I think the essence of the issue I raised is the opportunity to build a beautiful gun around a beautiful action.
It used to be that if you bought a gun with lousy barrels, the work required to put that right would outweigh the value of the gun.
It also used to be that sleeving was a cheap fix to get a gun working but was not close to the quality of the original barrels.
Now we can sleeve and apply exactly the same quality controls as we would when re-barreling. We hide the joint, balance the gun as original and for 3,000 you have a viable and aesthetically identical alternative to new barrels. On a very good, rare and expensive action, it works.
I remember a Woodward O/U pigeon gun with an action like new. It had been sleeved to 26". Bought cheap and properly sleeved to 32", it made someone a fantastic gun he could not hope to find anywhere - certainly at his budget.
I'm currently building a pigeon gun around a W&C Scott best grade hammer pigeon gun - in this case we made new barrels, re-stocked it to client's requirements and all because the action was immaculate.
While I see some merit academically in Shotgunlover's argument, practically it is a non-issue. Properly sleeved chopper-lump barrels do not fail or constitute any risk as a consequence of the sleeving process.
