Recently John Boyd, a member of this website, (aka Arrieta2) posted a comment about how some gun auctions knowledge of guns was not what he expected.

At about the same time as Mr. Boyd's post to this website, a friend of mine and also a member of this website sent me a link to a gun that is asserted to be a Holland & Holland hammergun listed on Gunbroker.com. I viewed the H&H gun listed several times and evaluated it versus what I read in the description of the gun at the listing on Gunbroker versus what I could clearly and plainly see of the gun in the many photos attached to the listing. I also evaluated the gun from knowledge that I have about the history of H&H and English guns in general. I also made mental notes about the gun condition and character that a prudent potential buyer might have.

Members of this website experience and expertise of evaluating English guns varies from Zero to a significant "great deal".

Mr. Boyd's comments plus other thoughts that I had about gun knowledge of sellers and buyers prompted me to decide to write this post and to offer it as a test of your skill and knowledge in evaluating an English gun.

So, "here is the deal and test". Those of you who would like to take the test view the Gunbroker listing (as posted below) and as you view the listing and the written details and observe the photos, take notes and then post a reply to this post of your opinion and what you see that you may consider different from what you read of the gun's description. I would also solicit any observations that you have of the gun that are not indicated in the written description; and lastly what questions you might pose to the seller.

I anticipate that this will be a very interesting exercise, and in the end I will post the list of what my 5-10 minute "looksee" of the gun produced.

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/789512101

I'm not an expert, but that guy has at least 3 or 4 nearly mint/new condition 19th century guns. Case colors, checkering, and bluing unworn. Weird dimensions to one of them, and I could find a lot to quibble with. Current bids are nearly peanuts.

A lot of too good to be true for me.

I'm definitely no expert and haven't looked at Hammer guns. A few things to question:

1) hinge pin does not fit correctly. The slot seems a buggered.
2) the trigger plate does not fit into the bottom of the action correctly. Maybe this is a result of the rehardening. However, I would think an H&H restoration would be better.
3) the barrels show a LP with a 7. The rest of the date is not legible. Not sure why the barrel proofs would be barely visible. If H&H redid the gun in 1992, then the barrels were done earlier.
4) if this is an H&H refurbish, where is the documentation.

What else did I miss?

Ken

There's an address problem as well I think.

If H&H made new barrels, wouldn't they put the 33 Bruton Street address on them?

Ken

BEWARE! Several years ago I purchased a Parker from Commonwealth Arsenal with a three day return policy. Upon receipt of the gun I discovered the barrel wall thickness was well below what is normally considered safe. I immediately contacted Commonwealth (via email, he would not accept phone calls) and said I was returning the gun. Rather than refund the money though the seller said he would relist it and give me whatever it sold for less 10% commission! Yes my bad—in the fine print at that time under the “Additional Terms Of Sale” tab that was the terms of a refund. Two lessons I learned: 1, always parse all of the fine print, and 2, never do business with Commonwealth Arsenal again!

No, I did not return the gun. The original barrels are way beyond safe and I have been seriously considering destroying them before someone after me should fire them. I luckily found a widowed set of barrels that were a perfect match and now reside permanently. I now have a shooter not worth half what I have in it. Really soured me.

They have 33 Bruton address, see photos 33 & 34.


However, proof marks should be metric if done in 1992, no?

After looking at the photos and reading the description, my first impression was that the description has a lot of hyperbole and questionable "facts." The gun is not restored, rather refinished and not to a very high standard, IMO. Replaced barrels always raise a flag as to use and care. 'Nuff said.

H&H is BV1. IMO, this gun is fairly graded as OQ6 - OQ7, so say OQ6.5. Current Conditiion level seems to be "Shootable but needs some repairs and refinishing or refinished with barrels or stock replaced." So, CC6. BV1-OQ6.5-CC6 = $1,672. If some wished to value the new barrels higher than that for a shooter and not a collector then they might be willing to kick the $ up a bit.

Hammer gun valuations are always a bit open as the population of hammer guns is relatively small. Need to remind ourselves that value and price are not the same thing. Value is someone's best guess whereas price is an agreement between an able seller and an able and willing buyer.

DDA

Original hardening looks nothing like that. That is a mess.

Back then did Holland and Holland even make their own guns ?

He also has a nice looking Purdey listed....too bad it was originally made for a midget.



Our lOcal X'spurt John Roberts will be along in minute to verify it's pristiness....

Just a cursory inspection, but H&H sources their cases from Huey in Kansas City, Missouri? So a cobbled together case & case label printed from the internet. From the images I don't see evidence the tubeset(s) are chopperlump.

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

I forgot to note that there's one phrase I really fancy:

"Now in a nearly-new state of preservation"

So currently it is in a steady state & as new? Might need to tidy up those screw-heads before even considering to making that statement?

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

It’s an old gun that’s been redone. Probably made in Birmingham anyway

That gun is shiny. Too bad it shines in all the wrong places. Clearly restored by a non British trained person. Checkering should be flat top. Case colors just wrong. Proof marks don’t agree with the narrative. If fact nothing much does. It’s just a shooter now and the buyer needs to price it that way. But a sucker is born every day and someone might pay for ay too much. Just won’t be me.

I was thinking that several of those screw heads had already been tidied up, judging by the width of the slots. Just not "tidied up" enough to remove all of the damage. The poor fitting between some of the metal parts makes a strong argument for not sending out a vintage gun for case coloring. The garish colors are certainly vibrant, but they don't hide the washed-out engraving. I doubt the gun left the Holland shop that way originally, and kinda doubt they'd let it leave their shop that way after a 1992 redo.

I am wondering what that little dowel repair is in picture # 58? I don't know enough about Hollands to comment about a lot of things, but am curious if the detail around the keels at the muzzles is correct? The forend latch lever should probably close flush with its' housing. Some of the checkering is flat topped, so we can give the restorer partial credit. The barrel blacking looks uneven, and worse than my very first attempt at rust bluing. Maybe I could get a job as a blacker at Holland.

Say what you will about the seller, but they certainly provided enough photos to make a judgement about their optimistic description. Now we will see if excited auction bidders let their emotions over-rule their eyeballs.

The screws can't be made right, considering the width of the slots. The hand screw is especially bad. The hinge pin is a mess. I would insist on some paper on this gun, paper on every phase of the redo. The stock can be made 14" or better with a proper pad, if there is a proper pad of a gun of this era. How about those colors.

Aside from the poor quality 'restoration',,it's a bad example of what the name Holland & Holland would generally bring to most peoples mind.

The overall fit of the metal to metal is bad,,and you can't blame it all on re-CCH. Wood to metal fit is in the same zone in many places,,it is an H&H after all.

The engraving quality is fair at most. It doesn't even match from part to part in the scroll format.
The simple border as around the lock plates can be just that but it should be cut with precision just as well. Not a sloppy quick go around just to have something there.
The wedge of scroll on the bottom ahead of the trigger plate is way off center (Pic 61) the engraver tried to compensate for the right leaning pattern by adding a couple extra medium size scrolls to the pattern on the left side.

It all reminds me too much of a cheaper Birmingham gun or even a Belgian made gun.
The name changed and H&H added. Wouldn't be the first time that's happened.
Even Spanish guns have been made into 'real' H&H shotguns,,name, proofs and all of it.

The H&H name engraved on the lock plates isn't anything of quality lettering when view close up. A quick lettering job with tilted letters. A handy space in the pattern for it though.

The frame is not symetrical in shape in some areas. Most easily seen in the pic #29 where the top tang narrows right about at the point where the top lever ends. One side not nearly matching the other.
Maybe on a Belgian Beauty but I'd not expect it on a London.

The London proofs on the water table near the back by the standing breech. The proof marks themselves not quite looking like London strikes,,especially the Crown/GP.
The front end of the table clean of marks. But something appears in the blue streak on the right side in the pic72.
An old #, or marking?? or maybe a fuzz ball in the pic!

There was something, another mark or letter, under the 'S' in 'Tons' in pic #75. Two parallel bars nicely get hidden (almost) by the curves of the S.
Those bbl proofs look hokey to me anyway. There are lots of sets of Brit proof mark stamps around, just like everything else.

..But the firing pins are Gold Plated,,and the paper Label says what it is,,,so it must be a good one.

Just some things I see. Maybe I've just seen too much crap go on to believe anything is real anymore..


added,,The screws can be made right that's no problem. It's just standard work,, but did they have to tweak every last one of them

Jack Rowe once posed a question to me: "Hey Joe, do you know why the sun never sets on the British Empire"?

"No, Jack, why"?

"Simply because it doesn't trust them"!

You can’t even see the hand pin. The hand pin is underneath the trigger guard tang. The only part of the hand pin you can see is the end of it that’s filed flush with the rear of the top tang, hardly an indication that it’s a “mess”. The Breech pin is underneath the top lever/or top tang. That is called the breech pin.

I called Holland and Holland years ago about restoring a well used 8 Bore Holland double rifle. They would do the restoration EXCEPT they said that they NEVER redo the case colors. Too much chance of warping. Holland would never have left a gun in that condition leave their shop! IF that gun was redone by Hollands, what do you think it cost? New barrels and restoration over $20,000.00 I'll bet! Not done at Holland's shop!

As I stated in my original post here are my notes from the quick look I had of the Holland & Holland:

--Gun is out of proof as I see no evidence of a "R" re-proof stamp on the action flats placed there by the relevant proof house after the re-color case hardening.

--The barrels are dove tail barrels not chopper lump barrels as described.

--The replacement barrels were proofed between the years 1954 and 1989, not 1992 as described.

--Only serial number I can see is on the fore-end iron, which raises considerable concern to me as even the trigger guard hand piece is not engraved with the serial number as per standards of English guns.

--Need to ask the seller for photos that show the serial number on the barrels as well as the barrel maker and barrel lump machinist stamps along with barrel bore and wall thickness. Would not expect any reply to request.

--A prudent call to H&H about the origin of this gun and its replacement barrels before anyone should bid.

--Holland & Holland did not have a factory in 1885-86 and so this gun was not made there as per description.

--Barrel blacking and polishing is a third rate job.

--Holland & Holland did not have this gun re-color case hardened, it is not English work and further all the screws would have re-engraved or replaced. When I lived and worked in England nearly 20 years ago, I learned from Malcolm Cruxton of Price Street Birmingham that the English gun trade was very opposed to re-case hardening guns and that no one in the trade would ever even consider re-case hardening a double rifle due to the potential dangers of a future cracked action.

--The gun is a 2nd or 3rd quality Birmingham built hammergun, not of the quality as described.

--Is the description of the gun trumponian hyperbole to try to overcome lack of knowledge.

--The labels of this gun's case as well as the gun case of the Purdey that is for sale by the same seller says it all to me: "tarted up"--- let the buyer beware.

In the past I have seen a complete 20 bore SLE "Holland & Holland" gun that was built as a complete counterfeit fake that fooled a person who had been in the gun business for a long time. Although he finally determined it was a fake himself--too late.

I once appraised a genuine FAKE Purdey for a Virginia dealer. I was hoping to be offered the gun at a reduced price because it really was a great gun. I was not offered the gun and I assumed my appraisal was entered in the round file. I appraised a very high grade smallbore Parker for the same dealer that was a built up gun with ruined, severely pitted and overbored non original barrels. The gun is now happily in the hands of a collector who should know better. The collector is a friend and I am silent on the subject of this gun.

Should it not be Henry Holland?

I once went in a dealers shop who knew I liked doubles. He spotted me coming in & said I've got one you need to look at. He had a boxlock marked Holland Holland. I told him there should be an And between the two Hollands, so I didn't believe it was original, besides being a boxlock. He said well they built some lower grade boxlocks, this wasn't a Best, but was still H&H. I then took it apart & it was covered with Belgian proof marks, so told him I'd pass. He would never admit it was not a genuine H&H.

I kinda felt sure he knew it but didn't think I would & thought he'd put one over on me.

Good thread. Most educational
I can look at that gun and know it doesn't look right; I can identify some of the reasons why, but others have offered far more explicit detail about what's actually wrong - and there's a lot.

Most of the guys here would smell something funny with that one. Not my area of interest, but, it looked to be heavily refinished, with a heavy hand.
Sparkly, and not in a good way, as well.

Best,
Ted

In photos 29 and 31, take a look at where the wider part of the top tang meets the narrower part. You don't need a precision instrument to see that the rear end of the wider part doesn't come close to being the same on the left and the right. Even the scroll in the engraving on the right side is more crowded to account for the difference. A Crescent built on a bad day has more symmetry.

With 7 days to go, and the price already up to $2525.00, it will be interesting to see the final hammer price on this one. The refund policy doesn't provide much hope of recourse for the lucky buyer.

Huey case is worth way more than the gun!

The seller often has some attractive guns but Lord help a buyer who thinks he has (1) an accurate description or, (2) the right of return and refund. See my post on page 1.

That gun looks amazing like the one that was in the latest Poulin's auction, and went for over $5,000. Poulins emailed me that the consignor was the one who had it rebarreled by H&H in the 80's. I was questioning the case colors too, strikes me as very gaudy for a true H&H. I spoke with the manager of the NY H&H showroom a couple years ago about rebarreling, he said it would be close to $30,000 for a new set of barrels. Odd that if the consignor had plunked down that kind of money (it would have been cheaper in the 80's, but then add in the rest of the refinish), why would he let it sell for $5,000?? Strikes me as more likely a cheaply done refinish, and had the barrel makers engrave the proper address on the rib. The engraving is less than on my similar vintage ones, and others that I've seen. So very "tarted up"

Of interest too, the Lang he is selling (789511707) appears exactly like the one from Poulins as well. Looks like C.A. gets some of their stock from there... with a tremendous amount of added hyperbole added to the description

As to Common Wealth, I have bough a double there that turned out to be exactly as pictured and described. I've been very happy with it. Their "return" policy is pure B.S. My only negative with them is I emailed them multiple times to go see a gun they had listed while I was in VA and they took forever to get back with me. It was the week before Christmas, so that may well have played a part in that

My apologies for leading any of you astray when I stated that the subject Holland hammergun was out of proof as its action was not reproofed after re-case hardening.

I have since learned from one of my gunmaker friends in Birmingham, UK that re-proofing is not required by UK proof houses on re-case hardened actions.

This fact is counter intuitive to reasonable thought to my mind as a re-case hardened action is brought up to a temperature of nearly 1500F degrees and then stressed severely by being submersed in cold water.

I stand corrected and gobsmacked.

A distinguished gunsmith from one of UK's big houses suggested to me during a restoration he wouldn't advise case-hardening for that reason.

I don't understand that reasoning, bushveld. If it was casehardened in that exact same way when built new, why would it be any more unsafe when done so again? Before it is (re)casehardened it is annealed, which supposedly relieves it of all internal stresses, basically putting it back in the same state it was in before being casehardened the first time. Unless there's something I'm misunderstanding about it?

Maybe that is the reason the proof house has the stance it does concerning it.

SRH

ThAt's new one on me.

Any time a piece of steel is heat-treated, either case hardened or through hardened it does indeed go through heating to above its critical temperature & then a sudden Quench in some form. In case hardening this quenching medium is normally oil or water, depending upon the exact composition of the base metal.

There are what is known as Air-Hardening steels & also Precipitation Hardening steels, particularly in the stainless line. Neither of these latter are used much in gun-making.

While I was NOT a heat-treater nor an Engineer, I have seen many parts go through heat treatment. Personally, I would never subject an older gun of mine to be Re-Case Hardened. The original hard case is still there, all you gain is cosmetics.

You gain cosmetics at a considerable expense & run the risk of warpage or even a cracked frame. In many cases, we do not even know for certain what the exact alloy of the frame is. Sure we know it is a comparatively mild steel, but even then differing amounts of carbon content & other trace elements can affect the outcome.

I am absolutely amazed that British proof law would not demand re-proof after a re-hardening.

Unless you are Ed the torch the temp is not that high when recoloring/re-case hardening an action kind of a slow bake in bone meal charcoal....it's not a task for the back yard tinker'r for sure.

In all I've ever read or saw on vintage gun making I don't recall anyone dunking an action in a bucket of oil or water to harden it.

The actions were cast in molds...I thought shotgun action hardening was more just a surface hardening to prevent wear and still allow the action to have some flex and the color was just a by product of the process.

You saw it right here, folks.

Complete ignorance.


Best,
Ted

No, the grammar was sorta OK.........

Should be unfathomable, but given that it is the homeless idiot, not so much.

"IF" the temperature does not exceed the critical temp, which varies a bit according to the amount of carbon in the steel it does not Harden, Period. In fact, it will draw/temper the hardness which was put in when the gun was built. An action can be "Colored" below that temp, but you w2ill lose the case hardness & only gain the color. Case Hardening, technically known as Carburizing does indeed harden the surface, "The Case". It does take the sudden cooling to affect the hardening process. When the critical temp is reached the molecules in the steel are re-arranged & the part also becomes Non-Magnetic. The Quench "Locks" the molecules in their new position, if it colled slowly they would go back to their original position & you would have Annealed the part.

If you get the part hot enough to color but below that critical temp, then the hardness is as I said tempered out & you have lost that hard case which was present. As I said I was not a heat-treater, but have seen it done in the machine shops I worked in, though in these cases it was done for the effect, not for color. Parts normally came out a grey. They were "Always" quenched in either oil or water. Some form of animal charcoal is used in color hardening, to obtain better colors.

I will agree it is not a Backyard project. If one insists on having it done send it to someone who is very well versed in the operation, & also do not allow it to be simply re-colored without re-hardening. Me, I will live without the color rather than risk damaging a gun that has not been made for many, many years. The original makers likely allowed for some number of failures.

In my 35+ years in machine shops I never saw a part go through heat-treating of any sort, either through or Case hardening which "Did Not Move" by some amount from the configuration which it had prior to being treated.
Take it for whatever its worth to you or totally ignore it. It's your gun, not mine that'll be exposed.

Tell us what I'm ignorant about Mr. Shittle'bean.

Tell us what I'm ignorant about Mr. Shittle'bean.



Screw grip guns-remember when you were arguing with an actual English gunmaker about that? Color case hardening, and how it happens. Water is a big part of the process. I’m also going to add anything to do with metal forging, since you believe guns are made in “molds”.
Hilarious.
And, sad.

Best,

Ted

And you don't think vintage receivers were cast ?

I think the Savage you were trying to chisel a few bucks off of the price to buy for Grandsonny in the “for sale” section, right before the lister told you to sick it, might have been.

Did you call Purdey or Boss and ask? Or, don’t they answer the phone anymore when Frank Cox shows up on the caller ID?

Hey, EVERY Darne receiver is a forging.

Best,
Ted

Most all vintage English built hammer guns, if you look closely, you can see the forging lines, looks like layers of sediment, usually wavy, almost like a type of Damascus....joE, those are indeed forgings. About the only parts on an English gun that would’ve been cast were bits like top levers, hammers, trigger guard tangs, forend escutcheons, etc.

I was told years ago that there is a risk of warping the action when a gun is recasé colored. Makes wonder about all the “restorations” being done. The case coloring looks great but was the steel rehardend?

In a restoration where a quality case coloring is done, the steel is definitely hardened, but only on the surface. Actions are very rarely warped by a competent case colorer.

They can be over hardened as was a Marlin 1895 I was restoring a couple years ago. It was a well known outfit in Illinois. Fortunately, there are many other colorers with much better quality control.

Probably the best discussion of the process can be read at http://marlin-collectors.com/forum/viewt...e8d23ba982a7747

I don't have any of my guns rehardened for color. Barrels blacked, checkering recut and wood refinished yes. Trigger guards and bits reblued by charcoal blueing or nitre blueing, but no re-casehardening for me. And I think the guns look just fine that way.

I am in total agreement with that Hammergun. Let no one fool you, Any time a piece of steel passes through that "Critical" temperature with one being Sudden, there "IS" a possibility of warpage.
As I stated earlier with over 35 years in machine shops where I saw heat-treating done on a near daily basis, I do not recall Ever seeing a part come out with absolutely No Movement what-so-ever. This includes through hardening by air, oil or water quench depending upon the exact alloy, as well as Precipation hardening & some case hardening, though we did not do a lot of that.
With a new gun, the maker takes the risk that all will not go as planned, on an old gun the owner takes the risk, I simply choose not to take that risk on a gun of mine.

I've always thought that an action that has been allowed to grey through age and use, while retaining the subtle color in the engraving has earned it's beauty. My Churchill certainly has after 108 years!
Karl

Good looking gun, Karl.

Best,
ted

I had one gun re-case hardened. It is a Charlin, an LC-1, and a very good friend still owns the gun. Doug Turnbull assured me warpage would NOT be a problem.

It was not. The design would not have allowed for any change, twist, warpage, distortion, whatever.

He delivered exactly what he promised. I disassembled and polished the action, he colored it. It was perfect.

Best,
Ted