S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
2 members (susjwp, Mark II),
847
guests, and
5
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,496
Posts545,392
Members14,412
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,740 Likes: 97
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,740 Likes: 97 |
excellent article...thank you...
it would be wonderful, if one day we could easily and affordabilily ship guns back and forth across the pond for rework and return...
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,753 Likes: 746
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,753 Likes: 746 |
Monoblocking is significantly stronger structurally
With monoblocing the base to which the barrels are sleeved is a solid piece and stronger than chopper lump barrels cut off and attached to. So with sleeved vintage guns the foundation while not as strong as monoblocking it is still robust and capable of handling the pressures of normal use and definitely pass proof.
I pointed out monoblocking in that it is similar to sleeving in terms of seams, which is the normal objection to sleeved vintage guns Ill give you the point about the forged, tool steel, monobloc being stronger than the remaining stub of a set of chopper lump barrels. That said, what percentage of guns actually have chopper lump barrels? Maybe 5%? Meaning, the very far larger percentage of guns were built with lesser methods of barrel construction. The stub can be brazed, soldered, silver soldered, welded, or, any combination of the above. All you guys bragging about your sleeved guns that passed proof 10-20 years ago havent been paying attention to the numbers of guns that are failing revised proof in Olde Blighty today. If you think your sleever would pass today, you might be in for a rude awakening. Sleeved guns are not accepted for reproof in France, because, French proof tends to tear them apart. Dont lament too much about your old gun not selling, ed. Most of the sleevers you linked to have been there for years, some for a decade. It isnt that hard to find a gun that hasnt been sleeved. Barrels are the heart of a gun. Buy the best you can. That, is never a sleever. Best, Ted
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 553 Likes: 56
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 553 Likes: 56 |
Ted,
There aren't only sleeved guns failing reproof in the UK. There are issues with older guns failing reproof due to the new rules.
Ken
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,124 Likes: 19
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,124 Likes: 19 |
Wow Ted I take it you dont like sleeved guns?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,753 Likes: 746
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,753 Likes: 746 |
Ted,
There aren't only sleeved guns failing reproof in the UK. There are issues with older guns failing reproof due to the new rules.
Ken I didnt say it was only sleeved guns. Best, Ted
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 737 Likes: 23
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 737 Likes: 23 |
I have a seamlessly sleeved Scott back action crystal window gun. The work was done in England and done well. No worries and I would buy another. I don't give a rat about resale value and I'm quite sure that it will give good service long after I'm gone.
Last edited by Hammergun; 01/17/20 07:47 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,703 Likes: 103
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,703 Likes: 103 |
Last edited by Geo. Newbern; 01/27/20 06:30 PM. Reason: added pic
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 138
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 138 |
Beautiful LC Smith! What a shame it would be to have thrown it on the scrap iron pile. Ted, you know absolutely nothing about shotgun sleeving. Rather than continue to comment out of complete ignorance, read the linked article in The Vintage Gun Journal. The information is excellent. It provides a very good overview of the process and some good commentary on economics and market value. Im not advocating for sleeved guns. I dont much care if anyone buys one. I enjoy shooting mine and appreciate them as a good value. But I do hate seeing misinformation spread on a double gun board. Id recommend reading the article, and others, and judging for yourself.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,753 Likes: 746
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,753 Likes: 746 |
Nothing I have stated is untrue. The only misinformation is someone claiming they are as good as new. They are not.
You, have stated you like them because they are cheaper than the correct repair, or, a gun in better condition.
Continue as you were. If I were to own an English best, again, it sure as hell wouldnt be a sleever. I read the article when it came out, noting that it was written by people who do sleeving. If you had comprehended what they wrote, you would see they made a strong case for it not being cost effective, most of the time.
You comprehend little of what you read. Best, Ted
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,124 Likes: 19
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,124 Likes: 19 |
You comprehend little of what you read. I think this is a two way street, I am sure they werent literal when staying good as new even with the correct repair it still isnt good as new. You are right about one part of the article but it is a very weak point you make, yeah its not always cost effective, especially on a gun worth 95 gbp. Regardless on how you personally feel sleeving is a very economical and practical repair, same can be said of stock repairs or splicing a stock. There are far greater examples of successes than failures for sleeving and just as the article says you have a choice pay for the quality of the repair! Using a cheap repair as an example of how all sleeving works isnt fair! Here is an example of what the article was trying to convey. The first photo is was done by a well known maker and worth the price for the grade of the gun, the second is at a lower price point per grade of the gun. You can see the difference. Both are great jobs but one was taken a step further to make a seem less and smooth transition from breech to muzzle. The other you can see where the tubes were joined but the rest of the barrel werent struck.
|
|
|
|
|