quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
What are the chances that the chambers were already bulged when JudgeG purchased the rifle from Mr. Moss?

I wondered the same thing when I read through this thread. I didn't know JudgeG had purchased the rifle from someone else, I assumed he had bought it new, and thought maybe he had unknowingly caused the damage.

I don't have a dog in this fight; I have never met anyone involved in this dispute, but that does seem to be the most likely explaination to me.

Emory, this may be the least of your problems, but I had a problem similar to yours with the two different chambers. I bought a used 450 3 1/4 double (from someone on this forum). After firing it with the supplied reloads, I attempted to resize the case using dies I bought (used) on this site. Exactly half of the cases would resize, the other half would not. I was suspicious, but went to the range again fired some more rounds, but this time I marked the cases. It turned out that the right chamber would resize fine, but the left would not. I was using a regular Rock Chucker press and was advised to get one of the bigger presses with more leverage. However, I was also advised that my Bertram brass was less than desirable (my words). I bought some Honeber brass and now can resize brass fired in either chamber using the Rock Chucker press. My questions and the advice I received can be found on this forum. I was certainly unhappy that the chambers seemed to be different dimensions and I really don't know how this can happen. This was not an old or traditional gun, but was of relatively recent vintage. So, brass can be a problem. I know this doesn't solve the bulged chanber problem, but ...
Peter.

quote:

Originally posted by Lhook7:


I didn't know JudgeG had purchased the rifle from someone else, I assumed he had bought it new,

Not sure when the rifle was made, maybe 1920's?

If I had to bet money on this situation then I would bet that JudgeG sold the rifle with an honest description and I would bet that way for a couple of reasons.

1) He has been quite involved with both AR and some other posters on AR and I think if he was going to sell a rifle that he knew was a dud he would sell it elswhere.

2) We all assesss rifles differently and rifles are also different at different times. The variation in how we assess different rifles is continually displayed in threads about Rem 700, M70, Wby, Sako etc.

3) Reloading techiques, how and when we use the rifle plus other variables influence how we assess a given rifle.

4) A fairly common thread on the forums is along the lines of.....my "go to rifle" has gone off etc...

Mike

Gentlemen,

If I may: If we just walk away from this post, it'll die a silent death.

I understand that the parties concerned with this thread have a valid reason for posting, but I may suggest that a message forum is not the proper forum for hashing out such issues. Furthermore, it is futile in my opinion to try and win an argument in a forum atmosphere; particularly when the argumentative parties have strong positions on said issues. All that results is 3+ pages of arguments that go nowhere.

Gentlemen, I understand that you feel strongly about your positions, but please, consider the effectiveness of seeking remedy in this manner. Surely there are better ways available? I just can't see any other purpose for seeking to accert your position online other than to make your issues known or save face. Can we agree that each party has properly aired his interest in this matter and move back to discussions of African hunting interest?

quote:

Originally posted by DB Bill:
Don G....I read your hissy-fit account about the bear hunt you and your brother went on last year and as I understand you and your brother (I can't tell which is which and who got the bear) both got discounts on the posted price....is that right? If so, I'm not sure why you have taken up the crusade against him. If neither or both of you didn't get a discount but the Judge did for "luring" you on the hunt (without your knowledge) then you have probably have justification for being...and pick your own word here ....unhappy...irritated...disappointed...pissed off.

And I wonder if what transpired on the bear hunt traumatized you so much why didn't we hear about it sooner? Again, I don't have a dog anywhere in this hunt but your inability to let any part of this thread die is baffling.

One final question. What would it take for your to be satisfied and made whole again?

The Judge quite successfully got me to post that I did not get a bear simply to make me appear a dis-satisfied customer. He is a lawyer and is very good at clouding the issues and changing the subject. But I will digress here.

The proposal was for an archery bear hunt. The Judge went on-and-on about how a "real" hunter would only use a traditional bow to be sporting, but that compounds were acceptable.

The Judge did not negotiate any deal for me. In fact, I wondered at the time why I had to negotiate my own price when I thought I was joining a set of hunters who'd been going together for many years. I negotiated very hard because I knew the outfitter needed money to pay back two deposits for two cancelled hunters, and it was in winter when the outfitter would have no income.

When the Judge asked if I could get any other hunters, I talked my brother into going. My brother also had to negotiate his own deal, and the Judge made me promise not to tell Dan what I had paid. Dan's a big boy, so I told him the "rules" and told him to negotiate hard. I found out after the hunt that the outfitter had more than made up on Dan what I had negotiated down on mine.

In the event I found that the group was not at all what I'd been led to believe. The "long-time" returnees were the Judge and one other guy who'd "brought friends", he - like the Judge - said he "would not hunt until all the hunters were on established baits". (Sound familiar?) One other hunter had been there once - the year before when he killed a cub.

To make a long story short, Dan killed a sow the first night. The returning cub-killer got another cub about 4 days later. The last night the Judge borrowed the guide's shotgun and killed the "monster CocaCola boar" that had been "hanging up out of range" (at 12 yards!). That "monster boar" was really a 200 lb sow. I was shocked that the Judge would use a shotgun after all his talk of ethics, but it was not illegal. I did not see a bear at all.

Before any of these threads started the outfitter had offered me a free return hunt since I did not even see a bear - the outfitter had guaranteed that I would see a shootable bear. So the outfitter lived up to his word. I have turned him down on the return trip, as I'd rather hunt with friends.

The only salient point about the bear hunt was that I think the Judge was using my brother and I to get a discounted hunt. (You know, the old "bring some hunters and you hunt free" deal that we all get offered at the end of many hunts.) When I asked the Judge how he afforded all his hunts he looked at me and said "You don't really think I PAY for all this do you?"

I did not and do not care about the outcome of that bear hunt. I am used to coming home from Canada empty-handed. (Just ask Canuck!)

In short I think the Judge had used me and my brother without our knowledge. Maybe you are used to being used, but I am not. If he'd been up front about it I probably would not have gone, but I do not feel the Judge owes me anything - at least anything it's possible to pay back. How do you repair a broken trust?

But if the Judge would use me, would he use others? Had he used others? Should I warn the other members here on AR? I kept a cowardly silence because I knew this would be a painful process (and it has been).

I saw the Judge rip Russell a new asshole on these pages about being in poor shape and I did not say anything. Here's a picture of the Judge taken on the bear hunt in June 2005:


It's hard to imagine anyone being in worse shape for a walking safari. How could this man gripe about another's lack of physical conditioning in preparation for a Safari? How could he rant about honor and ethics when he borrowed the guide's shotgun to kill that sow?

Did I let my dislike of Russell mentally justify my lack of response? Maybe, but it still bothered me.

I saw the Judge offer a whitetail hunt this fall in the same manner that he'd offered the bear hunt, and still I kept quiet. (But it bothered me not to speak up.)

When I saw the Judge acting holier-than-thou on the sheephunter thread, trying to claim the moral high ground there while simultaneously refusing even to publicly acknowledge that he was a principal in a very expensive rifle deal with very serious problems on another thread, I simply felt I had to speak up - but still I hesitated to start down this messy road.

With all this going on, the Judge then invoked the Marine Corps and gives out a big Semper Fi on the sheephunter thread, in an apparent attempt to increase his moral superiority. The contrast of my internal response to that cynical act compared to the recent Semper Fi I'd gotten from a Marine who'd lost his leg July 3rd in Iraq was the last straw that actually got me moving. I saw red, and it wasn't the flag at the bottom of the Judge's signature. That might be hard to understand if you are not a Marine, but it is true, and it is not flag-waving on my part. I cannot explain it any better than that. It pissed me off and absolutely forever changed the Judge's status to "slimy creature" in my mind.

(I seem to remember that I wsn't the only former Marine to protest the Judge's usage.)

My conscience had been bothering me for not speaking up ever since Emory posted about his problems, because I felt (and still feel) that Emory might have thought twice about dealing with the Judge if a wrangle like this had happened months earlier. (He at least may have done a better job of covering his ass instead of trusting the Judge to do the right thing.)

I have stated all this throughout these threads. I have not changed my story at all, ever. I will not change my story at all, nor will I erase my tracks.

I knew when I started this that all I would personally get out of it was grief from the Judge, his supporters and apologists. That is a price I was willing to pay to keep him from taking advantage of others in the future.

I do not have a monetary stake in any of the proceedings on any of these threads. I have never taken advantage of any hunter anywhere to line my pockets or obtain free or discounted hunts.

As far as letting this thread die - I gladly would stop if I was not being attacked. I think that I have succeeded in my goal of making everyone take a long, hard look at the Judge.

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:

quote:

Originally posted by Lhook7:


I didn't know JudgeG had purchased the rifle from someone else, I assumed he had bought it new,

Not sure when the rifle was made, maybe 1920's?

Yeah, I guess "bought it new" was a poor choice of words. I should have written "bought it from a dealer."

I made this assumption because I have never purchased a rifle from an individual; when I was 16 I got burned buying a pickup from an individual, the same again (different seller) at 18 with a motorcycle. Since then I have been very wary of purchasing anything of significant value from an individual.

Well, the bad news is that for one of the first times since I’ve been in Texas over the past 13 years, I’ve missed opening day of duck season when I’ve actually been home.

Better news is I’ve spent most of the day trimming out some stock blanks – one real good looking piece of back walnut from a blank I thought would yield two until I started trying to make sure the grain is right through the pistol grip, two real nice blanks out of a plainer but excellent grained French, and a much higher quality piece of Turkish with great grain, excellent pattern, etc. one of those is going to become a part of a .416, or maybe a 400 H&H. Might want to get some advice about these projects on the appropriate forum in time.

More good news is I emotionally walked away from this yesterday and consider I have no issue with Ernest. I wish him well. My son called yesterday and said this looked like the worst bit of judgment he had ever seen from me and to forget it (would like to hope he is right about the bad judgment but it might not make the top ten). For those who have kids, and especially if you have successfully reached the stage where you value your “kid’s†judgment and reflect on the course it has taken to reach that point, I won’t need to dwell. For who don’t have kids I wouldn’t consider trying to explain. Just take my word, the “double rifle trouble†issues would look ABC simple by comparison…

Now I am amazed at some of the views that come out of left field and will make one final attempt to close some of the easy ones out.

The rifle appears to be a .411. Notes from both my conversations with Ernest reflect that, the maker markings inside the action say .411, the box of professionally loaded “regulating†rounds from Safari Arms Ltd. dated 5/2005 for E.Gilbert on the professional label say .411, on his initial call after JJ examined the rifle he reported his measurements indicated Right @ .4110 and Left at .4115. I just checked the four rounds I pulled a month + ago and the solids seem to be .4100, .4105 and .4106. The soft measurements indicate .4110 on two successive readings. Unlike some of you who seem to get special insights from possibly misreading or skimming through these threads, I not SURE of much anymore, but all this leads me to believe we are dealing with a .411 – that’s why I ordered a box each of .411 Woodleigh solids and softs soon after the rifle arrived. They were back ordered and arrived within the last couple of weeks. I have not reloaded for the .411 – I haven’t even opened the boxes. Anyway, I don’t have the dies --- I must have forgotten to mention that…

I wrote the complimentary note within a day or two of receiving the rifle and before the loaded ammunition arrived and, therefore, before I fired the rifle of course – fairly late one evening after cleaning as I recall (note I’m getting a bit more careful about assuming people are keeping things sorted out and in context). It looked nice (still does) plus my wife liked the lion and tiger engravings - (you work with everything you can get going for you on one of these deals!).
Seemed like on one of these threads someone was presuming my reloading awareness and proficiency might be the issue being the novice I am with doubles. Oops, almost messed up again; I jotted down some calibers and just started to note I load, or have loaded for 12 calibers between 22H and 375 H&H. Realized I had left out 6MM and 270 – just to be sure then. Lets say at least 14. Probably shouldn’t count 3 pistol calibers and 4 shotgun gauges. I’m sure most have their own conventions with reloads. I make sure, by box, that all my rifle cases stay together through their loading life and that I can always tell the loading history by line entries on the side of the box. Dates, all data, etc.; sometimes it’s helpful to key the info back to notebook entries that go into a bit more about performance such as groups, velocities, drops, even weather believe it or not. Anyway, guess I don’t have to tread out on the thin treacherous ice of reloading for a vintage double yet. I did start by sorting the “sack†to the obvious
Solids, softs and fired categories. That line entry on each box has the date 21 Aug, Woodleigh solid/soft 400 gr, unk load; 21 Aug, fired brass, etc. And, I tried all loaded rounds to be sure they would chamber in the right barrel. Now this part is probably important: what I did not think about until after I had experienced the two failures to eject was that would be a problem in a DG mode and having to keep track by historical barrel use would not be sensible. Careful measurements later clearly indicate the firing history of even the reloads. Possibly more about that later. Things like that are more important than the “yes, I did, no you didn’t waste of time and emotion.

Now about the firing. I intended to go out see how the rifle performed, and over the course of the morning, empty all the reloads. Actually went fishing in one of the tanks for a while until it was late enough to start making noise. Between firing each group with the WR we killed time with more fishing, making the cattle imaginary buffalo and trying the snaps, shooting other rifles and shotguns – mostly allowing for nearly total cool down between increasingly focused group firing. Seems there is cynicism, and possibly drawing a SURE conclusion about this whole episode because of my firing offhand to check the rifle. The distance was about 50 yards (let’s say +/- one yd, or go ahead and make it two).

The first shot was right about where I would want it over the top of the front bead. The second shot absolutely astounded me as with the same hold it looked a foot low and to the left. I fired a couple of four shot groups then think I did a couple of two shot groups then wound up with a sitting group. The right barrel group was 2.5†high and 3.5†wide. The left barrel group was 3.5 high and 4.5 “ wide. The center of the left barrel group was about 4.5†low and 6†to the left. The extreme spread across the diagonal was 11.5â€. I suggest you diagram it out if that is confusing. The results looked damn bad while I was watching those left barrel hits down and to the left of the hold. The individual barrel groups are nothing to brag about but were sufficient to tell me I had a problem with loads and/or regulation. If the groups had been converged at about 4â€highx5â€wide, I would have just had to see how much better the groups became with a steadier position, figure out the loads – or possibly Ernest would have finally told me, and sent me the dies so I could use the rifle past the initial rounds he send. If anyone thinks those kinds of groups are impossible with careful offhand shooting, you probably haven’t had much serious practice with iron sights. If anyone is SURE I can’t beat that with an O/U using a bead over the rib, we need to talk and maybe give you a chance to donate some serious hard money – that would actually be a sucker bet. Having lived in states where slugs were mandatory I found they can be quite accurate...

Could one of the loads have been hot enough to cause the problem? Possible, but I didn’t discern any differences other than two failures to eject. Are they all too hot? I didn’t use a chronograph – mistake I admitted earlier! What are they supposed to be loaded with? Not sure. Three of those I unloaded had 80 grains of something, the other had 84 grains. It looked like IMR4831 as opposed to H4831 but could have been something else. Who knows what’s in the remaining? IMR4064, PETN? Don’t any of you who might know the implications of that over react. It’s a joke to make a serious point with reloads.

I take JJ’s expert opinion that the rifle is unsafe. It either arrived that way, or was damaged during the firing session I described using loads sent to me for the rifle.
I KNOW that, but obviously none of you, including Ernest, can.

Baring new information that I don’t have, there’s not much more I can add. I’ll probably either have the rifle fixed with the major re-sleeve option, or see if someone wants to buy it at a discount and go through the re-sleeve / re-barrel options themselves. Lots of lessons here…

Meanwhile, I was able to find my M70 stock screws. Might go with the drill press one more time as a milling machine (I do know better, and a small Harbor Freight vertical mill is actually less than that nice Turkish blank) humm, anyway I’ll get back to something I CHOOSE to do something about – working on a stock or two.

Regards,
Emory

Dang man, thats a drag.

Who is the guy? We wish to avoid him.

problems posting ..... test

My computer is being stubborn - thus the last post. Now, to make my point: I recently purchased a SXS rifle from the judge - his Cogswell & Harrison .375 2 1/2" (about four months ago). The rifle is in really good condition for it's age of 96 years (1909). He also sent me dies & reloaded ammo from the party that does his reloading for him (these arrived sometime after the rifle); I'm always suspicious of other people's reloads, so I opted to shoot only two rounds of the reloads when they arrived, and decided that I'd keep the rifle because it seemed fine from these two test-fires (small test, but gun seemed fine). I then proceeded to research loading data for the rifle for myself, and asked a few guys on this forum for their advise for load data, pulled all the bullets from the loads that the judge had sent (a couple of the bullets were heavier than the load that the rifle was proofed for had called for), and developed my own loads for my "new" rifle. Once I had my loads worked up, the rifle performed nothing short of excellent. What's my point here - I'm not discounting the judge's knowledge of reloading, simply saying that I question the knowledge & expertise of the party that the judge employed to do his reloading for him (and it seemed that he relied on them to develop his loads for him). I personally believe that they may not be very well versed in their knowledge of loading for double rifles, or their knowledge of the special problems that relate to reloading for SXS rifles (not to say they are bad reloaders, but only they are limited in their knowledge when it relates to SXS rifles). If my theory is correct, this whole nasty mess MAY be the fault of neither party (buyer or seller), but could have happened because of faultly ammo that the judge used and recommended in good faith. I must add that my buying experience with the judge was very pleasant ...... I'd buy from him again.

Frank's note adds some useful information. His buying experience experience from Ernest was pleasant. Mine was too up until about a month into this deal. That was the last time I talked to him about when he was going to send the dies - mannerism was somewhat agitated. Keep in mind that was before I knew I had a problem.

Now, we both were provided reloads loaded by a third party for Ernest. Frank got both the promised loads and dies a few days after the rifle. I got 39 loads and brass only in a loose pouch a few days later. If you haven't paid attention, remember Ernest said he had held back one round because he was so attached to the rifle and wanted it as a keepsake/reminder(aside to Lawndart, you might want to add flagwaving to your caution list). I'm starting to wonder where that round is? Now Frank had a couple of loads heavier than recommended. I pulled four rounds and found one had four grains more of unknown powder than the other three. I'll be interested in what the other ten loads I still have look like when I get around to pulling those. Frank, were your loads shipped loose as mine were?

Thanks,
Emory

Emory

The more this goes on the more I think Judge sold a rifle that met his description.

Mike

Something which I find interesting with this thread and the thread on African Hunting Reports....is the strong follow up by "500 Grains"

If you go back a few years ago a fellow who called himself "teanut"/teenut? put forward plans to make a cheap Magnum Mauser style action. "500 grains" was one of a few people who bought an action before it existed. That was then followed by 500 Grains going to different forums in attempt to get his money back

Buyer Beware....covers everything.

Mike

Mike,

Ernest was fairly expansive about his experience and knowledge of doubles. I now think I doubt the knowledgeable part.

Ernest said it was tight and on the face. It was tight as far as I could determine. When I got it outside in good light I noticed I could see light across the face. JJ later confirmed that it needed rehinging. That was not easy to see and I'll assume Ernest hadn't looked close enough, or doesn't see well enough up close to notice.

Ernest described excellent accuracy so I thought it reasonable to trust the barrels were regulated and with the loads he sent. I did not get anything like the accuracy he described.

After seeing where each barrel grouped, I suspect by using different aim points I could convience most it produces excellent accuracy.

We'll never know because after JJ's careful examination, I'm not about to wrap my fingers around the barrels and try to concentrate on sight allignment, breath control and trigger...

Emory

quote:

Originally posted by Mike378:

If you go back a few years ago a fellow who called himself "teanut"/teenut? put forward plans to make a cheap Magnum Mauser style action. "500 grains" was one of a few people who bought an action before it existed. That was then followed by 500 Grains going to different forums in attempt to get his money back

Mike

Apples and oranges, Mike. 'Teenut' passed away before obtaining his manufacturer's FFL from the ATFE. His widow and the people who took over the company declared that they would obtain the license shortly and fulfill the order. After some monthss, they did not receive the FFL, and then refused to refund 500grains' money.

He applied pressure in order to get his money back, something he was entitled to do.

George

Emory

If you go back to my earlier post you will see I covered the situation with how different shooters would assess a rifle.

This could be like a shooter selling an "accuracy" rifle and the buyer assumes the seller has certain knowledge BUT the seller's interpretation of "accuracy" is well below the buyer's interpretation.

I can totally accept that the rifle you bought from JudgeG is a piece of shit by your standards BUT I think by JudgeG's standard the rifle was good. In other words JudgeG was not selling you a rifle that he thought was a piece of shit.

Mike

George,

I am aware of the situation with teenut. My point was that 500 Grains jumped in very early (with whatever benefits that would give) but then had the expectations that would be associated with buying from Winchester, Remington, Ruger etc.

As a side note and 500 Grains will be able to elaborate.....but I seem to remember 500 Grains posting about his problems with the action well before Teenut died.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Emory:
After seeing where each barrel grouped, I suspect by using different aim points I could convience most it produces excellent accuracy.

Hardly a worthwhile situation for field use.

Oops, sorry about the mis-fire on the blank post. I didn't realize this was loaded when I hit the button a couple of minutes ago...

Mike,

I mentioned the rifle looked quite good - still does, and in about a year I may have it back functioning the way it should too. And, safely! I may be over-invested, but probably a bit smarter too.

It's too bad Ernest wasn't there when I test fired. He at least talked about that, but it would not have fit either schedule as I recall. I doubt he would have done that if he didn't beleive the rifle was essentially represented properly.

A few days back I reached the point where I can handle any of this rather unemotionally - as long as some one doesn't start trying to conclude or assume I'm misrepresenting how this unfolded from my end.

I think I conceded my obvious bad judgement on the opening post about a week ago...

Emory

how
long before this slime ball an his pocket pals slink away from AR now that they have been uncovered as such???
OH YES THE MIGHTY HAVE FALLEN AN FALLEN FAR!
If Don G's pic of an out of shape Judge G is any example of his false representations of himself and some of his ilk nothing else needs be mentioned on the matter!!!!

Emory,

I've read your posts and your concerns, and, FWIW, I think you have a healthy attitude about this. The money's gone and unlikely to be returned, and you're making the best of the situation, financially and emotionally.

I have learned something valuable from this and the recent related threads. To date, the only item I've puchased that I felt might have been misrepresented was a knife, and while $100 wasn't a major problem even 15 years ago, I still remember it. Your situation has reinforced it, and I do think an escrow account will be my solution to any purchase (safari very much included) over $1500 or so.

So, again FWIW, thank you for sharing your experiences.

Jaywalker

quote:

Originally posted by Mike378:


If you go back a few years ago a fellow who called himself "teanut"/teenut? put forward plans to make a cheap Magnum Mauser style action. "500 grains" was one of a few people who bought an action before it existed. That was then followed by 500 Grains going to different forums in attempt to get his money back



Mike

Yup, I gave a deposit. Teenut was terminally ill with cancer, fact that he concealed when taking orders. After placing my order and waiting more than the promised time, I found out he had been quite ill, but he said he was doing great and was going full steam ahead on the rifle project. Apparently this was a very serious cancer recurrence because unfortunately 2 weeks later he died.

The attorney for his estate was a swindler, IMO, and gave me the runaround and refused a refund. The widow sold all the machine shop stuff (lathes, cnc, etc.), but still no refund. So I took it public. That greatly stressed the widow. But in time, and with a few more phone calls, the refund came. I got a little beat up for taking a widow to task, but that was after a few months of patience and coutesy, getting the runaround and false statements, and after sale of the business assets brought in quite a few thousand dollars. I think it took a year and half of persistence but the money came back.

This experience also leaves me pessimistic about the MRC PH action.

Mike, would you have done it differently?

500

A mate of mine in Australia had an interest in that action but we both agreed that the best option was to wait. It was because of his interest at the time that I remember the Teenut deal.

In the unlikely event that I bought such an action and it all went sour I don't believe I would hit the forums with it. However, that is just me.

I think with actions like Teenut's and the MRC PH action or similar product situations it is similar to buying shares and expectations in all areas should be different than buying Winchester etc.

I would also regard buying an old double rifle as a risky adventure and ditto for several bolt actions.

As a side note, I seem to remember the Teenut action being when Saeed's forum was that old style forum, so before about 2000? Also, I don't remember Ray being on Saeed's early forum as he was mainly HA.

Mike

Mike, I do not recall the exact date, but perhaps 1999/2000. I cannot say whether it was before or after I asked Swamp to withdraw his ban on you from HA. In hindsight, that is probably a badge of honor.

I like to report good and bad. For example, when Cooper Arms fixed (for free) a .223 that I negligently blew up, I posted about it. They gave service above and beyond what anyone could expect, and I very much appreciated it, and I wanted others to know what fine folks they were to deal with.

This forum is supposed to be about the free flow of information which can help some or all of us.

quote:

As a side note, I seem to remember the Teenut action being when Saeed's forum was that old style forum, so before about 2000? Also, I don't remember Ray being on Saeed's early forum as he was mainly HA.

Teenut (Robert Bastow) was one of the originals on AR, in the old style forum. But I think it was when we first changed to a multi-forum website that he started up his pursuit for the ultimate mauser, and started the conversion of his machining company into a manufacturor of actions. I'd guess it was 2000 or early 2001.

Ray wasn't one of the "original" AR guys, per se. He came over from HA at about the same time as a few others ... I'd say '99ish. It was, however, before we got the huge influx of refugee's from HA that were pissed at Swamp for trying to ilicit donations to run his site, and his banning/censorship frenzy (that probably started with you! ), etc.

Cheers,
Canuck

This forum is supposed to be about the free flow of information which can help some or all of us.

500,

I agree with that 100%. My view of probably not hitting the forum has nothing to do with publicising something....more a case of me trying to limit making a fool of myself

Canuck

I seem to remember Robert Bastow discussing the action plans on the old site.

About August 1998 is when I first posted on AR.

How many people from those times do you think are still on AR. A bit hard to tell in some ways because you did not have a "handle" on the old site.

There was quite a lot of migration from HA to AR after John S became moderator on the African forum. I can't remember how many times Swampy banned me but I do remember it was 3 times on one day alone

Mike

quote:

Canuck

I seem to remember Robert Bastow discussing the action plans on the old site.

About August 1998 is when I first posted on AR.

How many people from those times do you think are still on AR. A bit hard to tell in some ways because you did not have a "handle" on the old site.

Teenut talked about his plans for a large mauser action LONG before he actually acted on it. I'm thinking it was close to two years, so that would put us around 2000.

There are a few of the originals here, but not many.

I started posting on the original forum in Feb or March of '98. I was looking for info on my 6.5 Gibbs. I remember because this was the very first place I found when I got my first internet connection! There was only maybe 20 guys posting back then. I can't remember many of the names.

Don_G was on HA at the beginning but came over soon after Saeed started this one.

I remember Teenut, Mats, Windcutter, Wild Bill and a few others. None of them post here anymore. And who could forget the most prolific poster of the early days....Latigo aka Cody7 aka Sidecar aka Mike Boyd....the original troll!

Cheers,
Canuck

quote:

Originally posted by Mike378:
My view of probably not hitting the forum has nothing to do with publicising something....more a case of me trying to limit making a fool of myself

We would both be mistaken to think that no one has formed that view yet.

quote:

We would both be mistaken to think that no one has formed that view yet.

500,

So you reckon I have a free hand as things can't get worse

Mike

I remember Teenut, Mats, Windcutter, Wild Bill and a few others. None of them post here anymore. And who could forget the most prolific poster of the early days....Latigo aka Cody7 aka Sidecar aka Mike Boyd....the original troll!

Canuck,

Yes, who can forget Mike Boyd. They just don't make trolls that way anymore. A troll that could organise the hunt with Saeed is way out of the area of the current trolls.

I remember the name Mats.

There was also a bloke into big bangers from Sweden....a name like Rhene or Rhian or something.

The Australian Karl was also there in the early days.

And last and far from least was Mitch. The original 577 T Rex man. Mitch was the first person that I got to meet on the telephone from the forums. As you know Mitch pushed for the Big Bore forum.

Mike

I vote to close this thread!

Any seconds?

Lastly: Lesson Learned - Always make sure to have a gun inspected by a third party before closing the deal.

Jeff

quote:

Originally posted by Canuck:
[QUOTE]Canuck

Don_G was on HA at the beginning but came over soon after Saeed started this one.

I remember Teenut, Mats, Windcutter, Wild Bill and a few others. None of them post here anymore. And who could forget the most prolific poster of the early days....Latigo aka Cody7 aka Sidecar aka Mike Boyd....the original troll!

Cheers,
Canuck

I can't remember when I came to AR, but all those guys you list were still here, including the illustrious MIKE BOYD. My first handle here was "DUGABOY1" but had trouble when the wibsite changed and couldn't sign on, so Saeed reccomended I change my handle. It worked. Ray was still on HA when I came here, and I still have the HA address on my "favorites" but rarely use it, as that web-site is dead as a door nail. I rarely go any place other than Nitro Express, and here! I had almost 5000 posts when we all lost our count in the change over, which would count around 9100 today.

It seems to me the little petty fights here are getting like thay have always been in the deer hunting forums of most sites, and it is my opinion, that some of the problems have come from folks migrating here from those general hunting sites, bringing thier "CAT FIGHT" habits with them. In the last year, it seems, you can't post anything without someone jumping down your throat. It isn't getting any more pleasent as time goes on! .........SAD!

Jeff,

I'll second that!

It seems like this one has gotten way off topic.

Les

quote:

Originally posted by LHowell:
Jeff,

I'll second that!

It seems like this one has gotten way off topic.

Les

Agreed, but the way it went is an improvment...

/Martin

I'm not trying to chime in and repeat what others have said, but it appears that the gun in question was offered with full inspection and money back privileges for a reasonable period of time. This is an old rifle that does not appear to have been represented as in 100% condition, nor was it purchased expecting to be so. The risks of buying antique guns are inherent in the process, which is a fact that pushes many of us out of that market. The need for evaluation by a trained eye, either in or out of your immediate circle, is mandatory, otherwise caveat emptor.
It sounds like Emory is a fine man, and from my personal experience, I can tell you that JudgeG is as well. It's unfortunate the prepurchase evaluations were not completed as offered. The only true fault in this transaction that can be documented would be this. Any other misstep or finger-pointing at this point is only conjecture that can be proven by no one.

quote:

This experience also leaves me pessimistic about the MRC PH action.

I'm waiting on one of those too...

quote:

Originally posted by 577NitroExpress:

quote:

This experience also leaves me pessimistic about the MRC PH action.

I'm waiting on one of those too...

Me, too. I gave away one of those for Christmas two years ago. It is a gift that just keeps on giving, as he's still waiting on it.

Maybe this year I'll give him a card with the original estimated date scratched out and 2007 put in!

quote:

Originally posted by Emory:

Mike,

I mentioned the rifle looked quite good - still does, and in about a year I may have it back functioning the way it should too. And, safely! I may be over-invested, but probably a bit smarter too.

It's too bad Ernest wasn't there when I test fired. He at least talked about that, but it would not have fit either schedule as I recall. I doubt he would have done that if he didn't beleive the rifle was essentially represented properly.

A few days back I reached the point where I can handle any of this rather unemotionally - as long as some one doesn't start trying to conclude or assume I'm misrepresenting how this unfolded from my end.

I think I conceded my obvious bad judgement on the opening post about a week ago...

Emory

Emory,
I just read this thread after being informed of it by a person who posts on AR from time to time (NOT JudgeG, as I have not corresponded with him in some time). I feel that you are a reasonable and reputable person from your posts, and I feel for your anguish.

I probably should stay out of this thread, as I know what I say will be scrutinized and flamed by some on this board, but I have a little additional info that you might find relevant.

First, let me make my position clear so there will be no misunderstanding whether I have an agenda in this matter. Some of you may know me, as I have in the past posted a good bit on this board. I do know JudgeG, and consider him a friend, as I do others on this board.I am not a "groupie" or apologist for JudgeG or anyone else (this is not directed at you, Emory, so please don't take offense).

I currently own 6 doubles, all but one of which are vintage rifles (including a VERY similar W-R to your rifle, except in 450/400 3"). I would not claim the expertise of several other posters on this board, but have gained a bit of experience in the care and feeding of vintage rifles over the years.

It has been my experience that there was little "standardization" of these rifles. I have a Webley 450 BPE with .461 bores (actually groove diameters). My sidelock H&H in 375 2.5" Flanged N.E. has .379 bores, and will not chamber current W-R factory ammo. I own one 450/400 3" that has .408 bores, and one that has over .412 bores. Most of my rifles have been a challenge to find regulating loads for. The list could go on, but I think you see the idea that I am trying to convey (vintage doubles are usually "interesting" to feed).

With that out of the way, let me give my little bit of information concerning the W-R double in question. When JudgeG first received this rifle he was anxious to shoot it as you might expect. Since he had no brass or dies at that time he called to ask me if I had any (as he needed fired brass to send in to get dies made). As luck would have it, I had a few pieces of HDS 450/400 3.25" brass left over from a previous project and told him to bring the rifle to my house so that we could let him have a chance to shoot his new/vintage double. I personally slugged the bores, as I do not like to take anyone else's word on bore diameter of vintage arms. Both barrels were .411 to .411+, so I knew it would safely handle .411 or .410 Woodleigh bullets. I had some Woodleigh .410 diameter solids (yes, I said .410-see photo), and decided to use these to be sure of not overstressing the barrels with the initial load. I compared the case capacity to my 450/400 3", and the HDS 450/400 3.25" brass held about 2 grains more than the 3" brass, so after consulting several sources for load data I felt safe in using a moderate version of my 450/400 solid load (unfortunately I did not record the powder charge since JudgeG knew what it was at the time, and I DO NOT load for him or anyone else under normal circumstances).

The bores looked good for a double of that age, and lockup was safe (although I honestly can't recall if there was any minute movement of the barrels without the fore-end on. I know that I will get torched by some of the participants on this thread for saying this, but I will not lie and say there was or wasn't when I only recall that I considered it safe to fire and reasonably tight at the time). I do remember that the chambers were a bit snug, and I ran the brass through a 450 3.25" die to reduce the base slightly, and make chambering easy.

We loaded four rounds and headed to the range. The first two rounds were used to "function test", and the second two were fired at a target at 50 yards (JudgeG did the shooting). The two record shots were, if I remember correctly, under 2" apart. Once again, I did not record the data, as it was given to JudgeG at the time.

The rifle functioned normally at the time and, other than the tight chambers, was a fully acceptable vintage double (and in rather nice overall condition). After this time I saw the rifle once more when Jorge had the opportunity to fire it, and it was still functioning normally at that time. What happened after this I cannot say, but at that time I would have been happy to have owned the rifle. I don't know about the ammo you received for the rifle because, as I previously stated, I don't load ammo for other people.

Emory, I hope that you don't consider this an attack on you, because it most assuredly is not meant to be. I only thought that you might be interested in my first hand observations of the rifle, having had the opportunity to examine it in some detail at the time.

I also find it interesting that JJ thinks a complete re-sleeve would be required. Assuming the chambers are bad now (and they showed no indication of that at the time I saw it),he offers a chamber re-sleeve for $650, and the bores were VERY shootable. Have you discussed this option with him?

Good luck,
Jim

Jim,

Appreciate you input. No way I could construe information such as you provided as an "attack".

It's helpful to understand what probably happened and when. The initial accuracy sounds fine. Were those rounds fired using a rest of any kind? how about a sling? It would not be surprising to get different results from me firing freehand, though I don't think the difference should be as great as I saw.

Those four pieces of brass are likely the one's Ernest mentioned were used to have the custom dies made from. He said he has fired 70-80 rounds through the rifle since then, and depending on the loads, I guess performance could have possibly changed without him being aware of the progression.

I'm going to need to drop off this computer quickly, I've spent mpost of the last day traveling - this is the only computer in the business center that works, and other people are waiting are waiting turns even in the very early morning hours.

I was surprised to find this thread is still going - sort of like the energizer bunny. If it gets more technical, suspect it could become a good topic for another forum.

Thanks,
Emory