she'd have to drive 50 miles to her gynecologist during the hot summer months of that year for check-ups and the "Cameo" had no a/c, so wifey lost any love for it, too. First son born that October. Cameo was traded off for a (lowered compression) '73 Chevelle Laguna S3 eventually, but hey, it had a/c and it was quiet!

I could care less what happened to that '73 Chevelle, but I miss the '56 Chevy and the '69 Camaro SS every day of my life. Wife and I have made it in marriage for 51 years. Looking back, I made the right decisions ......... but I DO miss those two cars.

Stan, my '67 Camaro RS/SS was also Aztec Gold. No spoiler though the roof did come down. My girlfriend at the time didn't think much of it until I stopped one day at a store in a strip mall. This was about 1980 and a nice summer day so the roof was down. Ran in to pick something up while she waited in the car. When I came out the car was surrounded by about 5-6 guys but they were ogling the car, not my girlfriend. When we drove away she said " I still don't get the car but I guess you know what you are doing.....those guys wouldn't stop asking me questions about this stupid car!" LOL I think she was a bit peeved she wasn't the object of admiration.

I would encourage you to hold out for a 240Z, and not go for the 260 and especially not the 280Z. My brother had one......they were lost by that point. If I was getting one it would only be a 70-72. Emission controls and safety standards started to take their toll in 1973 and it just got worse from there. Every year, slower and heavier. But thew early ones....wow.....they fit like the proverbial glove. I wore those cars, I didn't drive them.

When the latest generation Camaro was introduced in 2010, design based on the '69, I stopped by a showroom and picked up the brochures on it. Kept them for 11 years. Fast forward. My grandson bought a low mileage, one owner 2010 Camaro SS with roughly 405 hp. He has become obsessed with learning all about Camaro history and what can be done with these new ones to make them faster. He is OCD about the car. He won't even drive it if it's raining, the roads are wet, or the destination is off the pavement. Last year he was here at our house for CHRISTmas and when he left I remembered my brochures. I told him to wait a minute until I came back. I handed them to him, telling him how long I'd had them, and that they were his now. He was speechless, but finally recovered and said he'd keep them forever.

I love this stuff.

The line has evolved from Diggory to motor sports. I'll share with you all a cure to addiction. "Do not love what cannot love you back."

Many years ago I bought the fastest 1953 DBD-34 BSA Gold Star 500 single in North Carolina and took it to Alabama before going to Vietnam the first time. Over the next few years I put it back in order with a competition clutch, new racing magneto, everything...even spraying off the mud from the NC dirt tracks. There came a point with parent's garage filled with DBD-34 frames and spare parts that enough was enough. I got rid of all of it (trading it for a Norton Commando in pristine condition in disassembled form in boxes) and never again embarked on the nostalgic.



I drove my CJ-7 for 25 years all over India, Pakistan, Greece, the Balkans, Italy, France. My kids grew up in the back seat. The a/c never worked and we travelled with open windows in Crete stopping at road sides to get drinks. I elected not to do the work myself to restore it in 2014 and sold it to a former Marine who had two young kids that wanted to do fix it (though it was still running well...with bits of rust here and there). Basically though it was a rolling death trap with no airbags etc. (the Decals on the back window are code. if deciphered you are truly a historian)



You guys do your 1970's thing. Been there, done that.. and outside of shotguns that I can shoot, I welcome modernity. Just bought myself a new Wrangler JL Willys...back to the good old days. Except I don't have to spend $800 year in maintenance. And Jeep has finally fixed that crappy transmission after 14 years. (To demonstrate how close this one is to the CJ...wife, first time in the jeep, reached over to roll down the window. That showed we were close to nostalgia).