I have two of that same gun. Not nearly in as good shape but I love them both. One has the same swan and the other has a goose in flight on the right lock plate. Mine were made in 1885 and 1886.

Regards, Gordon

OWD,

I don't know which it better; you're first story or the second. Damn! I NEVER get that lucky.

Congrats and enjoy.

Phil

It's not far off the price of a good Purdey today.

I've seen in the same early catalog , was it Wm. Read, that the Premier and/or Premier Imperial were priced higher than all other guns offered, including Purdey best.

Unfortunately since Scott built lower grade guns along with best guns they have a somewhat soiled reputation. I have a Scott SLE that was built in 1898 that I'll put up against any British double of the same period Purdey included.
Jim

Nice gun, I got gun envy for a minute.

Had to go rub on my Scott Premier grade hammer gun....I'm okay now.

Seems like several of us have one of these. Mine's in good shape except for the pitted barrels. I shoot it with vintager type loads and haven't had the barrels reamed to remove the pitting; can't see how removing steel will make it any stronger. It does make it a job to clean the barrels after I shoot it though.

I figure these guns are a lower mid grade. Anyone know where they this model fit into the scheme of things? I have a re-print of the 1893 Scott catalog, but don't find anything in there that looks like the OWD's gun (or mine)...Geo

My 10 has pristine 32" barrels.

Whenever someone says that I wonder how they know someone else hasn't
reamed out a bunch of pitting and repolished the barrels on that 100 year
old gun to LOOK pristine...Geo

I guess they would start off by using a bore gauge, take precision measurements and then compare the measured bore diameter with the original proof marks? That would be one way of doing it. No telling what the original chokes were (unless you have factory documentation telling you what the gun was originally choked at) or if the finish on the outside is "pristine" though.

Dustin