Gunbroker Deal?? JOHN RIGBY & CO. BEST RIGBY SPORTING RIFLE .350 BORE CONVERTED TO .375 H&H

Bill_D

Bill_D

AH senior member
Joined
Jan 2, 2022
Messages
70
Reaction score
156
Here is the link
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1205412695
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1205412695

What's your guy's opinion on this this rifle? The bolt looks very shiny in the white or chrome plated? Two serial numbers present, 322 on bottom receiver flat, bolt, magazine internal parts (original Mauser assembly number?) and 2794 as the Rigby serial number on trigger guard, stock, barrel... The listing seems like some speculation as well, but the rifle looks like it could be used for a good working hunting rifle, and it looks like Rigby has verified its original authenticity. Who knows who did the 375 conversion though, more speculation...
 
Last edited:
Beyond my pay grade to pass judgement here. But one thing to note on these older rifles is that they have a ton of drop. The bolt handle looks just like my modern Rigby Big Game PH with Mauser action.
 
It has a Leupold quick release scope base and appears to have a Pachmyer decelerator pad. The scope base makes me wonder who all has worked on this. I would ask about those things to start with.
 
The text of description looks lifted from a Lock Stock & Barrel (LSB) auction. That’s their style/format. Imagine it went through one of their auctions.
 
Many of these 350 Magnums were converted, usually later than this one (in the fifties or sixties or later). I don’t know how they know from what is shown, that it was converted in 1912 (and I doubt it was).
The two serial numbers are correct - given it’s actually 2795. It’s the original barrel rebored, vs a rebarrel (which many conversions were).
The stock is original, the finish is not. It’s largely missing the appropriate oil finish.
It likely had a metal butt plate with trap, and was cut down to ~13.5” and the black pad installed.
It’s great to see with its original scope. I would ask for a picture of the new Zeiss scope mounted - I’m a little surprised it clears the bolt.
With a correctly done stock refinish, and not converted, and without that abysmal recoil pad, it would be a nice collector grade gun.
With a refreshed stock finish, and a less inappropriate silvers pad, it could make a nice shooter. It would be nice to get it with a 3-5 day return, to see how it shoots, given it’s converted.
To the point above, I don’t know what is Monte Carlo about that stock. It has a lot of drop for a scope.
 
Bill_D said:
Here is the link
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1205412695
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1205412695

What's your guy's opinion on this this rifle? The bolt looks very shiny in the white or chrome plated? Two serial numbers present, 322 on bottom receiver flat, bolt, magazine internal parts (original Mauser assembly number?) and 2794 as the Rigby serial number on trigger guard, stock, barrel... The listing seems like some speculation as well, but the rifle looks like it could be used for a good working hunting rifle, and it looks like Rigby has verified its original authenticity. Who knows who did the 375 conversion though, more speculation...
Click to expand...

Well you asked but you last sentence above indicates you know the answer.
Oh, great assessment above by @318AE !

From the Gunbroker listing,
"Box, Paperwork, and Accessories: This rifle comes with an original Rigby red velvet lined leather box. Included in the box is the original leather sling, scope case & scopes, front sight cover & extra sight bead plus original James Dixon Cornish Pewter oil can. Rigby Authentication Certificate showing two S/N 2794's one was sold to Sir E. Loder 7th July 1906 as a .303 Mauser Match Rifle with a 32 ½" barrel. The second one was sold to Mr. A.C. Cooper on 2 November 1906, should have been S/N 2795. It was converted around 1912 to a .375. "

If the documentation listed that Rigby had converted this Rigby rifle, the seller should have made that clear. "It was converted around 1912..." Around and by who? If converted by other than Rigby or documented the conversion was done by some famous maker, then maybe if one is a collector of these rifles and knows their value. At a starting bid of $10,500, I would watch this auction and learn. If the bidding goes to $20,000 by half a dozen bidders, that alone says something. Exactly what? At least a few bidders think this converted rifle is worth that.

I gave up collecting vintage shotguns years ago. Back then, a fine shotgun with replacement barrels was maybe worth half of the value of a similar gun with original barrels. Maybe half. That stated, if this rifle has documentation that it was rebarreled by Rigby, then the value should be that of other Rigby rifles.

If if is a rebore rather than a rebarrel, I'd run away but that's me. Lightening up the barrel would ruin the magic balance that Rigby put into it so many years ago...

The above is worth what you paid for it. Maybe our @rookhawk will provide a more experianced opinion? Please...
 
"Converted around 1912" seems a bit fishy, as the 375 H&H was first introduced by H&H in 1912.

That sort of timing might happen today, with our modern manufacturing methods and supply chains. But in 1912? That would almost have to be done in Londan and by Rigby or H&H? In which case you'd think there would be records?
 
I now see Mark also zeroed in on 1912 as well!
 
I wonder why the second Rigby letter mentions the rifle being converted to 375, but fails to mention that Rigby did it? I would have gone back to Rigby for more confirmation on the conversion. Proving it was done by Rigby would be huge, in my simple mind.
 
318AE said:
Many of these 350 Magnums were converted, usually later than this one (in the fifties or sixties or later). I don’t know how they know from what is shown, that it was converted in 1912 (and I doubt it was).
The two serial numbers are correct - given it’s actually 2795. It’s the original barrel rebored, vs a rebarrel (which many conversions were).
The stock is original, the finish is not. It’s largely missing the appropriate oil finish.
It likely had a metal butt plate with trap, and was cut down to ~13.5” and the black pad installed.
It’s great to see with its original scope. I would ask for a picture of the new Zeiss scope mounted - I’m a little surprised it clears the bolt.
With a correctly done stock refinish, and not converted, and without that abysmal recoil pad, it would be a nice collector grade gun.
With a refreshed stock finish, and a less inappropriate silvers pad, it could make a nice shooter. It would be nice to get it with a 3-5 day return, to see how it shoots, given it’s converted.
To the point above, I don’t know what is Monte Carlo about that stock. It has a lot of drop for a scope.
Click to expand...
I obviously haven't measured this rifle, but by a ton of drop I was meaning it looks like it may have 1.75" or more DAC. And maybe over 2" at the heel. Far more than any modern rifle. Lots of these early 20th century rifles do. If I wanted to use the rifle (versus have it as part of a collection), that would be an issue for me personally. So if I bought this rifle I'd want to restock the rifle, which makes it less of a bargain. Others may differ.
 
Mark A Ouellette said:
Well you asked but you last sentence above indicates you know the answer.
Oh, great assessment above by @318AE !

From the Gunbroker listing,
"Box, Paperwork, and Accessories: This rifle comes with an original Rigby red velvet lined leather box. Included in the box is the original leather sling, scope case & scopes, front sight cover & extra sight bead plus original James Dixon Cornish Pewter oil can. Rigby Authentication Certificate showing two S/N 2794's one was sold to Sir E. Loder 7th July 1906 as a .303 Mauser Match Rifle with a 32 ½" barrel. The second one was sold to Mr. A.C. Cooper on 2 November 1906, should have been S/N 2795. It was converted around 1912 to a .375. "

If the documentation listed that Rigby had converted this Rigby rifle, the seller should have made that clear. "It was converted around 1912..." Around and by who? If converted by other than Rigby or documented the conversion was done by some famous maker, then maybe if one is a collector of these rifles and knows their value. At a starting bid of $10,500, I would watch this auction and learn. If the bidding goes to $20,000 by half a dozen bidders, that alone says something. Exactly what? At least a few bidders think this converted rifle is worth that.

I gave up collecting vintage shotguns years ago. Back then, a fine shotgun with replacement barrels was maybe worth half of the value of a similar gun with original barrels. Maybe half. That stated, if this rifle has documentation that it was rebarreled by Rigby, then the value should be that of other Rigby rifles.

If if is a rebore rather than a rebarrel, I'd run away but that's me. Lightening up the barrel would ruin the magic balance that Rigby put into it so many years ago...

The above is worth what you paid for it. Maybe our @rookhawk will provide a more experianced opinion? Please...
Click to expand...


Just my opinion. The rifle is kryptonite. Run away.

Any rifle converted is bad. A Rigby on a standard 98 mauser action is a $300 rifle plus its collectibility and provenance being an all-original Rigby. When you take that originality away, you're left with the $300 residual value of a bucket of common parts.

If it was square bridged or a square bridged magnum, we could argue the action is worth $5000-$6000 alone, but not the case with a military 98 action.

Just because a fool buys it for too much doesn't mean someone *should* buy it. Trying to sell a frankenstein rifle requires a special, ignorant buyer that thinks its collectible because they don't know the collectible market.
 
One other thing I learned about old Rigby rifles that have been converted/tampered with is that they are often a mix of parts left over from WWI or WWII. These conversions may/may not have been done to sell excess inventory of calibers that were out of favor.
I get the fascination with old Rigby's but they are not always what you think. I have been stung twice on them not being what I thought. The new ones are better made.

Before dropping any cash on this, I suggest you get a Rigby expert to weigh it. Lon Paul in CA comes to mind.
 
So many of the 70 photos on this ad as so fuzzy, its a little hard for any of us to ascertain certain things. This rifle is not a collection of parts. It left Rigby as a 350, cased as shown, with a peep sight etc. The Mauser and Rigby numbers that are discernible, and many are, are all correct. The barrel proofs shown are for an early 350, while the barrel is also stamped in a different style “375”. It’s a rebore. If it were converted in the UK, it would have 375 proofs. It was almost certainly converted here in the US, and again, not in 1912.

It’s likely more common to see a rebarrel/rebores on 350 Rigbys than any other prewar British sporting rifle. Rigby made far more 350s on the magnum action than 416s. The action is big for the round, became quasi obsolete rather quickly and was later under the legal minimum for dangerous game when countries began implementing these regulations. For all these reasons, many were converted to 375.

By the way, I have two Rigby 350 magnums that were not converted (and have posted a handful of pictures here before with my vintage guns in the field, often in Africa). Rookhawk and I differ a little in that I think these quasi molested rifles have a place in a market, just not the collector market. I feel they can be fun rifles you can shoot and enjoy with a lot of nostalgia and character, and it seems others do to. I don’t think when these sell well below collector values, but well above $300 Rookhawk mentions, it just some ignoramous that doesn’t know what they are doing and will try and pass it on to the next guy when they figure it out.

As I said above, it has a handful of things, some of which cannot be reversed, that keep it from being a collector gun. With a little work, it could be a really fun rifle to shoot and hunt in an easier cartridge to feed than my 350s.
 
Last edited:
My proposition is that there is nothing rare about a standard 98 mauser action. There is nothing rare about basic 98 parts either.

When you look at a British sporter, the "shot and regulated by XYZ" nomenclature is really important. The originality of the British issue is also really important.

If we were to bastardize two guns on Mauser actions shot and regulated by a British maker, they may have more or less value. For example, if we completely take apart the Rigby in question as it now exists, the case is worth at least $600 and the aperture sight and cocking piece is worth about $2400. Those are unique, bespoke items. The rest of the parts that aren't original to the rifle are just parts and common ones at that. Compare that to a magnum mauser single square bridge by George Gibbs that was modified from say 505 Gibbs to 500 Jeffery or whatever. Both rifles are no longer original, but the sum total of the latter's parts are worth many, many thousands of dollars so it still holds a lot of residual value even though collectibility has been lost.

That's my point.

When the originality is gone, the parts remaining have to have intrinsic value. The engraving on the front ring of the action that says rigby and the matching trigger guard, and the cocking piece / aperture are really the only evidence of Rigby having participated in the life of this rifle.

I had this very debate with a gun dealer that had a lovely , far nicer specimen in 375HH. It was highly embellished with a gold leopard on the floorplate. He thought it was worth $16,000, I argued it wasn't worth half that. He still has it 15 years later. It was originally a Rigby 7x57 but the stock was redone, the barrel was changed out by someone else during recaliber change, and the bluing was done by a restorer and the engraving was lovely but done by someone other than Rigby. The only thing left that was Rigby was engraving on the common 98 action. What is left to consider that collectible? Very little.
 
I think I know the rifle you mention - it’s garish for a Rigby. I too would be surprised if that sold. It’s apples to oranges to this rifle. You’re going a little far off on the limb. No one is saying there is anything rare about a standard 98 mauser action. The rifle in question isn’t a bastardization of two guns.

To your previous post about - “kryptonite, run away, $300 residual value, requires an ignorant buyer”; frankly, I think you conflate an appraisal (an assessment of willing buyer, willing seller value) with your own personal preferences and personal financial advice. I think you prefer to buy high quality collector guns, as at least a store of value, and likely as an investment (you might even think its foolish to spend money not as an investment). I bet you enjoy having them, showing them to friends, and enjoy selling them at a profit later, proving you bought and sold well. It seems to be 100% in alignment with your personal financial ethos you evangelize on other posts. Sincerely, that’s great. However, that is an investor or collector activity, arguably not a hunting enthusiast activity.

Others like using these rifles in the field, taking them to Africa, getting a few scratches making a few memories. They value that. The money they “save” on a nostalgic rifle that’s not collectible can pay for another buffalo. If they play their cards right, it may be a reasonable store of value (not an investment), and they can get back a lot, if not all, of what they have in it, should they choose to. There is a market for that, and I don’t disparage those people. I may be one myself, depending on the rifle.

Ironically, I have followed many of the same personal financial decisions you espouse; avoiding debt, living well below my means, making two incomes and living off one, tax planing , rental properties etc. After a short stint as an Army officer, I was sometime later an executive at a fortune 50 company for over a decade still doing those things (trust me, most of my peers were not). I’m also more than a few years your senior. You may find after you’ve tackled your financial dragons and get a little older your perspective changes. You can’t take this stuff with you, and you may be leaving it to your heirs to sell. At that point, your heirs selling a rifle at a profit may bring less satisfaction than the memories of using it in the field on that last buffalo. Time will tell.

Also, originality - in the true sense of the word - actually matters less in British guns, than say Winchesters (whose owners are oddly purist about that, right down to failing recoil pads). A British rifle refinished, or sometimes even modified, by its original maker, though no longer original, can maintain most of its value. This rifles isn’t that. It was likely converted by an unknown smith in the US.

It shouldn’t trade at collector prices, but the market will show it’s still worth more than a collection of military mauser parts. That’s my point.

By the way, I’m glad you think the peep sight is so valuable - I’ve got one of those for sell on here… :)
 
318AE said:
Also, originality - in the true sense of the word - actually matters less in British guns, than say Winchesters (whose owners are oddly purist about that, right down to failing recoil pads). A British rifle refinished, or sometimes even modified, by its original maker, though no longer original, can maintain most of its value. This rifles isn’t that. It was likely converted by an unknown smith in the US.
Click to expand...

I agree with your definition of originality as it differentiates between British guns versus American guns. When I was speaking of non-original in the realm of a vintage Rigby rifle, I mean that there wasn't very much customization done to the rifles versus a basic K98. So the market will judge it cruelly if the very things that were done by John Rigby are now absent. Shot and regulation. Filing the original sights for the given load. Engraving the bridge that is potentially then covered by a latter drill/tap for a scope base, all of those things take away from what made it a Rigby rather than the $300 sum total of its parts.

As you know, there are many ways to appraise the value of an object. The sum total of its parts is one way of looking at something, another is FMV between a willing buyer/seller based on recent comps. I like adding up the parts because it tells us how much of a premium we are paying for the name engraved and the good will associated with that name.

There are Ferraris out there that were gutted and a Ford or Corvette engine was installed. That's a perfect example of a "lets just add up the parts" appraisal because there is not much left after cutting at the frame and the braces to install a totally different power train. (I hate that people do this type of conversion personally)

What I see in the Rigby rifle is a restored stock that was of low figure, that has been altered for a recoil pad. I see a new barrel in a different caliber with different sights. I see a 98 action and trigger guard, and likely a military trigger. Did the modification make it "better", or just different? I'd argue the former.

As you note, I'm a frugal person and we've enjoyed a number of fun threads on frugality. I'd remind everyone of what happens when the music stops and everyone is running for a chair. In 2009-2011, the music stopped on the global economy and you couldn't give away rifles like the one we're describing. Sideliner and amateur collectors were giving away the kitchen sink on any type of "art", firearms included. During that same timeframe, the finest art in the world hit the auction blocks because truly affluent families were squeezed and they let loose some of the most sublime fine art ever to be seen in our lifetimes. Those exceptional pieces hit record highs in an otherwise terrible economy.

I try to buy things that are likely to hold or increase in value, even in different economic conditions. A cobbled together British sporting rifle isn't something I'd recommend, I suspect for example for equal money you could find one of the best Dakota rifles ever to have been built. Shoot it. Put wear on it. It will still hold its value. On the other hand, an original, pristine 350 Rigby for $15,000 or so with great provenance can also be thoroughly enjoyed in the field and it will go up in value over the long haul because few exceptional specimens survived. (same with 360 NE double rifles...most were converted/ruined to 9.3x74r)

If someone is desperate to own a traditional British stalking rifle and its been frankensteined, I would suggest they look for one that has a unique property beyond normal military parts on it. For example, a take-down model by rigby, holland, or WR will still hold solid value even if its been highly modified because the take down mechanism makes it rare and its a unique set of parts that cannot be reproduced cheaply. (e.g. a take-down 318 or 333 that is now a 30-06 will still hold a lot of value)
 
Bill_D said:
Here is the link
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1205412695
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1205412695

What's your guy's opinion on this this rifle? The bolt looks very shiny in the white or chrome plated? Two serial numbers present, 322 on bottom receiver flat, bolt, magazine internal parts (original Mauser assembly number?) and 2794 as the Rigby serial number on trigger guard, stock, barrel... The listing seems like some speculation as well, but the rifle looks like it could be used for a good working hunting rifle, and it looks like Rigby has verified its original authenticity. Who knows who did the 375 conversion though, more speculation...
Click to expand...


A story in three parts:

1.) Rigby made a very odd-ball rifle that would be quite valuable today. A bench/match rifle with a 32.5" barrel in 303 British. Think about the excellence Rigby possesses and how the balance, stock shape, and all considerations would have been taken to create a rifle of this design with perfect balance and handling.

2.) Rigby gets the rifle back and converts it into a safari rifle in 350 Rigby. Think of all the changes to the rifle's design that happened with that conversion. Stock shape. Balance. Line up for iron sights of existing design versus optics or ornate ladder sights for long range competition.

3.) Mystery conversion from 350 Rigby to 375HH. We don't know what happened by #1, #2, and then #3.
 
318AE said:
I think I know the rifle you mention - it’s garish for a Rigby. I too would be surprised if that sold. It’s apples to oranges to this rifle. You’re going a little far off on the limb. No one is saying there is anything rare about a standard 98 mauser action. The rifle in question isn’t a bastardization of two guns.

To your previous post about - “kryptonite, run away, $300 residual value, requires an ignorant buyer”; frankly, I think you conflate an appraisal (an assessment of willing buyer, willing seller value) with your own personal preferences and personal financial advice. I think you prefer to buy high quality collector guns, as at least a store of value, and likely as an investment (you might even think its foolish to spend money not as an investment). I bet you enjoy having them, showing them to friends, and enjoy selling them at a profit later, proving you bought and sold well. It seems to be 100% in alignment with your personal financial ethos you evangelize on other posts. Sincerely, that’s great. However, that is an investor or collector activity, arguably not a hunting enthusiast activity.

Others like using these rifles in the field, taking them to Africa, getting a few scratches making a few memories. They value that. The money they “save” on a nostalgic rifle that’s not collectible can pay for another buffalo. If they play their cards right, it may be a reasonable store of value (not an investment), and they can get back a lot, if not all, of what they have in it, should they choose to. There is a market for that, and I don’t disparage those people. I may be one myself, depending on the rifle.

Ironically, I have followed many of the same personal financial decisions you espouse; avoiding debt, living well below my means, making two incomes and living off one, tax planing , rental properties etc. After a short stint as an Army officer, I was sometime later an executive at a fortune 50 company for over a decade still doing those things (trust me, most of my peers were not). I’m also more than a few years your senior. You may find after you’ve tackled your financial dragons and get a little older your perspective changes. You can’t take this stuff with you, and you may be leaving it to your heirs to sell. At that point, your heirs selling a rifle at a profit may bring less satisfaction than the memories of using it in the field on that last buffalo. Time will tell.

Also, originality - in the true sense of the word - actually matters less in British guns, than say Winchesters (whose owners are oddly purist about that, right down to failing recoil pads). A British rifle refinished, or sometimes even modified, by its original maker, though no longer original, can maintain most of its value. This rifles isn’t that. It was likely converted by an unknown smith in the US.

It shouldn’t trade at collector prices, but the market will show it’s still worth more than a collection of military mauser parts. That’s my point.

By the way, I’m glad you think the peep sight is so valuable - I’ve got one of those for sell on here… :)
Click to expand...
But I would say if someone wants this rifle as a "shooter" they should get the stock measurements. Because they look janky to me. And add the cost of a proper restock -- or even an improper restock -- to the price of this rifle and it's no longer a bargain. IMO this rifle is neither a shooter nor a collector's rifle. Closer to what @rookhawk said: a bundle of parts.
 
rookhawk said:
I agree with your definition of originality as it differentiates between British guns versus American guns. When I was speaking of non-original in the realm of a vintage Rigby rifle, I mean that there wasn't very much customization done to the rifles versus a basic K98. So the market will judge it cruelly if the very things that were done by John Rigby are now absent. Shot and regulation. Filing the original sights for the given load. Engraving the bridge that is potentially then covered by a latter drill/tap for a scope base, all of those things take away from what made it a Rigby rather than the $300 sum total of its parts.

As you know, there are many ways to appraise the value of an object. The sum total of its parts is one way of looking at something, another is FMV between a willing buyer/seller based on recent comps. I like adding up the parts because it tells us how much of a premium we are paying for the name engraved and the good will associated with that name.

There are Ferraris out there that were gutted and a Ford or Corvette engine was installed. That's a perfect example of a "lets just add up the parts" appraisal because there is not much left after cutting at the frame and the braces to install a totally different power train. (I hate that people do this type of conversion personally)

What I see in the Rigby rifle is a restored stock that was of low figure, that has been altered for a recoil pad. I see a new barrel in a different caliber with different sights. I see a 98 action and trigger guard, and likely a military trigger. Did the modification make it "better", or just different? I'd argue the former.

As you note, I'm a frugal person and we've enjoyed a number of fun threads on frugality. I'd remind everyone of what happens when the music stops and everyone is running for a chair. In 2009-2011, the music stopped on the global economy and you couldn't give away rifles like the one we're describing. Sideliner and amateur collectors were giving away the kitchen sink on any type of "art", firearms included. During that same timeframe, the finest art in the world hit the auction blocks because truly affluent families were squeezed and they let loose some of the most sublime fine art ever to be seen in our lifetimes. Those exceptional pieces hit record highs in an otherwise terrible economy.

I try to buy things that are likely to hold or increase in value, even in different economic conditions. A cobbled together British sporting rifle isn't something I'd recommend, I suspect for example for equal money you could find one of the best Dakota rifles ever to have been built. Shoot it. Put wear on it. It will still hold its value. On the other hand, an original, pristine 350 Rigby for $15,000 or so with great provenance can also be thoroughly enjoyed in the field and it will go up in value over the long haul because few exceptional specimens survived. (same with 360 NE double rifles...most were converted/ruined to 9.3x74r)

If someone is desperate to own a traditional British stalking rifle and its been frankensteined, I would suggest they look for one that has a unique property beyond normal military parts on it. For example, a take-down model by rigby, holland, or WR will still hold solid value even if its been highly modified because the take down mechanism makes it rare and its a unique set of parts that cannot be reproduced cheaply. (e.g. a take-down 318 or 333 that is now a 30-06 will still hold a lot of value)
Click to expand...
We’re less far apart than I thought as we discuss it more. I think the $10.5 asking price is a “price proud to value” as asking prices often are, but in the broad ballpark (maybe the outfield) of what its worth to the right buyer (which includes the stock measurements).
I think a pristine, cased example with the original scope would be quite a bargain at $15k (but could go for $20k+, although the market seems a little soft right now).
I think given the silvers pads come in different lengths, the stock could be recoverable for the right buyer, and it has a premium over the sum of parts as it sits (I think we’ve both seen far worse - and I understand this likely never had a silvers pad, but it would be less inappropriate).
I’m just trying to describe the rifle, not investment advice.

The Dakota you mention would be the better shooter, but would never have the same nostalgia or charisma to me as this rifle does, even adulterated. That’s a statement of personal value.

I’ve never seen a Ferrari with a corvette engine, but I get your point. The Corvette guys can be real sticklers for originality, right down the hose clamps. By contrast the DeTamaso Pantera guys don’t even seem to care if the car still has a Ford 351C at all. Markets vary. I do think when things sell at auction there was generally someone willing to pay one bid increment less, and it’s a pretty good assessment of value. I don’t assume those guys are ignorant, just value things differently.

Lastly, I don’t have the rifle in hand (obviously), and those photos are crap, but I actually think that’s a prewar magnum Mauser action (I’ve got five magnum mauser guns - look carefully at the length of the bolt/extractor, the trigger guard floor plate release etc, and remember this came from Rigby with a scope installed, which was not common in 1906; it was also recorded by Rigby as a best grade gun, and 350’s were generally magnums). I’ve always felt the 350M Rigbys were actually a little heavy for caliber. All valuation aside, the 375 isn’t a bad cartridge for that action and weight of gun. I think we see that differently and it’s part of what is leading us to different conclusions.
 
Last edited:
rookhawk said:
A story in three parts:

1.) Rigby made a very odd-ball rifle that would be quite valuable today. A bench/match rifle with a 32.5" barrel in 303 British. Think about the excellence Rigby possesses and how the balance, stock shape, and all considerations would have been taken to create a rifle of this design with perfect balance and handling.

2.) Rigby gets the rifle back and converts it into a safari rifle in 350 Rigby. Think of all the changes to the rifle's design that happened with that conversion. Stock shape. Balance. Line up for iron sights of existing design versus optics or ornate ladder sights for long range competition.

3.) Mystery conversion from 350 Rigby to 375HH. We don't know what happened by #1, #2, and then #3.
Click to expand...
I read it differently - I understood it to mean they realized they fat fingered it, and two rifles actually left with the same serial number in 1906. This is in fact rifle 2795, should not have been stamped 2794, and the other 2794 (a real oddball like you say) may still be out there. This was first a 350, not a 303 (which was that sloped action for Rigby and could not be converted to this…)

To someone’s comment on a different post above, I think Rigby’s is just saying it’s converted based on the owners description and photos. They know nothing about that. The more I think about it, it was likely done in the 80s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 1139 more.
Total: 387,467 (members: 1,189, guests: 386,278)

Forum statistics

Threads
70,655
Messages
1,582,549
Members
172,336
Latest member
ElmerJem
 

 

 

Proudly sponsored by

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

HENRY GRIFFITHS SAFARIS
HENRY GRIFFITHS SAFARIS
•••
HENRY GRIFFITHS SAFARIS
HENRY GRIFFITHS SAFARIS
•••
Bushcat Safaris
Bushcat Safaris
Check out our Cull Package Eastern Cape.Springbuck only one of these available. 2027
•••
Bushcat Safaris
Bushcat Safaris wrote on Frenchy06's profile.
Hay MR French welcome to the sight.
•••
S
Same'Ol wrote on 45-70guy's profile.
This guy is a scammer and i find him very odd.
•••

Share this page

 
Top