Purdey 18.7 re-bored barrels from 1998

[JR111]

3 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

Sadly many 'gunsmiths' advise boring out any pitting, and if the owner isn't careful and allows the gun to get pitted, then sends it for service, it may well get bored out.  My old Powell has a little light pitting - been there this last 48 years I have owned it.  IF bored out (and I'm assured it could be), it would leave it very near needing reproof.  As long as the gun is properly cleaned - there is no problem.  However, nowadays, there are various cleaning solutions (e.g. bore snakes) that may be fine for modern chromed barrels or even unblemished barrels - but may not really clean in a gun that is even slighly pitted.  I always use a dedicated solvent cleaner designed for barrels that is supposed to neutralise any powder residue, but many people use something like WD40, which is (in my view) only suited to it's design purpose - water removal.  Yes, it does remove the visible soot and residue, but does it neutralise any burnt powder residue hidden in any (even shallow) pits?

Pitting was a common issue in older guns as the cartridges of the time were more prone to leaving corrosive residue.  I appreciate this particular gun has 'modern' barrels, so is unlikely to have encountered older powders and primers.

I knew someone with a lovely pair of Churchills that he (and his father before him) looked after well and had 'serviced' every year.  Then one day he was told that his guns were now in need of 're-proof' as years of 'light polishing' the barrels had gradually taken them to the limits.

I believe he had them sleeved eventually, but never liked them much afterwards.

Thanks for your reply and Interesting read. I always spend a considerable time cleaning guns with the correct solvents. I still have 2 litres of original Youngs 303 if I'm wanting that old school smell! Some very good new products about at the moment also which I will use as much safer if it gets near the woodwork. 
 

With regards to the gun in question, it is still exactly on the stated bore/proof size so should have plenty of life left. From the family that are selling it on behalf of their late family friend, the gun was never fired since 2002. 

[Fil]

35 minutes ago, JR111 said:

Thanks for replying. I really appreciate your time. I'm not sure if you can see the proof marks well enough from the poor upload quality. It has the manufacture date of 98 from Purdey. The flats have two bore sizes on them. Both 18.5 and 18.7. The 18.5 bores are proofed london and the 18.7 from Birmingham. The 70 mm stamp appears to have replaced 65 mm. I have checked all of the marks and I'm happy with them all. 
spoke to the current owner (inherited) and the gun was purchased 2001. Also of note, £8000 was paid at that time. The owner did not alter the barrels, or actually fire them. So the timescale between manufacture and alteration is a max 3 years. I'm more than confident there would not be pitting in this timescale. 

without removing the mechanism you can never really tell what it's like behind the plates. However, the old gentleman who died was an avid gun collector and his guns were spotless. From paperwork, it would appear he had three Purdeys. ( one of which was a pigeon gun). Two were unfortunately sold before he passed away. His collection consists of browning b25 d5g which has never been fired. This again is worth a considerable amount. 
 

this is the tightests gun and the wear on the external is spotless. I personally agree, £6k is a good deal. I have spoken to a few gunsmiths who deal in guns of the era and they advised me that " it is cheap as chips"

I would be interested to hear when back boring a gun became a popular thing. I know Browning over bored their guns to 18.7 and it is something many still do. Back then people shot plastic wads more commonly and I could see the benefit for them. It would certainly help with recoil. I would be surprised if someone would be doing that about 2000 and with a Purdey. 

No I couldn't see them well enough to be sure. The deepening to 70mm makes sense for the new proof but the bore enlargement doesn't. At least not that amount anyhow.

I've never gotten into deliberate over boring to reduce recoil. I'm old school. If you want to reduce recoil reduce what you put down the barrel. I do forcing cones and all that but mainly to help ejection with old style chambers originally chambered for roll top cartridges. From memory we saw over boring coming in around the late 80's and early 90's. Purdey and H&H (my other late employer) never really took to it. When we started making the "Sporter" at H&H we had those sort of requests including extra long forcing cones, etc. If the customer wanted it they got. They were paying of course. As you say, back then they were using plastic wads. It doesn't make sense doing that on a 1998 Purdey barrel for that reason. It may always be a mystery why they took that much out the bores at re proof. It still would not put me off buying it. Amongst my Edwardian gun collection is a Damascus barrelled Clarke of Leicester, best quality BLE. It's on an Imperial .740 re proof mark which is the equivalent of 18.8 mm. It is deadly with 30g No.6 with fibre wads. As long as I'm shooting straight that is! I've had a lot of comments from fellow guns, modern o\u owners on how the hell can I bring down the birds I do "with that old gun." 

You are spot on why the one fails to eject when ejecting both barrels. The earlier ejector tripping drags the other extractor with it enough for the second kicker to not get a full blow on the extractor. Hence they both work fine when firing each barrel individually. Classic problem on most side by sides.

Anyhow, the Browning sounds real nice. Leaping into the modern world I do have a Browning myself. A customised (by me) 325 grade 5. I only use it on sim or big clay days. Otherwise I only shoot my Edwardian guns on game. 

Enjoy your chase. I'm sure you'll get a nice gun in the end. 

[JR111]

3 minutes ago, Fil said:

No I couldn't see them well enough to be sure. The deepening to 70mm makes sense for the new proof but the bore enlargement doesn't. At least not that amount anyhow.

I've never gotten into deliberate over boring to reduce recoil. I'm old school. If you want to reduce recoil reduce what you put down the barrel. I do forcing cones and all that but mainly to help ejection with old style chambers originally chambered for roll top cartridges. From memory we saw over boring coming in around the late 80's and early 90's. Purdey and H&H (my other late employer) never really took to it. When we started making the "Sporter" at H&H we had those sort of requests including extra long forcing cones, etc. If the customer wanted it they got. They were paying of course. As you say, back then they were using plastic wads. It doesn't make sense doing that on a 1998 Purdey barrel for that reason. It may always be a mystery why they took that much out the bores at re proof. It still would not put me off buying it. Amongst my Edwardian gun collection is a Damascus barrelled Clarke of Leicester, best quality BLE. It's on an Imperial .740 re proof mark which is the equivalent of 18.8 mm. It is deadly with 30g No.6 with fibre wads. As long as I'm shooting straight that is! I've had a lot of comments from fellow guns, modern o\u owners on how the hell can I bring down the birds I do "with that old gun." 

You are spot on why the one fails to eject when ejecting both barrels. The earlier ejector tripping drags the other extractor with it enough for the second kicker to not get a full blow on the extractor. Hence they both work fine when firing each barrel individually. Classic problem on most side by sides.

Anyhow, the Browning sounds real nice. Leaping into the modern world I do have a Browning myself. A customised (by me) 325 grade 5. I only use it on sim or big clay days. Otherwise I only shoot my Edwardian guns on game. 

Enjoy your chase. I'm sure you'll get a nice gun in the end. 

Thanks for your reply and sharing your knowledge. I'm not requiring another gun as I have several other guns which are my go to ( all s/s from about 1900). I think that this is a good deal and would be nice to add to the collection. I do think the money seems about right, however that is with working ejectors.  This season I have been using a 1906 Atkin on the original barrels. They are at  .736 and .734 on the bores and shooting like a dream. Like you I get a lot asking what cartridges I'm using to reach the high birds. 30grm 6s Purdey paper case and 29 grm 5.5 Gamebore grouse extreme. They are all using cartridges, which in my opinion are far too heavy. I think people are now compensating for lack of ability with more lead in the air. As I keep telling them, shot pattern is king over anything else. 
 

Friends laugh at my gun cabinet as no o/u to be had. Maybe one day...

[London Best]

@JR111, 

I, too, only use SxS, generally old British made guns. 
Like you, I get questioned but not only what cartridges, more often “what chokes do you use?”  The other boys are usually incredulous when I tell them how little choke my guns carry.

 

[Krico woodcock]

Very interesting thread. My late father's kavanagh, which was sent to a reputable gunsmith in uk , to get a full overhaul/ service.  Barrels had slight pitting, so were"lapped out" therefore had to be sent for re proof. After re proof they were stamped 70mm. Barrels were originally 65mm . Would they have deepened chamber?  This was about 13 years ago when work was done. 

[Fil]

1 minute ago, Krico woodcock said:

Very interesting thread. My late father's kavanagh, which was sent to a reputable gunsmith in uk , to get a full overhaul/ service.  Barrels had slight pitting, so were"lapped out" therefore had to be sent for re proof. After re proof they were stamped 70mm. Barrels were originally 65mm . Would they have deepened chamber?  This was about 13 years ago when work was done. 

Yes they would have deepened the chambers. As said earlier, in those days proof loads were the same for 65mm and 70mm so it was a no brainer to re proof to 70mm to expand cartridge choice. I hope they asked him first though. Some people like things original despite the plus points. I normally give the customer the option. 

Nice to hear someone use the term "lapped out." A lot are honing these days. I am still in the dark ages. I use a lead lapper. Wouldn't swap it for anything. 

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, Fil said:

Nice to hear someone use the term "lapped out."

I have also heard the term "fine bore".  Is that the same thing, or is that a bit more aggressive'.

[Krico woodcock]

6 minutes ago, Fil said:

Yes they would have deepened the chambers. As said earlier, in those days proof loads were the same for 65mm and 70mm so it was a no brainer to re proof to 70mm to expand cartridge choice. I hope they asked him first though. Some people like things original despite the plus points. I normally give the customer the option. 

Nice to hear someone use the term "lapped out." A lot are honing these days. I am still in the dark ages. I use a lead lapper. Wouldn't swap it for anything. 

Thank you for your response Fil. Yes I think he was well consulted at the time the work was being done.  And in my humble opinion, the work done was to a very high standard..  

[Fil]

7 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I have also heard the term "fine bore".  Is that the same thing, or is that a bit more aggressive'.

Hi John. Yes that term was used a lot years ago. We used rough emery grit like 80 grade for boring of the barrels and a fine grit, say 220 or even higher for a "fine bore." I can't speak for all the "lappers" out there but I don't think many use fine grade grit anymore. 80 grit leaves a very high finish if you have your lead lap working well. And with quality of emery cloth these days I have a polishing rod with ribbons of 320 grade on it to fine polish the bores say during a service or after a re black. Saves getting emery paste all over you again. Nightmare to scrub off!

[JohnfromUK]

Just now, Fil said:

Hi John. Yes that term was used a lot years ago. We used rough emery grit like 80 grade for boring of the barrels and a fine grit, say 220 or even higher for a "fine bore." I can't speak for all the "lappers" out there but I don't think many use fine grade grit anymore. 80 grit leaves a very high finish if you have your lead lap working well. And with quality of emery cloth these days I have a polishing rod with ribbons of 320 grade on it to fine polish the bores say during a service or after a re black. Saves getting emery paste all over you again. Nightmare to scrub off!

Thank you.  I may well have come across the term in an old book (I have shelves full!).

[retromlc]

@London Best

Thanks for your dismissive comment

Fact is you don't know why it was bored out.

Consider this perhaps

If the original barrels were 28" and he decided to have 30" fitted

And for easy maths say each barrel weighs 500grm

And the barrel is 3mm thick(for the maths)

500gm divided by 30 to get the weight per 10th of a mm, is 16.6grm per 10th

 By back boring from 18.5 to 18.7 that's 2 tenths off the weight of the barrels, that is 66.6 grams of weight removed.

If you accept the above then take 30" barrels, each inch of each tube weights 16.6 grams and there are 4" of extra tube with a 30" barrel over a 28" barrel, by  boring out the barrels you could reduce the weight to the original 28" barrels .

The other reason to Back bore is to reduce felt recoil.

Fact is you don't know why it was done , but thanks for your constructive comments.

[Fil]

1 hour ago, retromlc said:

@London Best

Thanks for your dismissive comment

Fact is you don't know why it was bored out.

Consider this perhaps

If the original barrels were 28" and he decided to have 30" fitted

And for easy maths say each barrel weighs 500grm

And the barrel is 3mm thick(for the maths)

500gm divided by 30 to get the weight per 10th of a mm, is 16.6grm per 10th

 By back boring from 18.5 to 18.7 that's 2 tenths off the weight of the barrels, that is 66.6 grams of weight removed.

If you accept the above then take 30" barrels, each inch of each tube weights 16.6 grams and there are 4" of extra tube with a 30" barrel over a 28" barrel, by  boring out the barrels you could reduce the weight to the original 28" barrels .

The other reason to Back bore is to reduce felt recoil.

Fact is you don't know why it was done , but thanks for your constructive comments.

I like your maths but normally when barrels are filed for weight we'd take it of the outside in the first place when they are single tubes. Much quicker. But your theory is still possible. I'm an 80's trained barrel maker. Different times now, different minds and different methods in some folk. Perhaps the weight was an afterthought and instead of taking the barrels apart and filing down the thought then was, no we'll just bore the hell out of it to make it lighter. It's unconventional in my time but still a possibility an as we see here, doable. 

Sorry to drag this thread on and somewhat away from the OP but when you get me talking about barrel making sometimes I can't shut up. 

Anyway

Cheers

Edited December 31, 2023 by Fil
Shpelling

[London Best]

1 hour ago, Fil said:

when you get me talking about barrel making sometimes I can't shut up. 

 

Keep talking!

You’re the one who knows what he is talking about.

[JR111]

7 hours ago, London Best said:

Keep talking!

You’re the one who knows what he is talking about.

Agreed. As a relatively young English s/s fan (40), I know I could listen to you talk about your trade for hours on end. It's refreshing to listen to the likes of Simon Reinhold talking about the craftsmanship of proper skilled gunmakers, which I'm sure you were. As Reinhold always said, " guns were made to a standard, not a price"

I'm sure this has been posted a number of times, but here is a very good link to Purdey gun making. Obviously it is Purdey based, however it shows a modern old school barrel making viewpoint

I would love to have seen the gun making ability of gunsmiths of the 1900era. The number of time served gunsmiths will never be matched. @Filkeep sharing your knowledge. I for one will always be happy to hear your opinion 

Ps going back to my original OP, I still feel £6k is good for workmanship of this quality. 
 

 

Edited January 1 by JR111

[retromlc]

Yes ,listening to a barrel maker doesn't happen often enough. I'm sure what you have forgotten about your trade exceeds the knowledge that some people claim they have .

Edited January 1 by retromlc

[millrace]

Lads, one of the best reading topics ive went through in ages,some clearly very knowledgeable people here explaining in a very simple manor, fair play!!

[Gunman]

I've followed this thread with some interest .I know "Fil" and respect his opinions and I am not going to get into the whole debate except to say that that the reason the gun was bored up can be may be any one of several things .

But as my own long standing gun trade experiences have shown > We may never know <!

[enfieldspares]

On 30/12/2023 at 18:01, JR111 said:

Like you I get a lot asking what cartridges I'm using to reach the high birds. 30grm 6s Purdey paper case and 29 grm 5.5 Gamebore grouse extreme. They are all using cartridges, which in my opinion are far too heavy. I think people are now compensating for lack of ability with more lead in the air. As I keep telling them, shot pattern is king over anything else. 

The man on the peg next to me was using Hull High Pheasant Extreme 34 gram #4. And there was I with my Henry Clarke, improved and improved in both barrels, of Leicester (my late father's gun he had on his twelfth birthday in 1919) using 28 grams RC Professional Game Italian #7 which is English #6 1/2. And not a bird on the day shot by anybody over thirty-five yards range. Go figure! Best shot I ever saw used a Purdey bore TRUE right and IMPROVED left and one ounce of Hull paper case English #7.

[enfieldspares]

On 01/01/2024 at 03:31, JR111 said:

As Reinhold always said, " guns were made to a standard, not a price"

Totally wrong I am afraid. Years ago when they were sold off I had access to the Webley registers, day books and etc.. The whole lot as I was a friend of the man who bought them and had them. There were pages and pages of guns for other supposed "gunmakers" and the comments made by Webley.

What was striking were the number of guns especially for William Evans that were listed as "engraved as 1st" with a proceed linked note telling its actual "grade". The most telling that I still recall were two. One for G E Lewis being "All future transactions in cash....no further credit" and for William Evans a pair of sidelocks with the annotation "7th grade...to be engraved and finished as 1st".

My late father's own Henry Clarke is an absolutely plain action with the only engraving being the name and then a fine lining on the edges such as you might see on a railway locomotive's tender. You'll see the exact same Birmingham trade action sold by other provincial makers quarter engraved or half engraved. But the action is the same. Built to a price indeed!

Edited January 3 by enfieldspares

[London Best]

4 minutes ago, enfieldspares said:

The man on the peg next to me was using Hull High Pheasant Extreme 34 gram #4. And there was I with my Henry Clarke, improved and improved in both barrels, of Leicester (my late father's gun he had on his twelfth birthday in 1919) using 28 grams RC Professional Game Italian #7 which is English #6 1/2. And not a bird on the day shot by anybody over thirty-five yards range. Go figure! Best shot I ever saw used a Purdey bore TRUE right and IMPROVED left and one ounce of Hull paper case English #7.

I am definitely on your side with this one! 
I have seen people use that exact same heavy load to shoot traditional flat land partridges over hedges. No doubt with ridiculously tight chokes as well. And yet I find 28 grams of No.6 or 7 work perfectly well through an imp cyl against Welsh pheasants.  
Many folk really do have little idea.

[Dave at kelton]

5 minutes ago, London Best said:

I am definitely on your side with this one! 
I have seen people use that exact same heavy load to shoot traditional flat land partridges over hedges. No doubt with ridiculously tight chokes as well. And yet I find 28 grams of No.6 or 7 work perfectly well through an imp cyl against Welsh pheasants.  
Many folk really do have little idea.

I would like to be a little more charitable and say that people really have no experience of what a lightly bored gun and 28gm cartridge can do. They have never patterned a gun with little choke and a light load out at 40 yds. They have been seduced by the cartridge manufacturers hype and what they have heard. Light chokes are for skeet, which they don’t shoot, so those choke tubes stay in the box and many fixed choke guns are tightly choked and never altered.

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, Dave at kelton said:

They have never patterned a gun with little choke and a light load out at 40 yds.

I suspect the above is more accurate

1 minute ago, Dave at kelton said:

many fixed choke guns are tightly choked and never altered.

My 'modern' game guns (AyA, Beretta) came (as factory standard game models) with either 1/4 and 1/2 or 1/4 both barrels.

[Fil]

39 minutes ago, London Best said:

I am definitely on your side with this one! 
I have seen people use that exact same heavy load to shoot traditional flat land partridges over hedges. No doubt with ridiculously tight chokes as well. And yet I find 28 grams of No.6 or 7 work perfectly well through an imp cyl against Welsh pheasants.  
Many folk really do have little idea.

Me too. 28g 6's Impax for me on both. My Coggie Extra Quality Victor has imp/cyl - 1/4 choke and brings them down no problem. Dead I should say too. I also have a H. Clarke Leicester with F/A & 1/2. Brought good pheasant down with that and getting questions from fellow pegs... "What cartridges are you using?"  

36 minutes ago, Dave at kelton said:

I would like to be a little more charitable and say that people really have no experience of what a lightly bored gun and 28gm cartridge can do. They have never patterned a gun with little choke and a light load out at 40 yds. They have been seduced by the cartridge manufacturers hype and what they have heard. Light chokes are for skeet, which they don’t shoot, so those choke tubes stay in the box and many fixed choke guns are tightly choked and never altered.

👍 Totally

[JR111]

4 hours ago, enfieldspares said:

Totally wrong I am afraid. Years ago when they were sold off I had access to the Webley registers, day books and etc.. The whole lot as I was a friend of the man who bought them and had them. There were pages and pages of guns for other supposed "gunmakers" and the comments made by Webley.

What was striking were the number of guns especially for William Evans that were listed as "engraved as 1st" with a proceed linked note telling its actual "grade". The most telling that I still recall were two. One for G E Lewis being "All future transactions in cash....no further credit" and for William Evans a pair of sidelocks with the annotation "7th grade...to be engraved and finished as 1st".

My late father's own Henry Clarke is an absolutely plain action with the only engraving being the name and then a fine lining on the edges such as you might see on a railway locomotive's tender. You'll see the exact same Birmingham trade action sold by other provincial makers quarter engraved or half engraved. But the action is the same. Built to a price indeed!

Sorry, I should have been clearer. I'm aware that Webley and Scott made a huge number of guns for London gun makers, however, other than the likes of W Evans. They were never intended to be true "best" guns. Purdey's, Hollands used Webley due to the vast numbers of guns they required for the London showrooms. The quality was not "best". 
 

I have seen Webley shotguns which were marked up as Hollands on the barrels. These are still considerably more expensive just because of the name!

I still believe that true London "best" guns were made to a standard. Yes, a price for variations, but still timed served gunsmiths making them. 
 

I believe that W Evans had a great working relation with Webley. I believe ( might be wrong) that they could make any model of W Evans shotgun to their desired quality. The guns would be marked as William Evans on the action and ribs. 
 

Webley made some great guns and I think the 700 series are a great buy if you are looking for an older s/s. 
 

one of my favourite guns is a single barrel 12 bore hammer gun by Wembley and Scott. This was my first shotgun at the age of 11 that my father let me used. The barrel on the gun is immaculate and due to the thickness, I'm sure it will still be around in 1000 years!!

[JR111]

5 hours ago, enfieldspares said:

The man on the peg next to me was using Hull High Pheasant Extreme 34 gram #4. And there was I with my Henry Clarke, improved and improved in both barrels, of Leicester (my late father's gun he had on his twelfth birthday in 1919) using 28 grams RC Professional Game Italian #7 which is English #6 1/2. And not a bird on the day shot by anybody over thirty-five yards range. Go figure! Best shot I ever saw used a Purdey bore TRUE right and IMPROVED left and one ounce of Hull paper case English #7.

It is crazy what people are using these days. I actually get quite ****** off as some of the birds are almost usable. On my last shoot, ( very similar to what you said), a young gun was using 36g #4's. Average bird was 30-40 yards with a few at 50. ( very few!)

Not surprisingly, he had no interest in taking any birds. Something else that ****** me off!

With my last few shoots coming up I will be using 30g #6 and if a high drive might drop to a #5. Bit like I previously said, pattern is king!