There is nothing absolute here, but certainly there is logic and reason behind the price points of new guns. Here’s an attempt at my explanation of such.

I think what's important to remember is that all of these guns are made to be sold for a profit. Therefore all have to be built to a certain price-point, i.e.: only X-number of man-hours and cost can go into each one for them to be profitable for the company.

The misconception about the price of new guns is that some makers charge more than competitors for the same quality… or that vast quality differences exist between comparably priced products… it’s just not so. The marketplace ensures that doesn't happen.

If one maker charged more for less quality than a competitor - then they wouldn’t be in business long, as buyer’s demand would weed them out with lack of sales for an inferior product that was over-priced.

So in terms of quality, the old adage stands true. You get what you pay for. The HEYM is no doubt better fit and finished than the less-expensive makes/models. They simply put more hours into building them, and –in turn- they cost more.

You’ll also see the price difference in the balance and handling characteristics of the HEYM. The guns are built with the weight “between the hands.” You’ll find this characteristic on all “Best” guns, but not on all guns.

Compared to the HEYM, neither the Chapuis nor the Merkel are built with 50% of the guns weight concentrated in the middle of the gun, i.e.: “between the hands.” They will usually balance on the hinge pin, but you’ll find the weight distributed about 50/50 for the two ends of the gun (the barrels and the butt). Merkel accomplishes this by adding a weight to the stock. Chapuis are barrel heavy and need a recoil reducer to balance them on the hinge-pin.

That’s not to take anything away from the Chapuis or the Merkel. It just goes back to profitability of the gun. Yes, they could build one with proper weight distribution, and yes they could fit and finish one as well as they HEYM, but in the end they would cost as much as the HEYM and that would move their position in the market (based on price point) to one other than the niche they’ve chosen.

Again, they’ve all decided to build a gun to a certain price point, and serve different buyers by meeting different price-points in the market.

So, is an H&H Royal a “better” gun than the HEYM?
Yes, it has more man-hours in it and in-turn, it costs more.

Could HEYM build as good a gun as H&H?
Yes, but it would cost the same as the H&H.

Is a HEYM a better gun than the Chapuis?
Yes, it has more man-hours in it and in-turn, it costs more.

Etc…
Etc…

Beyond the economics of serving a niche of the market profitably, you also have to look at the features.

The HEYM has 1) ejectors 2) hinged front trigger 3) intercepting sears

The Merkel has extractors
The Chapuis has ejectors
Neither of the latter two has intercepting sears or hinged front trigger.

The more options or features you add, the more they cost.

So how does the HEYM stack up against the Merkel and the Chapuis?
It’s different… it has more features and better balance along with better fit and finish. And because of those, it costs more. But at the same time, they are targeting a different segment of the market... HEYM's target niche is not the same as Merkel or Chapuis.

Again, each serves to fill a niche in the market place, and would not be albe to do that profitably by building in too much for too little cost.

Hope that helps put the differences in perspective.