quote:

Originally posted by Tommyhawk:

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:

Tommyhawk:

You have a lot of criticism here. Could you please fill us in on all your experience with handling and shooting the California Rigby? I am not defending California Rigby but it seems to me that before you go running your mouth off you ought to at least fill us all in on your own PERSONAL EXPERIENCE wit the gun.

Golly gee Dave...I guess I better come clean. No. I've never fired one of the CA Rigby's. I've never knowing eaten sh** either. But, I don't recommend it to others. I have handled hundreds of doubles and fired at least 25 different rifles. Including a Purdey. I threw my back out with an Evans 4 bore. I have examined and handled a few of the doubles in question here. Enough personal stuff! It's another 'kill the messenger' tactic. It's already been posted that their guns shoot accurately and function properly. I think that is great. The issue is that these doubles are not what we have been told they are. And, it seems that the man running this company is not what we have been told. If Mr. Miller would do a Tiger Woods, this would all blow over and go away.

Okay, there ya go. Tommyhawk has never "fired" a California Rigby and probably has never even seen one but we should listen to him because he has "handled hundreds of doubles and fired at least 25" but never says he even owned a double. Tommy suggest that the guns "shoot accurately and function properly" but still thinks they are not worthy of consideration. It's got nothing to do with "kill the messenger" cause the messenger doesn't have any experience with the gun but wants to trash the maker.

I have fired a California Rigby but it's been so long ago that I can't remember much about it. I am only interested in the guns. If Terry Wieland's book is correct, they are built on Merkel actions (not Merkel shotgun actions) Merkel makes a good action and I see nothing wrong with that. I am just not going to trash the gun or the maker until I have some experience with the product.

quote:

It's already been posted that their guns shoot accurately and function properly

So, the real issue is the morality of the owner!!!
Dave, with all due respect, you are completely missing the point here! If you or I were asked to evaluate a gun we would say: "Sure, let me look at it". If Tommy or ISS were asked to evaluate a gun they would say: "Sure, tell me about the guy who made it! Is he a Christian, did he cheat on his wife (this may be OK BTW) did he "steal valor"? If so, I don't need to see the gun it is trash.
Notice this is NOT the same as saying: "It is a fine gun but I choose not to buy it because of the morality of the owner". neither is it the same as saying: "The gun is not good for the following reasons...", because this would involve evaluating the gun itself. It seems to me that there are two separate questions here:
1. Is the gun any good?
2. Should I buy it?
Tommy and ISS are conflating the two probably because they consider them inseparable. I do not.
Again, just my 2 cents! Peter.

Dave and Peter,

The owner may very well be a crudball if he has in fact stolen valor.....never the less this is about the gun so.....let's look at the gun. I have not shot them or spoke with anyone in person who has. That said some have posted here relaying their and others experiences with the guns. I am willing to concede they shoot reasonably well and are functional. I have handled the Cal Ribgys and I don't find them particularly interesting to me. They are very large and clunky with a beavertail fore end. Just not my style. A clear departure from it's English predecesor. So my and I think other people's "beef" if you will is with this departure from English look and feel coupled with the fact that he builds them off a Merkel shotgun rather than a made from scratch gun and then sells them at top dollar English bespoke prices. For one we don't understand what in the hell would posses a person to do that and for two we don't understand who in the hell would be crazy enough to find that combination at that price even remotely palatable???? I guess that's what I'm and I'd imagine other people are thinking.

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:

quote:

It's already been posted that their guns shoot accurately and function properly

So, the real issue is the morality of the owner!!!
Dave, with all due respect, you are completely missing the point here! If you or I were asked to evaluate a gun we would say: "Sure, let me look at it". If Tommy or ISS were asked to evaluate a gun they would say: "Sure, tell me about the guy who made it! Is he a Christian, did he cheat on his wife (this may be OK BTW) did he "steal valor"? If so, I don't need to see the gun it is trash.
Notice this is NOT the same as saying: "It is a fine gun but I choose not to buy it because of the morality of the owner". neither is it the same as saying: "The gun is not good for the following reasons...", because this would involve evaluating the gun itself. It seems to me that there are two separate questions here:
1. Is the gun any good?
2. Should I buy it?
Tommy and ISS are conflating the two probably because they consider them inseparable. I do not.
Again, just my 2 cents! Peter.

+1

Dave, one of the probelems that most people have with the California Rigby is they try to act like they are the same company as the past UK Rigby. If you go to thier website and click history, they write like they are the same company building on the same tradition of the past. When in fact the guns they produce today are not even in the same league as the guns of old. When you talk with them at the shows they are also arrogant to this and try to pass off something that they are not.

quote:

Originally posted by McKay:
Dave, one of the probelems that most people have with the California Rigby is they try to act like they are the same company as the past UK Rigby. If you go to thier website and click history, they write like they are the same company building on the same tradition of the past. When in fact the guns they produce today are not even in the same league as the guns of old. When you talk with them at the shows they are also arrogant to this and try to pass off something that they are not.

+1

Precisely my point.

+2

Add that to my other above beefs. Saying that Cal Rigby is or London Rigby for that matter is an extention of the old Rigby company is a joke at best. The John Rigby of old is dead and will return no more. The only thing that stands with either London or Cal Rigby is the quality or lack of quality of their work. It doesn't matter a damn what words are stamped on the rifle or who bought what right to whatever superfilus thing.

Brett

Brett, good posts!
"The only thing that stands with either London or Cal Rigby is the quality or lack of quality of their work. It doesn't matter a damn what words are stamped on the rifle or who bought what right to whatever superfilus thing.".
I guess some folks would buy the name, but as you say, it applies to the London company as well as the California company. Names can carry a certain cache however and certainly some were disappointed that the Ca. company didn't live up to it's name!
Peter.

quote:

Originally posted by McKay:
Dave, one of the probelems that most people have with the California Rigby is they try to act like they are the same company as the past UK Rigby. If you go to thier website and click history, they write like they are the same company building on the same tradition of the past. When in fact the guns they produce today are not even in the same league as the guns of old. When you talk with them at the shows they are also arrogant to this and try to pass off something that they are not.

McKay...You nailed it!!!

Dave,...Personal attacks are a sure sign of a weak argument.

Correct me if I'm wrong but do we not have a picture on this thread of a Rigby DR made from a Merkel shotgun not a Merkel action or shotgun action.

The picture shows a Merkel SHOTGUN with the barrels cut off and resleeved with rifle barrels correct?

If this is the case then in fact these are not actually DR's but shotgun conversions.

Separate the person from his product: isn't that what people said about Bill Clinton? Didn't he coin the phrase "Situational Ethics"? Don't we have Bill Clinton II in the White House today?
Does anybody remember "Rogue River Rifles" from twenty years ago?

The current Kalifornia Rigbys are a travesty of the originals IMHO. And yes, I have fired four of them. I would not have paid ten grand for any one of them. Ten dollar horse under a forty dollar saddle.

Four other DRs available for less than 1/3rd the retail price of a Rigby/Merkel hybrid. Searcy, Chapuis, Merkel, and Heym. I handled all five a couple different days at SCI. The other four all felt and looked better.

Just me, but I have bought and sold cattle on a handshake for about twenty-five years now. I would deal that way with most of you here. Not KaliRigby.

Rich

I am not an American & neither am I an Englishman...So...

Please give me the names & phone numbers of 5 people who have bought cal Rigby rifles so that I can compare them with any other double rifle, including Merkels. I want to compare the Cal Rigby with otehr DRs so that I can see for myself the quality of manufacture, the metal & wood finish, fit, configuration, feel of the rifle, handling etc. I want to know the differences in the Cal Rigby that justify the US$15k to US$25k+ EXTRA that I would have to pay compared to a Merkel.

When I research the web I find the following base price info

• H&H royal sidelock Double rifle up to 500 NE = GBP 92k = US$ 145k
  
• Wm Evans sidelock Double rifle up to 500 NE = GBP 75k = US$ 120k
  
• Westley Richards sidelock Double rifle up to 500 NE = GBP 57k = US$ 90k
  
• Cal Rigby sidelock Double rifle up to 500 NE = US$ 49k
  
• H&H royal round action Double rifle up to 500 NE = GBP 48k = US$ 77k
  
• Westley Richards boxlock Double rifle up to 500 NE = GBP 29k = US$ 45k
  
• Cal Rigby boxlock Double rifle up to 500 NE = US$ 32k & 39k for a 500NE
  
• Merkel boxlock Double rifle up to 500 NE = US$ 12k
  

Now...what is so special about the Cal Rigby that makes it so much more expensive than the Merkel boxlock with chopper lump or shoe lump barrels? I know that Searcy charges $10k more for shoe lump barrels compared to monoblocks. If Cal Rigby rifles are sleeved, they should be even cheaper.

Cal Rigby is claiming royal warrant on its website which are not valid. Those warrants were not issued to Mr. Miller. Can he get a confirmation of the current validity of the warrant from Queen Elizabeth II?

Can Brandon Holquin build a double rifle of similar quality & specs to a WR boxlock, since the price difference is only about 3k?

quote:

Originally posted by Nakihunter:

Cal Rigby is claiming royal warrant on its website which are not valid. Those warrants were not issued to Mr. Miller. Can he get a confirmation of the current validity of the warrant from Queen Elizabeth II?

They are not valid warrants as it is a different company and if he is displaying them
as such, that is illegal.

I do think that he has made a point of displaying them on his web site so that they
look like they have them.

Very subtle way of trying to build credibility IMHO that shows that they need to
lean on these type of things to build cred as the guns don't have any.

So, it that fraud, or just another fat ass lie he's posting...?

Rich

But hey, to some of you here that doesn't matter since he has the "moral high ground...".

It seems Rigby London will end up with access to all the old records.

http://www.johnrigbylondon.com/archive.html


Interesting comment by Gibson.

""Gibson, the owner of the actual records, has recognized John Rigby & Co. (Gunmakers) Ltd. of London as the legitimate successor to the original Rigby company.""


"Karma" at work

.

quote:

• H&H royal sidelock Double rifle up to 500 NE = GBP 92k = US$ 145k
  
• Wm Evans sidelock Double rifle up to 500 NE = GBP 75k = US$ 120k
  
• Westley Richards sidelock Double rifle up to 500 NE = GBP 57k = US$ 90k
  
• Cal Rigby sidelock Double rifle up to 500 NE = US$ 49k
  
• H&H royal round action Double rifle up to 500 NE = GBP 48k = US$ 77k
  
• Westley Richards boxlock Double rifle up to 500 NE = GBP 29k = US$ 45k
  
• Cal Rigby boxlock Double rifle up to 500 NE = US$ 32k & 39k for a 500NE
  
• Merkel boxlock Double rifle up to 500 NE = US$ 12k
  

Now...what is so special about the Cal Rigby that makes it so much more expensive than the Merkel boxlock with chopper lump or shoe lump barrels? I know that Searcy charges $10k more for shoe lump barrels compared to monoblocks. If Cal Rigby rifles are sleeved, they should be even cheaper.

...i suppose the defense would be free enterprise/capitalism/market-based pricing, etc...and thanks to AR and the web, an informed decision can be made in view of the exaggerations, etc...that said, i would think sportsmen would be pleased to see more, rather than less, product choice in the marketplace...

quote:

Originally posted by 500N:

""Gibson, the owner of the actual records, has recognized John Rigby & Co. (Gunmakers) Ltd. of London as the legitimate successor to the original Rigby company.""

Does it stand to reason that the Royal Warrents should soon follow??? I bet that'll takes the wind out of Mr Millers sails!

Not sure about the Royal Warrants.

From my LIMITED knowledge, I thought Royal Warrants
as they applied to the original Rigby company ceased
to be valid once the company was sold originally.

Maybe someone from the UK more up to date with the law on these
can comment.


Edit
I just checked and Rigby are not current holders of any Royal Warrants
as far as I can see.

After all, I am sure Mr Miller can tell us if he has supplied any goods or services to the 4 members of the Royal household who can grant Warrants.

quote:

Originally posted by 500N:
Not sure about the Royal Warrants.

From my LIMITED knowledge, I thought Royal Warrants
as they applied to the original Rigby company ceased
to be valid once the company was sold originally.

Maybe someone from the UK more up to date with the law on these
can comment.


Edit
I just checked and Rigby are not current holders of any Royal Warrants
as far as I can see.

After all, I am sure Mr Miller can tell us if he has supplied any goods or services to the 4 members of the Royal household who can grant Warrants.

Royal Warrants are only valid in the British Empire/Commonwealth

Miller has the originals posted on his web site.

amazing, 11 pages of claims, counter claims, innuendo, accusations, boasts and bs and very few facts.
Fist, I have no dog in this fight. I have never owned, shot, or even held a California rigby or a new London "rigby". Of course, to the extent that I can determine, no one else has shot a new London "rigby" double rifle either as it appears that they haven't made one yet.

Facts: The rights to the rigby name were purchased and the production moved to California where they are made in a different fashion using some parts sourced from outside the company. They have a different look and feel fron the old Rigby double rifles origionally made in London. It appears that they function and shoot and are worth what a buyer is willing to pay for them. They should be valued based on what they do now not what the previous owners did.
Fact: A group in London discovered what they believe is a loophole which allows them to assume the name Rigby, dispite having nothing connecting themselves to the origional Rigby Company save a stated desire to build a rifle that equals those produceded by that origional Rigby Company.
Fact: They ain't done it yet.
Personally, I'm happy with my Krieghoff and have no interest in a Rigby, California or London, because I don't feel the need to spend dramatically more money for a gun that isn't going kill anything any deader than my Krieghoff does. If you are willing to: God Bless you, it's your money have at it. If the California rigby isn't your cup of tea, don't buy it. If it, go for it. As far as the new London "rigby": I suggest you wait until they prove they can make it before you fall in love with it. Don't forget, the ONLY reason that the name Rigby is on their logo is because their lawyers said they could get away with it. They may indeed to be able to make a double rifle worthy of the name Rigby, but for my money that have to prove it first. And until they do, I'll view then as "rigby" not Rigby.
My last name may be Reese, but that doesn't mean that I can make peanut butter cups.

TerryR,

very subtle use of the King's English to denigrate the London Rigby company, and attempt to legitimize the Kalifornia Kompany by innuendo.

First, the US company never followed up on the need to protect the logos and trademarks in England. That was the first thing they did here in the US. That should tell you how sharp the crayons are in that box.
Secondly, they set out to build the cheapest DR they could, and sell it for the maximum price, based solely on the name "Rigby" stamped on the product. They assemble parts from "here and there..." much in the same way as your local gunsmith does.
They started out like Butch Searcy did, with more capitol, and have never progressed to actually making any of the parts used in assembly of their DRs. They still buy Merkel shotguns and shotgun actions and convert them to DRs. Butch designed his own actions decades ago, and is now displaying a new action slated for production this summer.

FACT: A LOOPHOLE, in today's usage, is an inadvertent lack of total coverage in application, in a law that allows someone to circumvent the intent of the law thru some technicality. The intent of the Copyright, Logos and Trademarks laws is to insure that the first person, in most all cases the owner, to copyright the name and trademarks, etc of a business keeps imitators and those who would profit illegitimately from copying the legitimate owner's products and selling them. If the London company had used some technicality to use a similar name, ie Rigbey, or Johan Rigby, that is a form of loophole. Taking a name that had been unprotected for ten or so years, is not. There, in fact, has not been a gunmaker named Rigby building rifles in England for many years.

There still isn't one, anywhere in the world, building a genuine, bespoke Rigby DR in the original pattern or quality. That is, however, about to change. The London company has shown a prototype action, true in every way to the Rigby DRs of a hundred years ago.

I bought my first Krieghoff, a .500 NE in 1994; so I can understand your pride of ownership.

Hope this clarifies things a bit for you.

Regards,

Rich
DRSS: Searcy .470 NE and Chapuis 9,3x74R
and four real Big Bore CZ's

Rich
I have no interest in either legitimizing the California Company or denigrating the London group. To clarify: The California Company bought certain assets including the rights to the Rigby name. They proceeded to manufacture a gun which is different from that produced by the Company from whom they purchased those assets. Those rifles should stand or fall based upon their own merits or lack of merit. I make no judgment regarding them save to point out that they apparently camber, close and go boom when manipulated properly. So does a Holland & Holland or a handi rifle. Pay your money and take your pick.
I Have no interest in denigrating the new London "ribgy" company. But I won't legitimize them either just because their lawyer discovered that they could use the the name of a company that was once a highly respected London gun manufacturer. They have to do more than say say it they have to do it. As you pointed out they have made a prototype. That's a nice first step, but they have to demonstrate that they can put a gun into production and that, at least, it chambers, closes and goes boom. When they do, it should be judged on it's merits and it's merits alone not the merits of products once made by another company that, at one time, used the same name. Right now all that the new "rigby" company shares with the old is a London address and a stated desire to build the finest quality firearms possible. I hope that they can pull it off, hell I hope that the California outfit makes rifles that everyone applauds, but I'm not going to bow down to either until they actually do. When they do, I'll take the quotation marks away from "rigby".

Terry

PS the quotation marks are off the California Company because the name was sold to them by the true owner of the name, not because I feel that their products merit it.

quote:

Originally posted by TerryR:
I hope that the California outfit makes rifles that everyone applauds,

I think Searcy has taken the mantle of building quality DR's in the US over the last few years, especially since he has made the rising third bite.

My understanding is that Miller could not afford to buy anything. He went bankrupt and the note was bought by someone else in bankrupcy proceedings. He is building the guns under license from that person. The person that hold the note is a Texan named Gibson I think.

The original warrants are no longer valid and does not belong on his website

It would be interesting to see if the current Royal Warrant fron the Queen is valid for the new London Rigby or if not if a new warrant is issued from any of the Royal family would this then make London Rigby the "true" Rigby?

quote:

Originally posted by sjm:
It would be interesting to see if the current Royal Warrant fron the Queen is valid for the new London Rigby or if not if a new warrant is issued from any of the Royal family would this then make London Rigby the "true" Rigby?

No current Royal Warrant exists for Rigby as the original Rigby Warrant holder
is no longer trading.


A new warrant will only be issued if the new London Rigby supplies
goods or services to one of the 4 Royal Warrant issuers - not all
members of the Royal Family can issue warrants.

I don't suppose that the "John Rigby" poster made mention of his "Stolen Valor" accusations?

quote:

It would be interesting to see if the current Royal Warrant from the Queen is valid for the new London Rigby or if not if a new warrant is issued from any of the Royal family would this then make London Rigby the "true" Rigby?

Warrants can be withdrawn at any time. Mr Al Fayed used to display three Warrants on the outside of his Harrods store. But that does not mean that they were still valid.

Currently various gun concerns hold Warrants including the Hull Cartridge Comapny, Gallyons , Holland and Holland, M Lingard and Purdey.

A Warrant does not imply that the product that holder makes is the best in that field. To wit...Boss & Co!

It may be of interest to you to enquire of the company how long that Elizabeth II Warrant was valid until and the year it actually was withdrawn.

Rusty,

curiously so, that has not been addressed. I made a post right after his first inquiring about that issue. It was funny to see a few people (coincidentally none of whom owned one of their rifles) reply suggesting that we should separate the man's personal code of ethics from his business dealings. The two are inextricably intertwined, as a dishonest man is simply that; and a leopard does not change his spots.

Rich
DRSS, Searcy .470 NE & Chapuis 9,3x 74R
and both will be accompanying me to RSA April 8th.

Sent some questions to the London firm, but they have gone unanswered regarding pricing and availability of their guns.

I wonder if the ongoing litigation is forcing them to be unavailable to current potential clients?

no litigation has been filed yet, and I doubt it will be. There are too many little things, like the Royal Warrants issue. I don't think the assembler here wants to take that flight and be put under oath in a British court.

Rich
Searcy & Chapuis, good enough for me.

Rich-

Searcy and a Chapuis are nice doubles to be sure,
But only a Gustav Genshow my broken heart will cure!

HAHA!! Hope you like that one!

Cya buddy,
Gene

bf42,

It is Genschow not Genshow.

There is a decided difference in the balance, quality and looks of an English double rifle when compared to doubles built in any other country. Even here there are exceptions. I handled a J. Springer 9.3X74 full sidelock double (German) owned by Elmer Keith. It was built just like a H&H Royal including the removable side plates. With out reading the name on the rib you couldn't tell that it wasn't a H&H. On the other hand if you handle a Wm. Douglas side by side double (English made)you definately don't get that English feel or their look of quality. I have seen an Italian double that came close and almost made it but it just wasn't quite there. None of the American makers have duplicated that feel and balance but B. Searcy comes close in some of his side lock designs. Closer than any other American maker in my opinion. He keeps improving and if he lives long enough he may just do it.

None of the German guns do it either. I don't know if Kreighoff, Chapuis, Merkle or Heym use the same actions on their rifles as their shotguns but it sure wouldn't surprise me if they are just strengthened shotgun actions. I personally don't want any double rifle built on a shotgun action design. But that doesn't mean that such an action isn't durable and usable for a double rifles intended purposes. I had the oppurtunity handle all of the above rifles at the SCI convention a couple of years ago and they did not fit my desires in a double rifle. That doesn't mean that they won't meet your needs or expectations. Handle it and shoot it if you can and then decide. If you like it and can afford it, buy it.
That also applies to the California Rigby. Just don't expect it to handle or look like an original Rigby.
465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
None of the German guns do it either.

I'm not sure about that. I agree the one's you mention don't, but there are a select few that make well balanced, trim, splinter fore end.........basicly English guns!!! I forget their names, but I handled/oogled some of them at the SCI show and they gave up nothing to some of the finest English makers in my opinnion.

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
None of the German guns do it either.

I'm not sure about that. I agree the one's you mention don't, but there are a select few that make well balanced, trim, splinter fore end.........basicly English guns!!! I forget their names, but I handled/oogled some of them at the SCI show and they gave up nothing to some of the finest English makers in my opinnion.

Brett

Brett,

Please reread my post. I believe that is exactly what I said.

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by SINNER:
Sent some questions to the London firm, but they have gone unanswered regarding pricing and availability of their guns.

I wonder if the ongoing litigation is forcing them to be unavailable to current potential clients?

Mark Neal was kind enough to contact me today, he was very helpful.