Here's a really stupid question for Ray, Jack Belk, Chic and all the other well traveled, well heeled, and well shot. How good are the rifles from English firms such as Westley-Richards, Rigby, Holland & Holland, Gibbs, etc...?

The reason for asking is, that in the last 6 months I've come across several rifles from Gibbs and Westley Richards, a couple from Rigby and one or two from Holland and Holland. Most were built in the early half of the twentieth century that were in very good shape. All of them were pretty much the price of an ordered new Dakota, or one of the "semi-custom" shops. Are they comparable in quality? These were hunting rifles, not finely engraved exhibition pieces. All of them were less in price than say a new Martini-Hagn, new Searcy or others in the same league.

Jack,

Having had a few British rifles, I can tell you that they were mostly of high quality from the big name makers. I love the fit and appearance of these rifles, and for me they were worth what I paid for them. That said, were they better than a new semi-custom rifle-no. Will they shoot any better than a new semi-custom (or even an off the shelf Winchester or Remington) rifle-no. Would I rather spend the same amount of money on them rather than a new semi-custom rifle-absolutely !!!! If you find any good deals on British rifles that you do not want, please let me know .

Jim

Yukon Jack---

The early English magazine rifles are the guns from which most dangerous game rifles are derived.

The English had much the same two rules of firearms that I've adopted....

1) It must work perfectly---

2) It must look good doing it.

I'd rather have an old rifle than a new one, but in some cases metallurgy and heat-treat are better in more modern guns.... BUT , if the rifles are shot as they were designed to be shot......tapered cases and low pressures.....they'll last another hundred years without a problem.

99% of ALL rifle problems come from the quest for velocity........ and there's never been a game animal that knew the difference or cared about it.

To shoot an old express rifle from one of the venerable firms is to see perfection for the use for which they were made. Latter day custom rifle makers have altered the basic designs to account for the use of scopes, bigger shooters, hotter cartridges, and changing taste.

The old English rifles are the touchstone of fine rifles all over the world.

Beware of some new guns with the old names.....they're NOT the same....and they're not the quality or value, either.

Hey Yukon, could you email me offline? I have a question for you. I am in Squarebanks.

fsrfr@uaf.edu

Thanks.

I started studying British rifles and shotguns in great detail over twenty-three years ago. At the time, I was just out of college and financially strapped, but I was lucky in that I became acquainted with an advanced collector of fine custom rifles and shotguns. This gentleman had amassed an incredible collection of fine British double rifles, shotguns, and magazine rifles, as well as fine custom rifles from almost all of the great names in American custom rifle making. This man turned into a great friend of mine and he kindly took me under his wing. I've spent countless hours over the years carefully examining the firearms in his collection plus many others.

Early on (and the years have done nothing but reinforce this opinion) I came to the conclusion that the British make the best double rifles nd shotguns in the world, but their best bolt-guns are greatly inferior to the best America custom magazine rifles.

The pre-war British craftsmen excelled at fine-tuning and adjusting Mauser actions to feed with incredible precision and silky smoothness, but that's really about the end of my positive comments about their magazine rifles.

Otherwise, I consider the British rifle to be inferior in terms of stock design, checkering, finish (and the durability of same), over-all style, and general craftsmanship to the top American riflemakers. They don't understand the substance of accuracy nearly as well as American makers do, either. And for some reason, the British seem to have proper stock architecture for a shotgun mixed up with proper stock architecture for a scoped magazine rifle.

Quite some time ago, I was able to shoot a Holland & Holland .375 H&H (built sometime after WWII) alongside an Al Biesen custom .375 H&H. The Biesen rifle was far more comfortable to shoot, far more accurate, it fed just as smoothly, and exhibited a significantly higher level of workmanship in all aras. There really was no comparison between the two rifles whatsoever.

From what I've seen at various hunting conventions in recent years, the great British gunmakers really haven't elevated their game as far as design and quality are concerned. In fact the recent samples I've seen do not measure up to their earlier work. On the other hand, American (and some German and Austrian craftsmen) have gotten ever better in recent years and are creating the best custom bolt action rifles ever produced right now.

Why the difference? We'll for one thing, the British craftsmen seldom if ever actually hunt themselves, or even shoot. On the other hand, America is a true nation of riflemen and hunters, and that shows in the custom rifles we produce. Top America riflemakers build rifles from the inside out. More goes into what you don't see than in what you do see, but I get the feeling that the British are more interested in cosmetic gratification than function.

So I guess the romance (and that's what the British bolt gun is mostly about) of the British stuff is lost on me, and since I'm a hunter who commissions custom rifles to hunt with (I'm not a collector), I'll take an American custom bolt gun any day of the week for serious use.

My opinion only, take it for what it's worth....

AD

excellent post, Allen. I'm glad to see there are a few folks that are not of the "its made in America, it must be crap" school of thought. While some of the old doubles and magazine rifles are wonders of esthetics, I feel their match can be found easily among American craftsmen.

Gee Alan, you didn't learn much in that 23 years.

The old English guns that I have used just pointed better, functioned better and they all have that wonderful cast off and a little drop at the heel and comb as opposed to being stright as a 2x4 reputed to suck up recoil which many take for granite as fact, but is not altogether accurate..A lot of American classic design is hype to sell rifles and it is accepted without question, a bit mistake...You put something in print enough times and some folks just accept it as fact when they have no clue.

Most of todays custom stocks have about a pound too much wood on them, an un-needed cheekpiece, no cast off, too high a comb and too long a forend, and thats just for starters.

Considering the prices some can get for a laminated stock or fiberglass stock and just how much one can put into such a rifle as compared to what it cost to build, it becomes more and more apparant how gullible some self styled experts can be.

But the bottom line is to each his own, as long as the owner of the firearm is content then that is all that counts....

Ray
I realize that you have seen and hunted a lot of rifles over the years. But, I must take exception to what you are saying concerning the American bolt guns. Perhaps we aren't looking at the same rifles. The custom rifles I have handled have been anything but bulky. And, they all had cast off. The matter of a cheekpiece is a personal one I suppose.

The stock shape is different on English rifles. It has to be, they are set up for iron sights. Stock geometry has to be different to line up with a scope.

I like a British express style as much as the next guy. But, I don't take anything away for the American makers.

The ones of interest to me, have been about the same price as a new Dakota or entry level custom rifle. While I don't expect a $3500 bolt gun to be comparable to a top of the line David Miller, Maurice Ottmar or Martin Hagn, they do appear to comparable to a lot of the semi-custom shops that are well respected in the US. I have nothing against rifles made here. The Duane Wiebe's, David Miller's, et al, are fantastic rifles, I'm sure. All the rifles I have now are customized from the American big 3. I'm not a quarter MOA person. I hunt and want my rifles capable of hunting accuracy, not necessarily the tuned accuracy of benchrest tournaments. To have a Westley Richards rifle chambered in the 318 WR would much preferable to a brand new Dakota or rifle built on a Montana action if safe and of like hunting quality. Same to be said for a Gibbs Farquharson instead of a Dakota No. 10 or a new falling block from a high end shop. I do understand that Rigby has changed hands over the years and have heard some reports of the "new" Rigby company not being quite what the old one was. I can't justify spending that kind of money for a new H&H or even a new Rigby. Some of the old used ones in good to very good condition have decent prices on them from time to time though.

I'm not a speed demon. For the most part, my rifle loads are a bit slower than they could be pushed. The original loading parameters would be perfectly fine for me. After all, I do believe its the bullet that does the work, the velocity is just the push to get it where it needs to go.

Ray, you can ignore and trivialize my observations, you can make fun of them, and you can pretend if you want to, but as far as I'm concerned, gullibility comes in many shapes and forms, and I'll stand by every point I've made. Rifle thechnology didn't exactly stop in jolly olde London back in the 1930s.

AD

I, too, have owned a lot of English, European, and U.S-built sporters over the last 50 years or so.

Like Mr. Belk, I think there are few rifles in the world to equal (let alone beat) the best made English rifles for the purposes for which they were built. With a few exceptions, those purposes, however, were different than the circumstances encountered by most shooters in North America.

The English rifles were never intended to shoot sub-MOA groups. they were intended to shoot as naturally, with open sights, as a good shotgun would. That is a function of very small refinements in stocking, which most of the American bolt guns I have experienced
do not have.

At the same time, there were failures of Brit QC, too. For instance, I once had a pair of H&H-built bolt guns chambered for the .275 H&H. One was a splendid shooter, quite sufficiently accurate, and functioned as smoothly as greased glass. The other would blow primers and almost freeze the bolt with Holland's proprietary ammo. Something about the chamber or the throat was likely not quite cricket. I didn't bother to put it right, just sold the pair to Don Robinson in B.C.

It is my experience that many of the lesser grades of guns retailed by the big London makers were, in fact, made in Birmingham and had little of the supposed London-quality hand work in them beyond the stamping of the sellers vaunted name on them.

Brit sporting rifles from the big name makers were also not built with interchangeability of parts as a prime consideration and that includes the bolt guns. So, for convenience of repair I would take an American-built bolt rifle every time. Hand fitting means several things, but one of them is that almost every part is slightly altered to perfectly fit and function in that gun and that gun only. What with "tolerance stack" a part from one such fitted gun may not function at all in another rifle of the same name, model, and chambering, unless the "new" part is also altered. Machine-made guns may not be quite as smooth or meticulously mating, but they do function in the great majority of rifles of the same make and model.

However, I think most American bolt guns do equal, or better, most of the English run-of-the-mine grades of bolt rifles. There is also little doubt in my mind that the quality of both the English houses and the American Big Three has slipped dramatically over the last 50 years.

As a matter of fact, due to the decline of the apprenticeship system in the gunmaking world of England, the bigger name houses were touring Canada & the U.S. in the mid-70's buying back rifles and guns of their own make (and of their better competitors). They would then take them back to England, refinish them, re-dimension the stocks, and sell them to their new customers. I leave it to your judgement and research to determine whether they were always marked as re-fitted, rather than as new.

Some,, such as Purdey, also were stooping even lower, in my opinion. Baron Carlo Von Maffei who was then living in Alberta, Canada, frequently had Eddie Mech (also of Alberta) re-stocking his guns with better grades of wood of longer pull. I remember in 1979 when he left a pair of brand new Purdeys with Eddie to restock. As Eddie removed the maker's butt-stocks, we all saw, lo-and-behold, that they had been fitted to the actions by glass-bedding, not by meticulous hand cutting of the wood.

As to Mr. Belk's caution that many of the old British names have been taken over by others and are no longer producing the same fine work as they once did. YES, SIR. HE IS EXACTLY CORRECT.

For instance, Daniel Fraser, once a proud house of Edinburgh, Scotland... In it's hay-day easily the equal of Purdey, the new "Fraser" recently produced and sold actions to the U.S. market which I do not believe would have merited a novice his apprenticeship papers in England between the wars. I suspect the only part of the old Fraser firm in that effort was the purchased name and trade mark.

The bottom line (for ME only), based on my own experiences and study, is this:

1. For natural fit and reliability of function (and thereby close range ability to stop a dangerous animal) I would take a true "Best Quality" London gun every time, be it of double or bolt persuasion, IF I COULD FIND AN OLDER ORIGINAL ONE.

2. On the other hand, for prairie-dog accuracy, or battle-field sniping, well, I'd take the U.S. built piece hands down. Anytime I had to rely solely on the spares I could carry with me, say a month-long trek to Mongolia for sheep, it would also be the American gun in my kit.

Best wishes,

AC

[ 05-06-2003, 00:48: Message edited by: Alberta Canuck ]

I recently nearly bid on a H&H 240apex takedown with interesting provenance (Crown Prince of Romania) all the accessories including period scope in leather and oak box etc in very little used condition. It went for the same as the 6mmrem takedown and scope and no box I commisioned from an English custom rifle maker who uses the same (if not better)components as H&H would now.

The older rifle was no more beautiful and much less practical for the UK stalker due to considerably decreased accuracy and ease of use (trigger, scope etc) It had much more history but even the low value it had would be greatly reduced by any modifications to address the above.

I came away realising how much a good scope, nice trigger and repeatable accuracy from a warm barrel mean to me.

I happened to be at the SCI show in Reno this year and stopped at quite a few tables that had European made bolt rifles for sale. Used mostly. I was shocked at the asking prices for these well used rifles. Im not talking doubles. Plain ole bolt actions. I dont think I found one that was under $10,000. Most of them had seen a lot of hard use. But I digress..... What really shocked me was the quality of work. Im not talking about the stock style. Just the work in general. Metal to wood fit was not that great and the finish and checkering were absolutely horrible. I guess if you want the name Holland on your rifle go for it but as for me I will stick with american craftsman. The Brits can build doubles and shotguns like house of fire but they are seriously lacking in the bolt rifle arena. Just MHO.

Most of them had seen a lot of hard use.

This to me speaks volumes. When was the last time you saw an American custom rifle created like the present showpieces are that has seen a lot of hard use. As long as we are all giving an opinion, I'll add mine. I believe that the English rifles were created to use. They maybe weren't perfect in every detail like some expect in today's world of custom rifles. They were not meant to hang on the wall to be admired or to sit on some table at a custom gun show. They were meant to be used in the game fields and obviously if they had seen a lot of hard use they were being used as intended.

they are seriously lacking in the bolt rifle arena.

I think this is a rather bold statement to make considering most English rifles are well proven in the game fields. I also think it improper to compare English magazine rifles with todays breed of high dollar custom rifles. They are two totally different animals. Many custom gun builders are building rifles that they know will probably never actually be used in the game fields. Witness the "Tupperware" and "Laminated" stocks that are so popular now. Is it any coincidence that two of the highly thought of custom gun shops are building rifles made with these materials that they actually expect to see the game fields extensively? They obviously know their high dollar fancy grained wood stocked beauties won't make it out much if at all.

I agree that the American custom gun builder is perhaps turning out more precise rifles today than the older English made rifles, but I would sure like to see one of them go through the same paces that many of the old English magazine rifles have done before I make a statement like "Those English rifles are seriously lacking in the bolt rifle arena".

It's true that many of today's custom rifles are never hunted with or even fired at the range. But keep in mind, many of these rifles are ordered BY THE CLIENT with idea that the finished rifle will indeed be a collector's item. Other clients order a fine custom rifle with the intent of hunting with them, only to find that they just can't bring themselves to risk them to the hazzards of the field. In this case, the rifle itself was not used because it wasn't up to the task of hunting, the client set the boundries on it's use himself.

Most top American custom riflemakers whose work I admire most have built and build rifles, BY INTENT, to hunt with. Older makers like Al Biesen, Earl Milliron, Monte Kennedy, and Dale Goens built very taseful, simple, and elegant rifles for the express purpose of hunting, and they executed and finished them accordingly. Whether or not they were used for actual hunting was left to the disgression of the owner.

Current guys like Dave Miller & Curt Crum, Gene Simillion, Roger Biesen, and D'Arcy Echols (yes, there are others) work very hard to built fine rifles, BY INTENT AND PREFERENCE, for real-world hunting use, and they take great pride in the fact that most of the clients who order their rifles use them accordingly.

So what I'm saying is, it's a mistake to assume that fine American custom rifles aren't up to the task of hunting so much as the British guns if they remain unfired or little-used if he client makes the decision not to let that rifle showcase it's capabilities in the bush instead of merely looking pretty in a gunrack. I know of a quite a few fine American-built custom rifles that have been used extensively for hunting for over thirty years and have never been offered for sale, and these will likely be passed on to the next generation.

Romance plays the biggest factor of all in the appeal of British bolt guns, of that I'm convinced, and they are indeed horribly over-priced for what you're getting, no matter what condition they're in. You can get far more rifle for the same or less money from any first-class American maker; one that is more functional, far more accurate, better-finished, better executed - the whole nine yards.

AD

Idared,

The point I was trying to make was this. If I had $10,000 to spend (which I dont) and wanted a custom bolt action rifle I would spend the money with an American custom rifle maker. The fit, finish would be better. More bang for the buck and it would be new. Not used. I have no problem with folks wanting to own a piece of history. If that is what you want then have at it. You will get more for your money with an American built custom rifle IMHO.

I think in may ways that English bolt actions are similar to rifles you would get from Weatherby, Nesika or Prairie Gun Works, that is, they aim at a very specific market.

To me, the American custom gun such as a D'Arcy Echols is really about correctly executing the design of the Model 70 Winchester. In other words if Winchester did it right then their rifle would be like Echol's gun.

Another factor with the English bolt action is that such a rifle is their lower end. I would imagine to get satisfaction from say an H&H bolt gun you need enough money whereby it is not a significant purchase.

But overall I don't think the English or Echols rifle is a reflection so much of ability or lack of ability but rather catering to a particular market.

Mike

Everybody,
Thanks for posting your thoughts. I appreciate all the responses.

I guess originally I had thought that purchasing an older rifle from a firm like Westley Richards, Gibbs, Rigby, etc... would be like picking up an older Griffin and Howe or Cogswell-Harrison, or a new Dakota or new rifle from Winchester or Remington or Weatherby custom shop. As good as those rifles are, I don't think its a fair comparison to judge with a $10K or $20K rifle from David Miller, Duane Wiebe, D'Arcy Echols, Martini-Hagn or the like that is made just for you. These rifles, I had thought, were more of off the shelf "semi-custom". The prices I've seen on good to very good English Guns has not been in that range anyway.

Thanks to everyone for their input.

I have no gripe with our American guns..Some of them are awsome..Most of mine I built, and I'm an American, as is Jack Belk but we do appreciate the English guns...I do like the feel and specs of an English gun better than a American classic, that is my choice.

I have never owned a English rifle that I didn't make a gob of money off of it when I sold it, regardless of what I paid for it...That is something I cannot say for an American Custom rifle, as most of them bring 25 cents on the dollar when used, and one in the shape of some English guns wouldn't bring squat regardless of who made it...check the Custom guns in the gunlist, I do every two weeks. Resale value is a legitimate consideration...I have seem some awsome deal in the Gunlist...

Now a good old Hoffman will get my attention, but he built his guns on English specs for the most part...Some of today best American gun builders build their guns on English specs and I agree they are as fine as the best, maybe better, but some are functional and some are not.

Not all English guns are of top quality, I have little use for the cheaply built Cogswell and Harrison and a few others, but Westley Richards, Holland and Holland are wonderfull guns and better than the stock market for investment. A good Hoffman in a large caliber is a top investment and will someday send your kids to college..

I like them all, and they all have a place in my gun cabinet, I am not locked into a rut like some single minded folks are.