from a best guns price? I suspect this has been asked before but my research brought up questions about pressure and other factors. I have had sleeved guns that were excellent but they weren't best guns. If the gun and stock are in good shape and the sleeving is invisible and balanced well, does it still take a big cut in price?

Yes.

Best,
Ted

I agree with Ted. Sleeving turns a gun from collector material to a shooter. Far better than being sent to the scrap heap but value takes a beating.
Steve

This thread has 13 pages and no answer. Sleeved

As you can see, some people wouldn't touch a sleeved gun. Others look at them as a shooter for a more reasonable price.

Ken

Yes, big time in USA.

To me, the barrels are the heart of the gun. Everything else is ancillary. So IMO if a Purdey has its barrels replaced or sleeved by a top gunsmith it is no longer a Purdey but has some Purdey parts. And it’s value would reflect that. Just my two cents worth of opinion.

Joe, that does seem to be the general belief however it kind of mystifies me. A new set of barrels can be made or the gun sleeved, but to completely remake an action, sidelock parts etc would seem to be much more labor intensive.

I don't know, I have been contemplating buying an action with shot barrels (but a usable stock) in a UK auction and having it invisibly sleeved to my preferred barrel dims with 2 3/4 chambers and re-proofed in the UK then imported to the US. It probably wouldn't be a Purdey action or top tier maker, just a "fine" graded action from some little known or trade maker. I wouldn't expect to make money on it, but to have a high quality one off shooter that can take modern ammo for around 4K. I agree that collector value is shot with a sleeved gun, but I don't really care because I am not a collector.

Nitrah, you are correct about the costs and efforts involved but the fact remains that its the barrels more than any other part that determines the quality of the gun. Heck, I guess a nail and hammer could be sufficient to fire it.

A friend of mine has an early Purdey hammer gun that began life as a muzzleloader in 1845 or thereabouts. Barrels back then were very highly valued and sometime in the 1890's the owner had Purdey make a complete breechloading action for these barrels! Anything and everything was done to preserve the barrels back then.

Have the barrels on the gun in question been shortened? If "yes" then the value would already have been destroyed. If the "short" barrels are original length, IMO if you have them sleeved you might be cutting the value by 1/3 to 1/2. YMMV

You would be putting a bunch of money into the gun, AND cutting the value. If you have to buy the gun, you are out more money.
Might make sense on grandpa’s gun. But, I still champion the notion of just walking away, and buying a better gun. One that is in proof, sound as a dollar, and needs nothing.

Best,
Ted

The answer is on Holt's auction. "Barrels replaced by another" and "barrels sleeved" are the kiss of death to the value of a top tier English gun. They are nice guns, but the price is very much less than a high condition original gun. Of course, even worse is "wall thickness below recommended minimums". Those wild and crazy Brits!!

Bottom line: sleeving and rebarreling done right are fine for using guns sold at the right price. The great shots of the 1900s, the original customers of bespoke gunmakers, rebarreled their guns. If it was OK for them, it is probably OK for us.

The collecting thing is a little strange for bespoke items. It is like collecting Savile Row suits, OK for tailors who want to study the stitching etc, but kind of strange for users of the item.

Bottom line. Buy a better gun.

Best,
Ted

Here is my take on this.
1. Sleeving will be a discount argument whether good or bad.
The amount will depend (MHO) on who wants to buy and who wants to sell. I would use it as a bargaining chip in every case, and I suspect the market operates that way.
2. I think we do know how Ted feels about this. Maybe he should give it a rest.......

A guy asked a question. Maybe you should start your own forum where you pick and choose who responds.

I promise I won’t be there.


Best,
Ted

Touchy, touchy......
Question asked, my answer given.
Carry on Ted, I aint stopping you
Just a c o m m e n t.

Nobody ever came up with a third answer to the question I asked and,
provided two answers for. That being “Reasons to buy a sleeved gun”.

I came up with “They are cheap” and, “Other guys have them”.

Indulge me. Come up with a sound third reason.


Best,
Ted

It really seems pretty simple to me. if you're a collector, then no. if your just a hunter,then you can get a better gun that would normally be out of your price range.

" Just a hunter" ?

SRH

Ted,

This article Sleeving provides a rationale for sleeving. You may not agree with it, but it is the reason sleeving was done.

Ken

Your link leads back to the last conversation we had on sleeving. Incidentally, I read the article you meant to link to. It was by a gun seller who offers this form of repair, and, the point was very clearly made that it usually is not cost effective.


https://www.vintageguns.co.uk/magazine/twenty-first-century-sleeving

This was what you meant to link to. My opinion hasn’t changed since I read it, long before either of these conversations.

Best,
Ted

Between a SXS with original mint damascus barrels and an identical one sleeved with Boehler Super Blitz tubes by an experienced craftsman, I would opt for the sleeved one. Objectively it is the better gun.

I appreciate everyone's feedback. I have owned sleeved guns that were excellent but bought them knowing I was paying less and would likely get less when I sell. If I knew I was going to keep a gun forever, I would have no problem with a well done sleeved gun. I am wrestling with a gun I'd like to buy, but not knowing if I'll want to keep it long term, have to think ahead to what happens if and when I want to sell.

Of late, I would say that isn’t just a consideration with sleeved guns. Many excellent doubles linger on used gun racks, especially 12 gauge versions. Buyers are a fickle lot, and I’ve both heard and said “this is my last good gun” only to be dismayed when it didn’t turn out that way. In the case of a sleeved gun, there is the possibility you will be buried with it, and not because you requested that.

The choice of a gun to purchase never comes down to just two examples, and never to just a Damascus and a sleeved example. Keep looking. Unmodified, and in-proof will be points more important at the time of sale than what tubes were used at the time of sleeving.

Best,
Ted

Thanks Ted for fixing the link. I'm not sure it linked back to the original thread. I agree sleeving is not cost effective on when it costs more than the gun is worth. However, no repairs are worth more than the gun is worth.

Ken

I am just a hunter

Is it not true that sleeving has put many a gun back in the field as opposed to just being a wall decoration?
What is a best gun truelly worth if it can only hang on a wall and is unshootable?

Whatever the market will bear.

I’m not concerned about saving guns that are unsuitable for use without drastic repair methods. We live in a era when sellers like SKB struggle to get $1200 for a between the wars, long barreled, in proof, English boxlock, that simply needs to be hunted, not fixed.

Best,
Ted

Added an edit to note the barrels were original, not sleeved when I bought it and I just happened to know it was OE of pigeon configuration.

IMO, sleeving (good job commensurate with gun's OQ grade) will take a gun to Current Condition level six (CC6). It takes a pretty good gun to make this a financial break-even adventure (the cost of sleeving is more or less fixed but becomes a lower % of value as the OQ goes up).

One man's experience:
I had a London auction cheapo BLE with baaaaad barrels (30" cut to 26" and honed to "thin") - a good candidate for sleeving. The redeeming features were cheap price, good action, good stock, and "James Woodward and Sons" engraved on the sides. Oh, yes, the one and only BLE Pigeon style JW made (1946). Could I get my money back out of it? Not likely. But then I don't plan to try.

So how did that work out? I have no regrets and love the gun. It came to me within tolerances of my specs for weight, balance, unmounted swing effort and mounted swing effort. Stock dimensions need a wee bit of bending for cast-off. Thank you Toby Barclay.

Dig Hadoke theorized that a bespoke equivalent best work gun can be had for some $20K by buying a good SLE action but ratted out barrels and stock. Replace barrels with new ones to your spec. and restock to your dimensions. VIOLA! A virtually new bespoke best work gun. The above was a first test of this theory - keep it cheap and gain some real world experience.

DDA

A wall hanger Purdey has value of about $1830; BV1-OQ1-CC9.

DDA

I think those numbers are changing, perhaps more quickly than we imagine. The post on the reproofed English boxlock, that was worth 200 English pounds or so, in olde Blighty, was alarming.

Best,
Ted

It has been like that for years in the UK Ted. Very little demand for non ejector side by sides. It is only slightly better demand wise on thus side of the pond.

The market is now punishing those who hoarded good guns on the pretext of "collecting". Hoarding kept the prices artificially high for decades. It also prevented new shooters from getting to know the virtues of good doubles, they just could not afford them. So they opted for autos which have advanced, offering customising features. In Europe now you can buy top name Italian autos with stock shims, chokes and interchangeabl beads, cased for less than 1000 Euro new. It is the standard by which other options are judged.

I have friends who hoarded dozens of top doubles. Most of them shoot autos by the way.I cannot say I feel sorry for them now when they are trying to unload their "collections" and no young shooter wants them. How can you convince anyone to buy your Fabbris when you yourself shoot a Benelli Rafaello!

I looked into buying used guns, in France, and bringing them here to sell, circa 1997 or so. It wasn’t doable. Run of the mill Charlin and Darne guns were 3K. Nobody was going to buy them for that, here. Run of the mill boxlocks, sans ejectors, were most of 1K. Those numbers were skewed a bit, I think, due to the fact it was really only pretty wealthy people who seemed to be able to hunt, regularly, in France.
I believe that has changed, as well. Looking at French gun seller websites, everything has come down in price. It seems it is often just family members trying to unload some now dead ancestors pride and joy.
My kid, will be shooting his trap league this year with an O/U. But, I think he is the only one. He is looking forward to using the gun because it was his grandfather’s, not for any love of blued steel and walnut, that I can discern, but, time will tell.
Most of the kids have a black pump or auto. The club rental guns are the same thing.
Chris has been pestering me to shoot the gun since I gave him custody of the Beretta on New Year’s Day. We will try today. The weather has been awful, and he is excited to try.

Best,
Ted

Ted, it is not only in France, the situation is similar in Italy and Spain. The Italian site Armi Usate has many bargain priced SOs and the like.

There was a period of time, 10 years or so ago, when the Spanish government levied new taxes on gun ownership, and many were just dumped, here. The price of everything Spanish suffered as a result. I bought a clean Firearms Imports labeled Uggy boxlock for $400. It did not come from Spain when the tax was levied, but, became cheap as a direct result of it.
I think the decline of the Spanish gun market, including the wholesale shuttering of their domestic builders, began to happen in earnest with that tax. Since the social engineers had to realize the tax would never provide either a steady or increasing source of revenue, it always made me wonder if that was their goal, or, if it was just another (successful, by the way) method of disarming a population?

Best,
Ted

The European firearms regulations have an ostensible goal, ie to regulate the trade, but also tangible side effects that directly and I believe intentionally hurt that trade. As for instance the need for export and import licences when sending an already licensed and registered shotgun to the makers for warranty work. It needs FOUR licences to make the round trip, two export two imposrt licences. Each one takes weeks to obtain and the costs can climb to hundreds of Euro.