Just completed V-C 600 Nitro. Thought the Rhino was nicely done

Yes, very "over the top".....kind of like you :-)

Thats outstanding Ken VC have outdone themselves once again

When I sell the 577 and order a 450-400 I will definitely go for a rhino like that.

Ken, there is no doubt in my mind that you are putting the best double rifle on the U.S. market today in terms of performance, appearance, custom features, and price. And considering the fact that intercepting sears can be added to a VC gun for a fraction of what the others charge, even as standard features, is all the more in your favor.

That is a beautiful rifle done in a very tasteful manner.

Todd, aw shucks, you made Ken blush :-)

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Ken, there is no doubt in my mind that you are putting the best double rifle on the U.S. market today in terms of performance, appearance, custom features, and price. And considering the fact that intercepting sears can be added to a VC gun for a fraction of what the others charge, even as standard features, is all the more in your favor.

That is a beautiful rifle done in a very tasteful manner.

There's just no better way to put it Todd.

Wonder why it was decided to do a White Rhino instead of a Black Rhino.
I know hunting Black Rhino is a virtual impossibility today but the White just seems too docile to have on the floor of a 600NE IMO.

Ken:

That is a beauty and the engraving is superb. I know this is a 600 and perhaps that's why it looks like such a big gun but I have noticed this on all VCs. They seem a little, for lack of a better word, fat. I would like to see a VC with a somewhat slimmer line. Again, maybe it just because this is a 600. I'll post a caveat here. I have not seen a VC in real life or ever held one but this is what I am seeing in the pictures. I have a coupe of K-guns and it just seems to me that the lines of the K-guns seem much more "svelte" than the VC.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Ken:

That is a beauty and the engraving is superb. I know this is a 600 and perhaps that's why it looks like such a big gun but I have noticed this on all VCs. They seem a little, for lack of a better word, fat. I would like to see a VC with a somewhat slimmer line. Again, maybe it just because this is a 600. I'll post a caveat here. I have not seen a VC in real life or ever held one but this is what I am seeing in the pictures. I have a coupe of K-guns and it just seem to me that the lines of the K-guns seem much more "svelte" than the VC.

Dave, you answered your own question here. You haven't seen or held a VC in real life. They are quite "svelte" in the hands. Even my 577 is not imposing compared to other 577's I've held.

The one complaint however is that I don't like the beavertail fore-ends. I much prefer the splinter. The smaller the better for the most part.

Wonderful piece Ken, Glad I went with the same engraving on mine!

Cheers

Nick

I own a VC and like mine. It is a .577 with 24" barrels. That said, the bigger caliber VC rifles just are not svelte, no way, no how. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I do think that they would look better with longer barrels to help thin the lines out a little, but once you get up to the .500+ calibers the VC are what I have been called all my life, chunky or stocky looking. There is just no way around that. And to Todd's comment about the forearm, the beavertail does not help in slimming the lines of the rifle. Sorry to be the contrarian on this one.

[Edited: Case in point. Look at the .450NE that Ken just posted in the classified. With the smaller caliber and the longer barrels, that rifle looks much sleeker than the shorter, larger calibers.]

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
I own a VC and like mine. It is a .577 with 24" barrels. That said, the bigger caliber VC rifles just are not svelte, no way, no how. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I do think that they would look better with longer barrels to help thin the lines out a little, but once you get up to the .500+ calibers the VC are what I have been called all my life, chunky or stocky looking. There is just no way around that. And to Todd's comment about the forearm, the beavertail does not help in slimming the lines of the rifle. Sorry to be the contrarian on this one.

[Edited: Case in point. Look at the .450NE that Ken just posted in the classified. With the smaller caliber and the longer barrels, that rifle looks much sleeker than the shorter, larger calibers.]

Mike,

How does you VC compare to the Searcy? I was handling a Farmars 577 at the Cabelas booth in Reno and that thing was so much larger and heavier than my VC 577 that I can't see how anyone would actually be able to hunt with it.

How would you rate the more reasonable caliber VCs with rifles such as the Searcy or Heym. Say in 500NE? To me, they don't seem larger in the hands. Except ... that damn beavertail which is why I specified splinter on my new gun. Even then, I think the splinter could be smaller on VC. It's my only real complaint about them.

Great looking rifle, nicely appointed and proportioned for a 600. If I ever purchase a new DR, it will likely be a VC.

Thanks Ken for the Brnos.

Let me dig the foxhole a little deeper before I respond . . . my .577 Searcy looks, feels and handles like a much trimmer rifle than the VC. In comparison, I had a Searcy .500 and that rifle did not feel or look nearly as svelte as my Heym .500. I have never owned a VC S/S in any caliber other than the .577. I am not sure what it is exactly, the profile/contour of the barrels, the length of the barrels, the beavertail forearm, or more likely a combination of all of the above, but it seems to me -- my opinion only -- that the larger caliber VC's just have a chunky look and feel to them. It would be interesting to know, for example, what the width of each barrel is at the breech and how that compares to the width at the muzzle on various rifles like the VC's, Heym's, Searcy's, Krieghoffs, etc. A big part of it may be the barrel profile/contour. When you look at the barrels on a large caliber VC there does not appear to be much taper from the breech to the muzzle. I am open to the possibility, however, that as on many other subjects, I am just all wet.

Svelte is the VC 375 Flanged at DSC

Or the VC .303. That is a sweet rifle.

Mike,

I think you are correct in that there isn't much, if any taper in the barrels on the VC 577. And with the beavertail fore-end it is quite chunky. I haven't held the Searcy 577 so I can't compare to it. However, the VC 577 is a hell of a lot trimmer than that Farmars I was looking at. I'd like to check out your Searcy sometime at the range. But really, these ultra bore rifles don't seem to be the real standard by which we judge the rifles as they are pretty specialized, even over and above big bore doubles, if that is possible.

On the more standard caliber VCs however, I think that other than the beavertail, I find them better handling and more "svelte" (kind of not liking that word all of a sudden ) than the Searcy. Of course, that is simply my perception. It's what caused me to go with the VC Round Body the day I ordered it as I went back and forth between the two booths trying to make up my mind. It was that close of a decision for me. As in my previous posts, the final selling point was how the Round Body felt in the hand. It was less chunky IMO. In fact, that's really the wrong way to put it. It felt lively in the hand. Much more so than my old Merkel with the very square corners on the bottom of the action. I didn't compare either to the Heym as I'm not interested in spending the same amount of money for a gun that looks unfinished with the same features.

Now of course if we want to start talking about really nice and svelte rifles, we need to bring that H&H Dominion grade of yours into the conversation! Huba Huba!!

Todd and Mike:

I just took a look at the VC 450 in the classifieds. It's a round body. They are great guns and some of the engraving I have seen of the VCs are just fantastic. Great wood and mustache side clips. Very cool but maybe it's the forearm or the barrel contour or a combination of both but they just don't have the clean lines of an English gun. Perhaps it's just in some calibers but some of the VCs look, again for lack of a better word, chunky to me. It's just a matter of taste. However, in the smaller caliber guns like the 9,3X74R, I don't think you can find a more beautiful gun than a VC.

Which brings up what I posted on another thread:

"When you think about it, we all (using that term liberally) see a rifle like the two Jeffery's above and agree they are beautiful rifles. That being the case it makes you wonder why VC, Heym, Merkel, Chapius, Searcy, etc. do not simply take their design and replicate the lines of such rifles, i.e., splinter forearm, nice drop in the comb, slim, sleek look, etc. I am not aware of any modern manufacturer that does a rifle with the true lines of the classic British double. I wonder why."

I really do wonder why. We see it all the time, manufacturers racing to imitate the successful product of a competitor. With modern manufacturing techniques, CAD, etc. seems like someone would come up with Webley-clone????

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Which brings up what I posted on another thread:

"When you think about it, we all (using that term liberally) see a rifle like the two Jeffery's above and agree they are beautiful rifles. That being the case it makes you wonder why VC, Heym, Merkel, Chapius, Searcy, etc. do not simply take their design and replicate the lines of such rifles, i.e., splinter forearm, nice drop in the comb, slim, sleek look, etc. I am not aware of any modern manufacturer that does a rifle with the true lines of the classic British double. I wonder why."

I really do wonder why. We see it all the time, manufacturers racing to imitate the successful product of a competitor. With modern manufacturing techniques, CAD, etc. seems like someone would come up with Webley-clone????

Yep, It's a really good question. Take a look however at the newly constituted Rigby bolt rifles. They now have almost no drop in the comb. The owner was asked about why they deviated from the traditional lines and his response was that Americans prefer the straight stock now days! I'm sure they've done the market research, but I have to ask, are they polling the Remchesterby crowd or the Rigby crowd? Most of the guys I know who are into vintage rifles want the vintage lines. Surely, there is a market for new guns with vintage lines.

I like the VC doubles, having had my safari lux made in 500 and having now ordered a matching one in 600.
That said they are definitely a sleeker looking rifle when you incorporate the 26" tubes and splinter forend which mine have . I think they balance better with the longer tubes, give a better sighting plane
and also have a better look to them.
The quality and engraving is first class and the guys are willing to incorporate what you want into
The build as long as its within reason ie no 13 pound 600! They are in my view bespoke and that's why I've
Gone with them again for my next build. Did I mention that they actually shoot great as well?

Cheers

Nick

quote:

Originally posted by nickh:
I like the VC doubles, having had my safari lux made in 500 and having now ordered a matching one in 600.
That said they are definitely a sleeker looking rifle when you incorporate the 26" tubes and splinter forend which mine have . I think they balance better with the longer tubes, give a better sighting plane
and also have a better look to them.
The quality and engraving is first class and the guys are willing to incorporate what you want into
The build as long as its within reason ie no 13 pound 600! They are in my view bespoke and that's why I've
Gone with them again for my next build. Did I mention that they actually shoot great as well?

Cheers

Nick

And Nick,

It's that willingness to build pretty much anything you want that really sets them apart for me. As you know, when you go by Ken's booth, you never know what he'll have there as they are always doing experiments incorporating different ideas and designs into the rifles. This little 303 is a perfect example. Not in the catalogue but available if you dream it up. There are usually several off the menu guns like this in Kens booth each year.




If that little rifle isn't svelte and trim, well ...

If you saw this rifle in the booth, you know there is no way to do it justice with a camera.

Some quick pics of my Verney-Carron 600 Nitro Express to show its physique:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by nickh:
I like the VC doubles, having had my safari lux made in 500 and having now ordered a matching one in 600.
That said they are definitely a sleeker looking rifle when you incorporate the 26" tubes and splinter forend which mine have . I think they balance better with the longer tubes, give a better sighting plane
and also have a better look to them.
The quality and engraving is first class and the guys are willing to incorporate what you want into
The build as long as its within reason ie no 13 pound 600! They are in my view bespoke and that's why I've
Gone with them again for my next build. Did I mention that they actually shoot great as well?

Cheers

Nick

And Nick,

It's that willingness to build pretty much anything you want that really sets them apart for me. As you know, when you go by Ken's booth, you never know what he'll have there as they are always doing experiments incorporating different ideas and designs into the rifles. This little 303 is a perfect example. Not in the catalogue but available if you dream it up. There are usually several off the menu guns like this in Kens booth each year.




If that little rifle isn't svelte and trim, well ...

If you saw this rifle in the booth, you know there is no way to do it justice with a camera.

I saw that rifle at DSC, it was all I could do not to blow the deposit check I had for my leopard hunt on that beauty. "sleekness" is very much caliber dependent, also a beaver tail fore end tend to "fatten" the looks as well,not to mention requesting barrels shorter than all British guns where you will be hard pressed to find one with less that 26" barrels. That damascus 375 flanged was simply beautiful.

You guys have seen my 450 enough already, but save for the forend, it's about as sleek as it gets, I think so anyway

CCMDoc, how long are the barrels on your .600?

MJines

The barrels are 26"

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Which brings up what I posted on another thread:

"When you think about it, we all (using that term liberally) see a rifle like the two Jeffery's above and agree they are beautiful rifles. That being the case it makes you wonder why VC, Heym, Merkel, Chapius, Searcy, etc. do not simply take their design and replicate the lines of such rifles, i.e., splinter forearm, nice drop in the comb, slim, sleek look, etc. I am not aware of any modern manufacturer that does a rifle with the true lines of the classic British double. I wonder why."

I really do wonder why. We see it all the time, manufacturers racing to imitate the successful product of a competitor. With modern manufacturing techniques, CAD, etc. seems like someone would come up with Webley-clone????

Yep, It's a really good question. Take a look however at the newly constituted Rigby bolt rifles. They now have almost no drop in the comb. The owner was asked about why they deviated from the traditional lines and his response was that Americans prefer the straight stock now days! I'm sure they've done the market research, but I have to ask, are they polling the Remchesterby crowd or the Rigby crowd? Most of the guys I know who are into vintage rifles want the vintage lines. Surely, there is a market for new guns with vintage lines.

Much of the reasoning behind "less drop" in currently manufactured custom bolts, etc is largely due to the desire to scope the rifle...

The Rigby Bolt Rifles, at DSC, were a disappointment in fit, finish, etc...more like a factory gun than a top of the line custom gun...

jorge:

Compare the looks of your gun to a Krieghoff Big Five Classic here and you will understand what I am talking about. Click on the gun to enlarge the image:

http://www.krieghoff.com/index...fle/classic-big-five

There is more taper in the forend and the barrels.

I agree with you that VCs willingness to configure a rifle to your desires and their fantastic engraving does make it like a bespoke gun.

I am NOT criticizing any rifle owned by anyone here...and I love VC and the efforts they have made in recent years. I would order one today if I had the spare scratch. THAT SAID...there are a few things they need to work on IMO and elements that I would include in any future order as necessities.

1) Trimmer and SHORTER splinter forearms.

2) A more traditional checkering pattern on said forearms

Like this?



3) A slightly more "open" grip at the wrist.

4) MUCH less bowed checkering at the wrist...more of a straight line between the beginning of the checkering at the grip cap and the top near the tang.

Like this...




5) I would also do away with the extra point of checkering directly behind the wood panel to the rear of the action.

6) I would generally make the rear sight ramp shorter in length and shorter in height if possible. It just looks better and will allow more drop in the stock with seems to be an aesthetic beef that some people have with VC. You could also choose a slightly shorter standing leaf to accomplish the same goal.

7) Position the standing rear sight no further forward than dead center on the now shortened forearm. A bit aft of that is just fine.

JMHO...but let me say again that I could happily live with any of the rifles posted above!

All valid points gents and frankly, I should have done more homework when I ordered mine, like for example may be a bit more gold inlay on the caliber, brand etc. Points taken on the different looks, but I have to tell you, I didn't care for that K gun at all especially the schnabel forend and the "notched" action. Man I do love that Jeffreys OzHunter posted!

John,

I agree with items 1 & 3. The others don't seem to be as big of a deal to me. The full length pics of my new rifle are a bit blurry and the angle distorts it a bit but the splinter seems to be an improvement. We'll be able to tell more one I get it in hand and take some additional close ups as well as some better full length shots. You can tell those full length shots are distorted by looking at the size of the sling swivel eyes. The one on the butt stock appears huge compared to the one on the barrels as the camera is centered aft of the action but the rifle is also slightly angled away.

I much prefer the splinter profiles of both of the rifles you posted and the bottom of the grip could be opened a bit on the VC. However, I have to say that VC is putting out a beautiful rifle with attention to completely finishing out the aesthetics, albiet the lines not being vintage British.

Dave,

with regards to Jorge's rifle, I still say you need to see one in person and handle it to get a true perspective of the size and balance. For instance, the WR design to my eye in pictures, looks a bit thicker through the action than something like the H&H. However, once in the hand, they are exquisit and perfectly balanced. There really is no substitute for handling the different rifles and comparing them in the hand rather than trying to gauge them from photographs alone. Personally, I think the K-Gun compares more closely to the Merkel than VC in fit, finish, balance, and aesthetics.

Todd:

I know you have to actually handle a gun to get a feel for it. I am hoping to make it to next years DSC to hoist a brew with you and Biebs and do just that.

Good post Todd, well described. I'll also add I spent A LOT of time with all the afore mentioned rifles and to *ME* it wasn't even close. Well there was this gorgeous Purdy at DSC, but at 250K it was a smidgen above my paygrade!

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
The full length pics of my new rifle are a bit blurry and the angle distorts it a bit but the splinter seems to be an improvement.

I Agree 100% and, as noted above, I am not referencing any rifle in particular and would happily own any rifle under discussion here. What is interesting to me is how VC is evolving and doing so in a positive direction. A few years back, their wrist checkering was HUGELY oversized along with their massive cheekpieces. They have sized both down in recent years along with the forearms most recently and also eliminated the scalloped action while adding the "moustache". Their work has just gotten better and better and I think we can expect more progress in the future.

Before actually shooting one, I thought I preferred the more open grips as seen in the photos tendrams posted above. I like the looks but in my hands I just don't like the feel or control of the more open grip. Like revolvers, some grip shapes just feel more natural with better gun and trigger control.

I also prefer both the feel and the look of longer, fuller splinters. In this case it is my preference for the aesthetics of the longer splinter as much as feel. I mush prefer the look of tendrams 2nd picture than the first even if that difference is rather subtle. But even that's a bit too short for my preferences.

I absolutely 100% agree with #6 - that would be a great improvement in aesthetics to my eyes.

All in all I agree with those who say you should get what you want not what other people think you should get when you are the one shelling out the cash.

Good posts - I like constructive criticism - even that with which I don't necessarily agree.

quote:

Originally posted by CCMDoc:
Before actually shooting one, I thought I preferred the more open grips as seen in the photos tendrams posted above. I like the looks but in my hands I just don't like the feel or control of the more open grip. Like revolvers, some grip shapes just feel more natural with better gun and trigger control.

I also prefer both the feel and the look of longer, fuller splinters. In this case it is my preference for the aesthetics of the longer splinter as much as feel. I mush prefer the look of tendrams 2nd picture than the first even if that difference is rather subtle. But even that's a bit too short for my preferences.

I absolutely 100% agree with #6 - that would be a great improvement in aesthetics to my eyes.

All in all I agree with those who say you should get what you want not what other people think you should get when you are the one shelling out the cash.

Good posts - I like constructive criticism - even that with which I don't necessarily agree.

I'll tell ya, If I was offered either of those two rifles Tendrams posted, I would have a hell of a time deciding which one to go with. I love those classic lines on both, although they are quite different. And this goes back to my statement to Dave about needing to see the rifle in person and handling it.

When compared to the more flowing lines of the Hollands, they almost look a bit "chunky" or thick through the actions. But it's a look I've developed a real taste for in the way the splinter transitions the fatness into a thin and flat look at the forward end as it pans out. But this "thick" through the action look is very deceiving in pictures. In person, these rifles will appear much smaller and sleeker as the splinter creates an illusion of size. It's really amazing how much just the fore-end shape can affect the overall appearance of the rifle. In the hand however is where they really shine.

Yep, I'd have a hell of a time picking which one I like the best. Just a guess, John, but is the top a Westley Richards and the bottom a Jeffery?

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:

I have to tell you, I didn't care for that K gun at all especially the schnabel forend and the "notched" action.

That's okay jorge. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, no matter how wrong and misguided it may be...

Another example of what I think grip angles, forearms, and checkering should look like. A Rodda .475 #2. Drooool.

There seems to be a lot of requests for more English styled modern economical double rifles (which VC are working hard on) BUT then everyone wants more slender Actions.
As far as I can tell these two requests simply don't go together. It appears to me that to get that classic look and feel, you really need that deep heavy British type Action.
If I were to place an order for a 577 or 600 I would see if VC could increase the depth of the action but still request rounded edges that they do so well and with their H&H styled Splinter fore-end deepened a bit at the rear, this would certainly improve the aesthetics and balance (might not need weight added to the stock) and not to forget additional strength it would ad to the action.

Oh, and the Rhino should ideally be the Black variety as suggested by Huvius.