I've had a little part-time job for the last 6-years or so that has allowed me to handle and measure a fair number of fine and finer guns. It has also allowed me access to a very good reference library on fine guns (to answer most of the questions that have come up). As a general rule, the more a particular firearm costs, the better it seems to handle. There are exceptions (and I'm always on the lookout for them), but the more human time that is captured in completing a fine gun, the better it looks and generally handles. The absolute best values in a double shotgun (at the moment!) are the British boxlock guns completed from just after the First World War (when their makers generally gave up on attempting to market them as "Best" guns) up until production ceased over there, sometime in the late 1970s. Diggory Hadoke (evidently known here as Smallbore) just published a book on the subject that very much confirms what I have found. For a handmade gun that fits and handles beautifully, they are simply hard to beat. And, in the guns that are somewhat unadorned and even stocked rather plainly, the cost is usually insignificant. So much so, that the market for them is still very small. Machine made guns can now be created (using CNC-controlled machines and then lazers to cut the engraving) to look very-much like their far-more expensive counterparts, but when it comes to handling, they usually tend to fall somewhat short of that mark. Diamond-shaped grips and hand-struck barrels (as opposed to through-bolt round grips and mono-block mass-production) are part-of why that discrepency still exists.
Last edited by Lloyd3; 02/10/13 02:08 PM.
