|
|
|||||||
Boy, You guys really know how to derail a good opportunity to learn something here. I don't think 470Evans intended his post to take this path. I would not put any member of this forum in the "ignorant" pool - let alone put them in league with Nancy Pelosi! The fact that they are on this site proves that, even if they don't have a voluminous knowledge of Brit doubles, they do have a desire to build on what they do know. No need for disparagement. Now, back to the gun at hand. There is a lot that Pugs leaves out. Such as when, where, and by whom this gun was modified. (forget the "why" - nobody but the man who had it done can answer that) IMO, worth the ask? No, of course not. Nothing on his site is. "Better" than an original? Not to me or most others but maybe to some. Well done? Yes, even if not to a Brit type style or finish. The way I see it, this isn't too different than the treatment that thousands of Mausers get every year in the custom bolt gun trade. I don't see too many custom type A's being built these days... The primary difference being that the start of the project happened to be a rare and desireable double rifle and not a Mauser. Let's face it (can't help myself) still better than a CalRigby! |