Yes, I agree that assigning make with respect to action shape is problematic. In fact, the shaped action of my Jeffery is like none of the photos posted in this thread. The Jeffery with the stalking tigers in the photo above belonged to a friend of mine. Lying his rifle next to mine, you might not think they were both Jefferys. In fact, mine is exactly like the Number 2 rifle illustrated in one of the Jeffery catalogues I have perused (as well as the primary rifle photo in the Tate article), with full coverage scroll and toe and heel plates, while his is the less expensive number 3 model. The number 1 model in the illustrations was, I believe, an underlever boxlock with full scroll, and a very elegant rifle indeed. I think that lost in all these threads is what fine rifles some of these were. Most Jefferys were "using guns" and some I've handled have been misuded or overused -- they are beat to hell. But classic examples like my rifle and the stalking tiger rifle are wonderfully balanced, handsome weapons that may or may not have killed more Indian game than double rifles by any other maker. I could be very wrong about this, Army&Navy guns were popular as well, but in all the literature I have researched the Jeffery name comes up more than others in connection with Indian hunting. As an aside, I will say that I once passed up buying a Jeffery 450/400 with the push underlever, full scroll, as typical of the Jefferys in 600 Nitro. It was, I believe, sold for $6,000. I talked to the man in Salt Lake City who owned it. He told me it was 10 pounds 8 ounces, which I thought was too heavy, as many Jefferys in 450/400 come in around 10 pounds 2 ounces or even less and I hunt in mountains at 8,000 feet elevation or more. What a fool I was! Anyway, I think one of the reasons this thread is so popular is because of the quality of these rifles at prices that are, or at least, were, much more affordable than the sidelock London guns. Keith