|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics40,135
Posts571,031
Members14,674
| |
Most Online19,682
Mar 28th, 2026
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 2,135 Likes: 59
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 2,135 Likes: 59 |
This is a fascinating thread for me. I am learning so much from our discussion and the good pics.
I notice all the screws, save one, appear to be without color. The trigger guard shows wear not commensurate with the case color. Some of the screws show evidence that they have been removed and the barrel flats show wear also not commensurate with the cc.
The finish on the stock is commensurate with the cc and has been redone IMHO.
Beautiful gun, C.J.
So many guns, so little time!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 878 Likes: 137
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 878 Likes: 137 |
To Joe, Rocketman, Italian SXS,John Mann and L Brown.....thank you for your input, it's much appreciated.
The pictures were taken in someone's office and you must take into consideration that my heart was pumping and hands were considerably shaky!!....I will keep you posted and will produce better pictures when the transaction is completed.
I removed the pictures because the thread is unfortunately starting to head in a speculative direction and although I value everyone's opinion and expertise I am not in a position to have the originality of something that does not belong to me questioned at this point in time.......You can all chime in when I produce better pictures
respectfully
CJ
The taste of poor quality lingers long after the cheap price is forgotten.........
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 878 Likes: 137
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 878 Likes: 137 |
The deal is DONE!!!.......better pictures to follow
CJ
The taste of poor quality lingers long after the cheap price is forgotten.........
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 7,580 Likes: 830
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 7,580 Likes: 830 |
Mr. Lomas has an excellent eye, I tend to agree with him.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 878 Likes: 137
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 878 Likes: 137 |
I never said He didn't,......as a matter of fact I said I respectfully valued everyone's opininon and expertise
CJ
The taste of poor quality lingers long after the cheap price is forgotten.........
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,586 Likes: 420
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,586 Likes: 420 |
C.J., on the other hand, that gun shows little wear on the barrels, trigger guard, and the sharp corners of the wood. I would like to see the receiver flats and standing breech to observe the wear there, too. Finally, that is a fine gun and a wonderful Christmas package.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,465 Likes: 89
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,465 Likes: 89 |
I'm aware that chamber length wasn't marked. I couldn't make out the proof in the pictures.
Was it 1 & 1/8 or 1 & 1/4 oz ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438 Likes: 1 |
CJ:
Let me also add that you've got a fine gun there. I know there's issues with the "Brand Value" rating because Scott built guns in various price ranges.
However: I don't think they made ANY compromises in there top quality offerings. Be happy wuth your new acquisition!
Jim
The 2nd Amendment IS an unalienable right.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438 Likes: 1 |
CJ:
Let me also add that you've got a fine gun there. I know there's issues with the "Brand Value" rating because Scott built guns in various price ranges.
However: I don't think they made ANY compromises in there top quality offerings. Be happy wuth your new acquisition!
Jim
The 2nd Amendment IS an unalienable right.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,575 Likes: 182
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,575 Likes: 182 |
Joe, it was neither: MAXIMUM. That was a proofmark used from 1896-1904. It wasn't until the proof laws were changed in 1904 that shot charge was required. And that MAXIMUM marking can come in very handy for dating guns from that period, when SN data isn't available on the gun you're inspecting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/pDE6fdPm.jpg)