Considering my recent thread & posts on the subject of ACGG standards and machining mauser barrel threads, id like to ask what you expect in your fine high level custom.

What triggered this mostly, is the statement by Dennis Earl Smith.[However this is not about discussing work done exclusively by ACGG members]

".having been an ACGG member for several years and getting to know the "system" better....here goes my opinion. The Guild was established to provide a venue for the continuance of Custom Gunmaking in the USA and now North America. The level of work acceptable for entry level has evolved over the years. Jim Coffin (one of my mentors) said that he would never have made the Guild with the quality of the work he presented 25 years eariler (Jim died last year). His mentor was Al Biesen, who is recognized nationally as one of the better Custom stockmakers/gunmakers. The bar has risen each year as the quality of the work demanded by the American public became more discriminating. The minimum level accepted....as you asked....has changed over the years."

Re: Form Vs Function.

How much importance/scrutiny do you place on the quality/attention to detail of external work compared to the internal work?

Smiths are often praised-given accolades for doing various different things on a rifle to a high level. Some are presented on the outside of the rifle, other efforts of detailed work can remain mostly hidden from the human eye for the life of the rifle.

A number of people do highly praise/value precise crisp inletting, majority of which remains hidden from the human eye.

I myself do value high level pristine work below the wood line as much as above the woodline.
I have as much appreciation of precise inletting as i do of precise checkering, same goes with metal precision/finish both above/below woodline]

And for the same appreciable reason, I do highly value when someone goes to the effort[attention to detail] to get a barrel threaded to best accurately match the mating thread.

Same with thread fit of safety shroud to bolt.

I also value full metal contact between scope ring bases on a fully trued receiver, as I do stress free-full contact 1/4 ribs.

And numerous folk do appreciate when someone goes to the effort to produce a more precise barrel, even though other reputable less costly ones will give more than adequate & reliable accuracy for hunting...[Yes, I do want my custom M98 to shoot as accurately as possible.]

A rifle will often adequately and safely FUNCTION just as well without such highly detailed-thorough attention to internal & external FORM.

But "adequate" is not the driving force behind the minds of exquisite rifle builders.

This is not to suggest that everyone should desire or require say a Ralf Martini, D'Arcy Echols,Dave Miller or Peter Nelson rifle.

Well, "fools go in" so here goes! My first criteria is accuracy, out of any rifle, therefore an inaccurate custom rifle is a waste of my money. Bear in mind that I am not at the point where I can go to a custom gunmaker and say "here is a list of what I want". Most custom rifles I have seen on this forum look good to me! Not very discriminating I guess, but that is where I am.
Peter.

First and foremost I look at the outside as that is what everyone sees. I would desire it to be as flawless as is possible. As to those areas unseen such as the inletting I am less critical. In point of fact I'm not particularly concerned about inletting at all as on my second and last custom I specified the rifle to be fully glassed, action,barrel,complete. As to thread fit I would assume a normal fit as done by any reputable gunsmith would be adequate for me as I will probably never unscrew the barrel to check the threads. Upon disassembly I believe there should be no discernabile tool marks but to go so far as to scrape,engine turn, or further enhance internal surfaces as done by some English makers does little to impress me except to add price to the resultant work due to the hand work. Fit between mating surfaces such as mount bases and such should be as perfect as is possible to make the joint line as nearly invisible as possible. To me this would more or less be routine work for a quality gunsmith. These are my personal thoughts and undoubtly don't match many on these forums who are much more critical than I am. I am speaking of a basic rifle or shotgun bereft of ornamentation other than the metal finish. My choice of wood also goes in direct opposition of the norm in as much as I PREFER dark straight grain wood and do not like heavily figured wood at all on any gun. To me the grain should be as fine as possible to take checkering well. Flow of grain thru the grip should be almost perfect for me. To me form is VERY important as I have very fixed ideas as to what is beautiful an a gun and what is not. Just one old man's opinions which I think is what the question was.

Form Vs Function: Too perverse a question for my lazy mind. Firstly if I don't like what I see on the outside I will never find out whats on the inside. Secondly I only appreciate firearms that function (feed, trigger pull, ignition, extraction, safety operation etc) flawlessly and will own no others. Thirdly I only appreciate firearms that are acceptably accurate.

Now from the point of view of one in the trade, we all are constantly looking for some area of exterior embelishment or treatment to enhance our monetary return, but in this quest I believe the trade produces mostly "safequeens". I guess you pays your money and you takes your choice.

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder but dependability and functionality are not.
Delicate elegance is always a costly and fragile extravagance - whether it is in rifles or in people.

I've never understood why the question is always posed as either/or. Why not strive for both? It's very achievable.

Terry

It is not an either-or proposition. It is that beauty is pretty hard to quantify.
Do we want John Rigby's, Peter Nelson's, Roy Weatherby's or Harry Lawson's version ?

Not really, if you're having the rifle built for yourself it's easy to quantify what's beautiful and what isn't.

BTW, I've seen what you think is purdy, I'm talking to everyone else

In that case this is one of the finest custom rifles in the world as all the details are there.

If that's what you like, more power to ya. The owner is the only person that needs to be satisfied. If you think that's beautiful and it functions well then you have achieved both.

What's the black stuff? That wasn't on there when you published an article about that rifle was it?

It is aircraft wing-walk and it's been on the rifle now for 27 years.

How many times have you ever seen an example of first class worklmanship where it shows, then taken it apart and seen crap work on the inside?

In the real world, this is seldom likely to happen..pride of workmanship will either be all the way through the project or crappy work will be evident at first glance and likely to extend throughout the project.

I compare rifles to dogs. A rifle MUST function and shoot accurately. If it can/does function and is beautiful(whatever your definition), that's even better. A well trained retriever is a thing of beauty in and of itself. A well trained good looking retriever is just pure joy!

Accuracy above all else- I want my rifles to shoot better than I ever could. Accuracy and function also tend to go hand in hand. Everything else is a luxury.

If Robert Kleinguenther could guarantee .5" & 1" accuracy with standard/magnums in the 70s no reason to not consider that a decent bar for the average custom
rifle.

quote:

How many times have you ever seen an example of first class worklmanship where it shows, then taken it apart and seen crap work on the inside?

Ditto......it reminds me of guys who used to complain about polishing their boots and pressing their fatigues. Sloppy is as sloppy does.

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
I've never understood why the question is always posed as either/or. Why not strive for both? It's very achievable.

Terry

Its great when a smith wonderfully blends the two together.
However cost prohibits many people from owning such fine & desirable examples.
That is not to say I consider them overpriced.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Trax:
id like to ask what you expect in your fine high level custom.

I will attempt to answer based on my own limited experience but I will assume that I have a "high level budget"

1) Accuracy and safe operation are a given.
2) Feed and function perfectly under all conditions. Really nice feeding that is effortless.
2) It should be made to fit the intended use. North America different from Africa, Deer rifle vs DGR, etc...
3) It must fit me, balance and point as pefectly as can be made. This includes recoil management as proper LOP, etc is important use.
4) As light and trim as possible, cartridge specific as possible.
5) Crisp, clean trigger.
6) Rugged and dependable sights.
7) Assume we are talking wood stock - Inletting that looks like the metal was poured into the wood.
8) Great grain flow in the wood...dark mineral streaks are nice as well but a sound Turkish Walnut Blank is nice
9) Yes, I would expect the unseen parts to be finished at a high leve as well.
10) A little engraving and rust blue adds to the rifle.
11) Double Square Bridge Mauser Action.
12) Plenty of other stuff could be added....

There are so many choices in planning and executing a custon project that, in my mind, it must be taken on only when you have determined the goals, objective, budget, and what the intended use will be....

If I want a gun for Alaska or Africa you can bet they are going to be very different....

quote:

Originally posted by dempsey:

Ditto......it reminds me of guys who used to complain about polishing their boots and pressing their fatigues. Sloppy is as sloppy does.

Dempsey,
Not to get off the topic - but your post really hit home with me. I always took a lot of pride in my uniform and actually looked forward to polishing my boots and pressing my uniform for the next day. I never once had a soldier who took that pride in his uniforms appearance that cause me any problems. just the opposite in fact. As practical as the new ACU's and desert boots are - they really did an injustice to the soldier by taking away the means and expectations of pride in ones uniform and appearance.

The same can be said of a gun builder. If they take pride in themselves and their work you are not going to have problems with either.

After reading the first post on this thread by the esteemed Trax it seems that he does not know as much as my pet Airedale about what makes a rifle accurate! Poor guy is a boob who likes to think that he knows something about how to build an accurate rifle but has his head up his azz. Now if someone here who knows the difference between shiz and shinola please start a thread about this subject.

I don't know about you guys, but I'm quite reasonable about this sort of thing.

I'm always willing to settle for the very best in every respect, but I seldom get it!

Bill,
You are very correct about military uniforms. My Dad is probably turning in his grave if he knew about wearing BDUs or whatever they call them. My just retired Son thinks the same thing.
Butch

I select the components that I want based primarily on function and quality.
Then I want it put together faultlessly...
If it is a fine/best quality bespoke gun/rifle then that would take it to the next level in terms of artistic quality, but so far this has been specified by someone else and I am not the original owner!

quote:

Originally posted by Boss Hoss:
After reading the first post on this thread by the esteemed Trax it seems that he does not know as much as my pet Airedale about what makes a rifle accurate! Poor guy is a boob who likes to think that he knows something about how to build an accurate rifle but has his head up his azz. Now if someone here who knows the difference between shiz and shinola please start a thread about this subject.

I don't know about your's but My Airdale, Mattie, seems to have at least a rudimentary grasp of rifle accuracy. I say this because I once caught her urinating on the butt of my 260 Remington which was leaned up against the fence. The rifle was not shooting particularily well that day and I had felt the urge to urinate on it myself but had held back. She did this inspite of the fact that those threads were very nicely done, if I do say so, with the proper 55 degree angle for the Mauser receiver. Perhaps she was motivated by my knife and fork style of checkering or beaver-inspired inletting. I have resolved to be more careful in my workmanship in the future and also to be sure and clean any coyote blood off the rifle before leaving it where airdale urination is a possibility. Regards, Bill

That is Priceless ! My old man (best friend Winston) is not around anymore but he sits by my bed in his cedar box with his name on it waiting to go into the ground with me someday.

Still have a Hartman briefcase that when he was a pup "watered" for me and it left a mark. The only reason I still have the thing is that Winston marked it LOL!!!

My Airedale was one smart son of a gun and I miss him more than I care to admit----enjoy Mattie every minute you can because they are gone before you know it....