Hi all, who does a good job sleeving over here in the states?
Also, what is the approximate cost?
Thanks so much!!!
Greg
Kirk Merrington, also.
Cost ? Alot.
Just curious- what make and gauge shotgun do you have that you are considering having a sleve job done to??
I have seen several Pahkas that were sleeved by Briley that I was very impressed with the quality of workmanship. Better than I would have expected, somehow. Cost, around $1000, according to the owner.
SRH
Just curious- what make and gauge shotgun do you have that you are considering having a sleve job done to??
As we are humans and are curious folks, here's your answer. I have a line on a high grade W.R. Droplock, 12b. The action and wood are excellent, but the bbls are shot (pardon the pun).
Just in the thinking stage.
All the best!
Greg
Dewey Vicknair. Look at his site. He does a TIG'd sleeve and there is no solder joint.
Be careful! Next thing you will know, you will have a closet full of cripples like me.
Stan,Kirk Merrington probably did the sleeving at Briley since he worked there before setting up his own shop. I do not think they have a quality workman there to do this now.
Greg,
Prices seem to be running in the $1500-2000 range with blueing.
There's an old English smith up in the Ontario Canada area that quoted me about $900 U.S. dollars about 7-8 yrs ago. His website is
http://www.precisionarms.ca/Images/WebPages/GGSWhole.htmI don't know what he charges now nor how hard it is to get a gun into Canada and back out. Canada did repeal some laws governing long guns recently. Possibly it's easier now.
Kirk sleeved my two Langs 10 or so years ago. If I had another, I'd send it to him.
Jim
gjw:
For a good Westley, there is only one real choice in the US: Kirk Merrington.
Remember: you will have to live with the workmanship for the rest of your life. What is a few dollars compared to something less?
I don't know what he charges now nor how hard it is to get a gun into Canada and back out. Canada did repeal some laws governing long guns recently. Possibly it's easier now. [/quote]
A large part of the problem seems to be on the US side with the export permits, Homeland Security, etc.
As to the repeal of the long gun registry, it ain't a fact yet, but we are sure hoping.
Greg - If I were you I would look into Teague Lining, if if is just the interior of the barrels that are whupped.
safe, reliable sleeving of sxs guns can be accomplished for under $1000. however, do not expect cosmetic perfection for that price.
To me, the cosmetics are priority one,assuming the new tubes are straight,safe & wont fall off.To even consider sleeving it would have to something pretty nice,& to mess it up with a crappy looking joint would be just daft imho ( like some of those hideous Westley Richards jobs I've seen with SLEEVED BY ETC hammered deeply into the outside of the tubes,,yuk!)
What does Master Gunsmith Ed Landers charge for this service, if he does it?
franc
Indeed
OOOouch!!!
Where would we be without Photoshop?
franc
Leighton,
I was told that the smiths' name, at Briley, that does the sleeving now is Jeff Nealy, and that he was trained by Kirk.
I'm going to be calling them sometime soon about doing a set of Fox barrels that has a bad right barrel due to a failed bulge repair. I've got a hankering for a set of 34" barrels, struck so that they're not muzzle heavy. John had two Parkers like that. Amazingly nimble for their length.
SRH
drew: i am sure you have reasons for publishing your picture. if they are positive, perhaps you could elaborate...however, if they are negative, then perhaps you should consider carefully, before heading down that slippery slope?
drew: i am sure you have reasons for publishing your picture. if they are positive, perhaps you could elaborate...however, if they are negative, then perhaps you should consider carefully, before heading down that slippery slope?
LOLOLOLOLOL
Indeed
He stamps his name nice an neat...
if you go lookin for trouble...it is likely to find you...
How much does Ed charge for the bob job ?
joe: not sure these days, but somewhere around $1000. i know he ran out of barrel blanks recently and bought a fresh batch of blanks for an english source. as barrel blanks are the major material cost for a sleeving job, that may have caused his finished price to go up? anyway, i know ed's barrel work. like all other gun work that he does, it is above all safe. secondly, he will regulate the barrels to whatever distance you would like for the shot charges to converge. one gun that comes to mind that he sleeved is a parker ph 12 bore. it's new owner was amazed that it put one pattern right on top of the other at 30 yards!
if you want cosmetic perfection, with no seams showing, then ed is not the smith for you. i understand that there are other smiths who do fine cosmetic work with no seams showing. however, i understand they charge around $2000 for a finished job.
SLE ST 12ga Delivered 1902
Sleeved by Kirk in 1998
Used hard since, though I always thought the blacking was thin.
12ga Trigger plate action delivered 1880
Original 30" Damascus tubes were trashed
Sleeved by Kirk in 2000
Still in the white, maybe this winter I'll get to finishing them
Jim
Jim, I have a trigger plate 12 bore Lang with poor barrels, can I see a pic of your action, please?
Mike
Here you go, Mike
Let me know if there's something in particular you need a photo of. I shot it for first time (long, strange trip, it's been) this fall- 300 shells, it needs more cast off.
Jim
kirk appears to do wonderful looking work.
Thank you, Jim. Nice gun.
I have my gun on the desk here, similar fine engraving, but my gun, s/n 6708 does not have the brass cocking indicators (?) nor that great fat screwhead sticking out of the LH sideplate. What is that for, reinforcement?
My lever is very finely engraved, is yours? My lever sits closer to the trigger guard. I can't post pics, but if someone comes in to assist I can send that helpful person a pic by e-mail.
This is the gun that Ho JoE has insulted twice, by the way.
Mike
I call that screw, "The screw to nowhere" it has no function that I can figger out. I'm not certain whether the gold nibs are cocking indicators(currently not functioning) or if they are vents. I'll have to pull the the pins above and the striker disks and see what it is all about.
The lever is engraved and the gun was re-jointed by Kirk when it was sleeved. I have a single slide of the gun as I got it, if I ever find it I'll compare the lever position-- or not. I'm much more a big picture guy once I own something
Eventually, I'll get the screws redone and timed up, black the furniture and the barrels, and call it good for a while.
It's a crazy old gun from early on in the period of transition to hammerless guns. It's certainly understandable how it's significance could fly right over the head of someone like JoE
It's also naughty (in a Victorian sort of way), if you remove the trigger plate, hold it vertical, and view the lock works straight on, it looks like a ....
Stanton made the lock in my SLE as well as this gun, an interesting tidbit from the standpoint of a vendor relationship lasting 20+ years. Methinks old Jos. Lang must've been decent guy.
Jim
I can't post pics, but if someone comes in to assist I can send that helpful person a pic by e-mail.
This is the gun that Ho JoE has insulted twice, by the way.
Mike
As I recall...His gun has little in common with the gun you posted.
My gun was in rough shape when I bought it, pitted and perforated barrels, dinged, dirty, shrunken, and worn wood, off face, and a mainspring broke during test firing after sleeving. I came to it through a now departed, gem of a man and gun dealer who called me first, after he, "Had to buy it, to get some Winchesters" that were his forte.
On the advice and with help from, "my dear old uncle" Jack Rowe, I had a pair of mainsprings made in England. The stock was refinished/checkered as best possible and the Silvers pad added by a gunsmith friend of mine.
Old guns can come back from fairly remarkable depths if you know the people, have the money and patience to put into them. Aside from warm regard I have Jack, Kirk, and the others that have touched this old gun, I got in cheap enough as to still be below the "upside down" point- I think.
An added bonus is the opportunity is to show up at LC Smith Collectors Assn shoot and befuddle an old friend.
Jim
That's the third time jOe has insulted my Lang!
Well, it was very very cheap to buy, the stock has been repaired,(free), it's on face, with the free damascus tubes from my Belgian gun, no cost, given to me, I think I can make a silk purse out of this old sow's ear.
I might have $900.00 in this old beauty when I'm done
Mike
Mike,have any gun photos to share?
if you want cosmetic perfection, with no seams showing, then ed is not the smith for you. i understand that there are other smiths who do fine cosmetic work with no seams showing.
Guess I don't understand why, on a vintage gun that you thought highly enough of to sleeve the barrels, you would settle for anything other than fine cosmetic work. Except for the "Master Gunsmith's" work, those sleeve job pics are amazing. I'm thinking I need to start looking for a beautiful old receiver with crappy barrels to send to Kirk.
Sleeving, in theory, is a very straightforward procedure. Especially when cosmetics are not a priority.
It's a crazy old gun from early on in the period of transition to hammerless guns. It's certainly understandable how it's significance could fly right over the head of someone like JoE
12ga Trigger plate action delivered 1880
Top lever opening had been out for almost 10 years...what I see is a gun that was basically a design failure.
Sorry if it flew right over the head of someone like BeN.
Sleeving, in theory, is a very straightforward procedure. Especially when cosmetics are not a priority.
ben: nice job...who did the work?
Top lever opening had been out for almost 10 years...what I see is a gun that was basically a design failure
Just like all those hammer guns that continued to be made after internal hammers were introduced . . . .
The hammer gun was not a design failure...it's stood the test of time.
I figure Lang was just too cheap to pay the Royalty to use the Scott top lever and thought he could design something better....The under lever like on the Lang was like'n to a fart in a whirlwind.
Check the first picture of his later Lang from what little I can see the barrel extension appears to be for a Scott screw grip action ?
SLE ST 12ga Delivered 1902
The hammer gun was not a design failure...it's stood the test of time
The gun in question apparently still opens and closes and shoots - that would indicate it has stood the test of time too.
Dig's website has a gallery of actions, many of which are "design failures" by Brit makers who preferred to use their own design than pay royalties on others patents.
Actions Gallery Now Lang's Vena Contracta - that could be labeled a "design failure."
The lang looks like a Scott ? More than likely it was made by Webley and Scott . As was the Vena Contracta .
The hammer gun was not a design failure...it's stood the test of time
The gun in question apparently still opens and closes and shoots - that would indicate it has stood the test of time too.
What I meant by design failure and standing the test of time has nothing do with the gun still functioning....the design didn't stand the test of time and was basically unwanted by the gun trade.
Examples that did...the W&C Scott top lever and Purdey double under-bolt.
Sleeving, in theory, is a very straightforward procedure. Especially when cosmetics are not a priority.
ben: nice job...who did the work?
It's a Linder Daly I stumbled upon at Guns International
It's a crazy old gun from early on in the period of transition to hammerless guns. It's certainly understandable how it's significance could fly right over the head of someone like JoE
12ga Trigger plate action delivered 1880
Top lever opening had been out for almost 10 years...what I see is a gun that was basically a design failure.
Sorry if it flew right over the head of someone like BeN.
So any gun that doesn't have a top lever is a "failure"?
Interesting.
I disagree that because the design did not stand the test of popularity or even mechanical excellence that it is a failure.
If that were true then guns, then any design not still made today could implicitly be tripe. Further, hammer guns and alike would be passe.
The reality is that designs that either did not succeed because of function, fashion, manufacturing cost, etc can still be a true pleasure to own and shoot.
It would be poor sportmanship to belittle another's treasure.
I learned young to respect other's dogs and guns. The best shot I have ever seen (and best fly caster too) shot a very worn remington 11. The best pair guns I ever saw scored a 12 at sporting clays, though the guy shooting them was true gentleman and even let me shoot a few clays too. Both situations are good memories and I am better or them.
It would be poor sportmanship to belittle another's treasure.
Unfortunately, some here actually consider that to be sport.
the design didn't stand the test of time and was basically unwanted by the gun trade.
How many guns that have been profiled in the DGJ would qualify as "design failures" under this definition? Certainly all those 1870s guns Dig profiled last spring would have to be dismissed out of hand as design failures. Take that 34-bore William Ford with the trigger guard activated Purdey bite - what a POS!!!
It would be poor sportsmanship to belittle another's treasure.
In order to be belittled or have the gun "run down" there would have to be some sort of existing delusion of grandeur or expectation of value on my part. I know this gun well having owned it since 1999, it's been applauded and cursed (sometimes in the same sentence), by some of the best in the business
As has been the case on this board since it's early days, there are those who (over) romanticize their purchases, those who feel the need to "run down" every gun that doesn't fit their ideal, and them that parrot cliches like "it's no Purdey", "a 'proper' gun must have two triggers", "shame they ______". It's all old hat for me
As to j0e's comments, I take them with a light heart, as they can spark an amusing discussion about complacency with what's believed to be "state of the art" v. those who strived to innovate. I suppose which camp I'm in is obvious.
As an opening shot, I'd much rather own this Woodward 450/400 "failure" than any rifle containing a Scott spindle.
photo poached from Roscoe Stephenson's site
Re guns sleeved by Merrington . . . I don't think there's much question that he does good work. But he also does not stamp them "sleeved". Good work + not marked sleeved can = potential deception down the line, when the current owner parts company with the gun. If a gun is sleeved, especially "invisibly" so, it ought to be marked sleeved. As required by the proof laws in the UK.
I couldn't agree with Larry's sentiment on this issue more.
generally, when a skilled workman is proud of his work the puts his name on it...but of course, that was before lawyers took over the world...
Re guns sleeved by Merrington . . . I don't think there's much question that he does good work. But he also does not stamp them "sleeved". Good work + not marked sleeved can = potential deception down the line, when the current owner parts company with the gun. If a gun is sleeved, especially "invisibly" so, it ought to be marked sleeved. As required by the proof laws in the UK.
I couldn't agree with Larry's sentiment on this issue more.
If that's the case, y'all should take up a collection and send me and my guns to the London proof house, I'll take pictures. LVI, Philly, and Newark are the most convenient airfields for me.
Thanks!
Interesting discussion. Can a damascus gun be sleeved with damascus barrel(s) from another gun, assuming they are the same diameter?
Interesting discussion. Can a damascus gun be sleeved with damascus barrel(s) from another gun, assuming they are the same diameter?
I suppose it could be done but a) I doubt the patterns would match b) I bet the weld would be very obvious.
The answer is yes they can. I believe that Greener was offering such a service a couple of years back. They had come into a number of damascus barrels made back in the "golden era" of damascus.
Pete
Well, I am going to see if it can be done. The patterns will be different, but I know I will like the result.
Mike
Greener was making new guns with old Damascus tubes not sleeving them.i would like to sleeve a Damascus gun to see what it looked like. mc
I think the browning matching would be problematic
Re guns sleeved by Merrington . . . I don't think there's much question that he does good work. But he also does not stamp them "sleeved". Good work + not marked sleeved can = potential deception down the line, when the current owner parts company with the gun. If a gun is sleeved, especially "invisibly" so, it ought to be marked sleeved. As required by the proof laws in the UK.
I couldn't agree with Larry's sentiment on this issue more.
If that's the case, y'all should take up a collection and send me and my guns to the London proof house, I'll take pictures. LVI, Philly, and Newark are the most convenient airfields for me.
Thanks!
Not quite sure how that pertains to the question at hand, Ben. If an American gunsmith sleeves a gun, why shouldn't he then mark it "sleeved"--since that's the standard in the country where the practice was invented, and since it will lessen the possibility of fraud, when the gun is sold at some later date?
Re guns sleeved by Merrington . . . I don't think there's much question that he does good work. But he also does not stamp them "sleeved". Good work + not marked sleeved can = potential deception down the line, when the current owner parts company with the gun. If a gun is sleeved, especially "invisibly" so, it ought to be marked sleeved. As required by the proof laws in the UK.
I couldn't agree with Larry's sentiment on this issue more.
If that's the case, y'all should take up a collection and send me and my guns to the London proof house, I'll take pictures. LVI, Philly, and Newark are the most convenient airfields for me.
Thanks!
Not quite sure how that pertains to the question at hand, Ben. If an American gunsmith sleeves a gun, why shouldn't he then mark it "sleeved"--since that's the standard in the country where the practice was invented, and since it will lessen the possibility of fraud, when the gun is sold at some later date?
Between this and the proof house thread you sound like a jilted lover or remorseful buyer
Different steels polish and rust differently, while the joint may be indiscernible, in good light, the different steels are. To make a sleeved gun truly fraud-able requires an additional step or two
My humble sidelock would hardly be worth the effort being it has the dreaded single trigger that only functions perfectly when I hand it to someone. The damascus flats are a dead giveaway on the old gun.
Sleeving my guns made them safer, not less so. If you are inferring that by not stamping the barrels that I am attempting to deceive someone, I take exception to your remarks and demand fisticuffs or axe handles (your choice) as means of satisfaction, as my reputation is surely less tarnished than yours.
Should I ever decide to submit the guns for re-proof I'll be glad to have the flats stamped
SLEEVED Until then, the guns are in America, and owned by an honest, law abiding American. I feel no compulsion to submit to any Crown or Company of Gunmakers. We fought a war to end that crap over 200 years ago.
Jim
Not jilted or remorseful at all. I've owned two sleevers, both Brit, and both PROPERLY MARKED as sleeved. Falls in the same category as any other significant modification to the gun. You lengthen chambers, then stamp the @#$%^% gun that it's now 2 3/4" vs 2 1/2", or 3" vs 2 3/4". Why are people afraid to tell the truth? Shotguns, if properly cared for, will outlive their current owners. Somewhere down the line, the next owner may be less scrupulous, or the next buyer less knowledgeable and less likely to spot a sleeved gun. You're mixing two threads here, but no need to submit it to anyone under our current system in this country. Appropriately marking whatever modification was made means that there's no misunderstanding about what's been done to the gun.