Purdey 18.7 re-bored barrels from 1998

[JR111]

Hi everyone. I have the chance to buy an excellent condition Purdey sidelock self opener from 1896. Condition is great. New barrels were made from Purdey in 1998, however on closer inspection the barrels have been altered and reproofed by Birmingham proof house. The stamps advise that they chambers have been changed to 70mm and the bore now reads 18.7. The original bore mark from Purdey of 18.5 is still there. The owner sadly passed away so I am unsure when the barrels were altered. From my understanding the gun has not been shot since 2002 and it was before then. 
Purdey advised that the chokes were made at 1/4 and 1/2, however this will now have changed with the bore being increased. (Less steel friendly now)
Will the new barrels alter the price of the gun. I have the paperwork regarding the new barrels, just concerned about the barrels being altered will drastically reduce the price?

 

many thanks 

Edited December 27, 2023 by JR111
Adding photo

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Welcome to Pigeon Watch.

[London Best]

New barrels from the original maker will not affect price so much as barrels from another maker. 
I don’t think the chamber alteration will devalue much. Many might say it would increase the gun’s desirability.  
Chokes can be set at your wish.
The gun market generally is dead. 
But if anything retains any value it will probably be a Purdey with modern barrels.

Edited December 28, 2023 by London Best

[JR111]

Many thanks for replying London Best. I agree with what you are saying, however I was needing a second opinion before I spend more money than what I was intending! The market has dropped away, however, I'm hoping the name will help hold the value. I have definitely benefited by buying some very nice old shotguns, particularly a nice Henry Atkin which has shot flawlessly all season. 
I now need to negotiate a price, however I think I'm at as low as they will go for £6k. Still think that is very cheap

[button]

That is stunning 

Have you got some close ups?

[JR111]

[islandgun]

Beautiful.... You have the money..... buy it !

[London Best]

I would risk that at that price! 
But if you are at all uncertain of your own judgement on it’s condition take it to a reputable gunmaker/gunsmith (not a gun dealer/seller) and be guided by them.

[button]

No brainer, there ain't no pockets in shrouds! Get it bought!

[London Best]

The quality remains long after the price is forgotten.

[Arley]

Excellent advice from London Best i.e. get advice from someone who knows what they are looking at, be careful on buying on name alone side by side market is on its knees at the moment so some great deals to be had

[McSpredder]

1 hour ago, London Best said:

..... if you are at all uncertain of your own judgement on it’s condition take it to a reputable gunmaker/gunsmith (not a gun dealer/seller) and be guided by them.

PW members may be able to recommend a good gunsmith if you say whereabouts the gun is located.

A clearer photo (particularly  around the crossed pikes) might allow somebody to check the re-proof date, and help to confirm the stated history of the gun.

If there are visible marks showing that the barrels were originally chambered for 65mm (2-1/2”) cartridges, you can reasonably assume that re-proofing was done solely because the chambers were lengthened.

If there are no old 65mm proof marks, the barrels may have always had 70mm chambers, in which case there must have been some other reason why a re-proof was needed.

Edit:  I quoted London Best because I totally agree about consulting a good gunsmith, and was not tyrying to teach him anything.  The other remarks were for the OP.

Edited December 28, 2023 by McSpredder

[ditchman]

shame about the butt pad.........that would be the only reason for me not buying it

[grahamch]

change in bore size may well be wear between proofing not alterations. 

 

Looks nice but i would keep my cash for something else

[London Best]

1 hour ago, McSpredder said:

 

A clearer photo (particularly  around the crossed pikes) might allow somebody to check the re-proof date, and help to confirm the stated history of the gun.

If there are visible marks showing that the barrels were originally chambered for 65mm (2-1/2”) cartridges, you can reasonably assume that re-proofing was done solely because the chambers were lengthened.

If there are no old 65mm proof marks, the barrels may have always had 70mm chambers, in which case there must have been some other reason why a re-proof was needed.

 

The OP states that the barrels were new by the maker in 1998, not reproofed.
They would be made as 70mm chambers, not lengthened from 65mm.

Edit: apologies, my mistake.

58 minutes ago, grahamch said:

change in bore size may well be wear between proofing not alterations. 

,2mm.
Virtually impossible.

Edited December 28, 2023 by London Best

[JR111]

Thanks everyone for replying on the original post. The barrels were made by Purdey in 1998 as the flats and paperwork show. They were chambered at 21/2"and bored 18.5. They were proofed in london, however between 1998 and 2002 the gun has be re chambered to 70mm and backbored to 18.7 and the relevant "R" over the crown stamp has been issued. Also when re proofed it was done at Birmingham proof house. 
The previous owner's family advised that the gun was never fired after 2002 as he was a collector. ( barrels are mint)

I have just looked at the gun and it is spotless.  the only issue is that the ejector timing is off, which means it only ejects the right barrel with light snap caps. Heavier snap caps and both eject, however the left barrel half a second slower. Both ejectors work fine separately. As such, I will do some research. I am used to old English guns and use them daily. The condition of this gun is the reason it has turned my eye. Thanks again for all your comments.  

 

Edited December 28, 2023 by JR111

[London Best]

It is my understanding that timing the ejectors on the Purdey/Beesley action is not so straightforward as other actions. This may be expensive.

[JR111]

That is my fear. Will speak to my gunsmith and see what he thinks. Definitely not spending as much on it now ( if at all)

[ditchman]

2 hours ago, grahamch said:

change in bore size may well be wear between proofing not alterations. 

 

Looks nice but i would keep my cash for something else

Quite agree....

[JR111]

2 hours ago, grahamch said:

change in bore size may well be wear between proofing not alterations. 

 

Looks nice but i would keep my cash for something else

I am confident that there would be no wear in that timescale. ( 3 years max). Definitely will have a think about purchasing it. Not sure I need another gun to the collection but then again...,

[PeterHenry]

51 minutes ago, JR111 said:

That is my fear. Will speak to my gunsmith and see what he thinks. Definitely not spending as much on it now ( if at all)

Very much an amateur here - but Purdeys are complicated guns - if it hasn't been shot since 2002 it may well just need to be serviced.

[enfieldspares]

3 hours ago, ditchman said:

Shame about the butt pad.........that would be the only reason for me not buying it

It isn't worth £6000 IMHO because it is a short stocked gun that has been extended with this butt pad. It is also an early Purdey before the mechanism was "improved" later on. If the gun isn't exact to your needs in length of pull and the ejector timing isn't correct I would walk away. At the very least get a quote from Purdey regarding the ejector work (best and worst case costs) and use that as a lever to reduce the price if you do make an offer to buy.

The "best" gun market is in the doldrums and the 2023/24 Season ends in but four weeks. I'd wait until then and get a better gun with a stock that is all wood and all one piece at a much lower price. The new barrels mean little and IMHO a long stock "best" London sidelock gun with original barrels in proof and with adequate thickness is better than any "best" London sidelock gun with a rubber butt pad and ejectors out of time regardless of the barrel age.

Now if it were a boxlock "duck gun" or other with a 2 3/4" chamber by Bland or Midland or Greener with a rubber butt pad that'd say "function" and be in my opinion quite reasonable and even likely requested when the gun was purchased. No problem and a beneficial feature to some. But a red rubber butt on a "best" London lightweight game gun suggests...nay screams out...that the person that had such put on couldn't afford to do the job of having the thing fitted to them properly by having the gun fitted with a new stock and (from the same blank) matching forend.

Edited December 28, 2023 by enfieldspares

[button]

16 minutes ago, enfieldspares said:

It isn't worth £6000 IMHO because it is a short stocked gun that has been extended with this butt pad. It is also an early Purdey before the mechanism was "improved" later on. If the gun isn't exact to your needs in length of pull and the ejector timing isn't correct I would walk away. At the very least get a quote from Purdey regarding the ejector work (best and worst case costs) and use that as a lever to reduce the price if you do make an offer to buy.

The "best" gun market is in the doldrums and the 2023/24 Season ends in but four weeks. I'd wait until then and get a better gun with a stock that is all wood and all one piece at a much lower price. The new barrels mean little and IMHO a long stock "best" London sidelock gun with original barrels in proof and with adequate thickness is better than any "best" London sidelock gun with a rubber butt pad and ejectors out of time regardless of the barrel age.

Now if it were a boxlock "duck gun" or other with a 2 3/4" chamber by Bland or Midland or Greener with a rubber butt pad that'd say "function" and be in my opinion quite reasonable and even likely requested when the gun was purchased. No problem and a beneficial feature to some. But a red rubber butt on a "best" London lightweight game gun suggests...nay screams out...that the person that had such put on couldn't afford to do the job of having the thing fitted to them properly by having the gun fitted with a new stock and (from the same blank) matching forend.

Is it not a Silvers pad?

[Old farrier]

41 minutes ago, enfieldspares said:

It isn't worth £6000 IMHO because it is a short stocked gun that has been extended with this butt pad. It is also an early Purdey before the mechanism was "improved" later on. If the gun isn't exact to your needs in length of pull and the ejector timing isn't correct I would walk away. At the very least get a quote from Purdey regarding the ejector work (best and worst case costs) and use that as a lever to reduce the price if you do make an offer to buy.

The "best" gun market is in the doldrums and the 2023/24 Season ends in but four weeks. I'd wait until then and get a better gun with a stock that is all wood and all one piece at a much lower price. The new barrels mean little and IMHO a long stock "best" London sidelock gun with original barrels in proof and with adequate thickness is better than any "best" London sidelock gun with a rubber butt pad and ejectors out of time regardless of the barrel age.

Now if it were a boxlock "duck gun" or other with a 2 3/4" chamber by Bland or Midland or Greener with a rubber butt pad that'd say "function" and be in my opinion quite reasonable and even likely requested when the gun was purchased. No problem and a beneficial feature to some. But a red rubber butt on a "best" London lightweight game gun suggests...nay screams out...that the person that had such put on couldn't afford to do the job of having the thing fitted to them properly by having the gun fitted with a new stock and (from the same blank) matching forend.

This 

and to add Birmingham proof would put me off 

along with enlarged bore’s possibly because they had to be polished to remove marks 🤔

however if you like it and it fits go for it and enjoy 

butt pad on my purdey 

[enfieldspares]

37 minutes ago, button said:

Is it not a Silvers pad?

Yes but as OLD FARRIER shows the usual form follows function butt pad, as on the one on his picture I think, that Purdey would have used would have been a leather covered pad. 

Edited December 28, 2023 by enfieldspares