March
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
Who's Online Now
1 members (SKB), 876 guests, and 3 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums10
Topics38,374
Posts544,015
Members14,391
Most Online1,258
Mar 29th, 2024
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 32 of 97 1 2 30 31 32 33 34 96 97
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,981
Likes: 397
SKB Online Content
Sidelock
***
Online Content
Sidelock
***

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,981
Likes: 397
Gene,
Are you the author of the up coming article in Diggory's new online publication?

I think you are very close to correct in your hypothesis. When looking back through your thread and at the 2 A&D guns with the WR top levers pictured on pg.22 I noticed neither gun has a "T" preceding the serial number. Something I think of as fairly typical if WR had finished up the guns. On barreled actions sold to the trade the serial number was usually lacking the "T" prefix. I would bet my bottom dollar WR built those barreled actions. Pretty much everyone else was using the Scott spindle as soon as it was developed. I am not certain all guns finished up in house and sold with another retailers name always had the "T" prefix but many of them did.

Another thing I noticed was the advertisements in the London daily to stop on down to Oxford St. and have your gun fit, try it out, watch it be built. While certainly much of the advertisements of the day were full of falsehoods, this seems pretty legit. It does not seem you would pay good money to advertise a service you do not offer. My guess is Reilly at some point had settled into buying barreled actions and doing the fit, finish and stocking of them on bespoke items while at the same time offering a catalog of pre-finished Brmingham built guns.

Interesting reading for sure and thanks for all the effort.

Steve



http://www.bertramandco.com/
Booking African hunts, firearms import services

Here for the meltdowns
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,260
Likes: 510
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,260
Likes: 510
Originally Posted By: SKB
Gene,
Are you the author of the up coming article in Diggory's new online publication?

I think you are very close to correct in your hypothesis. When looking back through your thread and at the 2 A&D guns with the WR top levers pictured on pg.22 I noticed neither gun has a "T" preceding the serial number. Something I think of as fairly typical if WR had finished up the guns. On barreled actions sold to the trade the serial number was usually lacking the "T" prefix. I would bet my bottom dollar WR built those barreled actions. Pretty much everyone else was using the Scott spindle as soon as it was developed. I am not certain all guns finished up in house and sold with another retailers name always had the "T" prefix but many of them did.

Another thing I noticed was the advertisements in the London daily to stop on down to Oxford St. and have your gun fit, try it out, watch it be built. While certainly much of the advertisements of the day were full of falsehoods, this seems pretty legit. It does not seem you would pay good money to advertise a service you do not offer. My guess is Reilly at some point had settled into buying barreled actions and doing the fit, finish and stocking of them on bespoke items while at the same time offering a catalog of pre-finished Brmingham built guns.

Interesting reading for sure and thanks for all the effort.

Steve




Steve,
What you're describing is how probably a good 80 to 90% of turn of the century English "gunmakers" operated. It by no means meant that they all had a working factory that was capable of complete gunmaking. Stocking and finishing, while definitely considered sub-categories of gunmaking isn't gunmaking in its entirety, especially when your talking about companies that owned actual factories producing weaponry at the rate that Argo44 claims Reilly was doing. Some of these factories that actually produced complete guns from forging to finished gun.....didn't employ half the people that Argo44 claims Reilly had employed at the time.
With that many people employed and building guns don't you think its a little suspect that no one claims to have worked for Reilly? That none of these employees struck out on there own and pronounced that they were formally of Reilly's and now produce their own guns? No articles of workers, especially the super skilled type that might have been head hunted by other prestigious London gunmaking firms after Reilly shut its doors? Actioners, Barrel makers, finishers, stockers, Iron mongers, all would have been in serious demand.

A lot of provincial gunmakers, smaller firms, etc. used barreled actions and did the stocking and finishing. They also brought in completely finished guns... Nothing new about that, most everyone knows that. That's not exactly "gunmaking" in the full sense.
Its also a known fact that most of these makers had these barreled actions or finished guns either serial numbered for them by the makers they ordered from or they were ordered with no serial numbers...and were then later engraved with their own serial numbers prior to being stocked and finished at their shop, again...common knowledge. Serial numbers are most definitely NOT proof that the company built that particular gun. Back in those days, it was completely acceptable to tell little "white lies" in the gunmaking industry. White lies because it really did no harm and everyone was getting in on the action. Completely true? Not at all. Most of these shops (the 80 to 90% I mentioned earlier) had no real gunmaking equipment, very few of them had an actual milling machine (extremely expensive). Most of them had the tools and equipment for general repair and stocking. That's about it. Finishing was rarely done in house, almost always done by an outworker who was probably unknown to the general public at that time. Barrel making, etc. could be done in house, but was also usually done by outworkers. Very few shops had a house engraver. Again.....almost always an outworkers job. There were a few exceptions obviously. G.E. Lewis did most of their engraving in house. Argo44 claims that most all of these REAL gunmaking activities took place at the Reilly location. Nothing he's produced show's any of that taking place there, I don't buy "advertisements" and shop literature as proof. It's truly hard to believe that Reilly was a full on gunmaking factory, producing the amount of weaponry at such a prolific rate and nobody is documented to have apprenticed with them, struck out on their own, skilled workers weren't head hunted or moved on to other factories, machinery required not shown to have existed at the premises, and the list goes on. With the output of guns supposedly coming out of the Reilly factory, isn't it odd that Reilly didn't have a "house style"?? Most every London gunmaker had a pretty specific house style. Whether it was an engraving style, a particular kind of action, etc. No Reilly I've ever seen (I've owned a couple over the years), has a specific look or distinguishing feature about it. You know...something that identifies it as being a Reilly. That's extremely odd, damn near unheard of for a gunmaker with a London address. I honestly cant think of 1 that didn't have a particular calling card in regards to style, action or features found.

Even with all of his time consuming research that he's done, as impressive as it is (I don't know where he finds the time! Its a pretty monumental effort that's definitely to be commended),
I'd say he's still a ways off from connecting the dots as you say.

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,698
Likes: 99
Sidelock
***
Offline
Sidelock
***

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,698
Likes: 99
Easier to prove a fact than to prove a negative. That's why our legal system is based on the presumption of the negative.

Argo is assembling evidence I don't recall seeing before. Not conclusive yet, maybe but he's getting there. If clinching evidence is out there he'll probably find it.

I'd like to know...Geo

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,134
Likes: 309
Argo44 Offline OP
Sidelock
**
OP Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,134
Likes: 309
Yes Steve. Diggory read the line and thought it compelling and asked if he could publish the "New Short History of Reilly." He said he is not afraid of controversy. He has edited the history to make it less academic and more readable.

This might be a turning point because others in the UK will start to dig now. I'm sure I'm right. I've identified the "factories/work shops," his ranges, his products, a few of the people who worked for him including his shop foreman in 1862, and dated the serial numbers. I'll continue to dig but the circumstantial evidence assembled thus far is pretty overwhelming.


Baluch are not Brahui, Brahui are Baluch
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,260
Likes: 510
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,260
Likes: 510
Shoot for the late 1870s and 1880s and go from there. Its already been established by researching predecessors that Reilly did in fact make guns in the early to mid 19th century. We are mostly interested in breech loading guns. And like I said....just because theres serial numbers and pictures of guns, swords, pistols, etc does NOT mean that maker actually made the things. Just because s company was listed as a gunmaker DOESNT mean they actually manufactured the guns. Selling guns that show up to your factory completed, or even stocking , finishing or subcontracting those jobs on a barreled action doesnt qualify a company as a gun manufacturer in this day and age and just barely did back in those days. A lot of the companies that built ground up percussion and flint guns continued to use the gunmaker-gun manufacture label long after they ceased to actually build entire guns.

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,134
Likes: 309
Argo44 Offline OP
Sidelock
**
OP Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,134
Likes: 309
I will continue to look into this LeF...and you know a lot about British guns. But among the facts that cannot be explained away is the 1881 census. Reilly employed 300 people. Holland and Holland 25, Purdey 12? I'll come up with real numbers for the latter two. Reilly built 1000 Serial Numbered guns a year at this time period, twice the number of Purdey and H&H combined. So if those 300 people weren't making guns, what were they doing?

Also, Reilly is recognized as one of the three pioneers in UK championing breech loaders after 1851 - Lang, Blanch, Reilly. I can give you the cites. 1860 book has pages devoted to Reilly's breech loader (p. 12 above). His breech loaders participated in the 1859 trials squaring off against the best muzzle loaders as posted in this line (p. 13). Why all of a sudden about the late 1860's couldn't he make breech loaders anymore? The logic doesn't make sense.

You maintain Reilly had no gun-making machinery yet he made muzzle-loaders. I've a picture of a Reilly muzzle loader with 277 Oxford Street on the rib....post November 1881. So how could he make muzzle loaders without machinery? And those two huge buildings with four floors 25,000 sq ft of space (estimated on each one)....What was going on in all that space? He said he made guns there and invited clients to view the progress of their gun.

I'm not trying to be querulous; but the evidence is overwhelming and the people who bought his guns and used them were some very prominent hunters and writers. Again I'll ask for one article from the 19th century to be posted identifying him only as a retailer. I don't think you'll find one. So when did this myth start? I suspect after Riggs bought the company August 1922.

Lets see what the knowledgeable gun people in UK have to say about the subject after Diggory publishes the article....it's being published in two parts. Possibly three..I've told him the primary purpose of this line originally was to date Reilly SN's...that I think has been done successfully..so he may publish the SN dating chart as an addendum.

Posted before - but EM was a businessman and made what sold. Once you have a template...not too hard to build the gun.
......17 Aug 1862 "Bell's Life" - review of guns at the 1862 London World's Fair

Last edited by Argo44; 07/27/19 09:15 PM.

Baluch are not Brahui, Brahui are Baluch
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,260
Likes: 510
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,260
Likes: 510
The evidence is overwhelming to you. You want this to be true so badly that its making your research and opinions extremely biased. 300 people employed by Reilly....possibly a huge number of those for the retail? Think big department store, like Herrods. No frickin way Reilly employed 300 people making guns, swords, knives and pistols, and not a one of them went out on their own, not one of them carried the prestigious title of lead gunmaker, lead barrel maker, lead finisher, lead actioner, Head of iron monger shop, etc. Not one of those 300 employees went anywhere else to build guns and ply their craft??? No one struck out on their own and used Reillys name to establish themselves????? No one was ever apprenticed at Reillys???Think Henry Atkin, Beesley, etc. gunmakers like them apprenticed and worked for firms before striking out on their own. Its well documented. What, Reillys was the exception????? No.
Not one of those 300 wrote an article detailing the in house gunmaking that was supposedly taking place?
Every bit of evidence you provide of their gunmaking pre dates the breech loader and the Golden Age of gunmaking in England.
I do maintain that Reilly didnt have the capabilities (expertise, materials, facilities, machinery, etc) to build complete ground up guns in the late 1870s to until the went belly up, nothing is out there that proves otherwise.
Why is it you never hear of an old gunmaker talking about some Bloke at Reillys who was the inspiration for their work? Because the werent there. Thats why.
Again...if Reilly had the capabilities to produce as many weapons as you claim....they wouldve been used to arm her and his majestys armies in the Great War, the boer war, etc. Yet......they didnt receive a single significant government contract to produce anything of value. Hollands, Purdeys , and a myriad of other secured contracts to produce all sorts of wartime implements. Weird isnt it.

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,134
Likes: 309
Argo44 Offline OP
Sidelock
**
OP Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,134
Likes: 309
Lef....I have posted pictures of a half dozen Enflieds, a dozen Sniders made by Reilly. I've posted pictures of a dozen non SN'd Reilly's used by the Yoemanry. I've posted the history of the Green Brothers breech loaders which competed for the 1864 breech loader contract and finished second to which he had exclusive rights to manufacture, the Prince breech loader which he made and advocated, the Reilly-Comblain which also completed and to which he had UK manufacturing rights. I've posted Reilly made Martini-Henry's. But the Enflied factory at the time insisted on sending over parts to be assembled for the M-H's. He only SN'd one that I can find and that was very very early...Please read the above.

Boar war troops were using Martinis and the magazine fed new Long Lee-Enfields. (Some also still equipped with Sniders). There's one SMLE Enfield pictured with Reilly's name on it....but by that time the firm was very much in decline.

As for the Great War...come-on LeF....you know darned well Reilly went bankrupt in 1912.... when you write something like that...well...it sort of makes it look like you are desperate to disprove the thesis.

And he tried repeatedly to win a government contract. Please read the line. And how do you know they didn't receive a contract for something or other? The made cartridges for instance. There just are no records left.

As for milling machines...l discussed this above. Milling machines were used by factories building 1000 guns a week..part of the "American system." And Birmingham didn't start using them until the 1870's and 80's...see above. He was making what...2-3 a day and probably did not have a milling machine. I speculated that his workshops worked on the old system of templates... Birmingham could produce 100,000 guns a year using this system. but who knows?

And I don't care about this...I'm not "desperate." But the evidence is there. You can lead a horse to water. smile Let's see what develops. If I'm wrong, I'll admit it.

Edit for the record: Not only were those silly 19th century Englishmen fooled - what did they know - but Americans too!!..Even the used gun dealers were bamboozled.
"Forest and Stream" - December 30, 1880:

Last edited by Argo44; 08/23/19 08:55 PM.

Baluch are not Brahui, Brahui are Baluch
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,260
Likes: 510
Sidelock
**
Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,260
Likes: 510
Ok, Argo. Ok. Do your research and let the people decide. Thats how it works. You dont get to just TELL us your opinion and then expect us to take it as a bold faced fact with the only evidence being a two sentence statement that says Reilly manufactured a gun during the golden age of British gunmaking. Just know this....the discrepancies Ive pointed out are the questions that will have to have definitive answers for, or youll never convince the masses. We shall see.
Theres a lot of us here on this forum that arent at all convinced...regardless of all the volumes of minutia that youve posted in this thread. When or if you or someone else provides undeniable, empirical, definitive proof and not opinion and hearsay, Ill be the first to congratulate you.

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,134
Likes: 309
Argo44 Offline OP
Sidelock
**
OP Offline
Sidelock
**

Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 3,134
Likes: 309

Last edited by Argo44; 08/02/19 11:23 PM.

Baluch are not Brahui, Brahui are Baluch
Page 32 of 97 1 2 30 31 32 33 34 96 97

Link Copied to Clipboard

doublegunshop.com home | Welcome | Sponsors & Advertisers | DoubleGun Rack | Doublegun Book Rack

Order or request info | Other Useful Information

Updated every minute of everyday!


Copyright (c) 1993 - 2024 doublegunshop.com. All rights reserved. doublegunshop.com - Bloomfield, NY 14469. USA These materials are provided by doublegunshop.com as a service to its customers and may be used for informational purposes only. doublegunshop.com assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in these materials. THESE MATERIALS ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANT-ABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT. doublegunshop.com further does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information, text, graphics, links or other items contained within these materials. doublegunshop.com shall not be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages, including without limitation, lost revenues or lost profits, which may result from the use of these materials. doublegunshop.com may make changes to these materials, or to the products described therein, at any time without notice. doublegunshop.com makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. This is a public un-moderated forum participate at your own risk.

Note: The posting of Copyrighted material on this forum is prohibited without prior written consent of the Copyright holder. For specifics on Copyright Law and restrictions refer to: http://www.copyright.gov/laws/ - doublegunshop.com will not monitor nor will they be held liable for copyright violations presented on the BBS which is an open and un-moderated public forum.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.0.33-0+deb9u11+hw1 Page Time: 0.084s Queries: 35 (0.062s) Memory: 0.8851 MB (Peak: 1.8990 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-03-29 10:15:19 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS