This has to be one of the most beautifully decorated doubles I've ever seen. Absolutely first class work from the carved fences to the rose and scroll engraving. The gun has been refinished but that doesn't detract from the art. I believe it is from about 1914. If able, enlarge the pics a bit to really appreciate the work.
http://www.gunsinternational.com/BEAUTIFUL-W-C-SCOTT-PRE-WAR-16GA-SIDELOCK.cfm?gun_id=100227312
Great looking gun until you see the.......pistol grip.
Oh My,absolutly grand...and the condition! I wish I had money!
.....and then the buggered screw on the pistol grip.
Overall, though, it's purty
It looks like a double rifle with the long tang and metal capped grip. Wonder if it was rebarreled as a 16 and was maybe something else originally?
Nothing about the gun says "rifle" to me...Too bad it's a short chambered 16 ga.
Nothing wrong with the short chambers. I enjoy great performance with the B&P offering and have had no problems getting them whenever I have wanted another flat.
Nothing about the gun says "rifle" to me...Too bad it's a short chambered 16 ga.
j0e, what's wrong with a short chambered 16?
Mike
That one looks like it might be worth having that buggered screw fixed. But the 'stocked to the fences' crowd will surely turn their collective noses up on this one.
Nice enough gun. Not Scott's best quality model at the time though. The blurb is incorrect in stating it was more expensive than a contemporary Purdey. The model he is thinking of is the Excellentia and the later bar action pigeon guns of de lux quality. Looks to be a fair price for a decent gun as far as one can tell from limited photos.
What attracted me to the gun is the design balance of the engraving and its execution--the harmony of all the components of the artwork. Nothing seems out of place, one section flowing into the other. Far too often, to my eye, "best work" tends to become cluttered and without a smooth flow to the overall work--almost chaotic. The designer of the work had a high awareness of rococo art and what is known as the "golden mean" (google it).
For an introduction to this most important ratio check out this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zWivbG0RIo
Nothing about the gun says "rifle" to me...Too bad it's a short chambered 16 ga.
j0e, what's wrong with a short chambered 16?
Mike
Wish I had one........
jOe is.....well....jOe!!!
All the best!
Greg
Wonders will never cease, I did not expect to run into Eudoxos and Euclidean proportions.
Nice one Mr. Wood.
I agree with Joe, this is a nicely done engraving art with flow and integration throughout. The coverage on the lockplates,triggerguard and receiver bottom aren't all that unusual, but the carving of the fences extending down forward reflecting the stylized feathers on the receiver really pull it all together.
The model he is thinking of is the Excellentia and the later bar action pigeon guns of de lux quality. Looks to be a fair price for a decent gun as far as one can tell from limited photos.
No Excellentia grade Scott I've ever saw (or owned) compares to this gun.
What attracted me to the gun is the design balance of the engraving and its execution--the harmony of all the components of the artwork. The designer of the work had a high awareness of rococo art and what is known as the "golden mean" (google it).
I would think that Joe is circling this gun like a moth to a flame but for the fact that he told us about it.
Gil
No doubt they don't come along like this gun everyday.
No, I'm not in the hunt. Have finally discovered I can't own 'em all. But, like my daddy told me some half century ago, talking about a married man looking at a pretty woman he said, "son, it's fine to window shop but just don't touch the merchandise."
That's why they made divorce....
That's why they made divorce....
and alimony and property division. Which is why some really good guns come on the market....
Why is a divorce so costly...because it is worth it.
I am looking for a good double, too bad this one is about $6500 out of my price range.
CHAZ
Nice gun, although the description is slightly overblown. Scott was a Birmingham maker, not London--although I wouldn't hold that against him. Tried to identify the model from Scott photos I have, but I can't quite get anything to match. Pin and screw placement don't match up with either a Monte Carlo B or a Webley & Rogers sidelock.
Reproof between 1954-89. Wonder what it weighs.
Larry I think this gun is slightly over your head....
A fellow with his eYe for detail should know we weren't looking at a catalog gun
Scott may not be a London maker but I have one engraved London on the rib with London proff's. Please explain this.? Maybe made in Birmingham proffed in London?
A fellow with his eYe for detail should know we weren't looking at a catalog gun
Joe old bean, even "best gun" makers tended to use standard actions. Not terribly cost effective to make one-off actions. And if pins and screws are in different places, that means a redesigned action. One with any sort of "eye for detail" would catch that--if one has some photos of Scotts to look at. And if one knows that in 1914, when this particular gun was built, Scott "cataloged" 11 different models of hammerless sidelocks. Safe to say that each one of those was not built on a different action. For example, there were 5 different quality levels of W&R sidelocks "cataloged".
Sometimes one only has to write a single sentence to show that hitting the submit button does not necessarily indicate the poster knows what he's talking about.
Sometimes it takes more than just looking at pictures in an old catalog to know in real life what one is looking at.
Larry have you ever owned any W&C Scotts of lesser or greater quality than the gun in question ?
Yes. All lesser, unfortunately. But although that one's very nice, Scott "cataloged" guns of greater quality, like the Imperial Premier and the Premier--unless maybe you think that one's up to those standards.
As far as knowing what one is looking at, I've scarcely ever seen a post from you, Joe, that contains any substance whatsoever when it comes to guns. Just snide comments. Which means it's very much open to question whether you know much of anything at all about guns. If you do, you shouldn't go to such extremes to hide your light under a bushel. This place is all about sharing knowledge, not taking cheap shots. We know you're an expert in the latter, but that's about it.
Scott may not be a London maker but I have one engraved London on the rib with London proff's. Please explain this.? Maybe made in Birmingham proffed in London?
The Scott factory was in Birmingham, but they had a showroom in London.
I concur with the analysis that while not the highest possible grade Scott, it is at the top of the spectrum of quality. I believe it could be said to be a catalog gun to the extent that all the guns at the top end of the catalog were in some respects custom with options. With Scott as with other makers the top end is shown in the catalog, but the ordered and made to order from stock parts.
American manufatcturers like LC and Fox were similar in listing the top end guns in their catalogs while making them on what was essentially a custom basis.
But isn't that true of any gun manufacturer, the higher grades are usually in the front of a catalog. Some change it by goes the other way to get your interest.
With L.C. Smiths, starting at No. 5 up, they were all custom made to your specifications, not that you couldn't get some of these same features as in the higher grades, but then on a lower grade with options your price might be in the upper range.
On some of L.C. Smiths highest quality pre-1913's, the A3, there were only 18 made and then it was the highest priced gun anywhere, that included English guns.
As far as knowing what one is looking at, I've scarcely ever seen a post from you, Joe, that contains any substance whatsoever when it comes to guns. Just snide comments. Which means it's very much open to question whether you know much of anything at all about guns.
Unlike some I do know enough not to comment on things I know nothing about.
Your comments about this gun show you know nothing about Scotts.
My "comments" were based on an unsuccessful attempt to determine which of the many Scott hammerless sidelock models this one may have been. If you're able to tell us that, Joe, please do so. Otherwise . . . once again, you've contributed nothing of substance--thus maintaining your perfect record in that respect.
As for comparing this particular gun to other Scotts, I defer to the gentleman below, who I believe might even have seen one or two more Scotts than you have, Joe--as difficult as it may be for you to accept:
Nice enough gun. Not Scott's best quality model at the time though. The blurb is incorrect in stating it was more expensive than a contemporary Purdey. The model he is thinking of is the Excellentia and the later bar action pigeon guns of de lux quality. Looks to be a fair price for a decent gun as far as one can tell from limited photos.
The model he is thinking of is the Excellentia and the later bar action pigeon guns of de lux quality. Looks to be a fair price for a decent gun as far as one can tell from limited photos.
No Excellentia grade Scott I've ever saw (or owned) compares to this gun.
Larry I guess in your haste to beat your chest you missed my reply.
Joe, Small Bore didn't say this was an Excellentia grade, only that the seller's description would have been accurate if it was an Excellentia. Larry's question is still not answered ... appears you can't identify it either?
There is no way to identify a custom made non cataloged gun...but I can assure you if he had called it an Excellentia grade it would have been belittling the gun.
The only Scott I'm aware of that cost more than a Purdey was the Premier Imperial. I will stand corrected by the learned council but that's what my catalogs and reference material indicate. Crawford's book lists the Excellentia as a "B" quality gun.
I can leave out the banter, but the gun looks lovely. That rose scroll engraving has such a quality look about it.
Cataloged or non-cataloged, they ain't gonna redesign an action just to build a gun, custom made or not. And it's not that hard to identify features of a particular action, if you have photos to look at. (Guns in hand would be better, but a lot more difficult.) The Imperial Premier is cataloged, and this gun certainly does not come up to that standard. Nor a Premier, if one regards "stocked to the fences" as an important distinguishing feature of a British "best" sidelock--which seems to be the way they looked at things.
But it's still a very nice gun.
Gentlemen, I have just returned from Vegas and perhaps can add some info to the "discussion". The gun in question has the identical pin placement as my Scott Monte Carlo B pigeon gun, circa 1910. The treatment of the fences is also a feature that I have seen on other Scott built guns sold by other "makers". The gun has been finished/engraved to a high standard and shows the quality of Scotts workmen regardless of what model it may have been.
I'd say not Larry the side lock Premiers run from 20 to 30 thousand.
The Monte Carlo B cost 44 pounds in 1914. That's the same listed price as a Webley & Rogers 4th quality (which was also a nice gun). Scott actually made a couple boxlocks with higher listed prices in 1914. Of course if the buyer of this gun requested special engraving or other extras, that could mean a substantial price increase.
This gun is way above a Monte Carlo B grade
...(Larry you might need new glasses)
Then, as now, you picked your model and dressed it up to suit your tastes and your budget. In this case maybe beauty is only skin deep....
The fences are characteristic of the Webley and Scott W&R guns. Their best grade in that series was the London Pattern gun (the WLP) which retailed for about 50% more than the higher grade of the Monte Carlo Bs. (MCBs were produced in two different grades.) This isn't the London Pattern gun, but looks like perhaps the best grade W&R, which retailed for about 30% more than the higher grade MCBs. These guns came out of the P. Webley and Son line but could be branded as W & C Scott and Sons after the merger.
This gun is way above a Monte Carlo B grade
...(Larry you might need new glasses)
And you need to learn to read, Joe--with or without glasses. The poster above says pin/screw placement is the same as on a Monte Carlo B. Looking at a good closeup of a Monte Carlo B pigeon gun and the photos of this one, I agree: pins and screws are a dead match. Doesn't mean it IS a Monte Carlo B, but it does mean there's a very good chance the guns use the same action. So, you add more engraving (which a customer could order), maybe nicer wood, and you end up with a gun that costs a lot more than a standard Monte Carlo B.
Mike, I don't think the gun is a W&R, although the treatment on the fences matches very closely to a W&R first quality. However, I believe all the W&R's were third fastener (rib extension) guns--all screw grips, I think--which this one is not.
Must've cleaned your glasses....
A little
Mike, I don't think the gun is a W&R, although the treatment on the fences matches very closely to a W&R first quality. However, I believe all the W&R's were third fastener (rib extension) guns--all screw grips, I think--which this one is not.
Larry, Quite possibly it isn't, but a similar model from the P. Webley line built on the Rogers action. Crawford and Whatley refer to the Roger model which is similar to the W&R, available in the same grades, but without the rib extension. The Monte Carlo B guns were switched to the Rogers action in 1897 after the merger, which would explain the identical pin arrangement noted above.
Gosh, you need to be rocket scientist to sort all this out!
And the sad part is most that replied can't even see what they are talking about.....
(10 bucks says Larry comes back with the last word)
Gosh, you need to be rocket scientist to sort all this out!
It is a lot easier than looking like Brad Pitt.
Gosh, you need to be rocket scientist to sort all this out!
It is a lot easier than looking like Brad Pitt.
Ain't that the truth! Looking at an action and comparing things like pin and screw placement, presence or absence of a 3rd fastener, etc, definitely isn't rocket science. But it can give you a good clue as to which other guns from the same maker used the same action. Doesn't mean they're all the same quality or price, because "bespoke" meant you could request different engraving, etc. But it gives you a better starting point than if the gun is obviously built on a different action.
And the sad part is most that replied can't even see what they are talking about.....
(10 bucks says Larry comes back with the last word)
Pay up Mike....
(Want to go double or nothing ?)
Scott frequently proofed their higher grade guns in London to give them the cachet of a 'London' proof and possibly to help them sell a little better out of their London showroom,however out of six Premiers I have owned,only two have had London proofs,the rest being B'ham proofs ,including an Imperial that I still have,made in 1892.The sidelock 16 ga.in this discussion loks to have the same sidelocks as the model 180 ,also,but of course,much superior engraving. Marcus
Hello,
Here is a what I think is a rare Scott. Comments and information on this gun appreciated. It's a hard variation to find much information on. JJV
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=271080231
There was a DGJ article a few years ago on that lockup system and Scott guns in general. Maybe someone with the magazines and an index handy can give you the correct issue. Seems like Sherman Bell wrote it in his English guns series...Geo
I'm guessing it's a 10 ga.
(Larry should be along shortly to catalog it for us
) .
It's a 12 guage. I added some info to the auction. Sorry about my ommission of the guage.
JJV
What kind of value do you put on the gun ?
I am still trying to nail down an approx value. Like I said before, not much information available on this variation and the shotgun is in nice original condition. There are no alterations or repairs that I can see. Nice barrels with no major flaws and very good bores with just some light scattered spots. Also have it posted on the Parker Forum with one or two educated guesses taken by other members regarding value. Was hoping to get more information on the gun here.
JJV
Although unusual it's not a high grade Scott...is unusual good ?
To some it might be to me it's not.
I do see evidence of some home gunsmith'n which is also not good.
Jared I suggest you start a new thread and post the pictures again. Title it something like "Please identify this four bolt Scott."
I think you will get more attention and replies.
The button to start a new thread is in the upper left hand corner of the page and is titled "New Thread".
Good luck,
Mike
Jared I suggest you start a new thread and post the pictures again. Title it something like "Please identify this four bolt Scott."
I think your question will get more attention and replies.
The button to start a new thread is in the upper left hand corner of the page and is titled "New Topic".
Good luck,
Mike
There are a few screws that have been marred a bit. I don't believe the gun was apart though but being well over 100 years old, who knows. Still better than a restored or partially restored gun in my eyes. Beg to differ on not being a high grade. While perhaps not the highest grade engraving offered, The pattern is similar to a DH Parker or at least along those lines. Description and pictures added to the auction.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=271080231Also had it for discussion on the Parker Forum a while back. For those of you who are registered there, here is what they had to say about the shotgun.
http://parkerguns.org/forums/showthread.php?t=5737