I think the whole subject of grading is tenuous.In general classifiying guns as best ,second best etc. dose not go far enough . Compare a Boss or purdy to a Fredrick Williams ,you would say that the Boss was best . Not so . The gun made by Williams was his "best" gun ,so the term become subjective .
The range of guns produced in Britain was so great ,from the finest to the cheapest each type would have to be graded on its merits .You could not compare a boxlock to a sidelock , a hammer to a hammerless .
The name of course counts for a great deal , yet guns with a relatively unknown names can equal in quality the best London makes . Condition is also a factor , is a 1890' london gun with poor barres and a broken stock any better than a 1960's Webley 700 in good condition ?
Generalisation can only be applied with discretion and is subjective to what is being compared .
