Not often an Legend come up for sale,,,,,

http://www.gunsinternational.c...cfm?gun_id=100113296

Wow! That 1/4 rib is a marvel of the gunmaker's machining skills. Blends in so well it's virtually invisible. Very nice rifle but nicely overpriced for a used gun.

Don't woory about it-it's sold The rifle had never been fired.

Must not have been too overpriced.

In the rifle's desciption it says "Complete with a Leupold 2.5 – 10 x 45 scope on custom quick-detach mounts". Does anyone know how the mounts detach?

They're not detachaable, nor is there a quarter rib. I have heard that D'Arcy doesn't like to put open sights on his rifles-feels they are redundant, so no need for quick detachables. Those are Echols designed scope mounts.

Jah,
No quarter rib and no QD scope, fixed scope mounts.
Have heard Echols will do a scope mounting system but will not do iron sights on a rifle he so equips, and stocks.
He will do iron sights, but will not scope a rifle so equipped, if he built it, stocked it.
I guess he figures it is impossible to stock a rifle properly for both scope and irons.
I reckon he is not just being queer about it,
just a perfectionist.
My preferences are not that perfect.

Those scope mounts looked similar to the Talley fixed lightweights machined from aluminum.
Maybe Echols makes something similar from steel.

Maybe John S will chime in if I have this wrong but I think Echols would only do detachable if they were Burgess mounts. I don't think he has a 100% faith in the other mounts. John S's 416 has open sights and scope

Get an Echols with iron sights, then add the Weaver rings and bases yourself.

are you guys sure he won't do a rifle that has both? I thought I handled a custom he'd built at SCI a few years ago setup for both. I know that a stock cant' be setup for both perfectly, but aren't the irons normally a backup?

Red

That's what I want.

A DG rifle with quick detachable scope mounts, but without iron sights!

And where's the quarter rib?

This seller is a wee bit confused.

The seller is confused but I wasn't. enfield by burgess, stock by D'Arcy. I will say this, my face, although handsome, for whatever reason puts me too high behind scopes. He told me when I picked up one of his legends that the comb would be too high because of my cheek shape.

For a period of time a while back, Darcy wouldn't do a rifle with both irons and a scope, for several reasons. Then he got the chance to make a safari in Tanzania...a few buffalo encounters at various ranges caused him to rethink his position. I believe he now will do one, as long as the customer can supply a set of Tom Burgess detachable rings...he'll build the bases. If he ever gets the time to design them, his plan was/is to make his own detachable rings.

Dago Red...Man that is one FINE looking rifle you have there! I bet it feeds/functions and shoots as good as it looks too.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
Get an Echols with iron sights, then add the Weaver rings and bases yourself.

If he recountours the top of the action like he does for his scope mounted rifles, I doubt a factory set of bases will fit properly.
BTW, his custom ring sets have the base section made integral with the lower half of the ring, not sure if Talley is like this or not. NULA rifles have a setup like that, but I believe are made from aluminum.

John,

The NULA rings and Talley lightweights are one in the same, and yes they are aluminum.

Would D'arcy be inclined the Burgess rings that are now manufactured by Darrel Rager of Katies Guns?

$9500? For a synthetic stocked, pieced together (though nicely!) model 70? Wow....just.....wow.

David, you'd have to ask him about that.

tendrams..."pieced together" is how all rifles are made, but that's a poor description of what an Echols built M70 is, regardless of the stock material used. The actions receive the same blueprinting along with his cartridge specific magazine box and follower as the ones used in his wood stocked creations. They also get his custom steel scope mounts and bottom metal. They shoot like match rifles too, regardless of caliber. There is a reason why people pay what these things cost, just as people pay huge money for an H&H or Westley Richards double rifle.

I prefer what Patrick Holehan does. He builds up square bridges then machines the bridges and machines/re-does Talleys to fit in with an extra underlug and this results in a foolproof return to zero system. The actions are all also rebuilt etc, Krieger barrels are cryod etc. Here's my Rigby:

quote:

Originally posted by John S:
"pieced together" is how all rifles are made

hmmmmm....The term "pieced together" is much more applicable to the above than to these don't you think?


http://www.gunsinternational.c...cfm?gun_id=100103126

http://www.gunsinternational.c...cfm?gun_id=100098389

http://www.gunsinternational.c...cfm?gun_id=100107071

Granted, everyone has their own preferences, but for the same money it's not much of a choice in my mind. Of course, I would rather have a 9,3x62 rechambered Husqvarna 98 and spend the balance on killing stuff.

Yes, it's all about preferences so whatever you like is what you should spend your money on...but those are still pieced together just like the other. Only difference is those have wood stocks and will doubtfully have near the attention to detail spent on the actions.

FMC,
The only problem I see with your rig is the vertical split rings...we've never been able to keep a scope in place when using them. Between myself and a friend, we have 5 big bores with such rings and not a damned one of them will stay in place for more than 40-50 shots. Even the Burgess rings will allow this at some point, which is why Echols will eventually make his own with a horizontally split ring.

quote:

Originally posted by John S:
FMC,
The only problem I see with your rig is the vertical split rings...we've never been able to keep a scope in place when using them. Between myself and a friend, we have 5 big bores with such rings and not a damned one of them will stay in place for more than 40-50 shots. Even the Burgess rings will allow this at some point, which is why Echols will eventually make his own with a horizontally split ring.

I had a rant, which I deleted. I am a Conetrol guy and am indifferent about Talley's, but those are re tapped/threaded for strength. But Thanks for the tip I'll look out for that.

Frankly some of the best guns are actually built by these guys as they pay attention to what counts- the workings of the gun. The guns do shoot BR groups.....AND... they can build a gun (stockwork)that rivals any ACGG member, so deified on this site.


Truth be known the sloppiest work on any gun I own was done by an ACGG member. Cosmetics are not the issue. 2 of my rifles have Wby throats. The only good thing is that one of them likes TSX so that .3" jump is not a problem. The other rifle is a different story and has been in the safe. The problem with this rifle is embarassing to the smith. Shame, they're both on really nice pieces of wood.

They look pretty, but I'll take those other guy's rifles any day. Yes you do get what you pay for with an Echols, Holehan or Sisk gun........unlike others where you get a bunch of initials, a pretty gun but a so so shooter

quote:

Originally posted by John S:
FMC,
The only problem I see with your rig is the vertical split rings...we've never been able to keep a scope in place when using them. Between myself and a friend, we have 5 big bores with such rings and not a damned one of them will stay in place for more than 40-50 shots. Even the Burgess rings will allow this at some point, which is why Echols will eventually make his own with a horizontally split ring.

John, your experience is completely at odds with mine.

I use Talleys on several big bores, from .375 through .500, and have not had any scope slippage problems - even after far more than 40-50 rounds fired (more like hundreds) and with scopes having 30mm main tubes.

Have you had problems with Talleys specifically? I clean the rings, the scope body and ring screws with brake cleaner and torque the ring screws evenly to 20 inch pounds and have never had a problem.

BTW, I love the Enfield and the Holehan rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by tendrams:

hmmmmm....The term "pieced together" is much more applicable to the above than to these don't you think?


http://www.gunsinternational.c...cfm?gun_id=100103126

http://www.gunsinternational.c...cfm?gun_id=100098389

http://www.gunsinternational.c...cfm?gun_id=100107071

Granted, everyone has their own preferences, but for the same money it's not much of a choice in my mind. Of course, I would rather have a 9,3x62 rechambered Husqvarna 98 and spend the balance on killing stuff.

That stuff is pieced together. Now if the gunsmith was in charge of making the action and barrel it would be different....but he is using and "piecing together" what was made by others.

As to the "Husqvarna 98 and spend the balance on killing stuff" better to concentrate on making money so that choice is not an issue

quote:

Have you had problems with Talleys specifically? I clean the rings, the scope body and ring screws with brake cleaner and torque the ring screws evenly to 20 inch pounds and have never had a problem

Yes. The 416s would go longer than the 450s, but eventually they all moved when we were using 30mm scopes. My friend took his 450 Dakota to Tanzania a couple of years ago. Before the hunt he shot at least 100rds of full power ammo and it moved twice during that time, scope is a Swaro 1.5-6x PH. Luckily it didn't affect bullet POI out to 150yds but it's been a problem. I've since went back to 1" scopes, specifically the old Leupold 3x and so far no troubles. I've not seen this on the 375s or rifles with a similar amount of recoil.

"They look pretty, but I'll take those other guy's rifles any day. Yes you do get what you pay for with an Echols, Holehan or Sisk gun........unlike others where you get a bunch of initials, a pretty gun but a so so shooter."

Well said...and I might add that many of them won't feed worth a shit either, especially with flat nosed solids. I will also say that the only custom 'smiths whose guns I have owned that are near the level of an Echols type are the ones built by Al or Roger Biesen.

First off I want to say the gun pictured is not mine! God I wish, I think the only combo of metalworker and stockmaker that I might pick over that one would be Burgess/Fisher.

While high end customs are out of my range I can understand the guys that own them and I can definitely understand the pricing. I learned a few things from listening and obsevering the couple times at ACGG and once at SCI.

1. gunsmiths that charge less than proper pricing hurt the industry (this was pointed out to me by a newly joined member of ACGG). Many gunsmiths don't actually look at all their overhead, everything, and then also add on some profit. so they charge less, these are the ones that never really make it, or don't do it full time. but they set a precedent that then makes it hard for the full time gunsmiths to charge what seems high, but are actually fair rates.

2. There are few career gunsmiths, guys that have only ever done that. Most waited till they were retired, or do it part time. Or we see them all the time, make a run of it and then can't make it (see point 1 above).

Now, this sucks for guys like me that will probably never be able to afford a rifle like that one. That's my fault though for not making more money

Not to sound like I'm coming to the defense of D'Arcy (who is incidentally one of the few gunsmiths that is full time, been full time since he got out of gunsmithing school). More to all lay out the reason why all high end smiths have high price tags. And I would hazard to guess most of the clients are very serious hunters that buy these rifles because they are spending enough on hunting that they want the most reliable product they can get. It seems like a lot of money to me, but then again I can't afford the rifle let alone a 20-50k hunt to take it on. I see guys selling 100k doubles, and going on grand slams. I'm guessing for them it's not a surprising price tag.

And as far as comparing american customs to WR, H&H etc. I agree with what I've heard others say, there are no finer custom arms than the ones turned out by american makers. most of the time you are paying for name with these british marquees. I'm sure all these custom builders factor popularity and demand into pricing as well though. They leverage demand to increase profit, while balancing at the same time price to ensure that they still receive enough orders. In fact, they are forced almost by the market to increase prices to be able to cut down on orders and keep up while delivery the same quality.

sorry I assisted in bringing us further off topic. Great rifle, inaccurately described.

Red

From one dago to another.

Your point #2 has winged words and hits the mark (if I may borrow from Homer). I think that is the biggest problem, both in that it is in essence a hobby and projects are not nec. done under one roof. Piecemealing a project is a set up for mistakes. I would advise anyone to indeed use one gunmaker and not split it up. Miscommunication (read mistakes) can/will happen then one guy has to make up for the other's oversight.

Oh John you're right, thanks for reminding me about feeding LOL.....yeah the self taught local gunshop hick handyman fixed my feeding problem, by putting in the correct follower.


Too bad I can't overcome the Wby freebore mistake, but cosmetically a beauty. Sometimes you don't get what you pay for.

In response to the picture of the Echols .416. The gun was smithed by Tom Burgess. The stock was first made as a pattern and then shot so that it fits perfectly both with a scope and without. The peep hole has been bored out and allows very rapid acquisition. D'Arcy stocked the gun and did all the finishing touches. What you get from D'Arcy is a gun that functions perfectly every time. This gun was part of a pair the other being a .340wby. The .340 was eventually changed to a .416 Rem and sold. It originally had no sights but I believe the current owner had Tommy make a set. The gun is mine and has been on several African trips and even shot rockchucks in Montana. It has never failed to function and it is to bad that Tom Burgess died last year as he was one of the last great metalsmiths.

Can you explain why Darcy's Legend guns do not change the bolt handle? I know he is going for function but I just dislike the look of a stock Winchester classic bolt handle. I find it hard to believe anyone who buy's Legend is trying to save money. Does everyone else like the look of the bolt handle and I am just too picky?

If you are interested in one, you might ask Darcy about that. I'd think he would switch the handle if you're willing to pay for the job. I guess most folks don't find the factory one to be all that ugly...at least for a 'glass gun meant for rugged use.

You really have to admire a man that can sell $3,000-$4,000 rifles for $10,000-$14,000.

His rifles have all the hallmarks of a good gunmaker and a great salesman.

quote:

Originally posted by GeoffM24:
You really have to admire a man that can sell $3,000-$4,000 rifles for $10,000-$14,000.

His rifles have all the hallmarks of a good gunmaker and a great salesman.

If you could actually see what D'Arcy and Brian ( his very talented assistant) do when they are building a rifle, and then allow them as much money per hour as you pay your auto mechanic, you would not call them a $3000-$4000 rifle.

Very well put Phil! Food for thought.

quote:

Originally posted by tendrams:

hmmmmm....The term "pieced together" is much more applicable to the above than to these don't you think?

http://www.gunsinternational.c...cfm?gun_id=100098389

Hey, You like my Maurice Ottmar 404J? It is for sale at ths moment, but may be spoken for...not 100% sure yet. Nice piece...Biebs

Virtually every custom gun "builder" mentioned here starts with various components and "pieces things together" - but the end results vary considerably. Some make works of art, others make high quality working tools and a very few can blend the two.

This is an old debate.

A Ford will get you from Point A to Point B as well as a Bentley.

But some people prefer Bentleys to Fords, for all sorts of reasons, all of which are valid to those who prefer Bentleys.

Same concept applies to rifles.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:

quote:

Originally posted by GeoffM24:
You really have to admire a man that can sell $3,000-$4,000 rifles for $10,000-$14,000.

His rifles have all the hallmarks of a good gunmaker and a great salesman.

If you could actually see what D'Arcy and Brian ( his very talented assistant) do when they are building a rifle, and then allow them as much money per hour as you pay your auto mechanic, you would not call them a $3000-$4000 rifle.

I have never been able to understand why anyone would pay that kind of money for a plastic semi-factory rifle.

I read this

http://www.fieldandstream.com/...end-explained-part-i

And this

http://www.fieldandstream.com/...nd-explained-part-ii

Unless they can come up with a list of about 500 more upgrades this is the most overpriced rifle known to man.

Lets also take a look at your mechanic analogy.

Action = $600
Barrel = $400
Bottom Metal = $450
Stock = $500

$14,000-$1,950=$12,050 in labor costs

Assuming $40 an hour = 300 man hours.

Assuming 2 weeks off for vacation and holidays 2 men could turn out only 13 rifles per year and we know that isn't the case.

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
This is an old debate.

A Ford will get you from Point A to Point B as well as a Bentley.

But some people prefer Bentleys to Fords, for all sorts of reasons, all of which are valid to those who prefer Bentleys.

Same concept applies to rifles.

Mr Wiebe makes Bentleys, Mr. Hagn makes Bentleys. Hartmann & Weiss make Bentleys. Plastic rifles are not Bentleys.

What I don't understand is why people would pay Bentley money for a slightly dressed up Ford.

I understand paying for quality, I don't understand overpaying for quality.

quote:

Originally posted by GeoffM24:

I understand paying for quality, I don't understand overpaying for quality.

I know two Echols owners, one very well and the other not so well. What they both have in common is owning several Echols rifles made over a period of time.

If they were "overpaying" they would not have repeated the process.

13-15 rifles/year is exactly the annual output reported by John Barsness in his article about the Legend rifle in Rifles magazine from a few years ago.