Chris,

I spent a day with Monty last week and shot his 450/500 and 500 NE. We weighed them and I think the 500 was right around 11 - that sound right?

Both were fun to shoot!

quote:

Originally posted by 10generation:
Chris,

I spent a day with Monty last week and shot his 450/500 and 500 NE. We weighed them and I think the 500 was right around 11 - that sound right?

Both were fun to shoot!

Yes, his 500 is on the smaller of two available frame sizes and weighs about 3/4 lb less than the the same caliber on our larger frame.

Is the Jaeger still being produced, and would that style ever be produced on the 89b frame?

quote:

Originally posted by Colin Masters:
Is the Jaeger still being produced, and would that style ever be produced on the 89b frame?

I own Jaeger's in 450 and 375FL.
To my knowledge, Heym would consider producing more in the 88B, although perhaps not at the the "introductory" price from several years ago.
Heym has produced blued receiver standard 88B's with fitted stocks and ejectors as well, in fact Chris may yet have a 450NE
'Black" finish to sell. (cannot recall RH or LH, but truly a handsome gun.

To my knowledge there are no current plans for an 89 "Jaeger".

quote:

Originally posted by Colin Masters:
Is the Jaeger still being produced, and would that style ever be produced on the 89b frame?

Hello, Colin.

The "Jaeger" was - by design - built to target a lower price point. This was possible because all of the rifles were made exactly the same (straight stocks, no cast, etc...), and they had extractors rather than ejectors.

To make the price competitive, we have to do several to capitalize on the efficiency of doing several the same. In other words, one "Jaeger" built at a time is not really much more efficient than a regular rifle.

On the 88? Yes, we could do another run of "Jaeger" rifles, but we would need a few commitments to get started.

On the 89? Yes and no. No in that the 89 is finished as a higher grade rifle to compliment the 88. The 89 will not be available without engraving or in a "PH" model. Yes, in that if we had several that wanted to limit some of the options (same caliber, etc...) and engrave them all the same, then we could capitalize on that efficiency.

I hate all you people for bringing this stuff to my attention.

I WANT ONE!!!!!

Grade 2 please with CC, in 450 NE.

Wow. I want one.

This thread must be the best free ad in history, so long I have to admit I may not have even read the lot.

Did anyone ever explain how and why the sausage-like bolsters on the 88 have become a kind of historic salute, like rudimentary fences, on this one - but are not even part of the bar?

Mr. Sambar:

To my young eye the bolsters on the 88B look like the bolsters Purdy made famous. I believe Purday bolsters do not engage or go around the bar.

Someone better than me can add or subtract.

I know spelling, and I apologize.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Mr. Sambar:

To my young eye the bolsters on the 88B look like the bolsters Purdy made famous. I believe Purday bolsters do not engage or go around the bar.

Someone better than me can add or subtract.

I know spelling, and I apologize.

The bolsters on my 88 PH are on the bar but, on going to check, I notice they are farther down than might be ideal. I notice it has the same tubular look to the edges of the barrel flats (can't think of the correct nomenclature) into which the faux bolster of the 89 runs.

I'm not sure about the Purdey you refer to but the bolsters look the real thing in this one:

http://jamesdjulia.com/item/lo...dies-and-case-38165/

The 88b boalsters as I am referring to them are the side clips that do not extend around or down through the bar and belly (like a holland).

I believe the little bolster on the 89 is model after webley. You can see it in the shots of the catalog on Mr.Sells video. Those small side clips are highlighted in the book titled Boxlock sold through Safari Press. The book is a primer of English boxlocks. Based on the 89 bolster/side clip being represented in vintage British boxlocks, I respectfully disagree that it is faux. Is it "necessary"? Well, like the discussion on dolls heads, it may not be necessary, but is none of the less proper.

I do not see any real distinction between the Purdey you posted side clips/bolsters and the 88B's side clips/bolsters. Of course, that could be cause of the picture quality.

I would be happy to be educated if someone can explain a real difference in the strength comparing the two designs of 88 bolster vs. Prudy.

Sambar deer are not on my short list, but are not to far off.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
The 88b boalsters as I am referring to them are the side clips that do not extend around or down through the bar and belly (like a holland).

I believe the little bolster on the 89 is model after webley. You can see it in the shots of the catalog on Mr.Sells video. Those small side clips are highlighted in the book titled Boxlock sold through Safari Press. The book is a primer of English boxlocks. Based on the 89 bolster/side clip being represented in vintage British boxlocks, I respectfully disagree that it is faux. Is it "necessary"? Well, like the discussion on dolls heads, it may not be necessary, but is none of the less proper.

I do not see any real distinction between the Purdey you posted side clips/bolsters and the 88B's side clips/bolsters. Of course, that could be cause of the picture quality.

I would be happy to be educated if someone can explain a real difference in the strength comparing the two designs of 88 bolster vs. Prudy.

Sambar deer are not on my short list, but are not to far off.

http://www.hallowellco.com/hw-...mm-left-close-sm.jpg

The above is a bolster not aside clip!

This is a side clip!

http://www.hallowellco.com/sideclips-stoeger-12.jpg

As far as I know Heym has never had side clips on their double rifles.

Mr. Mac:

Obviously, you are right I used the terms interchangeably, and I should not have.

What is your opinion on the Heym 88B bolster as compared to the Prudey. I think visually and functionality they are the same. What is your opinion on the 89 bolster. I think it is is appropriate given the action is based on a Webley. Now I do think the holland and holland mustache bolster that comes around belly may be superior to retard the flex under firing, but for the use of the small bolster on the 89 being based on Webley, I do think it is proper.

But what do I know. Please feel free to educate. I promise to write it down and thank you

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Mr. Mac:

But what do I know. Please feel free to educate. I promise to write it down and thank you

My opinion of the bolster on the 89 is certainly, as to usefulness, quite adequate, considering the best steel money can buy was used in making the action. You are correct on the similarity to Webley and I too think it is fine in this case.

I too prefer the H&H mustache for looks, but the new 89 is a very well done rifle, and If I could afford it, I would have a big five of them made in 375H&H fl, 450-400 3 inch, 450NE, 470NE, and a 500NE. However at age 80 yrs,I doubt I would live long enough to see them finished, much less get to take all of them to Africa.

In regard to you writing this down, point taken!
........................................................................ Mac

Mr. Mac;

I was being sincere when I said I would write it down. I appreciate your information. I apologize that it read insincere. It was not my intent, and thank you again.


I really do write this stuff down.

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
My opinion of the bolster on the 89 is certainly, as to usefulness, quite adequate, considering the best steel money can buy was used in making the action. You are correct on the similarity to Webley and I too think it is fine in this case.

The 89B doesn't have any bolsters.

What you are looking at are the fences, which have nothing to do with adding strength to the frame.
They really are there just for decoration not strength.

quote:

Originally posted by 5seventy:

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
My opinion of the bolster on the 89 is certainly, as to usefulness, quite adequate, considering the best steel money can buy was used in making the action. You are correct on the similarity to Webley and I too think it is fine in this case.

The 89B doesn't have any bolsters.

What you are looking at are the fences, which have nothing to do with adding strength to the frame.
They really are there just for decoration not strength.

I was speaking to what the poster was calling bolsters/side clips. I agree they are simply carvings and not functional at all. However IMO they are not needed on this rifle anyway. IMO as well most with bolsters today are simply decoration and are not needed with the fine steel used today.

Where have you been 5seventy? I feel left out without your input on my posts.
.................................................................... Mac

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Mr. Mac;

I was being sincere when I said I would write it down. I appreciate your information. I apologize that it read insincere. It was not my intent, and thank you again.


I really do write this stuff down.

Don't worry about it, I didn't take it the way you think. No apology is needed here!

................................................................. Mac

Ten four Mr. Mac and thanks.

The explanation point and the lack of visual cues/body language that comes with typing had me worried. Respectfully to all, I do think it is technically a bolster on the 89B. You can see it more clearly on an open action or an action without barrels in place. But I do agree 100 percent any support is minimal in comparison to the steel used in the action. Or when compared to other more substantial bolstering surfaces/techniques.

What I mean with the 89B's raised and extend surface coming down off the fence is that it is a styling from the Webley and a type of bolster. I define bolster as a extra metal left around the radius. That extra metal being employed to prevent or retard flexing. I see that extra metal when I look at the 89B. More subdued and subtle; yes. However, I do see extra metal, or at least raised metal, in that area.

I welcome any rebutle.



Good hunting

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
... What I mean with the 89B's raised and extend surface coming down off the fence is that it is a styling from the Webley and a type of bolster. I define bolster as a extra metal left around the radius. That extra metal being employed to prevent or retard flexing. I see that extra metal when I look at the 89B. More subdued and subtle; yes. However, I do see extra metal, or at least raised metal, in that area...

I notice the shape of those roundy protrusions (still fences if not decoratively carved into?) behind the standing breech has changed with the new model but I don't see any more (or as much) metal sweeping down from them around the bar.

Are you saying that the old bolsters are not needed now because the width of the bar has been increased? the bar on my 88PH .450/.400 is about 37.3mm wide below the bolsters - how does that compare with the bar of the same calibre on the 89?

Hello Sambarman: I just saw your reply. I was not ignoreing you. To my feel and what Mr.Sells has said the width and length of the action from the 89 and 88B are the same. This excludes the wings of the 88 that gave it the "notched look". The enforcement that the wings provided has been moved to inside the action under the wood by the engineers at Heym according to Heym USA. I cannot begin to describe how they did that because I have not seen an action with the stock off reviling the actions guts. I also did not ask how. Heym USA told us Germany was very reluctant to give up the wings because of the reinforcement the wings provided at the head of the stock.

I was saying because of the better steel and metallurgy we have today bolasters are not necessary. They are a good thing. Firms have their own style for bolstering. They are like a dolls head top fastner. In that they are a good thing and done right can provide that extra theorically margin for safety. Both are a Firms touch, but due to the steels being used today are not necessary.

The bolsters on the Heym 88 was seen as a Gemantic styling. I alsways thought they looked very Prudey. However, everyone thought otherwise, so on the 89 they had to go away. I am ok with that. I actually like the 88s bolsters, extended action, and cocking indicators better than the 89. That is like saying a like red heads better than black hair, but love them both.

I understand what you are saying that what we are talking about is just craving/styling off the fence. I see a little more; especally when the action is viewed from above with the barrels hinged open.

By more I mean steel left higher/proud. I do not think it does much from a stregnth stand point because it is very subtle and modern steels render bolasters not mandatory.

I hope this was an articulant and respectful reply. It was intended as such. I am not saying you are wrong; just trying to explain myslef. I do not dispute that the 89 does not have the 88's (to my eye Prudey like) bolsters.

Thanks LHeym...
I'm not quite sure what you mean by the 'wings', unless you mean the circuitous back line of the action.

I would have thought that the steel in the last model would be so close to the 89's that it would not matter.

I am not necessarily in love with the bolsters on the old rifle, esp. the abrupt way they end at the front. However, as an owner of the old design it may be in my interests to assert it's superiority (like a pre-64 Winchester), just in case I want to sell it some time

Sambarman338: I do not think it, the strengthening, matters. I think it is the Germans being German when it comes to engineering. That is why I like them.

I like your pre 65 idea. Good hunting.

We've taken a new direction with our online "FAQ."

Professional Hunter Mark Vallaro and I have put together a series of short video clips that work to best answer Frequently Asked Questions about rifles, calibers, and their use in the field.

We hope you find this information beneficial and welcome your suggestions on additional topics you would like to see covered.

We kick off the series with "Caliber Choice" for your double rifle.

Set your DVR for Tracks Across Africa... Saturday, April 15, 2017... 5:30 EDT.

This episode features Phil Massaro hunting buffalo with the new HEYM 89B in 450/400.

I was able to pre-view this presentation.

Well worth watching.

For some reason I think it was on last night April 11, 2017. Or at least I saw the gentleman and this rifle hunting buffalo. It was a nice old bull

This Heym Model 89b it´s a winner. I am impressed however of the marketing. The Americans have always been better salesmen and been able to aim directly so the customer felt the product came down to a personal level between the seller and him. Overhere(EU) one would never experience Heym in Germany saying:" Come down to our office and see for yourselves and shoot some of our rifles". The US Heym salesman seems envolved and commited to the products and to the customer, again something most europeans gun manufactors cannot deliver and the most europeans could´t absorb it anyway.

Jens, you are wrong. I discussed a Heym double a couple of years ago with the factory and was invited to visit the factory and test rifles.

Morten

quote:

Originally posted by jens poulsen:
This Heym Model 89b it´s a winner. I am impressed however of the marketing. The Americans have always been better salesmen and been able to aim directly so the customer felt the product came down to a personal level between the seller and him. Overhere(EU) one would never experience Heym in Germany saying:" Come down to our office and see for yourselves and shoot some of our rifles". The US Heym salesman seems envolved and commited to the products and to the customer, again something most europeans gun manufactors cannot deliver and the most europeans could´t absorb it anyway.

I think that high dollar luxury goods marketing is a combination of correct market positioning, implicit or explicit celebrity endorsement to set the image, and personal relationships. I wouldn't order food from a five star restaurant, put it in a styrofoam to-go box and then eat it in my car with a plastic fork. People spending $20-40K on a rifle have earned the right to an exceptional buying experience. When I bought my first beemer, I couldn't help but notice how different the experience was compared to my previous vehicle purchases.

Mr. Sells, Dr. Early, and Mr. Tony did not have to stroke me to get my money, and they knew that. But they still treated me like I had bought five doubles from them.

I do not care if it's fried chicken from Hillybillies in Knox County or New York strip at Morten's in Louisville. Treat me right or you do not get my money.