Comparative quality between old and new

[PeterHenry]

So, I was wondering, what is the comparative quality between old and new guns? With all the stuff about non toxic shot recently, I've gone over from shooting old English and Scottish side by sides, to a relatively modern Browning 425 Wildfowl.

Now, obviously I realise that the Browning is not quite up to the same 'quality' as my old Cogswell and Harrison sidelock or similar (that I am refusing to get rid of), but I was wondering how it stands up to something like a fairly plain / typical Birmingham made A&D boxlock sporting a name such as Thomas Bland, etc? I know there is always trouble performing a direct comparison with things like this - old English guns were often made to diffrent standards throught, where as modern ones are often only finished to diffrent standards, etc - but nevertheless, I'd be intrested in hearing other pepoles thoughts.

[old'un]

All depends on what you mean by “quality” is the mostly hand made English gun better quality than the mostly cnc made browning, from an engineering point I would say the browning is the better gun.

[bornfree]

Your 425 along with miroku mk,s and Beretta 682s are the pinnacle of gunmaking all three of these will shoot 1 million shells without even needing to be tightened.( If properly lubricated) no English gun will ever do that. 

[London Best]

Bring it back in 100 years and we can then make a fair comparison.

[enfieldspares]

I don't think that you can compare the two O/U vs S/B/S as the lighter gun...the S/B/S...will always be at a disadvantage. A fairer and more useful comparison would be between a Webley 700 and modern AYA No4 and, unless AYA have changed the recipe of using chopper lump barrels and a full width removable cross pin then the AYA is actually the better constructed gun.

So let us then compare a modern O/U such as a Beretta with a classic bespoke London O/U such as the Boss and you'll see that in the way that it is constructed the Beretta system is pretty much a simplified "knock off" of the Beretta system. I've discounted any and all underbarrel lug O/U guns as from a technical point of view it is an inferior design.

Edited October 30, 2020 by enfieldspares

[old'un]

5 minutes ago, London Best said:

Bring it back in 100 years and we can then make a fair comparison.

But you do not know what work the gun has needed in that time.

[bruno22rf]

Modern machining has brought precision, that was once the hallmark of hand building, to the masses - neither gun is better, new guns are simply built a better way where money is an issue. Where the main difference is apparent is in the quality and versatility of modern steel or Alloys. IMHO a moder Browning, for example, will easily outlast a gun built at the turn of the century - the problem is that modern buyers rarely buy for life and guns pass through several hands with their value dropping each time, neglect follows (cant be bothered cleaning it - it was a £200 gun) and then premature wear sets in.

[DUNKS]

1 hour ago, London Best said:

Bring it back in 100 years and we can then make a fair comparison.

If it goes back to the makers for a service after every season as the gentry used to in past days it will compare favourably. Many of the older hand made guns which did not get this treatment are now sheds. We have all seen them.

[Walker570]

1 hour ago, London Best said:

Bring it back in 100 years and we can then make a fair comparison.

Beat me to it. I have an Army & Navy 16 gauge, not a terribly posh one and it still does the job when asked. It was made very early 1900s and black powder proof when I acquired it but passed proof no problem.

[matone]

Apples and oranges...English guns were built for fast handling qualities whereas the modern o/u is built simply to work and relatively handles as a fencepost.

Both are excellent for their respective design remit.

(I own both fenceposts and thoroughbreds).

[PeterHenry]

Thank you for the replies - a lot of thoughts that echo my own.

As has been suggested here, I think thats it's something ultimately only time, and a lot of cartridges will tell. 

[Gunman]

Old guns were built. Modern guns are made .  I saw well maintained older guns and badly maintained modern guns .

Like all else there are good and bad in both .Materials, production methods ,can and will affect the quality . Parts once machined from solid steel now precision cast , less man hours spent on the finishing , lazer engraving   ,comparatively poorly finished wood etc , It doesn't mean the gun is any less good or reliable . It means it has become more of a tool relying on gadgets and add ons rather than the feel of something sleek and alive in your hands .

I saw modern guns that look great on the outside but take the stock off and they are rough as can be  and appear thrown together  others are well made to fine tolerances with interchangeable parts .Its all down to price so you get exactly what you pay for .

I saw many old hand built guns that had been made to a price as well as those made to a standard and you can not fairly compare the two.

Same as with cars .Modern cars are far far better that those made 40 years ago  ,cars that will do 200,00 miles yet we hanker for a 1950 hand built sports car knowing full well it will always be a problem . That said my my modern mid size four door will outperform many sports cars built in the 60's/70's will not break down , leak and stop when I want it to .So yes its nice to own an old hand made gun knowing skilled men had made each piece but a modern gun of good make will be more reliable and better able to handle modern cartridges .

[old'un]

Just my experience of English guns over 55+ years, Boss boxlock single trigger, problems with the single trigger and ejectors, Joseph Lang sidelock, broken main spring, cracked hammer, William Evans boxlock, broken top spring, problems with ejectors, W. C. Carswell sidelock self opener, broken main spring, problems with the ejectors, I have had other English guns and never had any problems whilst I owned them.

For the last 45 years my go-to gun as been a Miroku 800SW, bought new in 1975 and has had thousands of cartridges through it and never missed a beat, from an engineering and wear point I would say its got many years ahead of it.

[DUNKS]

Nice to see unbiased comments from experienced shooters. I have older hand made bespoke. I also have modern run of the mill and enjoy both. but modern ticks all the boxes.

Edited October 31, 2020 by DUNKS

[JohnfromUK]

37 minutes ago, DUNKS said:

Nice to see unbiased comments from experienced shooters.

Question is a bit like whether you prefer a good detailed photographic portrait ............. or a good painted portrait.  Both have their place, but one is a treasure, the other is just ........ well just a photo.

[matone]

Good analogy!

[enfieldspares]

 

13 hours ago, Gunman said:

Same as with cars .Modern cars are far far better that those made 40 years ago  ,cars that will do 200,00 miles yet we hanker for a 1950 hand built sports car knowing full well it will always be a problem . That said my my modern mid size four door will outperform many sports cars built in the 60's/70's will not break down , leak and stop when I want it to.

When I look back and compare my current Mazda 2 Sport with my Sunbeam Tiger 260 I can't but agree. The Tiger had faster acceleration, granted, but top end speed is higher with the Mazda and it has disc brakes all around unlike the Tiger that had drums on the rear and terrible, terrible brake fade besides drinking petrol (albeit three star) as if there was a drought coming to the land. No cruise control, no air conditioning and door locks of a security level you'd only see nowadays in the sort of lock fitted to those red painted pressed tin cash boxes they sell in Pound shops. 

[Gunman]

The door locks were that good ?????