Mr. Vicknair’s piece does seem plausible and well-argued. He even dispenses with the recurring foul language.

I know my station; and it looks like it’s with the “machine-made” gun.

There were actually a number of English makers producing best quality guns between 1890 and WWl, and for those who want that quality without paying the premium associated with names like Purdey, Boss, Holland, etc. there are guns available at reasonable prices, it just takes research, patience, and a little luck.

https://i.imgur.com/aonYSqL.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/Q1TjMkp.jpg

Seems theres no certain answer on what a best quality even is .
Ive seen them say well its a best quality name but not a best quality gun because it has to be a best quality grade :rolleyes: .

Ive always just went by the common line of thought of if its a London made double then its a Best .

“Best” is then just a term describing a manufacturing process, and a stubborn one at that. Holding on to these old traditions in manufacturing is fine but modern stockholders sure wouldn’t appreciate it very much.
Like Dewey says, mass production was of utmost importance to American manufacturers and I agree with him that the Parker Gun is at the top of that heap.

As for me, I’ll take ‘second best’ any day. Never had a desire to own a “best” gun even if I could afford it. I guess this is because I’m an American and take great pride in all of my ‘second best’ Parkers.

There are automobiles that have been made entirely by hand, but damn few of them... and the question begged is “Why?” Pride in the fact that they could do it I guess. But who can afford to own one... Jay Leno? I live in the same town Jay was raised in and I can assure you it’s not “in the water.” Even Jay wouldn’t enjoy driving it - he’d be too afraid of damaging it to really enjoy using it. I’d be afraid of the same thing if I owned “best” guns.




.

The term may have come from describing their products something like Good, Better, Best. They could have as easily said 1, 2, 3, or V,P,G, etc.
London makers presented themselves as though the makers in other large cities had lesser skilled workers. Birmingham had a wealth of skilled labor, and a William Ford sidelock, ordered by someone who asked for William Ford's best work, got a gun every bit as nice as a Royal Grade. Polished, gilded and pierced bridles were not limited to any specific geographic area.
I remember many nice English side by sides of my dad's, and my mother's cousins, in Scotland had a half dozen in a rack on the bootroom wall. They were all beautiful, because they were, except for barrel length, and maybe bore, the same. It almost appeared as every gun was engraved by the same hand. Except for guys like Ken Hunt, most of the engravers seems to stick to fine scroll work.
Apart from Parker being made in my Dad's hometown, the endless variety, and relative affordability are only a few of the reasons I love them so much.

I can see Dean's point. But... even a "Best" Parker, such as a AHE, is imbued with a dimension of human craft and art that a Trojan is virtually devoid of. Both can take game. But, there is something about the human hand and eye that translates into clear intrinsic value, one over the other.

A Purdey, Boss or Holland & Holland has it. Because they are crafted by skilled artisans... not machines. The same is true of a Rolls Royce or Morgan.

That does not mean that fine guns or fine cars are not meant to be used. The General Manager of Purdey's once told me that every gun they make is intended for use. And it was rather pointless not to use them.

What's more, I once knew a car collector in LA who had a fantastic garage full of wonderful collector cars. And he tasked one of his curators to take each car out every so often and drive the bejesus out of it, because that was what they were for. I wish I were that guy.

Still, I shoot my Purdey, Holland & Holland or Grant on a regular basis. Because that's what they're for.

Jay,

A very nice Hussey! Is she yours?

Ken

Yes, it’s mine.