I'm not a gun maker or an engineer but I'm curious, after a recent thread, as to what really is handmade? My opinion is that a gun that is mostly made using machine work is not "hand made". Doing some final fitting of barrel assembly to breech, hand polishing some internal parts that were made by investment casting or by the thousands, on a CNC machine and custom stock dimensions do not qualify as "hand-made". "Hand-made" gives me visions of shaping the breech from a block of steel, using a hand drill, a hacksaw and a bench full of files, that would be "hand-made". I don't believe any guns are made this way and haven't been for many moons. What say you?
When I was a kid (about 12 or 13 years old) I made a single shot 12 gauge shotgun by carving a stock out of a 2X6, a barrel out of a piece of cast iron plumbing pipe, a breach out of a threaded pipe coupling (filled about 3/4 of the way with lead and then drilled down the center for the firing pin), a rounded off nail for a firing pin, a piece of bar stock for a hammer, and rubber bands for a firing spring. I guess you could call that a "hand-made" gun. The only thing that saved my sorry butt was the shells actually caught on a lip when loading, the inside diameter was more like a 10 gauge. When the shell would discharge the case would split and there was sufficient blow-by past the shot that it kept the pressure down enough to keep it from blowing up.
I guess I'm living proof that God proects fools and small children (or foolish small children!)
But you'll have to agree it was definitely hand-made.
Steve
Most expensive stuff out there is "hand finished", but there are some rustic CONTINENTAL shops out there making them the old way.
Their annual output is usually 10-20 guns,
I could name some shops, but I will let others do that for you.
I guess then that Holland and Hollands are no longer hand made then because they use CNC!
To me hand made means:- if the action and barrels are finally shaped and struck off by HAND, the ribs HAND soldered, the engraving is HAND done, the stocking HAND fitted and shaped, the balance HAND done, polishing hand done etc etc that is hand made.
If a manufacturer choses to make the initial shape of the action or barrels by maching this is good commercial sense, the slave trade died out years ago, whats the point having some poor soul chipping and filing away for 7 days at a lump of steel when a machine can do it in 7 minutes... the devil is in the finish and the final attention to hand detail.
Jonty
If you really want to push the issue, using any tool - hacksaws and files included - precludes a gun from being hand made. Sure, hacksaw is powered by hand but those sharp little teeth on the blade are pure machinery.
A CNC machined gun is not hand made, one that was made on a manual machine tool is much closer. Look at a gun made in 1910 using some very rudimentary machine tools - producing a part on those machines required a great deal of human intervention and skill.
I read that it takes 700 hours to make SLE 'Royal' at Holland and Holland Hof.
Double rifles take a bit longer to make. Now, that is understandable, since you have to fit swivels, express sight/q-rib,...... plus half a day at the range for regulation (using 'match grade' custom ammo like Superior Ammo, or it could take a good deal longer with that "generic crap").
Some best guns are indeed still totally hand made. Charles Hellis now make small quantities of sxs and over/under guns without use of CNC machinery.
However, most producers now use CNC to a degree, some more than others.
A hand-made gun as you describe is really a 'bespoke' gun. A 'one off' made to the order of the individual. This will involve barrels that are bored by a man with a barrel boring tool. He will strike it up by hand. The action may or may not be from a CNC cut block but the final filing and fitting is done by an actioner with a file (as Edgar Harrison once said "it is the last cut that counts", (not the first).
Fitting of action to barrels will be done by hand, Fitting of stock to action will be done by hand. Shaping of the stock will be done by hand and finishing and engraving will be done by hand.
The gun will then be regulated by a person and this will be done at the pattern plate and adjustment done by hand.Triggers, furniture and rib-laying will be done by hand.
Regulation of triggers and ejectors will also be done by hand.
A gun made from interchangeable parts in a factory, largely by automated machinery and then given a bit of polish and engraving that makes it look nicer than the basic version is not the real MacCoy.
One small point - I like hand-made springs. I think spring making is an art in danger of imminent death - a spark eroded spring is not the same thing and who will fix all our old guns when the only way anyone can make springs is on machinery and the machines are only set-up to make the springs of the common, current production models?
I don't believe that it really matters how much is hand made and how much is done by machine. What matters is the end result. Really nothing is completely hand made since the stone age. And if you want to split hairs probably not even then. The only reason they used a hanmmer and chisel 100 years ago is because they didn't have a machine that was capable and now we do. It still took a great deal of knowledge and talent to make the machine and program it to do the job. The more proficient the manufacturers are with their machinery the more high quality guns we will all be able to afford. So not much is truly "hand made" any more and that is not bad its progress.
BTW Steve, I think you could go to prison for that post but I will agree it is hand made.
Jim,
Did you get the 1938 American Rifleman article I sent? Even in the good ol' days machines were quite heavily used.
Of course that article was about an American made gun, not a "hand made best".
Some best guns are indeed still totally hand made.
Dig, I don't understand how that could be. Barrels are turned in lathes, recievers machined in mills, etc. The lack of use of CNC doesn't mean a machine wasn't used.
I think Jim's post was to make a point that guns haven't been "hand made" since the mill and lathe were invented. I worked on some sophisticated fighter planes many years ago, running non-CNC mills and lathes, the parts were often hand fitted and assembled. That didn't make the planes "hand made" IMO. I think the term "hand made" is now used to refer to a well made product even if the methods of manufacture are unknown or there is some hand work involved. The RBL has hand polished barrels and recievers ( I think the reciever is even hand filed to remove mill marks ) along with a hand sanded and finished stock. Is it "hand made" or machine made? It seems there is no real definition.
I suggest that all modern (for hundreds of years) guns have been machine made to a fairly high degree and hand finished and fitted. How much hand fitting and finishing is really what we are talking about here.
Bill G,
I think the current ATF regulations allow for individuals to make guns for their own use as long as they are not sold. Although Steve may have gotten several orders for that hand made gun.
Chuck,
I'm was thinking more the Patriot Act". Think IED's. That thing sounds like it could explode any time.
Bill G.
Unless you're a cartoon character, it's kind of hand to work that forging with one's fist alone!
I think Mr. Legg is looking for few good shops that make them lock, stock, and barrel using traditional hand tools and "simpler power tools".
Using outsourced continental parts and "polishing" by hand is considered cheating by some purists.
Genady showed us some pics of double rifles that looked pretty special. I believe they're offered for sale by one of the members who operates doublegunheadquarters. Now, these things must be made in one factory, because they're too unique.
Someone at another board asked how long one would last in 460Wby chambering. My response was: judging from it's construction and bulk longer then a Mark V bolt gun!"
Three or four commonly-found interpretatons which may or may not apply to gunmaking but are thought-provoking.
1) freehand application of tool unjigged, untemplated, uncontrolled except by eye and hand, tolerances of assembly of parts terrible to irreproachable but no consistently repeatable, "interchangable" or identical copy produced with relation to a model or blueprint. Does not preclude layout on material, from rudimentary to painstaking. Cut and try accompanied by the old Masonic standards of comparison, i.e. "plumb of truth, square of integrity" etc.
2) applicaton of tool or cutter in a linear or reciprocating manner "by hand"; the operation of most chopping, chiseling, shaving, scraping tools. When linear or reciprocating motion of the human hand and arm is applied to a device (say crank and flywheel) which produces continuous rotary motion in the cutter or material cut (by this standard a treadle or bow lathe and even a carpenter's brace is very much a machine) it's no longer precisely "handwork" in the sense of #1 above no matter how demanding of power by Armstrong. I know there are apparent exceptions for instance metal planer or the big gang or frame saws still used to resaw sandstone. However, most of us, whether we think much about it or not, recognize that the conversion of energy from sources other than human muscle into usable, controllable, and endlessly reiteratable motion in a toolhead (the "drivetrain" so to speak) is the hallmark and bedrock of the industrial revolution. How many gun barrels were ever bored without a crankshaft in the boring rod? Just because it's accomplished in a grimy, ill-lit smithy doesn't make it "handwork".
3) many techniques, skills and processes under the mastery of one mind and one set of hands; the one-man-band, backswoods prodigy idea which is very long-lived and attractive to the individualistically-inclined. As we've seen, wasn't true in Birmingham and probably very little truth to it in any era. Complex processes require complex organization.
4) perhaps most relevant to gunmaking, finishing and fine fitting as in blacking down and polishing, exterior sculpting and surface adornment (checkering, engraving). Whether this work is 90% of the work in a built-by-hand gun, I leave up to you. You can engrave an iron-pipe zipgun, but a highly-organized and specialized industry had to make the pipe.
jack
Lots of interesting responses. Files, hammers, punches, chisels and hacksaws are tools, not machines. I'd probably even include drill presses as tools. After all, they were powered by hand long before electric motors came along. Using milling machines(that's why they're called machines), lathes and other obvious machines for the major part of the work make calling an item "hand made" simply B.S., IMO.
Thank you for your thoughts,
Lathes were powered by hand, or foot, so if you're going to allow a drill press then you have to allow a lathe.
Files, hammer, and punches are tools, but so are machines. That's why they're called machine tools. It seems we've become accustomed to the idea that if something is driven by an electric motor or steam/gas engine that's where we draw the line. Not sure that's an especially meaningful line, but OK.
There is a world of difference between producing a part with manual machine tool and a CNC tool. Those who don't understand the difference have never used the two.
It's much easier to go with something outragously expensive with a famous West London name on a lock plate!
Those Suhl or Ferlach special order 'hand made' ones are best left to those who don't walk like they swallowed a long plank!
JL:
Hand-cranked drill presses and the modern "pocket" version--the "eggbeater" hand drill--also the "big wheel" lathe was likewise human powered. I still don't think the source of power makes the distinction as do controllable motion ("speed and feed")of the toolhead. Devil in detail as always.
jack
The bottom line is, if you walk like you swallowd a long piece of pressure treated lumber and .... truffles, or not at all only London best will do!
A few years ago I read an article in Gun Digest??? how they made firearms in the India , Pakistan area by hand tools. They didn't even have a vise, most of the products were Enfield rifles and such, I don't believe they made many Purdy double rifles. Jim
PaulJ, your Delphic procunciamentos require some thought. Prince Albert could hardly stand up for 10 minutes but Mom bought at A&N. Did his shooting stick contain arsenic? Was he poisoned thereby? Which are the best crutch guns? Please provide further obfuscation at earliest convenience.
jack
Holland & Holland for example is a legendary name. Just ask guy with bad teeth and beer belly at your local gun store! 'Buy the gun not the name' is the opium of the masses. A NEWLY made to order gun from the 'Holy Trinity' of London is the opium of the obscenely wealthy.
I'm told it's often lonely at elevation. Could be.
jack
For most, buying a London Sle made before WWII is the best bet for a handmade gun.
"Buy the gun, and not the name," is the same as, "if you have to ask."
"Buy the gun, and not the name," means your on a budget!
Just remember, a craped-out Purdey, will cost you more than a pristine GE Lewis.
One can do very well by avoiding 'The Trinity' and sticking with older 2nd-hand guns with names like: Atkin, Churchill, Evans,....I would go with SLE from Henry's shop if I wanted one.
"Buy the gun, not the name" means you know the guns well enough to recognize quality irrespective of the name that ended up on the gun. Yeah, it takes more knowledge of the subject than merely being able to recognize a name. Going by name only is for amateurs.
Thats the rationale of the third tier buyers!
Nope, it's the rationale of a wise buyer.
It's the rationale of the "just as good as crowd."
...and we know what that means!
If the gun goes bang and hits the target, everything else is 'self stroking', don't you think? If a fella with a wad of money likes the name, I see no reason to begrudge him, nor the other guy that wants a "just as good...". A wise ... person once said to me; "Don't count anyone else's money". That applies in business as well as pleasure, I think.
Our airplanes are all hand made, no two alike.
Ah, well, some people just aren't intellgent enough to grasp more than the recognition of a name.
Some people think their Sherlockian efforts are above the rest.
OR!
Whatever you have in YOUR cabinet at the time is, just as good as.
Both are just a freeform mind jam!
The so-called "Holy Trinity" is just that, so-called. I would consider an Atkin, Grant, Woodward, and others as being no better or no lesser than H&H, JP&S, B&Co. You can not do any better than perfection, but you can equal it.
I have no doubt that there are some who look down on those shooting a gun made by H&H, JP&S, B&Co as a waste is more about envy than substance.
It's an open secret that we all admire and want a high degree of quality in design, manufacture, and asthetics. To each his own, buy the best quality gun you can afford no matter who made it and never mind what anyone else has is the best advice anyone can give.
Chuck, if the gun only goes bang, why are the All-American classic shooters so impressed with grade?
Never do I hear how the gun handles.....its just it's grade that counts.
Oh, SN too!
I mean, if it's just going to go bang.
Stick to your $39 scopes, thornly!
JL
Its stuck on a very nice Kimber SuperAmerica - thats what counts leggy.
Five thru a crow's eye at fifty five!
Maybe you should lay off the crows for awhile and allow them to drive the owls off. Less beheaded quail maybe?
jack
Whats a few owls to do with it, when there isn't the large tracts of land. They are easy to blame, but its really the cost per acre these days. If not in the family, not many city boys can dig-up that kind of money for quail land.
Thats the hard part.
Bird hunters buy their 2-10k guns, they just don't want to cut lose a million bucks and them some for the land needed.
I knew it was "stuck on your Kimber SuperAmerica". The subject of this thread is "what constitutes a handmade gun", not a review of your lack of class.
Well Lowell, what I was trying to say is; any gun quality or features above its functional necessary characteristics is for the owner's pleasure, not anyone else's. "self stroking" may not have been the most palatable term to use, but it is not inaccurate. I don't think a guy should be thought lessor of for picking one gun or the other for his purchase, but it sounds like you disagree.
Well then Jim, an Edwardian era London sidelock ejector gun - is just the thing. You can bet they're handmade!
Chuck, there are too many who think they can snoot out a lesser gun that equals the better named ones.
In 99.9% of the time, they're making up the rules as they go along.
The English tier system is spot on.....and yet!
I hope you're you almost done? ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
If you don't buy one of those London "Westies", best pull out that wooden plank, and what comes out of the alimentary canal will smell bad to others.
There are some equals out there from very little known makers.
For example, there is a Swede named Hans Englund of Klippan. He used to be one man operation and it took him 700-800 hours to HANDCRAFT SLE double rifle.
Just sold my Noble Arms "torreador" gun. No question there was "handwork" in that one. I don't think a machine can engrave "toucans and fence posts" like those. Unfortunately, the Euskadi also resorted to "hand" hardening of internal parts. Apparently no amount of rubbing will result in reachng the critical temp.
Would you believe bought by a MO dealer in less than a week altho I was clear in the ad that it doubled. He'll notch that hammer bent deep, make it act right til it's out the door, and get his money and then some. That's OK, I did too. ;}
jack
I know where this is going. London-made SLE,.....outdoor wear from Cordings,....footwear from John Lobb Ltd. You know, there is a lovely small "French Villa" about a mile from me on the banks of James River and only $2,000,000, and the closest Anglo driven bird shoot is about 45min away!
The Ironmonger's handmade, and the finely crafted gunmaker's handmade are two different things all together.
Just being handmade means very little.
Stick to your $39 scopes, thornly!
JL
If a gun is totally handmade then no parts should interchange.
L.F.
Hey....wait a minute!
That Cabela's scope was, I think....$52.75 with tax, handling, insurance and shipping!
I luv it!
Instead of a cheap rimfire rifle, I bought a cheap scope.
LG:
As Sean Kelly said to Bobke Roll, "You just ain't gonna quit, are you?" Good on you!
jack
Some of those cheap scopes are truly impressive. Maybe I wouldn't count on one if I was going on safari, but, if I had the inclination to do a "Thorny crow safari" I wouldn't think twice about it. I was reading about an optical factory (far east, of course) that had a production area that wasn't lit, when a machine broke, the repairman had to bring a light to work on the unit. Alas, good guns won't be like that any time soon. I'm sure an accountant somewhere is just sick about it, too.
I saw NO machines in the G. Granger shop in St. Etienne. Three guys at a bench with hand tools. The Bruchet's have a machine that profiles the inside of the barrels, the outside is struck by hand. The only other machine that they used was a small lathe with a jig ('er,I mean, fixture) for drilling the hole for the bolt in the buttstock. They do contract with a guy for rifle cut (spreader) barrels on shotguns, and I think the double rifle barrels are purchased in a finished state on the ID. The action start as round forgings that are delievered with three rough cuts made around each piece. The balance is done by hand.
Best,
Ted
Wow! It's hard for me to imagine how a person could make the internal configurations of a gun frame without a machine like a mill or shaper. Also difficult to imagine taking a big ol bar of steel and filing the external shape of a modern barrel while holding wallthickness consistantly. But my question is why. Why would anyone chose to do these things without the benefit of a machine?
I believe we are living in a period where the relative pinnacle of gunmaking is possible at all levels of economic class or catagory. The blending of technology with traditional work can produce the best "best" ever. The RBL is an example of bringing higher quality to lower price point.
That's a darn good question from the historico/educatonal as well as the advocacy perspective. I can more or less see the increasing metal work as one progresses from bar in wood to sidelock action bar to boxlock but most of what we hear about the "allied crafts" concerns fitting and finishing processes that come well after the how you get those mortises and channels stage. How did they do it? Archimedean drill as in down by the Ganges? Drill a bunch of holes, connect the holes with a small frame saw, break out the waste, clean it all up to the line with floats and files? Does the bar-action sidelock action really pre-date all but the most rudimentary machining. Which ones? When? What does a blind hole like the "box" of a sidelock mean? What developments in machining made it possible? Go ahead, educate me.
jack
Jack,
I dunno jack about the history of machine tools, but I poked around the net and found some stuff. I have only crossed checked these claims in a few other websites and make no claim to their accuracy.
It seems Eli Whitney (US)is often credited for having invented the modern milling machine in 1818. In the same year, Thomas Blanchard (US)(of Blanchard grinder fame?) was said to have invented a duplicating machine for gunstocks. Joey Whitworth (UK) suggested standardized screw threads in 1830. Henry Maudslay (UK) was credited with inventing the first engine lathe (metal working lathe) in 1797 (although it is well known that woodworking lathes existed prior to this for an indeterminent time and clockmakers were developing metal lathes) and also an improved micrometer in the same year. Johnny Wilkenson (UK)was said to have invented the horizontal boring mill to allow cylinders of steam engine blocks to be bored accurately.
Even with the CNC machinery today, some hand finishing is still required. But rather than using the term "hand made" one should be using the term "hand fitted" or "hand finished". This refers to the era when everything wasn't done by computer. Stamping out parts on the Winchesters and Brownings during the during the 60s are a good example. The period when more parts were made and fit by hand instead of the burnt on checkering that is done today instead of hand checkering and hand engraving. Who wants to pick their engraving from a catalog that is going to be exactly done on thousands of other S&Ws? This is why so many new guns today need to be stoned to get a better trigger. Most of the time you can hear and feel the sound of an older gun tossing out the empties or the sound of the firing pins. Much like the difference of a nice leather basketball as opposed to the sound of a cheap beach ball sound of a cheaper one. It's the difference of closing your eyes and putting an $8,000.00 Ljutic trap gun to your shoulder as compared to a $1500.00 Browning. You can hear and feel the difference. Or some can.
A true handmade gun is liken to an original painting. An RBL would be more like a signed print.
LF
"It's the difference of closing your eyes and putting an $8,000.00 Ljutic trap gun to your shoulder as compared to a $1500.00 Browning. You can hear and feel the difference."
Sorry but I can't hear or feel a $6500 difference.
LF
I can also feel and see the difference when I shoulder my Browning Custom hand-built Superposed compared to a budget Ljutcic...
teee heeeee, sorry couldn't resist that ;-)
Wow! It's hard for me to imagine how a person could make the internal configurations of a gun frame without a machine like a mill or shaper. Also difficult to imagine taking a big ol bar of steel and filing the external shape of a modern barrel while holding wallthickness consistantly. But my question is why. Why would anyone chose to do these things without the benefit of a machine?
I believe we are living in a period where the relative pinnacle of gunmaking is possible at all levels of economic class or catagory. The blending of technology with traditional work can produce the best "best" ever. The RBL is an example of bringing higher quality to lower price point.
I agree with Chuck Why?????
In 1962 we did not have CNC machines to make special tooling such as cams, so we use a Jig boring machine to cut the general
outline of the cam and finish it with a file. this took many hours of hand work. today I can use my computer to design whatever shape I need, write a program, and machine it to a correct size on my CNC and be done with it in a fraction of the time.
Why should I not do that.
Casey
Should have said "box of a boxlock" above. Not that it matters much now we're throwing money in each other's faces. Chuck's chronology of invention in the early 19th C appears to support Jim L's speculation and Jimmy W's terminology. Admittedly, invention does not always receive instant widespread adoption. Ginning millions of pounds of cotton and the way they built a couple of guns down at Purdys may be two quite different things for all I know.
jack
You boys better hope there's a value-for-dollar correlation of fit and finish found in your high-end guns. Maybe we should have a "perceived quality" thread. No Newtonian slapdown for that one, eh Jim? I'm told that you can buy everything you need for performance and durability in a $1500 racing bicycle. You can get one for 4-6K now without big increments of increase in performance--matter of refinement and attention to detail where it doesn't really count as well as where it does. Course that's a .01 of a second game in competition so itty-bits count. If you close your gun and it clicks like a miser's purse, will you get more birds? There are diminishing returns of utility for outlay as the price goes up. Whatever the past necessity of doing things the hard way, "handmade, handworked, and handfinished" are today principally a scorekeeper for big money.
jack
I stumbled on this website that has some history of gunmaking picking up in Gardone several centuries ago and progressing forward.
http://www.nowpublishers.com/product.aspx?product=TOM&doi=0200000001§ion=ch01
Thanks, Chuck. Seen a lot of the stuff and the progression in Holtzapffel which I have. Comparison of the English and American branches of the Industrial Revolution very revealing of our culture-based biases about what constitutes "quality". Take a closer look this afternoon.
jack
A typical reason that intensive hand labor persists, long after it "shouldn't," is the high cost of mechanization / automation. IMO / IME this is a major reason that W-W didn't make it -- or perhaps a major symptom because ineffective management is arguably the root cause. I was in the W-W plant in the mid '70s and was astonished by the antiquated equipment and methods that were still in use.
Timely capital investment is required to remain competitive in manufacturing, but labor pressures and / or the desire to maximize current profits often delay it. A slippery slope develops -- as the firm becomes less competitive, profits fall and soon it becomes very difficult to raise the needed capital.
When I went to Eibar in 1981, the absence of machine tools in the shops of the "Spanish best" I visited was another jaw-dropping experience. It's a pretty tight community and left the distinct impression that these firms typically provide a basic livelihood to more families than one would expect possible, as the firms themselves work to survive.
I think the Fabbris continue to set the standard in optimally making the best guns. They use some of the best CNC-controlled machine tools available, and had almost finished developing a top-level DNC (distributive numerical control) system when I was there in 1984. (That was just a few years after the technology had been pioneered for and by the US aerospace industry.)
Fabbri's point is a very good one: They consistently maintain tolerances literally impossible by hand, then use skilled hands to do what only they can accomplish -- fine finishing and fitting, to the last few ten-thousandths of an inch in most cases.
Hang the cost and diminishing returns, I just want my gun to be perfect ;-}
Jonty
Outstanding, Chuck -- THANK YOU!
Fred:
I guess a lot of individual setups milled the m12 receiver and continued to do so until. . . Humour it with a couple whacks of the ball peen and good to go for another 40,000. Actually I don't see a hell of a lot of difference between turret tooling and punch cards and the same thing with computer numeric. Different guy holding the ball peen?
jack
Jack,
I was raised on conventional (non-numeric controlled)machines. The punched paper tape and plastic tape were the main NC machines of my machining days. When I was getting out of the biz, CNC and later DNC were becoming common. A primary advantage of these machines is their ability to do very complex tool paths. Another big advantage is the ability to repetitively produce close relatively tolerances. I say relatively because the machine is only as capable as the operator/setup man/programmer. Cutting tool flex, fixture rigidity, and the programmer's ability is always key and don't forget machine condition/maintenance. One of the first machines I ran in a leading aerospace company in 1974 had a tag on it from the U.S. Army dating as far back as 1931. It was loose as a long neck goose and you had to hold your tongue just right to get it to make accurate cuts, but it could be done. Later, I ran some machines I think are in that link to the evolution of gun making.
Like I said, some of us can feel and hear the difference and some can't. For those who can't, they make a Mossberg.
Ever consider getting a seeing eYe dog ?
Don't need one. But you sure do.
Good luck.
I've never bought into the English cottage-trade gunmaking industry. The men who actioned Purdeys, and the like, stayed at that level of gun and didn't on odd days make-up a lesser for a pint.
Like anything, some were skilled, and some not so much.
Being handmade is only the beginning.
"It's the difference of closing your eyes and putting an $8,000.00 Ljutic trap gun to your shoulder as compared to a $1500.00 Browning. You can hear and feel the difference."
Sorry but I can't hear or feel a $6500 difference.
LF
I'm still trying to see a $6,500 difference.
We don't know that for sure, Lowell. A guy who actioned in London during the day might be interested in timing a neighbors"Brummie" ejectors over a pint in the evening-what the hell, it is a safe bet the actioner couldn't afford the London gun to begin with, and owned a Brummie himself. Further, I daresay, there is nothing wrong with a set of locks that say "Brazier" on the inside surface, and more than one London gun has proudly worn them.
Best,
Ted
Ya Ted, but you don't deal in twaddle, like this laddie do.
Jimmy and H. Joe:
Do you guys conduct these blind taste tests in stores or you actually have all these toys? If so, could you send me something yummy--Ljutic, Silver Seitz--for a few days so I can get an informed sense of things. Please include workaday Purdy if there's room in the box. Don't sweat the boogzwah stuff; got plenty of that.
jack
Rabbit you get to see and handle alot of guns at my club. Honestly...I don't own either a Ljutic or a Silver Seitz. The screws I have are not loose enough to own either.
L.F.
joe-Obviously, you don't shoot trap either do you? I know you don't. Otherwise, you wouldn't have told me to try it with a low hold in a past post. And yes, I shoot a Ljutic mid rib, rabbit. And I have two (trap) Berettas and a Browning. When you put hundreds of rounds through a gun a week, it pays to have a little better gun. And you can tell the different when you shoot them. Good luck.
JW you are absolutly right. I'm not a Trap shooting jUnkie...If I recall I suggested shooting 'low gun' to break the monotony. Myself I'd rather have fun and break 23 than have to get in a trance to break 25.
I've always womdered if these high priced trap guns were so good why do they sell a 'parts kit' to fix them ?
L.F.
Its all in how the barrels have been struck - all else, is just all else. This imo is what makes up a hand made gun.
Seriously??????
Manufacturers don't sell parts kits for the good trap guns. At least I have never seen Kolar, Seitz, Ljutic, Kreighoff, Perazzi, Beretta or anyone else sell parts kits for their trap guns. But there was an article in Shotgun Sports about five years ago on Ljutic #1. It had over one million rounds through it and only had to have a firing pin replacement over the years. This is only a 1/2 hour job that the owner can do. This is why people spend more money on a gun that fits them and they shoot thousands of rounds a year with no problems. They expect the gun to last a lifetime, which they usually do- for them and their kids. So do the math= a gun that costs more and lasts a lifetime or 4-5 $1500- $2000 guns that a shooter has to get used to over and over again. Plus there are so many advantages to the mechanics of a finer gun. Better/quicker triggers. Better pointing, handling, etc. The same is true for any fine gun over a cheaper one. This is pretty common knowledge. Good luck.
They do sell spring kits for Perazzi's. Seems everyone either has one or is looking for one. Spring breakadge is more common than you think.
They may last a lifetime of use. They don't float my boat in looks or value. In this case I agree with Lowell it could be more in the "striking".
I'd rather live my life with a cheaper gun than a CNC/Handmade gun that's way over priced.
I do agree being Willed one would be better than being left a Mossberg.
Chuck, when handling a gun, it's the first thing you notice.
Its the barrels ole bean, that gives the gun, that live feeling.
...and not it's gold birds!
LG:
I think you have to balance what you do in barrel striking with what you do to the after end. Light barrels and a recoil reducer in the stock makes for squirrely handling.
jack
Well, I believe you mean the design of the barrels as opposed to the execution. It seems to me that the barrels are the most apparent to benefit from machine making. I'm betting no modern (say 18xx) shotgun barrel was built with any quality without the aid of a machines. But more to the point, a modern machine is more capable of producing any barrel profile and wallthickness the gun designer choses and do it with much more precision than a craftsman with a few files. Polishing, of course is different from carving profile. Old barrels on many guns show that there were straight sections and often two taper angles that were blended by hand. How well they were blended was part of the hand work. Today, it would not be necesarry to have two angles but rather have any constantly blended profile the designer chose. Machines today have the capability of fully polishing the barrel as a separate component also. This would minimize the hand polishing after assembly.
IMO, barrel thickness and profile is a design characteristic today and not a craftsmanship characteristic as it once was when files were the predominent final shaping tool.
No argument there. Hand filing is a slow way to make swarf.
jack
Chuck H, Excellent reply,....Olde Handmade Stockmaker, CC.