doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com How do you define a best gun?

Many makers made occasional Best guns, a few makers made nothing but and a fair few never bothered, it just wasn't their market.
Most makers were capable if pushed.
The only sure way of telling a Best gun is to look at it through the eyes of someone who has minutely examined, externally and internally, a multitude of guns raging from the fabulous to the ghastly.
People are always tempted to offer particular points of style and design that make a gun Best or otherwise but there are always exceptions.
I have worked on guns that had interceptor sears, non through lumps and were stocked to the fences and they were without a shadow of doubt NOT a Best gun.
I have also worked on many guns that had no interceptor sears, through lumps and 'flat-back' actions that definitely were a Best gun.
I have seen guns by Boss and Purdey were the execution of the engraving was pretty appalling but internally they are every bit a Best gun.
I have seen border engraved H&H's that were finished to the full extent of a Best gun.
I have also see beautifully engraved guns, giving the impression of fabulous quality that were a mass of poorly fitted parts and filing marks inside.
Generally only experience will tell you the difference between a Best and second grade (or worse).

Toby, very good explanation, thanks.

Maybe look at auction prices realized for what you like and compare them to similar guns that you may not be interested in. Chances are the most expensive ones are the best ones for fairly narrow reasons.

English makers were always looking for a marketing edge and as a result there was a mad rush during the 19th century and earlier to invent and patent thousands of different ideas to "improve" a gun. By far the majority quickly and thankfully slipped into obscurity. London, being the main cosmopolitan center of the country, was always considered to have craftsmen and products that were superior to the rest of the country. And they certainly didn't discourage that image. Competition was stiff between all gun makers but the London gunmakers inherited the "best" title. And competition between these top London makers kept them pushing forward trying to never be viewed as a second tier company. And indeed the results of this demanding market produced some of the finest arms the world has ever seen. There were many provincial makers aggressively competing with the entire industry and a number produced arms ever bit as fine as anything London produced but they never could overcome the cachet of "London best".

What is a best? I think the word itself is an oxymoron, since nothing made by human hands can ever be considered to be the best. Someone could always make it a little better. But in my mind it is a gun that stands out from all the rest as being nearly perfectly constructed in all respects, always bearing in mind the constraints encountered during the time of its manufacture. Every area of England outside of London produced examples of this work, Birmingham, Liverpool, Wolverhampton, Glasgow, Edinburgh, and many, many market towns.

The attitude that a best gun must be stocked to the fences, not have a through lump, etc., is the result of the homogenization of all the ideas preceding it having been sifted out and funneled through a narrow opening. And I think this thought process is wrong. Each gun, regardless of its mechanical process should be critically judged independent of the standard.

A best gun is the one I'm trying to sell at the moment.

Best Gun - A pompous English term for a gun that must have several specific details. To qualify for the title, it must have a Sidelock action with Intercepting Sears , have Chopper Lump Barrels , be Stocked to the Fences and have its lumps concealed by its floorplate . While almost any respectable gunmaker can accomplish these requirements, the implication, of course, is that it is also built to the highest standard of quality.

http://www.hallowellco.com/abbrevia.htm#B

To which I would add, "noun; see swindle".

I once owned a "best gun" by definition, since it was a Boss&Co. product:



Unfortunately it had a slight air conditioning problem:




A sage from Tennessee who frequents this site suggested I use it as a tomato stake. I followed good advice and did not spend any money restoring that one...Geo

Bruce Owen, former production manager at Purdey wrote that with the advent of CNC machines work has become more accurate, and steels used upgraded due to CNC machinery needs.

So if in the past Purdey made "best" guns, can we say that in the CNC era they have upgraded to "bester"?

As for best being English by definition, the poster has not examined high grade Darne and Ideal, or Rizzini Fratelli, Fabbri, Desenzani, Bossis, Perugini Visini and the list of names ending in a vowel can get long.

For someone who has no interest in English guns, you sure have an opinion on them. You seem to know all about the English gun trade and the making of a Best gun.

Well, yes. Having seen the underside of the English shotgun trade I�m of the opinion they are a poor value in shotguns. Hence, I have no interest in English shotguns.


All, no. Enough, yes. See above.



Whenever I see someone writing about �Best� guns (capital �B�, no less) I cannot help but wonder how many times he has bought an interest in the Brooklyn Bridge.