|
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
Topics38,472
Posts545,152
Members14,409
| |
Most Online1,335
Apr 27th, 2024
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,266 Likes: 93
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,266 Likes: 93 |
I've never bought from the English gun auction houses. I understand from posts here that double the hammer price is good general estimate for firearms, but how much does a hard gun case cost to ship to the U.S.? A little more involved than putting it in a hard case and mailing to USA.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 168 Likes: 57
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 168 Likes: 57 |
Was S.R. Jeffery and Son more a retailer/gunsmith or actual gunmaker back in the day? I never heard of him before.
_______
TC Good question, Tim, but with the British system of using outworkers difficult to answer.
The founder of the Guildford business, Richard Jeffery started in about 1850. A very nice single percussion rifle by him featured in DGJ not long ago. To what extent it was built in his workshops and to what extent he bought in the lock (probably) the Damascus tube (probably) and had it rifled (quite likely) by specialists we are never likely to know.
There is an August 2020 article in Diggory’s Vintage Gun Journal about a Richard Jeffery gun made for him by E.C. Hodges in Islington.
In the 1960’s they appear to have been primarily retailers of guns built by others, but if Lord Onslow had walked into their shop and said “build me a best gun regardless of expense” they could no doubt gone to an actioner, barrelmakers, a stocker and finisher and a best S.R. Jeffrey gun would have emerged from their front door. Interesting read. Thanks for that Parabola. _______ TC
|
|
1 member likes this:
Parabola |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 780 Likes: 11
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 780 Likes: 11 |
Around 1970, sure someone here knows exactly when, H&R put out 2 small catalogs to list their wares for sale to the American market. One for fishing rods, etc. another for firearms. Still have a copy of latter, probably in old files at office. It included bolt action rifles, Webley pistols, flare pistols, a cased harpoon gun identical to the one used in JAWS, and some Webly & Scott doubles. Even then as a teenager, I was attracted to the 728. It was a 28 gauge with 25” barrels, choked 1/4 and 3/4, straight grip checkered butt, cased with accessories. Looked almost identical to the gun that started this thread. Price then was $700. Flash forward to about 1981 and I got into the market. Looked at some beautiful Superposed (P2 Q) etc at Scotts furniture store in Jay, Fl. Wanting a SxS he suggested I call Bill Jayques (sp).Bill mentioned a couple out of my price range and then suggested a, as new, 728 with “the pettiest wood” he had even seen on one. Did not haggle and bought it for $2750. Killed hundreds of dove with it and a number of quail until I got to reading about the “need” for longer barrels. A Red Label and Parker Repo aquired since just never did as well. Guess I should dig it out of safe and try to learn to shoot it again. It is one I will never sell. My son better not either. Forgive an old farts trip down memory lane.
|
|
2 members like this:
Tim Cartmell, Parabola |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,377 Likes: 105
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,377 Likes: 105 |
Our English speaking friends across the Pond tried their best to confuse us Yanks with the numbering system for the 700 series guns, which appeared shortly after the end of WWII. The base model was the 700. The next step up was the 702. And the 701 was the top of the line. I've never owned a 701. However, I have owned a couple 720s. The 720, like the 728 mentioned above, is basically a 702 made in the specific gauge (20) for the US market. 3" chambers in the 720, on a gun that will weigh less than 6 pounds. And, as also mentioned, the 720 and 728 came with the shorter barrels then more in fashion, but somewhat less so now. The wood will obviously vary somewhat from gun to gun. But the 720s I owned did have very nice wood. I believe that a nice canvas covered hard case was also part of the 720/728 package. Nice guns for the money. One way to tell a 720 (or 728) from a standard 702 is by the serial number, which began with the model number: 720xxx, for example. And there was also a 712. According to the Scott book by Crawford and Whatley, 225 712s were made; 229 720s; and 215 728s.
|
|
1 member likes this:
Tim Cartmell |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2020
Posts: 904 Likes: 359
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2020
Posts: 904 Likes: 359 |
The S.R. Jeffery 701 did indeed struggle to reach its reserve.
It appeared last night in their catalogue of unsold lots, but I saw that they had now been bid £700 so will presumably sell for that unless any higher bids come in before the sale closes.
|
|
1 member likes this:
Tim Cartmell |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 168 Likes: 57
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 168 Likes: 57 |
The S.R. Jeffery 701 did indeed struggle to reach its reserve.
It appeared last night in their catalogue of unsold lots, but I saw that they had now been bid £700 so will presumably sell for that unless any higher bids come in before the sale closes. It's still a nice gun and I think it would be okay using lead light loads. One thing I noticed on this later model 701, is the engraving looks closer to a 702 style when comparing it to the 1953 catalogue image showing a much fuller, finer coverage. Maybe it was a cost cutting thing. Webley & Scott 701 Catalogue Image____ TC
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,749 Likes: 744
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,749 Likes: 744 |
I would have liked to have known what that left bore was proofed at, because with 2 3/4” chambers, I highly doubt it was .019, which, is what was noted by the auction house.
Best,
Ted
|
|
1 member likes this:
Tim Cartmell |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 168 Likes: 57
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 168 Likes: 57 |
Agree. It would still have to be in proof by law for resale. If you were buying such a gun, it would be prudent to have it inspected by an expert first.
_____
TC
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2019
Posts: 272 Likes: 56
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2019
Posts: 272 Likes: 56 |
No doubt it will be a fine shooter but it wouldn`t allow any barrel work in future imho. I don`t see value in guns with marginal measurements,if push comes to shove ,sleeving isn`t viable nowadays ,new barrels can be forgotten about and reproof by the philistines at the proof houses will destroy it !!! Caveat Emptor.
|
|
3 members like this:
Tim Cartmell, Ted Schefelbein, Parabola |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,749 Likes: 744
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,749 Likes: 744 |
No doubt it will be a fine shooter but it wouldn`t allow any barrel work in future imho. I don`t see value in guns with marginal measurements,if push comes to shove ,sleeving isn`t viable nowadays ,new barrels can be forgotten about and reproof by the philistines at the proof houses will destroy it !!! Caveat Emptor. Great advice. Going forward, the guns that feature modern dimensions and unaltered barrels will likely be the everyday guns of shooters who see the future for what it is, the slow encroachment of rules and regulations designed to remove them from the field. Those guns will be the last to go. Best, Ted
|
|
2 members like this:
Imperdix, Tim Cartmell |
|
|
|
|
