Good find John. That looks like a beauty.
Proofmarks somewhat difficult to read. Looks like the flats need some cleanup. But assuming the 2 1/2" mark isn't a reproof after the barrels were replaced, then you're looking at barrels no older than 1925.
Nice gun, looks worthy of restoration.
Here's a translation of the flats. The fellow whited some stamps and not the others. There are no re-proofed stamps but only stamps for the new barrels. Rocketman, what are your thoughts.
One photo added here.
A beauty it is, crowned by the Side Lever.
Cheers,
Jani
The barrels are a very nice 4 Iron 'British Best'
Are you going to refinish browned or black & white?
Very nice gun John. Let's hope it fits you.
Not black and white, certainly. More likely to leave the barrels in current state but redo nitre blue on the appropriate bits. My smith suggested it would not be foul play to engrave the rib with "Henry Atkin from Purdey's" but am inclined to leave it as is.
You could email or call AG&L to get their info on the gun. Looks like a best gun from Atkin.
Ken
Very nice gun John. Let's hope it fits you.
Thanks, Brian. If it doesn't fit well, well that's the end of it. As you know hammer guns are more my thing anyway. Most recently made a trade that brought me a MacNaughton gun that has me over the moon. If this one not in the cards then will continue to hold out for a Stephen Grant side opener but with hammers and bar in wood. In either case probably would be actioned by E.C. Hodges.
The side lever is pretty nice. London Proofs, it seems, but hard to read. I would expect Birmingham proofs if the gun was re-barreled by W&S. The gun is not a self opener, which is typical of the post 1908 Atkin guns. I would be curious as to the dimensions of the barrels before I paid much money for the gun.
I differ with your gunsmith. The rule in the UK is that the firm that fitted/made the replacement barrels is the firm name engraved on the top rib. No misrepresentation allowed.
Their are some very high quality Atkin guns out there and they are easily the equivalent of The best guns made in London - and the prices are dropping, I think.
I love it! A side-lever sidelock best has been on my want list forever. Don't let that one get away...Geo
JBL, looks to me to be BV2-OQ1-CC5 = $6,655. Atkin fits nicely with the group of 17 maker's names that get 3/4 of BV1 (Boss, H&H, Purdey's, and Woodward) value. I have no trouble calling it a best work gun - Original Quality grade 1. Current Contition level looks like level six, "Shootable but needs some repairs and refinishing or refinished with barrels or stock replaced."
The forearm speaks of a well used gun. There appears to be some restorative work and reasonably well done. I am curious about the use of pattern welded barrels. It would seem that these barrels have been on this gun a lot longer than the OE's. I think maybe "fitted" implies that the barrels were already used when fitted to this gun.
It should be a gun worth owning if there are no hidden warts.
DDA
Rocket man, that is a very insightful comment. 1908 would have been a little bit late for brand new Damascus barrels, although not unheard of. I suspect you’re insight is correct that the barrels were subsequently fitted to the action as stated on the rib.
Approach project guns cautiously.
Good luck.
Best,
Ted
My friend bought an Atkin sidelever last summer here local. It has flutted fences like a Grant.
Re-barreled by the Maker with 28" barrels. Beautiful gun.
I beleive his was made 1900. We sent off to AG&L for a letter for his and my Atkin.
Like Rocketman said, the forearm shows lots of use (checkering worn to the nub). Add replacement barrels, I’d wonder if not at least a bit tired, if not more so. I’d want to examine that gun closely before I jumped in. A lot would depend on the price for me. As a side note, I once asked David Trevallion what he thought about Henry Atkin guns, and his response to me......’they’re old’.
Being old is one of the interesting aspects of vintage British guns.
Always impressed me how advanced in features and style British guns are.
Like Rocketman said, the forearm shows lots of use (checkering worn to the nub). Add replacement barrels, I’d wonder if not at least a bit tired, if not more so. I’d want to examine that gun closely before I jumped in. A lot would depend on the price for me. As a side note, I once asked David Trevallion what he thought about Henry Atkin guns, and his response to me......’they’re old’.
I shoot a gun made in 1920 that works as well today as the day it was made. Old doesn’t matter. Condition does.
Like Rocketman said, the forearm shows lots of use (checkering worn to the nub). Add replacement barrels, I’d wonder if not at least a bit tired, if not more so. I’d want to examine that gun closely before I jumped in. A lot would depend on the price for me. As a side note, I once asked David Trevallion what he thought about Henry Atkin guns, and his response to me......’they’re old’.
I shoot a gun made in 1920 that works as well today as the day it was made. Old doesn’t matter. Condition does.
1920 was a third of a man’s lifetime, and perhaps the most important 30 years of critical understanding of production, composition, and development of steel since 1890. If we are still talking about the gun the OP is considering, the front wood and the inscription on the tubes give an indication of “condition”, and it demonstrates considerable use.
Were it me in his shoes, that gun would be a conditional buy, with the passing of a completed inspection, gladly at my cost, by one of the recognized double gun ‘smiths, say, Dewey Vicknair, Del Whitman, Kirk Merrington, or, whoever holds a similar reputation in Canada.
That said, I admit it isn’t me. Good Luck was a statement I didn’t mean lightly. Few things in the hobby burn money faster and harder than a sick sidelock with a pedigree.
Best,
Ted
Well, I own it now. The condition was much nicer in person than in the photos. Action is tight, bores are flawless, ejectors work. It's lovely. The fore-end is better than it looked in the photo - the wood is very dark, not oil-saturated. Yes the checkering worn but it was very shallow and flat-topped in the first place. I may not have it refreshed at all.
Regarding the rib inscription, I had mistakenly related to Nick it read "Barrels Re-fitted by..." and his thought, maybe in the nature of devil's advocate, was if they can't get the terminology correct then maybe its fair to change it.
Rocketman, do the numbers come out the same whether side lever or top? Not debating here, simply curious.
thanks everyone for your insights.
I hope it is a wonderful gun for you.
Keep us posted.
Best,
Ted
Sidelevers are uncommon enough I haven't gotten a statistically significant difference. I think it is more of a specialized interest. Like anything, when two guys of means go at over the same gun at an auction, all value bets are off. I, personaly, conclude that the top lever wins against all comers for practicality and aesthetics. Fashion wasn't the deciding factor.
DDA
Well, I own it now. The condition was much nicer in person than in the photos. Action is tight, bores are flawless, ejectors work. It's lovely.
Fantastic, I’m pleased for you!
A very happy JB arrived at my home yesterday complete with the cased Atkin!
JB has asked me to share with you my thoughts on first sight of the gun.
A 12G S.L.E by Henry Atkin, No1 of a pair,circa 1895.An excellent example of the work of Henry Atkin, described by Teasedale-Buckle in his book, "Experts on Guns and Shooting"[Published in 1900] as one of the best gunmakers practicing in the London Trade.
The best quality replacement Damascus Barrels are engraved on the rib "Fitted by Webley and Scott limited, Birmingham." The "Limited",indicates that the barrels were made some time after 1897.
The barrel dimensions were measured and compared to the proof marks and confirmed to be," in proof". The chamber length was 2 1/2.Wall thickness of the Barrels was at least .025.
You will have seen from the pictures and comments by others that JB has a fine addition to his collection.
If this was my gun all that I would do is to; strip, clean and refinish the wood.
NB:
It is highly likely that the Damascus barrel blanks used to re;barrel this gun were drawn from old stock made By W & C Scott.so as to match the original barrel material.
It is not uncommon to encounter re;barreled #1 guns; likely because it was the #1 gun that got the most use!
John, congratulations on the new addition to your collection. Looking forward to seeing it.
Interesting thoughts about the tubes fitted by Webley & Scott. Of course that would have required reproof. And unless there was yet another reproof after that (I was unable to tell from the proofmarks I could read on the flats), the reproof for those fitted barrels took place no earlier than 1925. (Chamber length wasn't marked prior to that, other than for guns with exceptionally long chambers.) So the suggestion that the barrels are old stock makes a lot of sense. Not a lot of new Damascus barrels being made after 1925.
Re: Mr. Hebbes
Roy, it was such a pleasure to meet with you, see your guns/books/accoutrements, and bask in your experience and British vintage gun knowledge. Thank you. Spoiler alert: I did not buy just one fine gun on Sunday.
James, Patrick, and Stephen - thanks for your kind words and you can certainly see the Atkin or even shoot a round of skeet with it at the SXS classic this June.
I'll be looking forward to seeing it John. Patrick and I have been trading envious texts about it and your good fortune. LOL See you in June if not sooner.
John, I’m looking forward to June!
Lovely gun, enjoy it in good health!
Steve
FYI the barrels on the Atkin are new replacements.
New barrels are proof tested and marked to reflect the applicable standard of the day they are not marked reproof.
Original Barrels that exceed the dimensions set by the Original proof marks but have been reconditioned to meet the next higher Proof house standards, are marked as reproof, always provided they pass the proof test.
NB:
It is highly likely that the Damascus barrel blanks used to re;barrel this gun were drawn from old stock made By W & C Scott.so as to match the original barrel material.
Roy, I'm trying to match the above to your most recent post. My point--re the proofmarks--was that the barrels, whether new or old, would have been submitted for proof when they were refitted by Webley & Scott to the Atkin. And in the case of that particular set of proofmarks, which includes the 2 1/2 mark, the proof could not have taken place any earlier than 1925--chamber length being a required proofmark under the rules of 1925.
Hope this explains my reference to W & C Scott.
W & C Scott was, as you are probable aware, the fine gun making division Of Webley & Scott and would have been be the logical business location to make the replacement barrels for the Atkin.
Based on the proof marks, most guns of that era were using steel barrels. At that time Scotts would still have had access To Damascus barrel blanks, suitable for making the replacement barrels to matched the Atkin originals. Hence the proof marks appear to be out of historical sequence!.
You may recall that in recent years W.W.Greener made several guns fitted with damascus barrels, using old barrel blanks from their Inventory. Following passing proof test, these guns would have the proof marks of the day applied without any regard to the age of the Damascus barrels.
Hope this explains my reference to W & C Scott.
W & C Scott was, as you are probable aware, the fine gun making division Of Webley & Scott and would have been be the logical business location to make the replacement barrels for the Atkin.
Based on the proof marks, most guns of that era were using steel barrels. At that time Scotts would still have had access To Damascus barrel blanks, suitable for making the replacement barrels to matched the Atkin originals. Hence the proof marks appear to be out of historical sequence!.
You may recall that in recent years W.W.Greener made several guns fitted with damascus barrels, using old barrel blanks from their Inventory. Following passing proof test, these guns would have the proof marks of the day applied without any regard to the age of the Damascus barrels.
Thanks. We're on the same sheet of music. The chamber length mark (1925 rules of proof) on new Damascus barrels had me scratching my head.
Like Rocketman said, the forearm shows lots of use (checkering worn to the nub). Add replacement barrels, I’d wonder if not at least a bit tired, if not more so. I’d want to examine that gun closely before I jumped in. A lot would depend on the price for me. As a side note, I once asked David Trevallion what he thought about Henry Atkin guns, and his response to me......’they’re old’.
Not sure what that means.
When Dale Tate examined my 1930 Atkin lightweight self opener he was ecstatic over the condition and quality and felt that the resale value would be north of $20K... far more than I paid for it a couple years ago. I don't know how optimistic his estimate was.
As far as "old" goes, Atkin made guns until about 1960 - forget the date when they merged with Grant & Lang, et. al.
When the late English gun writer Gough Thomas decided to order a bespoke gun, it was--if I recall correctly--an Atkin. (Tried to find the reference but couldn't.)
When the late English gun writer Gough Thomas decided to order a bespoke gun, it was--if I recall correctly--an Atkin. (Tried to find the reference but couldn't.)
You are right, Larry. Said gun went at auction something like 15 years ago. Sadly, it was a tad too rich for my wallet at the time. One I have always been sorry to let get away.
DDA
When the late English gun writer Gough Thomas decided to order a bespoke gun, it was--if I recall correctly--an Atkin. (Tried to find the reference but couldn't.)
It has been sold (or at least come up for sale) twice recently;
https://www.bonhams.com/press_release/15159/http://www.carlrussellandco.com/gough-thomas-shotgun/
The Atkin gun #3512 ,made in 1948, for G T Garwood, is pictured on the dust cover of G.T.Garwoods [Gough Thomas] Book entitled ,"Gough Thomas's Gun BooK".
It is also reviewed in The Book "The House of Churchill," Author, D A Masters.
Carl Russell in the UK has Garwood's Atkin listed on his website. In fact I believe he reproduced another one just like it last year.
It is a very nice gun.
My 1926 Spring Opener is truly a "Best" gun. I prefer it to my Purdey
Carl Russell in the UK has Garwood's Atkin listed on his website. In fact I believe he reproduced another one just like it last year.
It is a very nice gun.
My 1926 Spring Opener is truly a "Best" gun. I prefer it to my Purdey
Mike,
Atkin, Grant, & Lang are remaking the GT gun with Kell style engraving. They have one listed for sale
GT sidelock ; you'll have to scroll down to see it.
Ken
Beautiful side lever shotgun.
Be sure to post pics when Chris finishes with his gun magic.
Carl Russell in the UK has Garwood's Atkin listed on his website. In fact I believe he reproduced another one just like it last year.
It is a very nice gun.
My 1926 Spring Opener is truly a "Best" gun. I prefer it to my Purdey
Mike
Not EXACTLY like the Garwood gun - the one listed has 29" barrels, Garwood's gun had 27" barrels. Just sayin'.
As a postscript to this thread I am happy to report that I really, really, like how the gun shoots and handles. Weight is 6 lbs, 7 oz. Chokes 1/2 and 1/4. Very gratifying when you break the pair and open the gun the spent hulls pop out in parallel arcs landing at the same time 6' away and 3" apart. Most of my guns have extractors and with the ejector guns I tend to catch the spent hulls in my hand to pocket. This one so far I let them fly because the beauty of their timing makes it remarkable. 125 years is not "too old" either when you out-shoot your squad.
There are some spectacular stock refurbs being posted lately. This is another one. I would love to see more. JBLondon, do you have some "before" photos to compare? After seeing the miracle performed on Recoil Rob's Purdey, I would love to see some more of these restorations.
There are some spectacular stock refurbs being posted lately. This is another one. I would love to see more. JBLondon, do you have some "before" photos to compare? After seeing the miracle performed on Recoil Rob's Purdey, I would love to see some more of these restorations.
Brent,
Go to page 1 for before pics.
Ken
Fantastic work, beautiful gun!
John, just like your MacNaughton, you Atkin turned out fantastic!
My 1926 Spring Opener is truly a "Best" gun. I prefer it to my Purdey
There are some who think the Atkin 'Spring Opener' is marginally better than the equivalent Purdey. As good materials and workmanship, slightly better variant on the Beesley patent (to even the closing force) and slightly better (more reliable and easier to set up) ejectors.
I own a nearly identical Atkin sidelever SLE SN:573 from 1890. I have tried several times to reach A,G&L in UK for info but haven't gotten a reply... Assuming it is COVID19 related closure.
My gun is also a #1... is it futile to hunt for #574 (gun #2)?
Me and my friend received a letter on our Atkins last year from AG&L. My friend has a very nice side lever Atkin made 1902 I believe.
As far as finding your gun's mate. Try looking and listing at Matched Pairs in the UK.
They have lots of guns listed, including my 1927 Spring Opener.
Thanks for the tip! I have registered my gun in their search database.
