Argo,
excellent answer, thanks. One thing that comes to mind is this Jim Kelly of Darlington Gun Works, who is said to have worked on this gun. Wouldn't a gunsmith of Jim Kelly's experience, standing, heck, just plain old honed sense of self-preservation in the face of potential liability like this, make some sort of statement about the shootability and safety of a bored-out gun like this? On literally every rifle that I have seen come out of this collection there is some lingering question, some bigger issue. Not about Did Mabel put that scratch in the barrel, or did JimBob, but Is this gun safe to shoot? Or Why is this critical aspect altered?
I am not trying to be a d#&k here. My experience with the collection this gun comes out of over several years taught me some lessons, and I would be very unhappy if someone on this chatboard with the best of intentions bought this thing, fired it, and was maimed or killed. Or discovered that their investment is very poorly placed.
I will end by saying that we don't know who bored this out. A hundred years ago who would have bored it out, a market hunter seeking a bigger punt gun? Possibly. It is hard to say. But I would firmly say that it is very unusual to see fine, rare foreign guns like this be so badly altered in their own time, when their worth and value were known. It probably wasn't until much later that some enterprising person said "We need to go hunting elephants in Upstate New York, and a four bore is much better than an eight bore." And "a four bore is worth a lot more than an eight bore." Somehow the seller arrived at his own wacky $75,000 price tag for this gun, so he knew something about its rarity. He had something vested in its rarity. Somehow noted gunsmith Jim Kelly missed the constellation of safety questions orbiting this big ol thing when he supposedly worked on it.
OK, PA over and out on this subject. Good luck to whoever purchases this thing.
