doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Henry Atkin

Tim, I think that's a point that can be debated. There were also very fine guns made that were not stocked to the fences (although this one is). Does that lower them a notch from top quality? Re the barrels on this gun in particular, given the production date of 1904, I think one might contend that the barrels on a best quality gun--whether chopper lump or not--ought to be either best quality Damascus or else Sir Joseph Whitworth steel. But I'm not positive that would lower it from best quality to something less either. Will be interesting to see what Rocketman has to say re his rating system.

"Best work gun" for my system has been defined as best design (with allowance for further development and overlap time), best materials (with allowance for development of more advanced materials), and best workmanship (with allowance for changes in fashion). The "London best work gun" ticks the boxes for "best work" and London fashion: "top tier" London maker, top lever hammerless SLE, stocked to the fences, no through lumps, chopper lump barrels, 75%+ coverage of best engraving, outstanding quality wood usually highly colored and figured (but never sacrifice of quality for color/figure).

There are a number of issue concerning best guns that can/have been debated since back when. Chopper lump barrels are one such issue. "Best work" dovetail barrels are most certainly good enough. Choppers may be a bit better, but not sufficiently to dismiss dovetails as a disqualification from "best work." Design issue.

Steel barrels have supplanted damascus. However, we seem to have accepted that best work damascus is good enough. Damascus barrels does not disqualify a gun from "best work." Materials issue.

Somewhere out there works the poorest quality gunmaker considered capable of best work. While others may do better work, his is still good enough to make the "best work" cut. Sorta like the Dr. who graduated last in his class. Workmanship issue.

If you can accept the "London best work" as a fashion subset of "best work," we can look a bit deeper. Can a hammer gun be "best work?" Yes. Can a flatback SLE be "best work?" Yes (1890's Boss). Can a boxlock be "best work?" Yes (Greener G-gun). Can a non-ejector gun be "best work?" Yes (1880's - 1890's). Can a damascus barrel gun be "best work?" Yes. Can a gun with through lumps be "best work?" Yes. Can an unengraved gun be "best work?" Yes (funeral style guns). Can a plain figured stock be on a "best work gun?" Yes (early 1900's Purdeys). And, of course, a top lever. Oh, yes, can a "best work gun" bare a plebian maker's name? Yes (all makers could get out a best gun via the trade if so commissioned).

One of the things I look for in all (honest) guns is harmony. Do the design, materials, and workmanship all go together?

My system has 405 pigeon holes for guns. I can't say it takes in every gun ever made because I haven't seen every gun ever made. I think it takes in the Lion's share of Brit and Continental guns bade between 1890ish and 1960ish. When you can imagine/picture in you mind a gun for each pigeon hole you will have a jump start on understanding what is really out there.

Questions??

DDA

"If you can accept the "London best work" as a fashion subset of "best work," we can look a bit deeper. Can a hammer gun be "best work?" Yes. Can a flatback SLE be "best work?" Yes (1890's Boss). Can a boxlock be "best work?" Yes (Greener G-gun). Can a non-ejector gun be "best work?" Yes (1880's - 1890's). Can a damascus barrel gun be "best work?" Yes. Can a gun with through lumps be "best work?" Yes. Can an unengraved gun be "best work?" Yes (funeral style guns). Can a plain figured stock be on a "best work gun?" Yes (early 1900's Purdeys). And, of course, a top lever. Oh, yes, can a "best work gun" bare a plebian maker's name? Yes (all makers could get out a best gun via the trade if so commissioned)."

I agree with this statement absolutely.

Boss guns squared back action, used up until around 1900: not stocked to the fences, yet top quality workmanship.

Whitworth may have been the first to use pressed fluid steel but other firms such as Siemens and Cammell turned out steel of similar quality which was used by the best barrel makers alongside Whitworth steel.

Steel all a bit topical here in the UK currently, since it seems our home-based steel industry is in danger of dying out. Swedish steel seems to be the best favoured high quality steel currently; I know Longthorne use it to mill their double barrels from billet. Very good they are too. But I digress, sorry!

This is take nothing away from Henry Atkin and the excellent work they turned out. I'm sure this gun fits the bill.

Tim

Any idea when Atkin #188X would have been made?

1906 as per Brown

Thank You. I was just coming to a similar conclusion after reading through the Masters book. A few years prior to the spring opener Atkin patent it seems.

Henry Atkin also made lovely border engraved sidelocks at a lower price point. I have one (ordered in 1902 by an English lord/Field Marshal) for sale at Safari Outfitters for anyone interested in a highly affordable Atkin. http://www.safarioutfittersltd.com/EnglishPage101.htm

there is something so very alluring and beguiling about the bright freshness and cleanly executed lines of an english box lock...much the same as with english women...