First, I see nothing arrogant wrt Mon. Dorleac's comments. They seem spot on to me and my eyes. Though we've never met, his observations on here and descriptions of his work along with the photos give evidence of his knowledge.

My observations about the subject rifles- everything seems out of proportion and I agree with others, with all the hullabaloo of 'Old Rigby', why couldn't they have just copied an original? Other than a higher/straighter combed stock for more common scope usage these days, nothing really to change. I noted the mid barrel short step taper. I haven't handled a pre-war .416 in awhile but I don't recall that being a Rigby characteristic- more Jeffery. One would think that the traditional Rigby barrel flat could be easily achieved with modern machinery. Overall, I feel disappointed in what is being marketed as a Rigby. (Still MUCH better than the Cal. Rigbys- gag!)