Lefever HE 16 ga

[Bill Murphy]

"More 16s than 10s?" Is that the experience of other Lefever collectors?

[Nick de Guerre]

Bill,

Maybe I should qualify my point, as it certainly can't be diffinitively proven.

It's my assertion, based on a sizable pool of shared data (I am one of several contributors), that this is the case. I am aware of Bob Elliott's estimates, and his books remain the standard from which Lefever information is judged. But his last book was published some 18+ years ago, and much has been learned since then. Certainly, the internet was much newer then, and it has hugely enhanced our knowledge base.

An older collector told me a while back that Elliott was working from a list of only 400+ guns when he produced his estimates. We have seen several thousand now, and have an even clearer picture of what the arc of production looked like. People would likely be surprised as some of what is rare, and what isn't.

Joining the LACA and reading the newsletter is the best way to learn them.

NDG

[Bob Brown]

I'm also interested in seeing an exploded diagram, and perhaps directions for taking them apart. I bought my first Lefever yesterday. 21033 is a 10 gauge EE with stout 30" barrels. My LACA registrstion is pending.

[Nick de Guerre]

Bob,

Congrats on your E grade purchase! That serial range is one of my favorite, both for ingenuity and for the cocking mechanism they were building then...a hook-in-hook design.

You said your gun has ejectors...are they the in-frame type (two L-shaped pieces which sit in recesses milled into the water table), or forend ejectors (typically you will see a screw on each side of the forearm)?

NDG

[Bob Brown]

It has the screws in each side of the forearm, Nick.

[Bill Murphy]

Nick, in the first edition of Elliott's book, the ten gauge was not included in the "rarity chart" that did list the 16 as quite rare. In the second edition, the sixteen was listed as half the production estimate compared to the ten gauge. I am getting my estimates empirically, but would be interested in your sources. I have not had a lot of success in getting any information from the source you are probably referring to. One particular researcher gladly accepts my research but will not share his, in fact is very snitty about anyone who asks. Personally, I have found a kettle of ten gauges for every sixteen collected.

[Nick de Guerre]

Bob,

Your gun has forend type ejectors, which are quite rare. Congrats!

[Nick de Guerre]

Bill,

I sympathize with your frustration regarding Lefever info. Years back I decided my only recourse was to start building my own database. In time, I connected with others and we agreed to share.

I do the same for a few other makes I collect - Sneider, SAC, and others.

So to answer your question as to my source...my answer is "me." My background dovetails nicely with such an information collecting endeavor, and I can mine my information for stats, oddities, etc.

The dispersion of serials we have is fairly even across the years. At current, 10's represent slightpy less than 10%. 16's account for nearly 12%. But because 16's are primarily in the lowest grades, the survivorship should be naturally lower. As such, the odds are that more 16's havent survived the years, and I therefore reason that the gap in percentages is likely larger than 10% vs 12%.

As a statistician, a sample pool of 10% of any population has a very high reliability ("confidence interval"). So when we reach roughly 6,000 serials, I'd say someone should be penning an updated book.

I'll bet it would sell tens of copies !!

NDG

[Bruce Day]

Originally Posted by Gerald McPherson

Brush chokes on a Lefever catalog page cyl /imp cyl. Bruce I think you posted a catalog page that stated for brush. I can't find it again.

I found it. The chokes page recommends chokes for brush.

I have an HE 12/28 fluid steel and it’s a great field gun. Enjoy your H.

EE 16/28 with Krupp barrels:

[Bill Murphy]

Nick, for years I have been sending my serial numbers and specs to someone claiming to put this information together for the "common good". Is this person you, or have I been participating in a bogus research activity? You know the name of this person. Is his research being used honestly or just for his satisfaction? PM me if you are reluctant to reply here.