The question for me is not whether British bests are better than American bests. The more important question, for me, is what does it matter? The answer to that, for me, is "It doesn't, in the least". I have no use for a best gun, from either side of the pond. I am not a pure collector. I am a shooter, first and foremost. I have shot a Purdey belonging to my acquaintance Rob't. Matthews. It was gorgeous and handled nicely. It was after a S X S shoot several years ago at Brushy Creek, a now defunct sporting clays club. Bob offered it to me to shoot as much as I'd like. I took it to the last sporting clays station on the course, just up from the shed, and ran the station. I was impressed, but I drove away thinking that I had just won high overall score at the shoot with a BSS, which is worth a fraction of what the Purdey was worth .......... in dollars. And, this is just me, but I'd rather shoot well than have the prettiest gun there. I'm not saying both can't happen, but I've seen more winners shooting run of the mill guns than I have shooting best guns. I won't attempt to answer why, but I have my opinions.
I shoot a lot of different guns of my own at clays and at birds. I've been privileged to shoot many more very high end guns that belonged to others, like Bob's Purdey. And after doing so I cannot make myself believe that I could shoot higher scores with a British best, or kill doves at a higher percentage of bird to shots fired. If I really believed that I would sell all of what I've got and buy one. It is my opinion, and we all know what that's worth, that most of the demand in Britain for best guns was driven by a "keeping up with the Jones" attitude. When you have money to burn why not have that pride of ownership. Best guns did not make everyone who bought them a "best shot". A comment by a friend of mine after a closer friend won the S X S event, in a shoot-off against a gentleman shooting a Purdey, sums up my, and many other American's feelings, about this matter. My friend who won was using a Parker with the forend held on by electrical tape. Comment made was "You just have to admire a man who wins High Overall shooting a taped up Parker".
Another question I've always had was why, if they were built so flawlessly, did they need servicing and refreshing after every season? Sure, there were a few gunners who shot 30,000 rounds a year at game. But, how many? Enough to justify the nationwide practice? In the clay target games the K guns and the P guns are regarded as best guns in their "field".
I listened to the podcast linked above, and enjoyed it. I've got no problem with agreeing with the American Gregg Elliott's views about best guns. But in the end, it really doesn't matter a whit to me. America has plenty enough to be proud of in our past, without trying to prove the unprovable. Isn't it interesting that this old kettle got stirred up yet again, not by an American, but by an Englishman? Braggadocio....... or insecurity?
