Has anyone seen, examined, or actually fired the newest iteration of the (London) John Rigby bolt gun (perhaps better characterized as a "magazine rifle," since a Brit)?

If so, what are your observations?

If not, what reliable news of availability/quality/cost?

Good hunting to all.

No matter what it is its like buying a Yugo and calling it a Mac truck. The whole Rigby thing is a gigantic screwed up mess in my opinion.

John Roberts bought the Rigby name somewhere along the line and then somewhere along the line took the money for selling it again. In my opinion all these guys should just sink into the North Sea and be done with it.

There never will be another Rigby anything of such quality to wear the name.

Everybody gots der money. Goodbye Rigby and good riddance.

I see Mrs Will must have finished up a fresh batch of Curmudgeon Cakes !!!!!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
No matter what it is its like buying a Yugo and calling it a Mac truck. The whole Rigby thing is a gigantic screwed up mess in my opinion.

John Roberts bought the Rigby name somewhere along the line and then somewhere along the line took the money for selling it again. In my opinion all these guys should just sink into the North Sea and be done with it.

There never will be another Rigby anything of such quality to wear the name.

Everybody gots der money. Goodbye Rigby and good riddance.

Will, did you mean Paul Roberts?

See how confusing it is!

BTW, your "stuff" is going out in tomorrow's mail. Thanks again.

quote:

Will, did you mean Paul Roberts?

Paul now owns jeffery rifle company now

quote:

Originally posted by Express_Rifles:

quote:

Will, did you mean Paul Roberts?

Paul now owns jeffery rifle company now

Actually the owner of the Jeffery name is based in Houston. Paul leases the right to build rifles with the Jeffery name.

Everybody now has a "name." All seems quite meaningless does it not?

Had, and used in Zim, a Roberts "Rigby" circa 1988 in 416 Rigby, with H&H claw mounts, BRNO action. An exceptional rifle in all aspects. Name aside, could not have asked for a finer bolt DG rifle. Also had a 1921 Rigby Rigby in 350 Rigby. Roberts rifle was superior in all aspects save for the commercial mauser action in the original, IMHO.

I haven't actually handled one, but the pictures sure are pretty.

quote:

what reliable news of availability/quality/cost?

From what I've heared and seen, quality is WAY better than the CalRigby bolt guns.
This is in no way a Yugo being called a Mack - these are proper bolt guns in the classic style.
Prices aren't too bad for what you get either:
http://www.johnrigbylondon.com/416.html

I think the name does add value. But it depends on the name. There is no question that the Rigby name has been tarnished, rightly or wrongly, by it's Califonian connections, and I think that has put a lot of people off.

As I understand it, Californian Rigbys are now made under licence by Roberts in London, who also makes Jeffery. There is a completly seperate company, also based in London, also named Rigby, as also making fine guns. Too many Rigbys for the brand in my opinion.

Some of the old names still continue and can still be genuinely described and "Best Quality London/ English guns". In my opinion this list would include H&H, Purdey, Charles Lancaster, Westley Richards, William Evans, Churchill, W J Jeffrey, Grant Aitken Lang. The provenance of these firms is the possession of the order books going back a century or two. Order a Charles Lancaster today and the order detail will go into the same ledger that has the names of Annie Oakley, Baden-Powell, Gordon-Cummings etc etc. You are buying into history and provenance.

Not wanting to disparage the many fine independant gunmakers around the world, but the English express rifle is inherrently English. Otherwise it is merely an "English style" express rifle, and therefore an imitation.

Will the "names" kill any better than a good custom 'smiths rifle? Of course not. But the history will cost you a few bob more.

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

Romeo and Juliet, WS

Yes, a name is a name. What matters is the reputation that goes with the name. John Rigby built a reputation associated with its name over 250 years. Newcomers in California and England using that old name have been building their respective reputations only 13 years and one year. Even if quality of current manufacture is good, they have a long way to go to prove themselves with any appreciable history.

One of the newcomers states on their website, "Since the early 1700s we have made guns....". It doesn't matter how good their guns are, how can they possibly claim that?

The last Studebaker rolled off the assembly line in 1966. If I purchased the name, hired some young engineers and laborers, and set up a small custom auto factory in Tucumcarri, New Mexico would it be sensible for me to tell people I've been making automobiles since 1904?

Knowing some of the people and the reputation of others involved in the London operation of John Rigby & Co operation, I have no doubt at all they will be making very fine bolt and double rifles.

If I had the money, I'd definately place an order for one of their round action doubles in .500 and with nice short barrels......problem is even if I could afford one, I'd also have to pay something like 100% import tax plus 14% VAT plus shipping.

I am however open to sponsorship offers.

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
No matter what it is its like buying a Yugo and calling it a Mac truck. The whole Rigby thing is a gigantic screwed up mess in my opinion.

John Roberts bought the Rigby name somewhere along the line and then somewhere along the line took the money for selling it again. In my opinion all these guys should just sink into the North Sea and be done with it.

There never will be another Rigby anything of such quality to wear the name.

Everybody gots der money. Goodbye Rigby and good riddance.

Agree 1000%

And even at its best a poor cousin to H&H and Purdey

Mike,

I don't think they're particularly trying to compete with H&H, WR & Purdey etc. Rather they're trying to aim at a lower priced but still good quality market.

For example, the H&H round action double, laughably (if I remember called the PH model) goes for something like UKP60K whereas the new John Rigby and Co will be considerably less than that.... but still a good round action double.

All that said, I reckon the post 1960s (or so) H&Hs aren't a patch on the old ones and vastly over priced for what they are.

And let's face it, no-one will match the WR drop lock double when it comes to quality. (IMO)

quote:

Has anyone seen, examined, or actually fired the newest iteration of the (London) John Rigby bolt gun

Forgive me, but was this not the original question? If so, why are we jumping up and down getting our panties in a wad about the NAME? The real test surely is the piece on which the name is engraved. I have been waiting for about a year now to see one of their doubles. The reason is simple: the doubles that they are going to build were going to handle like the "original" British doubles. Still waiting, but maybe this is a good thing! I have not seen any of their bolt action rifles, but their shotguns have been out for a while and I believe the Ghubert on this forum may have shot them. I do not buy firearms for the name on them. Obviously some here do.
Peter.

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:

quote:

Has anyone seen, examined, or actually fired the newest iteration of the (London) John Rigby bolt gun

Forgive me, but was this not the original question? .... The real test surely is the piece on which the name is engraved.
Peter.

Point taken and you are correct. My comment was meant to address the potential practice of using an old name and reputation to induce a customer into believing he is purchasing something he is not. I see nothing wrong with using a grand old name as long as the consumer isn't confused into believing he is buying the original product from the original firm. Indeed, the new companies may be very good and the products may be of very fine quality. If so, their products will earn a reputation in their own right.

I too would like to hear from someone who has fired the newest iteration of the bolt rifle.

To me the name does matter, since in the past the name Rigby exuded quality English gunsmiths. If the new owners are still based and making guns in England of the same quality, no issue. If they are not, it's kind of like when Miller bought Lowenbrau, turned a fine German Pilsner with a great tradition into a mediocre mass produced lager ...

Regards,

Chuck

Grenadier, we agree! Additionally of course, when you have a well established name, this sometimes commands a premium! Fortunately we have a forum like this one which enables us to identify manufacturers like CZ who make very fine products at a reasonable price. To me a CZ says:" This guy knows his guns"!
Peter

CZ is a very good example. They have been building firearms since 1936, or nearly 75 years. Their reputation as one of the best at what they do is very well established.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:
I haven't actually handled one, but the pictures sure are pretty.

As I've always shared with my kids, pretty and handsome can hurt you. You can pin that on girls, boys and rifles with no track record in the field.

quote:

If the new owners are still based and making guns in England of the same quality, no issue. If they are not, it's kind of like when Miller bought Lowenbrau, turned a fine German Pilsner with a great tradition into a mediocre mass produced lager ...

Yes but when BMW started making cars in USA or South Africa is it still a BMW?

Being "a Brit" I seen a lot of this "name" bollocks and really it is all just that in many cases.

A company ceases to exist except on paper - like the company that made Adams revolvers or in the case of the US Newton rifles or Canada Ross rifles.

But nevertheless the magic piece of paper of the company registration still exists. There's no factory, no guns been made for years, but that registration as a company still exists.

Then many years later someone buys that piece of paper and proclaims themselves to then me "the Adams Revolver Company" or "the Newton Rifle Company" or "the Ross Rifle Company".

Does this really make them "true" products of those forbears? Legally yes.

But in truth I, if I bought that paper would no more be "Mr Newton Rifle Company" than I be President Obama or Governor Palin!

I think that if there is an unbroken line of actually making the products year on year on year then yes then the "XXX" of today is the true successor to the "XXX" of yesterday.

But not if there has been a period where the company has been nothing more than a piece of paper and an entry in a register of companies.

Take Marlin in the USA.

There was no "Mr Marlin" since how many years ago? Yet I belive that the Kenna family made legitimate Marlin rifles and were indeed legitimate heirs to "Mr Marlin".

Or maybe others have differnt opinions?

One could equally argue that it all depends on the people involved and the product produced.

Look at the number of times some of the motorcycle marques have been reborn or sold, resold and reintroduced with similar products. Some have been good and some not so good. Some in the spirit of the original product, some (occasionally( better than the original and some not so much in the spirit of the original, (to put it mildly) and some absolute crap.

Examples might be Norton, Harley Davidson or Indian motorcycles... and there's plenty of others and certainly no-one would suggest that HRD quality dropped when Phil Vincent bought the company and formed Vincent HRD in the late 1920s would they?

As I previously said knowing some of the guys involved and the reputation of others, I reckon they'll produce a very good product for the price and I'm certainly prepared to wait and see how good they are.

Whilst we're talking about making a product in the spirit if the original, bear in mind they're working on a rising bite action..... they must be bastards to build but they're helluva good.

Trial by internet never works.

Yes, unlike Rigby, when Kenna purchased Marlin he wasn't just purchasing intellectual property, i.e. the name name. Kenna purchased the entire business. When Remington purchased Marlin in 2007 it purchased the entire company. Each time the core of the company and its products survived the new ownership.

I want to reiterate that I am not criticizing the new Rigby products. Nevertheless, I think we are in agreement that new Rigby guns will never be the same as "original" John Rigby & Co. guns. Accurate duplication of the old firearms and quality would, at best, amount to manufacture of "reproduction" Rigbys. John Rigby & Co. reproduction guns, or modern guns made to that style and quality, would actually be a good thing.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

Whilst we're talking about making a product in the spirit if the original, bear in mind they're working on a rising bite action..... they must be bastards to build but they're helluva good.

I believe that one of the reasons for them stopping making them was because
they were hard and expensive to build and they couldn't charge enough to make
it worth while.

Then they went to Webley's !!!

.

I honestly think they'll be very good quality at a very good price and would be more than happy to test one on a few safaris...... esp a round action, short barreled .500.

Can you build a rising bite on a round action BTW?- Not that it matters to me because I reckon either would be out of my price range but it'd be interesting to know anyway...

Huvius,
The CalRigby bolt rifles in the past were made by Reto Buehler and Jim Tucker, two of the best craftsmen you could find. Most Europeans only wish they could do the same Quality of work.
Also back in the early 90'S I built barreled actions for Paul Roberts. Reason I point this out is that most of you guys out there has no idea what goes on in this trade.

quote:

Originally posted by Butch Searcy:
Huvius,
The CalRigby bolt rifles in the past were made by Reto Buehler and Jim Tucker, two of the best craftsmen you could find. Most Europeans only wish they could do the same Quality of work.
Also back in the early 90'S I built barreled actions for Paul Roberts. Reason I point this out is that most of you guys out there has no idea what goes on in this trade.

Well said Butch.

A bit like all Holland's before a certain date were Webley and Scott's (or one of the early versions with Scott in it).

A bit like Petrol, just because it says Exxon on the pump doesn't mean it wasn't refined by Shell, Caltex or BP !!!

Same goes for all industry's.


.

Butch raises a good point when he says the British gun trade has always used a lot of out workers and that's still true to a (perhaps) lesser extent even today.

That said, I get an idea that most if not all of the new John Rigby & Co work is being done in their own workshops.

Actually, I have to say that Butch Searcy and his company are a bloody good example of not having to have been making doubles for hundreds of years to make good double rifles. I've never met him but have met a fair number of his double rifles and there's bugger all wrong with them at all!

Having just checked his website I see he's also now offering a rising bite double which just goes to prove how good a design they are.

What is interesting (to me at least) that despite this recession, the double rifle industry is seeing more changes now than it has in umpteen years. I know of at least 3 or 4 new companies (in the UK alone) that have been recently(ish) established to make high quality double rifles.

I'd still like to know if it's possible to build a round action, rising bite double though?

I have one or two observations that may be relevant here.

My first is that too many cooks spoil the broth. The Rigby in California and the Rigby in London ( just outside actuallly ) are subtly differently named entities producing radically different products. Paul Roberts is one of the finest rifle makers in the world and certainly in respect of English double and bolt rifles, It is same to say that irrespective of whether Jeffery or Rigby is stamped on his product the end result will be first class.

The London Rigby is claiming to have built a few rifles and be working on a few more, I have not fired any rifles but have taken a B class side by side around the sporting layout at the A1 shhoting grund here in London last year and was very impressed with the gun. the example I handled was not quite finished as it was the very first gun the company had produced.

I have not had anything to do with Rigby since.

quote:

Originally posted by mauser93:
Has anyone seen, examined, or actually fired the newest iteration of the (London) John Rigby bolt gun (perhaps better characterized as a "magazine rifle," since a Brit)?

If so, what are your observations?

If not, what reliable news of availability/quality/cost?

Good hunting to all.

In early 90s I have shot one in .450 caliber. It had qd scope mount on left side of the magnum length receiver. The quality was first rate. Best of all the rifle was made in England with Czech action so there was no distinct germanic AXIS stink about it.

quote:

Originally posted by Butch Searcy:
Reason I point this out is that most of you guys out there has no idea what goes on in this trade.

peter

Ghubert,

I just snorted coffee thru my nose onto the keyboard and monitor when I read about Roberts building a quality DR! The DRs he is building (err having built) in London are done so to try and bolster support in his court cases and allow him to advertise "London built". He bought a name and has been pimping the license to build under that name for a couple decades. Nothing more.

Rich
DRSS

That bolt gun was superb and if I was not struggling university student at that time I would have ordered one in .416Remington.

Paolo,

If you shot it in the early 90s it wasn't from the new John Rigby & Co..... at a guess it was probably from Paul Roberts.

quote:

I just snorted coffee thru my nose onto the keyboard and monitor when I read about Roberts building a quality DR! The DRs he is building (err having built) in London are done so to try and bolster support in his court cases and allow him to advertise "London built". He bought a name and has been pimping the license to build under that name for a couple decades. Nothing more.

So, ISS, how does this answer whether on not the guns he builds are "quality" guns? Your comments are totally irrelevant to the issue of whether or not the guns he builds are quality guns. You may choose not to buy them, but everything you say could be true, and yet the guns can still be quality. We have had this discussion before about the California Rigby and "stolen valor", where somehow the guns are inferior because of this issue!!
Peter.

It is worth noting that the original Rigby Co. produced at least three grades of double rifles. Their best grade was the full back action sidelock that we are all familiar with. The second and third grades were Anson & Deeley pattern box locks. They were differentiated from each other and the best grade by wood quality, action contour refinements, engraving and other unspecified cost saving measures. I owned a an early No 3 Grade for a short time in 450 nitro but didn't keep it because it had 28" barrels and was too heavy at 11.5 lbs. for me.

I think we just need to look at the currently produced Rigby's, either London or california, and judge them by their quality.

465H&H

465,

How would you define quality? Function, artistry? or a combination. We all know that a AHR CZ 550 #2 upgrade is about as functional and reliable as you can get. It sets no standards for artistry. You do not require minute of angle accuracy for a Cape Buffalo at 50 yards.
I do not intend to be condecending.
What is the yardstick here?

EZ

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
It is worth noting that the original Rigby Co. produced at least three grades of double rifles. Their best grade was the full back action sidelock that we are all familiar with. The second and third grades were Anson & Deeley pattern box locks. They were differentiated from each other and the best grade by wood quality, action contour refinements, engraving and other unspecified cost saving measures. I owned a an early No 3 Grade for a short time in 450 nitro but didn't keep it because it had 28" barrels and was too heavy at 11.5 lbs. for me.

I think we just need to look at the currently produced Rigby's, either London or california, and judge them by their quality.

465H&H