I recently examined several older H&H Royal SxSs with the view of possible purchase and noticed that H&H did not use bushed strikers nor do they have gas vents.

Do the newer guns have the bushed strikers?

Just a matter of curiosity.

I've noticed that guns where the barrels have been replaced (even by the makers) seem to fetch a lower price but it seems to me that newer barrels are an advantage or am I missing something?

Frank

Gnomom

My early royal, circa 1890, has gas vents via scott patent No. 617/1882. I have never seen one with bushed strikers either but that does not mean there are none out there.

replaced barrels, even by the maker will always be looked at as a negative as far as dollar value. The gun is not looked at as "original" any longer and therefore brings a lower market value even when done by the maker themselves. It is usually worse when dealing with sleeved guns. I can't comment on Teague lined barrels as I have not seen too may of those up for sale.

You are right, in most cases new barrels would be looked at as an advantage if you are actually going to shoot the gun. if you are a collector, you would probably stay away from such a gun.

JMO

H&H

Mine is rather early (#14xxx), no bushed strikers but it does have gas vents. It also has barrels replaced by the maker which I look upon as an advantage but fortunately other interested buyers dissagreed so I maneged to get it for a digestable sum.
With kind regards,
Jani

My "later" style in the 16,700 range [1896-97] has neither bushed strikers or gas vents.

Major component replacement (by anyone) is viewed as high probablity the gun has had a lot of shooting, poor maintenance, and/or a major accident. Any of these cast doubt on the condition of the rest of the gun. High quality repair is expensive. So, the market is going to discount any gun with questions about it. Even if you have the gun carefully inspected and it gets a clean bill of health, you will have to discount your purchese price in anticipation of having to discount your selling price of it some day. This market position moves a lot of guns from collector pricing to shooter pricing.

I do not believe H&H used bushed strikers on any of their Royals real old, real new, or in between.

OWD

Gnomon:
Obsessed is correct. Bushed strikers are almost always Birmingham/Provincial work, done to obviate pits around the firing pin hole. H & H never does this as a matter of course. They will do anything the customer wants, however.

Bushed strikers do not effect a gun's performance and should not be held against a high-level "shooting gun." Same with replaced or sleeved barrels as long as the gun's balance has been maintained.

Best, Kensal

I take it you refer to "disc set strikers" ?I dont think I have ever seen a Holland with them,at least not one made by them ,as to guns made for them may be a different matter . Gas vents went out of style when gas tight cases became the norm as they were no longer needed. I'm no sure weather Kensal is on the same track on this ,as a lot of top grade guns were made with disc set strikers . Although I have seen some of the repair type work he refers to . Done before the days of modern welding.

Handling dimensions, weight, balance, unmounted swing effort, and mounted swing effort, are to handling as stock dimensions are to stock fit. One looks for a gun that has fit and handlind dimensions that suit the individual. A gun could be "ruined" by handling dimension changes resulting from sleeving/tubing/rebarreling for one person and dramatically improved for another. If the barrels were sleeved/tubed/rebarreled for reason of wear (think thin barrel walls), then it is sure that the original set of handling dimensions had already been altered. The handling desired after repair may or may not be as the gun was when new.

Interesting about the lack of disc set strikers in the guns as the rifles do have them; e.g., my 1897 No 3 double in .303 British and 1904 Royal in .500/.450 nitroexpress.

Regards

A Holland Royal paradox with disc set strikers circa 1913

There isn't the slightest doubt in my mind that bushed strikers are better than hammers with integral firing pins. Break the former and it's no big deal to replace, break the latter and it's big PITA.
nial

Alternatively you can argue that disc set strikers are one more part to go wrong. Since we no longer use corrosive powders and breech faces should not corrode like they used to when primers were less gas tight than they are now, they are of dubious practical merit.

Like most things, when made to the highest standards with the best materials they are welcome but there is nothing to miss if they are not a feature. On cheaper guns, they are an additional cost with little benefit, especially if made cheaply.

If you break a striker, you will want to dismantle the gun anyway in case part has fallen into the lock work.

Some boxlock guns may or may not have integral firing pins. That is a separate issue to the disc-set strikers.

I had a nightmare getting one out of the Lang I have here...in fact myself and two gunsmiths failed to get it out, so it stayed in. As Dig says nowadays just something else to go wrong!

Cheers
T