doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Purdey thumb lever hammer gun

They weren't all best guns or necessarily better guns back then....

I owned an 1879 Purdey bar lock hammer gun with the infamous third bite and double under-bolt and top lever opener.

I didn't think it compared to a high grade Scott of the same time period.

Much has been made over the years of multiple bolts, inferring "Great Strength". Most of it is nothing more than Advertizing Hype. The main stresses on a break open gun are not in holding the bbls shut, but in holding the standing breech "Up To" the barrels breech, which an underbolt adds very little to. Thus the hinge pin takes the thrust & the strength of the frame keeps the standing breech from Flexing back. I think that both Parker Bros & Winchester 21s proved beyond any reasonable doubt that a single underbolt is ample to hold any double "Shut". It is not really a matter of "How Many" bolts a gun has but of their strength & how well fitted. In many guns having multiple bolts a check of their fits will reveal that "VERY OFTEN" a single one of them is actualy carrying the load, the rest being simply superflous. It should also be well noted the more bolts a gun has the more difficult it becomes to ensure that all are equally sharing the work to be done. It is also noted the further the bolt is from the hinge the less is the strain upon it, thus the forward bolt of a double bolt, even if equally well fitted can never carry the load of the rear bolt. While I have never actually seen a thumb lever Purdey in the flesh, as I recall its bolt does occupy the position of the rear bolt in the double bolted one. "IF" of adequate strength the one is all that's really needed.

If it was 'enough' don't you think it would have stood the test of time ?

The double under-lug design from just a few years (1870) later is still used today.

It didn't take long for James Purdey to establish himself as the 'best' in London and he was on a personal mission to eclipse Manton who had certainly influenced Purdeys understanding of quality.

Maybe Joe is a century out, certainly Purdeys from the 1970's were perhaps not the best showcase of work they ever did.

James Purdey didn't live forever...

Joe;
Many guns having only a single bolt, either under or top, did indeed stand the test of time. My personal go-to gun today is a single, top-bolted, Lefever some 110 years old. Neither it the Bakers, Parkers, 21s, LC Smiths, AH Foxes, NIDs etc ceased production because their single bolt was inadequate, but for other reasons. I have nothing against a double bolted gun, in fact own some, But I have no illusions that just putting on two bolts automatically makes it a superior gun or that a gun having but a single bolt is automatically inferior.

I, in fact just went & did a quick scale measurement of bolt distance on one double bolted gun & the Lefever. distance from the C/L of hinge to rear of notch on the double underbolted gun was 7/8" for front bolt & 2" for the rear. For the Lefever top bolt it was 3�". Thus if enough pressure was put upon the bbls in an opening direction to put 100lbs of strain on the front bolt, the rear bolt would only be stressed to about 44lbs, while the Lefever bolt would only be stressed to 27lbs. SO; Yes!! a single well fitted bolt of proper construction is quite adequate for the task. Therefore "IF" the bolting of the Purdey in question is inadequate, it is not because it is a single bolt only, but for the simple reason it was not of adequate build to begin with. Having no experience with this particular model of gun I am unable to actually answer that, but I can definitely affirm there are a good number of single bolted guns which are entirely adequate for their purposes. In fact the Ithaca NID which was the first gu to chamber the 3�" 10ga magnum was in fact a single bolted gun.

Most period guns need low pressure loads more to protect the wood than the barrels. What is a reasonable load was more the question than is the gun safe to shoot. I am sure that gun has had more than a few loads over 7,500psi shot in it over the years. For many in the US it has only been in the last 20 years that low pressure became easy to find or make for many shooters. How many shooters use to think that the height of the brass was an indication of pressure? Too many I am afraid.

I would measure the chambers. Perhaps honing them had elongated the forcing cone area or some idiot had a 2 1/2" chamber reamed out to 2 3/4" or more. I would want to know. If you are going to spend thousands of dollars on guns you might as well spend a few hundred dollars more to have measuring tools on hand and learn how to use them. Many on these guns have been altered over the years and you need to know it sometimes.

Nope he didn't, but James the Younger was no slouch. We don't you try reading a bit sometime instead of spouting one liners? Notice the first Royal warrant was granted in 1868.

http://www.purdey.com/history/history-of-purdey/

Everything can't be learned from a book....

Your right on that one, sometimes it is best to actually DO something.........