Bought the dream rifle, or bought the farm, today.

Some people are going to take this the wrong way I know, but I think the German and other continental makers strike a better balance between technology and hand work.

Does a stock need to be spoke-shaved and rasped from a blank, rather than milled on a CNC router and then finished and checkered by hand? Is lock inletting better when it is hand chiseled rather than precisely machined and THEN hand-fitted? Do any of these makers have a try-gun with digital outputs??

The best CNC mills have accuracy that hand filing can never equal, lamp black or no lamp black.

This is one reason why there are so many firearms makers on the Continent producing not only very high quality, but very competitively priced and technologically innovative firearms and making good money doing it. Making guns in exactly the way they were made in the 19th Century is waste of time and money, but when your market is that niche which not only can afford to pay those prices, but takes pleasure in the exclusivity of doing so(!), then you can afford to waste that time and money, but you will never be anything but a niche builder. A bit like Morgan Cars being proud of their antiquated methods and having a 5 or more year waiting list; nothing to be proud of at all!

Guns were built this way in the past because it was the only way they could be built, but most of the businessmen of the 19th century would have embraced the technology we have today in a heartbeat if it had been available then.

Tangental to this thread, but the video reminded me of it.
 
There was an only way to hand made violins and pianos out of wood, and nothing could repeat that sound. Now you can produce sounds digitally with better accuracy and consistency on a $3 chip of silicon. Does that mean that no violins should be hand made anymore?

There are plenty of savage axis and mossberg atrs in the world. Technology and progress are in no danger, don't worry. Quality traditional craftsmanship on the other hand is timeless.
 
RRCo. said:
Some people are going to take this the wrong way I know, but I think the German and other continental makers strike a better balance between technology and hand work.

Does a stock need to be spoke-shaved and rasped from a blank, rather than milled on a CNC router and then finished and checkered by hand? Is lock inletting better when it is hand chiseled rather than precisely machined and THEN hand-fitted? Do any of these makers have a try-gun with digital outputs??

The best CNC mills have accuracy that hand filing can never equal, lamp black or no lamp black.

This is one reason why there are so many firearms makers on the Continent producing not only very high quality, but very competitively priced and technologically innovative firearms and making good money doing it. Making guns in exactly the way they were made in the 19th Century is waste of time and money, but when your market is that niche which not only can afford to pay those prices, but takes pleasure in the exclusivity of doing so(!), then you can afford to waste that time and money, but you will never be anything but a niche builder. A bit like Morgan Cars being proud of their antiquated methods and having a 5 or more year waiting list; nothing to be proud of at all!

Guns were built this way in the past because it was the only way they could be built, but most of the businessmen of the 19th century would have embraced the technology we have today in a heartbeat if it had been available then.

Tangental to this thread, but the video reminded me of it.
Click to expand...

The car analogy is good here. A Toyota Camry is probably a more reliable car than a Ferrari. Does that make it better?
 
RRCo. said:
Some people are going to take this the wrong way I know, but I think the German and other continental makers strike a better balance between technology and hand work.

Does a stock need to be spoke-shaved and rasped from a blank, rather than milled on a CNC router and then finished and checkered by hand? Is lock inletting better when it is hand chiseled rather than precisely machined and THEN hand-fitted? Do any of these makers have a try-gun with digital outputs??

The best CNC mills have accuracy that hand filing can never equal, lamp black or no lamp black.

This is one reason why there are so many firearms makers on the Continent producing not only very high quality, but very competitively priced and technologically innovative firearms and making good money doing it. Making guns in exactly the way they were made in the 19th Century is waste of time and money, but when your market is that niche which not only can afford to pay those prices, but takes pleasure in the exclusivity of doing so(!), then you can afford to waste that time and money, but you will never be anything but a niche builder. A bit like Morgan Cars being proud of their antiquated methods and having a 5 or more year waiting list; nothing to be proud of at all!

Guns were built this way in the past because it was the only way they could be built, but most of the businessmen of the 19th century would have embraced the technology we have today in a heartbeat if it had been available then.

Tangental to this thread, but the video reminded me of it.
Click to expand...

All opinions appreciated, even those that scratch their heads at the cost of rifles made this way, and I can honestly see the point to a degree. I own and use a Merkel double rifle after all, and have written about it a good deal. However, what you're arguing for in my eyes is the demise of a culture, set of skills, and traditions nearly extinct in the modern world. It's no different than preserving cultural, military, or family traditions in a world where they no longer serve an analytically supported purpose, or preserving a language on the edge of extinction when it doesn't have a place in the modern world. To those of us who appreciate the old ways, and talents, these are art. Art is seldom produced by machines, at least none I appreciate. A Holland & Holland Royal or anything of its class is not just a gun, it is a painstaking art, not merely some eccentric paint on canvas painted in thirty brush strokes and 40 days of staring at the canvas, but up to a year start to finish of hand stroked files, chisels, brushed by torches, ultimately coming out with lines and a style only the best computer in the world can conceive; the human brain. This Royal to me is foremost the best piece of art I'll ever own, and the most useful too, it will accompany me in Africa, the North, and who knows where else we'll find. I must admit, while I own a classic car it is not a Morgan, but I do very much appreciate Morgans as well. Anything that bucks the trend of automation, labour reduction, mass production cookie cut products is interesting to me. I also do woodwork, and I do it for the very reason it allows me to escape the automation and corner cutting of most of my life and job. There's something beautiful in that, and that is why so many of us sigh and smile warmly at the video, or when holding a truly hand made masterpiece of a firearm. I do not feel that means we've caved to image and marketing, I believe it is quite the opposite.
 
Ardent said:
All opinions appreciated, even those that scratch their heads at the cost of rifles made this way, and I can honestly see the point to a degree. I own and use a Merkel double rifle after all, and have written about it a good deal. However, what you're arguing for in my eyes is the demise of a culture, set of skills, and traditions nearly extinct in the modern world. It's no different than preserving cultural, military, or family traditions in a world where they no longer serve an analytically supported purpose, or preserving a language on the edge of extinction when it doesn't have a place in the modern world. To those of us who appreciate the old ways, and talents, these are art. Art is seldom produced by machines, at least none I appreciate. A Holland & Holland Royal or anything of its class is not just a gun, it is a painstaking art, not merely some eccentric paint on canvas painted in thirty brush strokes and 40 days of staring at the canvas, but up to a year start to finish of hand stroked files, chisels, brushed by torches, ultimately coming out with lines and a style only the best computer in the world can conceive; the human brain. This Royal to me is foremost the best piece of art I'll ever own, and the most useful too, it will accompany me in Africa, the North, and who knows where else we'll find. I must admit, while I own a classic car it is not a Morgan, but I do very much appreciate Morgans as well. Anything that bucks the trend of automation, labour reduction, mass production cookie cut products is interesting to me. I also do woodwork, and I do it for the very reason it allows me to escape the automation and corner cutting of most of my life and job. There's something beautiful in that, and that is why so many of us sigh and smile warmly at the video, or when holding a truly hand made masterpiece of a firearm. I do not feel that means we've caved to image and marketing, I believe it is quite the opposite.
Click to expand...
AGREED!!

(although when you started to bring British cars into it .. I was getting a little bit apprehensive....owned too many - from Lotus to Sunbeam Alpines - to know what evil is really lurking under their hoods!)
 
Different strokes for different folks, it's all what each individual wants. Some people just want a usable tool and others look at it like a piece of art, as is the case with this rifle.
I can appreciate the craftsmanship that goes into this firearm, though I would personally never own one as it's not my cup of tea and completely unsuitable for my needs, but that's immaterial.

Most would probably be surprised to find out that many of the individuals who make the individual portions of these guns are neither interested in hunting nor firearms a great deal. They're artists.
 
Ardent said:
Ahhhh diabolical Lucas electrics... Not another thread, but another book entirely. Mostly angry. I'm about to undertake tuning and syncronisation, and have just acquired the components of a quad-Weber manifold for a 289... I'll have plenty of curses to share.
Click to expand...

The last 289 I drove that impressed me was a '65 Comet (cant recall if it was a Caliente or Cyclone) with 289 4 barrel ... they were pretty quick from a light and held you tight against the seat. Didnt know there was a quad weber manifold .. presume 4x 2 barrel? .. pretty neat!

(but the Sunbeam Tiger with the 289 was no slouch!!)
 
Last edited:
Perhaps one day there will no longer be artisans building firearms like in the Holland & Holland video, and on that day we shall all weep.



RRCo. said:
Some people are going to take this the wrong way I know, but I think the German and other continental makers strike a better balance between technology and hand work.

Does a stock need to be spoke-shaved and rasped from a blank, rather than milled on a CNC router and then finished and checkered by hand? Is lock inletting better when it is hand chiseled rather than precisely machined and THEN hand-fitted? Do any of these makers have a try-gun with digital outputs??

The best CNC mills have accuracy that hand filing can never equal, lamp black or no lamp black.

This is one reason why there are so many firearms makers on the Continent producing not only very high quality, but very competitively priced and technologically innovative firearms and making good money doing it. Making guns in exactly the way they were made in the 19th Century is waste of time and money, but when your market is that niche which not only can afford to pay those prices, but takes pleasure in the exclusivity of doing so(!), then you can afford to waste that time and money, but you will never be anything but a niche builder. A bit like Morgan Cars being proud of their antiquated methods and having a 5 or more year waiting list; nothing to be proud of at all!

Guns were built this way in the past because it was the only way they could be built, but most of the businessmen of the 19th century would have embraced the technology we have today in a heartbeat if it had been available then.

Tangental to this thread, but the video reminded me of it.
Click to expand...
 
AP said:
The last 289 I drove that impressed me was a '65 Comet (cant recall if it was a Caliente or Cyclone) with 289 4 barrel ... they were pretty quick from a light and held you tight against the seat. Didnt know there was a quad weber manifold .. presume 4x 2 barrel? .. pretty neat!

(but the Sunbeam Tiger with the 289 was no slouch!!)
Click to expand...

Forgive my own temporary hijack folks, yep four 48IDAs, each intake runner has its own carb barrel. In race trim they'll pump out up to 500hp at over 7,000rpm. Not very street friendly by that point though, and nothing internal is stock anymore at that point.

 
Ardent said:
Forgive my own temporary hijack folks, yep four 48IDAs, each intake runner has its own carb barrel. In race trim they'll pump out up to 500hp at over 7,000rpm. Not very street friendly by that point though, and nothing internal is stock anymore at that point.

Click to expand...

:):d
 
Ardent said:
Forgive my own temporary hijack folks, yep four 48IDAs, each intake runner has its own carb barrel. In race trim they'll pump out up to 500hp at over 7,000rpm. Not very street friendly by that point though, and nothing internal is stock anymore at that point.

Click to expand...
and here is a modern take of it on a Nascar engine with AWD

 
Ardent said:
Ahhhh diabolical Lucas electrics... Not another thread, but another book entirely. Mostly angry. I'm about to undertake tuning and syncronisation, and have just acquired the components of a quad-Weber manifold for a 289... I'll have plenty of curses to share.
Click to expand...

What is this going on? Are you using an old school block or something more modern? Mechanical cam I assume - unless you are going with a high end roller setup. What about heads? As much as I like the old stuff - my friend has a fantastic '67 Belvedere with a factory 426 race hemi, one of about 50 ever made - they can be a PITA. As I am sure you will find out. ;)
 
Been wrenching a long time and through a few motors and builds, I enjoy the tinkering. I'd sooner take a classic motor than a new one for a car you take to the track. Flat tappet, twisted wedge CNC 190s, will get the Webers up top, right now it runs a Holley intake and Edelbrock carb and is pretty much just a hot Hipo. Still the original block but all new internals except the rebalanced crank, I like the 289 block because they're almost as light as an aluminum 9.5 deck. Yep, they have a short life and crack down the valley when held at 450+hp for too long. I do want to go to an aluminum 9.5 and have a 427 Windsor (yep, small block, stroker) coming together in the shop that will likely replace it long term, just got a set of titanium rods in for it. After getting the Webers set up it's more about suspension and chassis and I'd like to put an independent rear end in. This is a whole other thread however, and you can spend a lot more on the track than the hunting field unfortunately. At least more easily.
 
1899 said:
What is this going on? Are you using an old school block or something more modern? Mechanical cam I assume - unless you are going with a high end roller setup. What about heads? As much as I like the old stuff - my friend has a fantastic '67 Belvedere with a factory 426 race hemi, one of about 50 ever made - they can be a PITA. As I am sure you will find out. ;)
Click to expand...

Really rare to have is the similar vintage Ford 4-cam 427 Hemi that an old bud had in a '70 Mustang. That thing ran great.
 
SHELL SHUCKER said:
Really rare to have is the similar vintage Ford 4-cam 427 Hemi that an old bud had in a '70 Mustang. That thing ran great.
Click to expand...

Think you mean the cammer, the overhead cam 427 that was banned by Nascar immediately, there were no quad cam 427s. $65,000 engine today for an original, and so much power potential it is absurd, base tune is 600hp, and they have no trouble making 800hp naturally aspirated. And on this note, I think we need another thread!
 
Brian46 said:
and here is a modern take of it on a Nascar engine with AWD
Click to expand...

I'd seen that, pretty ridiculous, it keeps getting shared as a Nascar engine, but it's actually meaner than a Nascar engine with 410 cubes instead of 358. Same HP, but more torque. My boy lets me drive his '67 fastback from time to time, and it's nowhere near that wild, but still very, very quick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom