look? yes.. look too thick to be 9.5#.. though the sauer is, imho, a good starting point

jeffe

I think the key phrase is "Custom made".

I'd say they were a bit too thick.

But hey, for 3,500, if it shoots to regulation, it would be a deal!

quote:

Originally posted by Rusty:
I think the key phrase is "Custom made".

I'd say they were a bit too thick.

But hey, for 3,500, if it shoots to regulation, it would be a deal!

And he has a .450 coming up.

But it still says "reserve not met" so who knows the actual price.

One must remember the way a camera makes thing closer look wider than they should compared to the rest of the object being pictured! Stop and think for a moment! The holes in the barrels only measure .411"MAX and maybe .410" then measure the thickness of the barrel wall at the muzzle, and see how many times it will fit accross that hole in the barrel. I thnk you will find it isn't as thick as it looks in the pictures.

Though the work looks good overall I'd want to shoot it before buying. However if the rifle regulates as he claims, and isn't crossing at that 50 yds, and truley weighs only 9.5 lbs that could be a real bargain depending on what the reserve is!

Good points Mac. It may just be an optical illusion.

Just cleaning my own .400. Those are really thick. If the tubes ended up that thick at a finished weight of 9.5 lbs, then the donor action was too small. One of the common problems with conversions on shotgun actions.

quote:

Originally posted by 400 Nitro Express:
Just cleaning my own .400. Those are really thick. If the tubes ended up that thick at a finished weight of 9.5 lbs, then the donor action was too small. One of the common problems with conversions on shotgun actions.

Thank you sir!

Just checked the thickness of the barrel muzzle on my Webley & Scott .450/.400 3 1/4" double,
and the thickness is about 2,5mm or ca 1/10"

Also checked the thickness on my 16/16/9,3x74R (original caliber, NOT rebored 9,3x72R) drilling made by Buschenmachenmeister Robert Hübner, Darmstadt pre 1912. The thickness is only 1,6 mm!

But the barrels are made of 'Röcklingers Electrostahl'.

The barrel thickness on the double shown looks like ca 4 mm.

looks way to thick to me to, even if it regulates it will most likely sving like a log.
but to each his own.

best regards

peter

I believe it was 400 Nitro Express who noted that the thickness of the barrel walls on a double should directly correlate with the thickness of the owner's skull.

That way, the barrel harmonics are perfectly tuned to cranial sine wave activity. Right, 400?

Tells you a lot about those that would opine that the thickness of those barrels in the pic may be a photographic distortion......Uh, huh!

quote:

I believe it was 400 Nitro Express who noted that the thickness of the barrel walls on a double should directly correlate with the thickness of the owner's skull.

Now you know why I have never posted my barrel measurements on line, Jim!

quote:

Just checked the thickness of the barrel muzzle on my Webley & Scott .450/.400 3 1/4" double,
and the thickness is about 2,5mm or ca 1/10"

The barrels of my Webley at the muzzle are .096". Most British Nitro DRs run .090 to .100". Some are thinner. A friend's Holland .465 is .086". Most Chapuis 9.3s I've measured have been .078 to .080".

quote:

it will most likely sving like a log.
but to each his own.

I think that covers it.

I'm in contact with the builder of this rifle.

400,what's your diameter at the 24" mark?
This one has .135 walls at the front end.

The weight of this one is 10# 1 oz w/o a mercury tube. so add 8 oz for that if needed.
With out being able to shoulder it, it sounds right.

Mike:

My .400 is 10 lbs, 2 oz with 26" barrels. Min wall at muzzle is .095". At 24", it's .099", about what a pre-war Jeffery .400 with 24" barrels usually is. New Heym .400s are about the same. I'll measure one at SCI to refresh my memory.

quote:

With out being able to shoulder it, it sounds right.

Sorry I can't agree. A min wall of .135" at the muzzle of 24" is WAY too thick, and it's obvious in the photos. The new K-guns in .400 I handled at SCI last year are also very thick, and they're CLUBS. Think about it. If the barrels need that much beef to bring the weight up to 10 lbs, the action wasn't heavy enough, period. A mercury tube might even things out, but you still end up with much of the weight in the ends, rather than concentrated between the hands, where it should be.

Like I said, this is a common failing of "double rifle" conversions of shotguns. Ideally, an expert barrel filer would contour the barrels properly for a double rifle (which would make this rifle underweight), but that kind of talent commands too high a price for such conversions, which is why they end up this way. I view this piece as worth less than the current bid ($3,500).

What would have helped this rifle is a little contouring at the muzzles. It appears, that these have just been "faced off" in a lathe. Perhaps if they had been 26 inch barrels then they would have been thinner further down the barrel?

While the work looks nice ,I think it looks like just a relined shotgun barrel job & not a mono block job , if you look carefully you can see the liner !

Last night I notied that although this was supposedly sold it has been relisted with "buyer fraud" given as the reason.

Sarg has sharp eyes. I missed it on the first go-round but when I went back and looked really carefully, I believe that he's right. It appears to me that this gun was not sleeved in the traditional way but has had full-length liners inserted after boring out the shotgun barrels. That would explain why the wall thickness is so great at the muzzles. Although the work appears to have been very nicely done, I'd bet that it handles like a fence post.

This gun is obviously a lined shotgun...nicely done nontheless. $4000 is a bit too much for something like this, but to each his own. I'd hold out a couple more paychecks for a used Merkel if I was in the market for a lower priced double.

Gary
DRSS
NRA Lifer
SCI
DSC

I'm not sure what you gentlemen think you see. But this rifle is threaded and silver soldered to the mono-block. The origional barrels have been cut off to make the mono-block.
With the forearm off it is visable.
If there is doubt sent the seller/builder a note and ask like I have.

Mike,
It's not what I think I see. it's what I don't see. No matter how a tight a seam you have between sleeved barrels and the monoblock, no matter how invisible that seam is when the barrel assembly is polished steel, when you blue it, the seam becomes visible. I've built a number of these, and I always thread and solder the barrels into the monoblock, so it is a crush fit. But, polished to 400 grit, then blued, the seam is always visible in certain lights and at certain angles. Even companies like Berreta, who have been doing this for ages, cannot get away from that. That's why they roll engrave a pattern over the seam, to disguise it. Now, there are quite a few good close-up photos of the breech end of those barrels in that ad. I've examined them very closely, and I sure do not see a seam.

I'm in the same boat as you. I can't see it from those pics either. But I am telling you what he's told me.
Perhaps hes welded the seams or peened them over to conceal the joint. I will ask him.
And yes I'm seriously thinking about getting one of them. But the 450NE spins my crank simply because I already load for the 450 BPE.

I don't think I agree that these were lined as opposed to sleeved. The photos aren't good enough to tell much though. The visible seam on the face of the barrels is consistent with sleeving, and I see no seam on the muzzles that would be there were they lined. The lack of a seam in front of the chambers (where the old barrels were cut off) is meaningless. Seamless sleeving is common today, and well done non-seamless can be very difficult to see, and virtually impossible to see in a photograph. I recently handled a non-seamlessly sleeved .450/.400. The seams were visible only under a work light with strong magnification.
------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

While I don't like to post on this site because of some grumpy posters who like to fight !
I do think this has lined shot gun barrels !
If I have put photos up here ? There should be 3 , 2 are made by this guy I'm sure & the 3rd also , I think , as you can see he has mono blocked them , easy to see , unless he has found a great way to get the contour , joint & metal finish just right , I think he has lined the shotgun barrels on this one ! to my eye I can see a line in the barrels too , but as you say the pic will not guarantee that veiw
I always watch these conversions so as to learn more about them , to may be make my own one day ?

[URL= ]

[URL= ]

[URL= ]

quote:

Originally posted by Sarg:
While I don't like to post on this site because of some grumpy posters who like to fight !
I do think this has lined shot gun barrels !
If I have put photos up here ? There should be 3 , 2 are made by this guy I'm sure & the 3rd also , I think , as you can see he has mono blocked them , easy to see , unless he has found a great way to get the contour , joint & metal finish just right , I think he has lined the shotgun barrels on this one ! to my eye I can see a line in the barrels too , but as you say the pic will not guarantee that veiw
I always watch these conversions so as to learn more about them , to may be make my own one day ?

Sarg, you are absolutely correct that the rifle was build on a shotgon action. This may simply be a difference in what this is called in New Zeland, and the USA, but the shotgun was mono-blocked, not lined. the old barrels are cut off about 3.5 inches from the breech end, and bored out to a cylinder and the new rifle barrels sleeved into the resulting mono-block.

As I said, this may simply be a difference in what this is called where you live, but here this is called mono-blocking, or sleeving, and the word lining in this context indicates the whole shotgun barrel was lined with a liner, from breech to muzzles.

In the seller's text he states that he mono-blocked the barrel set. This could also be a cut off shot barrel butts,to make them into a mono-block, or a new solid mono-block, I believe it to be the former. Judgeing by the little engraveing on the Greener bolt extention, and lines on barrel it is most likely a mono-block made from the old shotgun barrel butts!

quote:

by seller;

Custom Built 450-400 3" Nitro Express built on a JP Sauer action. Built on a Monoblock. 24" Shilen Barrel. Weighs approximately 9.5 lbs. Extractor only. 15" LOP over Old English pad. Express sights. Regulated with Hornady Dangerous Game Series Ammo. Shoots 1.5" groups at 50 yards. I will also have a 450 3 1/4" Nitro Express for sale shortly. Contact me for more info. Ships in a hard case. Shipping is $45.00 Credit cards okay with a 3% charge.

I'd ask the guy to go somewhere and get an accurate weight. With the thickness of those barrels it would seem virtually impossible for it to weigh only 9.5 lbs. "Weighs approximately 9.5 lbs." doesn't mean anything.

Seems like a well-made conversion especially for $3500. Probably won't sell at that but a nice job.

my sleeved double, in .458, is going to be 9.5+ before pad and sights.. 10# will be heavy ish, but easy to shoot.

I would guess closer to 10.25 for this

It sold for $3,995.00. He reported the weight as being 10 lbs. 1 oz. He said it is NOT a sleeved shotgun barrel. He said it balances just in front of the pin.

A bargain seems to me.

Workmanship does look good....but could the guy be making any money on these things?...I mean unless someone GAVE him the donor guns. Seems like a lot of effort for the $$ or maybe just getting the money back from his hobby?

Gary
DRSS
NRA Lifer
SCI
DSC

The thickness of the bbls is one thing; the thickness of the action walls is a more important thing, esp on a boxlock gun. Shotguns are designed to be light weight. One of the tricks to keeping weight down is to limit the thickness of the sidewalls of the action. The bad news is that this is the area of greatest stress on a break action gun. This can be somewhat compensated by the use of modern alloys, the the GCB helps a bit, but this gent uses vintage Sauer actions made from mild steel with typically thin walls.

The problem with this gun is not how well it handles, but how long it will be before it shoots off the face.