quote:

Originally posted by Mike378:
Mickey

I am not assuming the rifle is rough in terms of feeding etc but its finish and especially the front end of the bolt.

With the tax, are you saying that if he did not pay $201000 to SCI he would have had to pay $201000 in tax?

Mike

Mike

Back in the days before tax reform an individual making above a certain amount would have been required to pay 90% of his net income in taxes (don't know what, never got there ). This would have been after any deductions for interest, State and Local taxes, write offs, charity etc.

A person making enough money would in effect be able to donate to a tax deductible foundation money that he would have in effect given the government. By buying a rifle for $203,000 he would get a deduction for everything over the value of the rifle. I think that rifle had a makers value of around $25000 then. This would have been a number low enough to allow any bidder to deduct a huge amount off his taxes.

This type of deduction drove the Charity business in the US for years and founded everything from the Red Cross to the local Church. Any donation with no item in return was 100% off the top. An item recieved in return was valued at whatever it cost. As you can see a creative accoutant and a charity could play fast and loose with the values.

quote:

Originally posted by Mickey1:

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Mike 378:

Show me a modern rifle that will with the wink of an eye sell for 70 or 80 K US, rough bolt and all?

If I recall correctly, the David Miller Company Leopard Rifle sold for $201,000.00. It took more than the blink of an eye though. I think the auction lasted about 15 minutes.

The price some drunk paid for a rifle while trying to impress his friends is not the true value. I think I heard it was for sale for $65,000 a couple of years ago.

Mickey1

I assume, from your statement, that you were there, and that you knew the person who purchased the Miller Company rifle to be intoxicated, and I further assume that you know for a fact that the rifle was later sold for $65,000.00. I further assume that you know for a fact that the IRS allowed the entire $201,000 purchase price as an income tax deduction, and that in fact the purchaser had taxable income in that particular year in which to make the large of a deduction.

My question to you is, Was it you that purchased that rifle at the auction?

I think the value is not just high because of the finite number made, but because of the NAME BEING MADE BIG. Like you said Alf, this gun was made by Mauser and little of the work done by Rigby. And not knowing too much about them I can't say for sure, but that bottom metal looks different than others I have seen, and in my opinion not as nice. So you have one of what 200,000 mausers made, but only 200 or less stamped and "modified a bit" by Rigby.

Rigby, H&H, names forever seared into the collective memory of the hunting community, the names mentione dwith the greatest hunters in the world's literature. Of the companies that still exist at least. And they are HOUSES, that is why the long term success and widespread fame of Echols or others might not achieve that. Just like Stratevarious (spell?), one guy didn't make every violin right? But the name is HUGE. I have an acquantance that is a violin maker and has even said they aren't the best sounding, but they were finished in a way that nobody has been able to duplicate since. That is the trick to them apparently.

These british "firms" are now owned by other corporations, but have kept the name, and people just have to have it. Just like Rappers and their Sean Jean clothes and Hummer H2's and what not. the name matters.

But if Alan would just make some great hunting accomplishments, and do something really unusual, like get involved in a war in the Congo as a leader of a band of Guirrrilla fighters, then I guarantee the well written book would carry the Echol Legend rifle into the eschalon of the Rigby's and H&H's.

Also, the winchesters and others are big names, but I believe have two things going against them. 1. they are mass produced, which always takes some of the flash off an object. 2. The are American. why is that bad? well, we're the biggest consumers in the world right? hell, we spend more on our pets every year than the national product of some small countries. People in the US have always thought something European was sexier, wilder or "insert hot button word here" than the American "knock-off" or version. Therefor the Americans with the excess of money are going to go for those Euro jobs versus the roiund the corner guy who lives in a house in Washington, Oregon or Idaho and works out of a small shop.

My 2 cents.

Red

PS

Sorry Alan for picking on you as the person that has to carry the Echols name into Legend, but you are a prolific hunter and use Legends (notice word play ) exclusively. So get that plain ticket to East Africa bud.

Red

Well, perhaps rich Americans think that owning a Purdey, Boss or a Holland will transform them into Euro royalty? Sorry, but......
Type A pre-war Mausers are nice, but hell, they are Axis guns!
Buy English it's one of the few countries which still stands behind America! Go Brits!

Is it understood that a team of men put together guns in the English houses?
One man makes a stock, another finishes it, another does the action work, then someone else will look after the barrel. Engraving was another separate skill. There would have been trainees coming through the ranks. It was the ability to train and sustain the high levels of skill which marked the Best gun houses. These man worked as a team for one firm.

Some years ago whilst at the premises of an English provincial gun maker, he showed me a London made rifle by a famous maker that he had just completed some work on.
The rifle belonged to one of the European Noble families.
The nobleman had sent the rifle back to the London maker for the work to be done. The maker had farmed out the work to an intermediate company who had passed on the work to my friend.
My friend charged the intermediate company for the work he did. His charge knocked on, through to the owner of the rifle, ie at each stage a handling charge and administrative fee was added. As far as the owner was aware this work had been done by the maker and charged accordingly.
Now that the gun trade is not as bouyant as it once was in Britain, it's my understanding that the "farming out" of work is not an uncommon practice.
This in itself is not a bad practice, but it does lead one to think what is the status of some of The House Names.
American custom rifles have the work done attributed to the craftsman who did the work. You can know who did what. To my mind this is much more satisfactory.

That Rigby would be quite the bargain if compared to this Winchester
http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/content/community/gun...ster/324697_1000.jsp

quote:

Winchester Model 1876 "One of One Thousand" .45-60
WINCHESTER MODEL 1876 1 OF 1000 LEVER ACTION RIFLE. Cal 45-60. SN 10036. This ultra rare rifle is one of only 5 ( and this being the only one currently known to survive) "1 of 1000" ever made with 30" bbls. The bbl is full oct. with full magazine and fine, center crotch cut, beautifully figured walnut with checkered forearm and straight stock that has a crescent steel buttplate with trap. The front sight is a Lyman hunting sight ivory bead and the rear sight is a very early Winchester folding leaf original sight. The tang is mounted with a Lyman tang sight. It has the second model screwed on dust cover rail with an impressed thumbprint dust cover. The chamber area of the exposed bbl flats is engraved in foliate arabesque patterns with punch dot background and the engraved script legend "One of One Thousand". The muzzle is matching engraved on five flats with identical patterns and a single silver band to match the silver band over the chamber. The caliber marking is rolled on the top flat above the rear sight and below the bbl markings. This special rifle is further equipped with single set trigger. It is accompanied by a Cody Firearms Museum letter dated Jan. 22, 2004 completely identifying this rifle as having been shipped on June 8, 1880 to order number 20253. This very rare Winchester was recently purchased out of the family which had owned it since 1905. CONDITION: Fine. Bbl retains about 80% original blue, thinned and turning brown over the chamber area and in front of the rear sight. Magazine tube retains 40-50% original blue with the balance turned brown. Forend cap is a smooth brown patina. Receiver and sideplates retain 75-80% silvered case colors with the balance a smooth brown patina. Wood is sound and shows substantial wear and handling with no original finish remaining and with minor handling and use marks commensurate with the overall condition of the rifle. Mechanics are fine and the bore is bright and shiny.
$165,000

Old American made Winchester + rare = $$$
I have seen a nice 1895 in .405. It was some kind of "Super Grade" complete with express sights and English proofs (can't remember if it went through Birmingham or London Proof House).
I am no Winnie fan, but this was a nice safari lever gun!
I also had a chance to buy very nice "Winchester Golden Eagle" aka Winchester 777 in .30-06. Nice and rare rifle, but a Jap gun so it was quite affordable.

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:

quote:

Originally posted by Mickey1:

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Mike 378:

Show me a modern rifle that will with the wink of an eye sell for 70 or 80 K US, rough bolt and all?

If I recall correctly, the David Miller Company Leopard Rifle sold for $201,000.00. It took more than the blink of an eye though. I think the auction lasted about 15 minutes.

The price some drunk paid for a rifle while trying to impress his friends is not the true value. I think I heard it was for sale for $65,000 a couple of years ago.

Mickey1

I assume, from your statement, that you were there, and that you knew the person who purchased the Miller Company rifle to be intoxicated, and I further assume that you know for a fact that the rifle was later sold for $65,000.00. I further assume that you know for a fact that the IRS allowed the entire $201,000 purchase price as an income tax deduction, and that in fact the purchaser had taxable income in that particular year in which to make the large of a deduction.

My question to you is, Was it you that purchased that rifle at the auction?

22WRF

Yes I was there.

Yes I know who purchased the rifle.

Yes his ego and 'relaxed state' helped the bidding. (that's why they serve alcohol at these events)

I do not know if the rifle was sold.

Yes I do know the value given the purchaser for tax purposes.

No it was not the purchase price.

No, he could not legally claim the whole amount. He could only claim the amount over the value given for the rifle and the accessories given to him by SCI.

No, I have never been so drunk as to spend $200,000.00 on a rifle. I hope some day to be rich enough to be able to spend that much on a rifle however.

You obviously have never learned the definition of assume.

As a Canadian, in response to Paolo, I sincerely hope that the possession of a Rigby, Purdey, Holland or even a BOSS does not turn ANY American, rich or otherwise, into anything resembling ...Euro Royalty...

As far as rifle quality is concerned, I have yet to see a big name British bolt action hunting rifle, including a mint pre-WWI Purdey Mannlicher, that was as well inletted, finished and handled as well as a Brno 21H made between about '46 and '56.

Mickey1

There are many different definitions for the word "assume". I used it to mean "I suppose".

Regardless, in getting back to the real discussion concerning the worth of rifles, or for that matter anything, "worth" is a very subjective concept that can have as many meanings as there are people on this earth.
Regardless of his motive, the rifle was "worth" it to the buyer, just as the subject of this thread may be worth whatever the seller is asking. Utility doesn't have to mean what something can do, or what it can later be sold for. It can mean pride of ownership and sense of accomlishment.

The rifle that started this thread is "worth" whatever its owner wants it to be worth to him or her, and only one of those measurements happens to be money.

I agree with that, if someone wants to spend a huge sum on a given gun, it's a personal decision. It's when someone trys to tell me that I should agree with this choice due to the name of the gunmaker that I have difficulties.

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
Mickey1

There are many different definitions for the word "assume". I used it to mean "I suppose".

Regardless, in getting back to the real discussion concerning the worth of rifles, or for that matter anything, "worth" is a very subjective concept that can have as many meanings as there are people on this earth.
Regardless of his motive, the rifle was "worth" it to the buyer, just as the subject of this thread may be worth whatever the seller is asking. Utility doesn't have to mean what something can do, or what it can later be sold for. It can mean pride of ownership and sense of accomlishment.

The rifle that started this thread is "worth" whatever its owner wants it to be worth to him or her, and only one of those measurements happens to be money.

22WRF

I hope you took my post 'tounge in cheek' as it was meant.

Five thousand to one person is 50,000 to another.
The slickest working bolt coupled with very reliable rotary magazine can be had for approximately 1000USD. It's the Kongsberg from Norway.