Husqvarna Model 300, made in 1912 in Sweden by Husqvarna ( the original). FAIR is a large company, they make guns for many firearms companies and retailers, branded to sell under their own names. They produce fine guns in many variations and grades, comparable to B Rizzini, etc. their over/under production is built on the generic trunnion hinge/underlug action that is used by nearly all mainstream Italian producers today except Beretta. This Husqvarna 1400 would be intended for the Scandinavian market, in particular Sweden and is likely readily available there, never likely to be retailed in Canada or US.
Let's see some pic's of your SxS's & O/U's
- Thread starter Win/64
- Start date
Husqvarna Model 300, made in 1912 in Sweden by Husqvarna ( the original). FAIR is a large company, they make guns for many firearms companies and retailers, branded to sell under their own names. They produce fine guns in many variations and grades, comparable to B Rizzini, etc. their over/under production is built on the generic trunnion hinge/underlug action that is used by nearly all mainstream Italian producers today except Beretta. This Husqvarna 1400 would be intended for the Scandinavian market, in particular Sweden and is likely readily available there, never likely to be retailed in Canada or US.
An exciting project. Will look forward to seeing the final results.
Well you’ve had a peek Reddog but you might still be surprised by some of the things at the back of my safe. The collection is shrinking in numbers now but increasing in quality. And just to make things more difficult for me I think I may have been infected by Pinfire.
I certainly think it is.
A good pin-fire double rifle by Westley Richards would fit nicely in your collection, I think. Of course, finding one is the challenge...
Wouldn’t that be something? There may not be something like that in this country. Being slightly more realistic, any Westley Richards double rifle would satisfy me - for awhile. The holy grail at present is a Westley Richards Best Quality double .450/3 1/4, preferably with detachable locks to match my D/L shotguns, cased of course.
Years ago I was offered a Westley Richards Ovundo in 12 gauge, nice condition, and cased. I turned it down as it had fixed locks and I wanted a drop lock. In hind sight, I missed a great opportunity.
I've never seen a WR double rifle in Canada. Back in the 80's I used to go to the January Las Vegas gun show and there were incredible guns and rifles. Never did buy a gun there but it was a great place to look and learn about doubles. I used to go during slow times, like early Sunday morning, and dealers and collectors loved to share their knowledge.
I've never seen a WR double rifle in Canada. Back in the 80's I used to go to the January Las Vegas gun show and there were incredible guns and rifles. Never did buy a gun there but it was a great place to look and learn about doubles. I used to go during slow times, like early Sunday morning, and dealers and collectors loved to share their knowledge.
As is often seen in the firearms industry, the name on the gun often doesn’t reflect the talented craftsmen, the array of companies, or progression of ownership of the brand that resulted in the gun/label. This gun is an American example of just such a contorted heritage.
The gun’s grandfather was designed and built by the Elon Musk of the 20th century – Ainsley H. Fox. Like his modern contemporary, he was a character. He not only designed and built “best” guns, but automobiles, too. The gun below must have inherited it’s mother’s genes because it didn’t inherit much from an A.H. Fox.
It’s father was a portly fellow known as the Fox Model B. By this time, the Fox brand was owned by Savage. You could already see the divergence from the A.H. Fox lineage, as the Fox B was built on the Savage 311 design with only cosmetic changes. One of those was the distinctive Fox frame “cheeks”.
This brings us to the current generation – the Savage Fox A Grade. Once again, this generation bears little resemblance to any that came before. This time the conglomerate that now owns the Savage brand and with it the Fox brand has licensed the production to the Connecticut Shotgun Manufacturing Company (CSMC). CSMC is already producing A.H. Fox guns from the original patterns, as well as highest quality versions of Winchester Model 21, Parker Bros., and more.
CSMC also produces their own design, the Round Box Lock, or RBL. The Savage Fox A Grade is, for all intents and purposes, an RBL. Like the Savage Fox Model B, it has the iconic Fox cheeks.
The concept was not popular with Americans, even though they were already buying basically the same gun for $1000USD more. As a result, relatively few have been made. They are, however, still available directly from CSMC (they show 4 on their site, all in 12 ga.).
I was in the market for a 20 ga side-by-side with a rounded frame. It had to have double triggers, a straight stock, and a splinter fore end. Aesthetically, I prefer colour case hardened receivers, blued barrels, nicely figured walnut stocks, and either colour case hardened or blued furniture. This gun checked all the boxes and is just as quirky as it’s new owner. Look out pheasant, here we come!
The gun’s grandfather was designed and built by the Elon Musk of the 20th century – Ainsley H. Fox. Like his modern contemporary, he was a character. He not only designed and built “best” guns, but automobiles, too. The gun below must have inherited it’s mother’s genes because it didn’t inherit much from an A.H. Fox.
It’s father was a portly fellow known as the Fox Model B. By this time, the Fox brand was owned by Savage. You could already see the divergence from the A.H. Fox lineage, as the Fox B was built on the Savage 311 design with only cosmetic changes. One of those was the distinctive Fox frame “cheeks”.
This brings us to the current generation – the Savage Fox A Grade. Once again, this generation bears little resemblance to any that came before. This time the conglomerate that now owns the Savage brand and with it the Fox brand has licensed the production to the Connecticut Shotgun Manufacturing Company (CSMC). CSMC is already producing A.H. Fox guns from the original patterns, as well as highest quality versions of Winchester Model 21, Parker Bros., and more.
CSMC also produces their own design, the Round Box Lock, or RBL. The Savage Fox A Grade is, for all intents and purposes, an RBL. Like the Savage Fox Model B, it has the iconic Fox cheeks.
The concept was not popular with Americans, even though they were already buying basically the same gun for $1000USD more. As a result, relatively few have been made. They are, however, still available directly from CSMC (they show 4 on their site, all in 12 ga.).
I was in the market for a 20 ga side-by-side with a rounded frame. It had to have double triggers, a straight stock, and a splinter fore end. Aesthetically, I prefer colour case hardened receivers, blued barrels, nicely figured walnut stocks, and either colour case hardened or blued furniture. This gun checked all the boxes and is just as quirky as it’s new owner. Look out pheasant, here we come!
Attachments
Falconflyer
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Awesome looking 20 g starightshooer!
All Victorian sporting guns carry with them several stories, with some more easily deciphered than others. There is usually a name on the gun, possibly the maker or at least the retailer; secondary marks and proofs that might help identify individual craftsmen or assist with narrowing a date; and perhaps proprietary features that can enrich the narrative and add to the gun's historical significance. It gets complicated when the usual clues aren't there, or are confusing.
The gunmakers were businessmen, and their businesses had their ups and downs, and not all were successful. The economics of gun-building was complex, and wealthy patrons were not always the best at paying their bills on time. Credit was the norm, though skilled workmen had to be paid – a situation frequently leading to bankruptcies. Some found ways to cut corners, a risky approach regarding safety and reputation in an otherwise rigid and highly regulated industry. On the surface, this single-barrel pin-fire gun signed "H. W. Whaley, Strood, Kent" is a fine-looking gun that has undergone period repairs and perhaps more recent restorative work. Any pin-fire single is worthy of note. These were guns ordered for a specific purpose, as their cost was not far different from the more usual double-barrelled configuration. They were not the entry-level or beginner guns that most single-shots are today. The dimensions are for a person of typical stature, and the level of decoration is in keeping with a quality gun of provincial make (Strood is a small town about 40km east of London). The action is the design of Robert Adams of London (the inventor of the Adams revolver), and the inert under-lever mechanism shown here is his patent No. 285 of 1860. In a letter to the weekly sporting paper The Field dated 6 February 1864, Adams stated his guns were "my own patent, made on my own premises, and under my own supervision," when challenged about the origins of his pieces, clearly establishing his 76 King William-street workshop as the sole builder and purveyor of his patent action.
I expected to find an Adams patent mark or at the least a patent-use number on the action, should Adams have licensed others to make or use his action, so I was surprised to find no markings of any kind, not even provisional proofs. The story got darker, finding no proof marks on the barrel, only a bore stamp (15). The 28 1/16-inch barrel is of twist construction and is partially half-16-sided to half-8-sided towards the breech, suggesting it was repurposed from a muzzle-loader; the chamber is bored for the 14-gauge pin-fire cartridge. Whatever marks might have been on the original barrel were gone, and once rebuilt, it was never submitted for proof to the London or Birmingham Proof House, a grave offence under the Gun Barrel Proof Act of 1855. Adams was not unaware of the risks of avoiding the proof house: in February of 1860, he was fined £10 for having sold a rifle whose barrel lacked proofs, claiming in court he had sent it out "by mistake." He subsequently had to recall twenty rifles, to avoid paying additional fines of £20 for each one. One can assume he did not want further risk to his finances and reputation.
Had Mr. Adams not made the action, could the provincial gun maker have made it? With no way to date the gun, it possibly was made after the Adams patent lapsed. However, there would have been far easier and more robust designs to copy by such time than the Adams. Other than the barrel, the gun shows no sign of being any sort of conversion. The Adams action was popular in the early 1860s until it was largely displaced by the Henry Jones double-bite screw-grip, which could be built royalty-free after that patent expired at the end of 1862. Adams's guns under this patent were of the bar-in-wood type, hiding a narrow action bar and the hinge beneath the woodwork. Making any bar-in-wood gun is not for the faint of heart – the fit of metal and wood has to be perfect, and this is the only bar-in-wood single-barrel pin-fire gun I've ever come across, in hand or in print. Once again, it's not an entry-level knockabout gun. The lock is called an "island lock," surrounded by wood, a pattern used to great renown by James Purdey. Very little metalwork is apparent, giving it the look of a fine muzzle-loading gun.
The name and address on the gun, Henry Watson Whaley of Strood, Kent, offers another avenue to the investigation. He was born in Lynn, Norfolk, around 1805. His father, John, was born in 1781 and was a gunmaker by trade, and Henry likely apprenticed under him. John Whaley & Son traded in High Street, Strood, starting in 1831. Henry married in 1834, but happiness was replaced with trouble in the business. In June 1839, the company was dissolved, with both the father and son being sued and ending up in the notorious Marshalsea debtors prison that year. Around 1844, Henry resumed the business under his name at 46 High Street. There must have been a severe falling-out between Henry and his father, as on 13 November 1849, he took out an advertisement in the South Eastern Gazette announcing "that John Whaley, Sen., his father, has left him, and has no connection whatsoever with his business, and that the said John Whaley, Sen., is not authorized to receive any money or take orders on account of Henry Watson Whaley, from this date." Nothing much else is known about the business. Henry died in 1881, and the business was continued by Edward Palmer until around 1894.
Unfortunately, there is no way of knowing if Robert Adams's workshop made the action, or if it was made under licence (or not) by Henry Watson Whaley at the High Street address. From the possibly repurposed barrel, I presume it was fitted and the gun assembled by Whaley; the special-order nature of the gun might help explain why the action and barrel were never proofed, being a one-off order, perhaps made under time pressure. In any case, it is fine work and aesthetically pleasing for what was legally a counterfeit gun! 14 gauge was popular then, and the single barrel and bar-in-wood construction made for a light gun at 5 pounds 10 ounces. The silver shield stock escutcheon is unmarked, leaving no clue as to the original owner; the gun is unnumbered, which is not unusual for a gunmaker producing a minimal number of guns in a year, and in any case, no Whaley records have survived. The period repair, an inletted pinned metal strap straddling the hand and comb, shows that someone wanted to keep the gun in the field despite a broken stock, perhaps sometime after the pin-fire system was out of fashion. Two other repairs, filler added around the lock and a possibly replaced fore-end tip of darkly-stained wood instead of horn, suggest later amateur repairs or restoration work of a lower quality, perhaps when the gun was relegated to wall-hanger status. Despite these minor blemishes, the gun is interesting, unusual, and storied. The stock is nicely figured, and the flat-top chequering is well executed. Exactly who made the gun cannot be determined; so is the reason for its construction or why it escaped the proof house. Few Whaley-marked arms of any type (by father or son) have surfaced, so it is impossible to know if it was typical in build or quality. Perhaps something will turn up that will help fill out the story.
The gunmakers were businessmen, and their businesses had their ups and downs, and not all were successful. The economics of gun-building was complex, and wealthy patrons were not always the best at paying their bills on time. Credit was the norm, though skilled workmen had to be paid – a situation frequently leading to bankruptcies. Some found ways to cut corners, a risky approach regarding safety and reputation in an otherwise rigid and highly regulated industry. On the surface, this single-barrel pin-fire gun signed "H. W. Whaley, Strood, Kent" is a fine-looking gun that has undergone period repairs and perhaps more recent restorative work. Any pin-fire single is worthy of note. These were guns ordered for a specific purpose, as their cost was not far different from the more usual double-barrelled configuration. They were not the entry-level or beginner guns that most single-shots are today. The dimensions are for a person of typical stature, and the level of decoration is in keeping with a quality gun of provincial make (Strood is a small town about 40km east of London). The action is the design of Robert Adams of London (the inventor of the Adams revolver), and the inert under-lever mechanism shown here is his patent No. 285 of 1860. In a letter to the weekly sporting paper The Field dated 6 February 1864, Adams stated his guns were "my own patent, made on my own premises, and under my own supervision," when challenged about the origins of his pieces, clearly establishing his 76 King William-street workshop as the sole builder and purveyor of his patent action.
I expected to find an Adams patent mark or at the least a patent-use number on the action, should Adams have licensed others to make or use his action, so I was surprised to find no markings of any kind, not even provisional proofs. The story got darker, finding no proof marks on the barrel, only a bore stamp (15). The 28 1/16-inch barrel is of twist construction and is partially half-16-sided to half-8-sided towards the breech, suggesting it was repurposed from a muzzle-loader; the chamber is bored for the 14-gauge pin-fire cartridge. Whatever marks might have been on the original barrel were gone, and once rebuilt, it was never submitted for proof to the London or Birmingham Proof House, a grave offence under the Gun Barrel Proof Act of 1855. Adams was not unaware of the risks of avoiding the proof house: in February of 1860, he was fined £10 for having sold a rifle whose barrel lacked proofs, claiming in court he had sent it out "by mistake." He subsequently had to recall twenty rifles, to avoid paying additional fines of £20 for each one. One can assume he did not want further risk to his finances and reputation.
Had Mr. Adams not made the action, could the provincial gun maker have made it? With no way to date the gun, it possibly was made after the Adams patent lapsed. However, there would have been far easier and more robust designs to copy by such time than the Adams. Other than the barrel, the gun shows no sign of being any sort of conversion. The Adams action was popular in the early 1860s until it was largely displaced by the Henry Jones double-bite screw-grip, which could be built royalty-free after that patent expired at the end of 1862. Adams's guns under this patent were of the bar-in-wood type, hiding a narrow action bar and the hinge beneath the woodwork. Making any bar-in-wood gun is not for the faint of heart – the fit of metal and wood has to be perfect, and this is the only bar-in-wood single-barrel pin-fire gun I've ever come across, in hand or in print. Once again, it's not an entry-level knockabout gun. The lock is called an "island lock," surrounded by wood, a pattern used to great renown by James Purdey. Very little metalwork is apparent, giving it the look of a fine muzzle-loading gun.
The name and address on the gun, Henry Watson Whaley of Strood, Kent, offers another avenue to the investigation. He was born in Lynn, Norfolk, around 1805. His father, John, was born in 1781 and was a gunmaker by trade, and Henry likely apprenticed under him. John Whaley & Son traded in High Street, Strood, starting in 1831. Henry married in 1834, but happiness was replaced with trouble in the business. In June 1839, the company was dissolved, with both the father and son being sued and ending up in the notorious Marshalsea debtors prison that year. Around 1844, Henry resumed the business under his name at 46 High Street. There must have been a severe falling-out between Henry and his father, as on 13 November 1849, he took out an advertisement in the South Eastern Gazette announcing "that John Whaley, Sen., his father, has left him, and has no connection whatsoever with his business, and that the said John Whaley, Sen., is not authorized to receive any money or take orders on account of Henry Watson Whaley, from this date." Nothing much else is known about the business. Henry died in 1881, and the business was continued by Edward Palmer until around 1894.
Unfortunately, there is no way of knowing if Robert Adams's workshop made the action, or if it was made under licence (or not) by Henry Watson Whaley at the High Street address. From the possibly repurposed barrel, I presume it was fitted and the gun assembled by Whaley; the special-order nature of the gun might help explain why the action and barrel were never proofed, being a one-off order, perhaps made under time pressure. In any case, it is fine work and aesthetically pleasing for what was legally a counterfeit gun! 14 gauge was popular then, and the single barrel and bar-in-wood construction made for a light gun at 5 pounds 10 ounces. The silver shield stock escutcheon is unmarked, leaving no clue as to the original owner; the gun is unnumbered, which is not unusual for a gunmaker producing a minimal number of guns in a year, and in any case, no Whaley records have survived. The period repair, an inletted pinned metal strap straddling the hand and comb, shows that someone wanted to keep the gun in the field despite a broken stock, perhaps sometime after the pin-fire system was out of fashion. Two other repairs, filler added around the lock and a possibly replaced fore-end tip of darkly-stained wood instead of horn, suggest later amateur repairs or restoration work of a lower quality, perhaps when the gun was relegated to wall-hanger status. Despite these minor blemishes, the gun is interesting, unusual, and storied. The stock is nicely figured, and the flat-top chequering is well executed. Exactly who made the gun cannot be determined; so is the reason for its construction or why it escaped the proof house. Few Whaley-marked arms of any type (by father or son) have surfaced, so it is impossible to know if it was typical in build or quality. Perhaps something will turn up that will help fill out the story.
Ah, the Book. I have been working on it for years now, and I still manage to put in an hour or two of research and writing most days -- the advantage of retirement. Social media allows me to tinker with sentences, bounce ideas, and make contact with knowledgeable souls. The Internet has made some forms of research easier, with the digitization of old books, newspapers etc.. However, there is still a lot of fog surrounding the earliest days of breech-loading shotguns in Britain and elsewhere in Europe. Every once in a while, a gun comes along that clarifies some things, while posing new questions. But I can say that I have gotten to the core of the story, and it differs from many published works, requiring me to be doubly sure of my research, and the need to depend on contemporary sources. I would like to finish the book this year. It will cover the history and social history of the pin-fire game gun in Britain, how it appeared and became accepted, how it formed the technical and aesthetic basis for the double gun as we know it, and how it disappeared -- all within a space of twenty years (a shorter period of time than I've spent researching them). It was, for a short period, the best and most desirable sporting gun in the world, though little-known and all but forgotten now. The book will examine in detail some 70 examples, which hopefully will be of interest to collectors and gun history enthusiasts.
Thanks for the kind words and encouragement.
sillymike
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Ah, the Book. I have been working on it for years now...
1) Keep us inform when the pre-sale is on!
2) While the nice screw head used to get my attention (impressive how it remained in such nice shape for it's age), my wandering mind just noticed that there is no metal showing between the action and the forend! Now I'd be curious to see underneath of the forend...
Bar-in-wood construction, where the hinge and much of what we call the action, is covered in wood, is a peculiar (and challenging) form of building breech-loaders that started with the pin-fire, and continued into the central-fire (as recent images of those beautiful Purdeys show). The fit of metal to wood has to be perfect, and the grain of the blank takes on an even greater importance, as that wood will be asked to absorb a lot of recoil. It is not uncommon to see splits, chips, or replaced sections, though the better makers used blanks that were drying for more than 70 years before being made into stocks. The eternal problem, you want beautiful marble-cake figure in the stock, while having ruler-straight grain where it will be inletted or take the strain. The advantage of the bar-in-wood is purely aesthetic, to make the break-action gun look like a muzzle-loader as closely as possible. Each maker building this type of gun had a slightly different approach, with some being better or sleeker than others. The best-looking ones removed the most metal, creating structural issues. In the early days of the breech-loader, the makers brave enough to make bar-in-wood guns were Robert Adams, Westley Richards (best known for their crab-knuckle joint), Joseph Needham, Thomas Horsley, William Powell, James Purdey, Parker, Field & Sons (the gun pictured), James Purdey, and some enterprising smaller makers -- no two are alike.
This one, by Parker, Field & Sons, has the partial snap-action rotary underlever action, for which John William Parker Field obtained patent No. 3485 of December 1862. The firm, who only made a handful of these, had the claim of being Queen Victoria's personal gunmaker. The firm is probably best known for its military contracts, having supplied arms to the Honourable East India Company, trade guns to the Hudson's Bay and North West Companies, and military Enfield muskets to both sides in the American Civil War. The firm had an even grimmer source of income, supplying wrist shackles and leg irons to the slave trade.
Here are two photos better showing the joint:
the spank
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Planet Earth Wearing My Tinfoil Hat
I received these pictures today. Chris has finished the restoration, reassembled the gun and will take it out this week and test fire it to make sure all is in order before shipping it.
I think he just wants to take it Ptarmigan hunting and I don't blame him.
I'll post clearer detailed pics once I have the gun back but these are good enough to see the beautiful job of rebluing and refinishing of the colour case hardening that was done.
The picture of the beads was to show the new hand turned beads Chris made to replace the old yellowed brittle originals.
The only thing left to do is the gold replating of the triggers. There wasn't time for Chris to find a source and return the gun in time to hunt with this season but at his suggestion I went with having him polish the triggers and leave them as is prepped for later completion. Chris said he may look into doing replating himself in the future and if so he will do them at that time. I'm sure that would be something he could easily accomplish and excel at given the man's talents.
I think he just wants to take it Ptarmigan hunting and I don't blame him.
I'll post clearer detailed pics once I have the gun back but these are good enough to see the beautiful job of rebluing and refinishing of the colour case hardening that was done.
The picture of the beads was to show the new hand turned beads Chris made to replace the old yellowed brittle originals.
The only thing left to do is the gold replating of the triggers. There wasn't time for Chris to find a source and return the gun in time to hunt with this season but at his suggestion I went with having him polish the triggers and leave them as is prepped for later completion. Chris said he may look into doing replating himself in the future and if so he will do them at that time. I'm sure that would be something he could easily accomplish and excel at given the man's talents.
