doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion Classic & Custom Single Barreled Sporting Rifles @ doublegunshop.com English/ American bolt rifles

It has always seemed to me that bolt rifles from America's better custom makers are in a league beyond the British makers', and yet prices for mid-level British repeaters are often several times what comparable quality American ones will bring. Why are people willing to pay more for less? Often the British rifle is nothing more than a surplus military action, an English barrel, and a very plain piece of wood.

I think its all in the maker name and the perception that the grass must be better on the other side of the pond. And those are valid reasons if your the person with the dollars to spend.

I've seen these Purdey, H&H, Westley Richards and others at SCI and Vintage Cup since the 1990s. I really don't think these firms make or sell very many bolt rifles. With exceptions they don't hold a candle to the best American rifles. WR are the nicest I've seen, and in the highest demand.
Another British firm that does quite a few bolt rifles has them made in Oregon on actions made in Arizona. They do ship them to London for proofing and enter them into the ledger books.
The same rifle ordered in Oregon without proof or ledger entry is a few thousand less expensive.

In an effort to "improve" the Mauser rifles and actions bought from Germany, English gun makers resorted to a bizarre set of alterations, typically having to do with the bolt handle knob. They were bent 90 degrees or replaced with an ebony knob, in large part I think to create a distinctive point of recognition for the maker.

Those makers seemed to cling to the notion that a bolt rifle should be taken down from the shoulder and cycled between shots. None of the English makers that I am familiar with made a bolt rifle which was particularly easy to cycle from the shoulder, unlike the pre-War American made rifles such as the Newton, the Winchester Model 70 and the Remington Model 30, and converted military rifles done by Owen, Hoffman, Niedner and Griffin & Howe and others of their ilk, the Lee Speed being the exception which proves the rule.

I have always felt that English makers regarded bolt action rifles the way American makers regard bolt action shotguns: an inexpensive expedient, not worth spending a great deal of time beautifying. Not to mention the "Not Invented Here" prejudice which attached to most of them.

Bill,
If you're talking about used rifles I think several factors come to play,supply and demand,the romance thing__the white hunter,trekking through the African bush, etc... I compare it with crazy Winchester lever prices and the cowboy thing.Another value factor would be be the records kept by the British makers,a name,not just some hardware store.
As to new rifles,name recognition trumps.If money wasn't a issue,would you rather show your buddy your new rifle,custom made for you by a famous English maker,or one of equal or even better quality built by Joe Schmo in Drippydic Tennessee. If I could build a rifle equal to one made by Steven,(I can't)I could never get more than a fraction of what SDH can charge.I would starve or go broke as a gun maker, because I'm unknown.

In some respects, I would agree, but in shooting these rifles, the classic English bolt action generally handles much better than an American classic rifle. American makers (G&H particularly) tended to make their guns heavier than the English. I think the same holds true with shotguns as well.
As for the modern makers, notice how many now build rifles to what is traditionally the English style? I don't see too many built up with a tight grip, big cheekpiece and heavy forend like the G&H rifles of the past.
One thing I do agree with is that for your money, you do get a better fit and finish from an American custom gunmaker than you will from an English maker.

xausa,
Lee Speed rifles are handy to operate from the shoulder and even though Americans don't the "smelly", they are fine rifles.
Mike

I think there is a lot of sense in the suggestion that bolt rifle were seen by makers as basic level rifles- practical tools for the man who could not afford a double rifle. The British craft had built such a reputation for one off excellence that bolt rifles may not have seemed worthy of so much effort. Their single shot rifles were mostly inexpensive, at least in plain form. I agree that the Brits did a better job of building repeaters to a sensible weight.We took a long time here to get comb height right.

Guys: It is my opinion, and only that, that the Brits approach Gunmaking and their penultimate position in Beautiful Gunmaking behind American craftsmen, the way they see checkering. First and foremost GUNS ARE TO BE USED...AFRICAN AND INDIA HARD and GET HURT IN THE PROCESS and CHECKERING IS FOR YOU TO GRASP...NOT LOOK AT! While the American gun community, owners and makers, see Gunmaking as the art it has become, Brits see guns as Beautiful TOOLS. For example when I lived in Shropshire U.K., the gentry I knew and shot with, were not very careful [bumps scratches etc.] at all with their guns, and when I asked about this, I was told they simply send them back, every so often to the maker or his successor and have them "DONE OVER" or refinished. They see hunting as intrinsically surface damaging to the gun, and it is silly to try and avoid this while in the field. They also tend to hunt more than Americans who may take to the field, with their babied Parker 2 or 3 times a year. I know these are generalities and do not hold to all Americans, me for example,as I hunt quite a lot for my age [62] and still working full time, spend more time in the deer woods now, than when in my 30's. So I guess what I'm saying is they don't see fit and finish as permanent or very important, as it will be eventually replaced, and they don't tend to favor overly complicated checkering patterns, as it doesn't give as good a purchase as the simple multi-point pattern, with lots of diamonds [20-22 l.p.i.] with a large area covered. Why do people pay for these guns? HELL IF I KNOW! I own one, a J. Roberts .375 H&H bought in like new condition, never used, made for a Californian in 1979. The workmanship on it[outstanding!], was what caught my eye, after seeing big bores in the U.K., out the wazoo, whilst living there, it jumped out at me as a "best gun". Just one man's observation.

Hello Guys

I wrote a bit of an essay on this, but sort of got beaten to the drop by Jerry, who has covered some of my ideas.

Basically I think you have to look at who was "innovating", who was copying who and why. I don't think the difference is in terms of craftsmanship, its purely a style thing, and the English middle order makers are long gone, leaving only high end makers catering to the very wealthy.

The high end English makers of the period in which the English style developed copied the middle order guys because the bulk of rifles were ordered by Govt. Officials, Military and Colonials who were not aristocrats or wealthy, but gave makers a lot of feedback on producing a rifle that would be carried by a hunter on foot who covered a lot of country and shot a lot from a standing position. Think 1890 to 1914, pre common telescopic sight days, this crowd also didn't really ever favour aperture sights either. Basically a very practical answer to a particular need. Copied by the high end guys who had customers asking.

In the US the classic period in Bolt rifles may have been a little later. By then the "need" was different, transport was readily used and shooting (including "varminting") was more important than hunting (big game). Aperture sights and very shortly afterwards scopes, heavier rifles and higher combs gave a better result for these situations - and a new fashion or style developed.