middlesex guns

[bezoar]

Whats the big issue with them other then being made in india and proportions slightly off?

 

[Wes/Tex]

Whats the big issue with them other then being made in india and proportions slightly off?

Not much! The first samples of Indian-made guns had an issue with the breech plug threading but this was taken care of. The only real problem is their "clunky" appearance due to insufficient thinning of the stocks, a problem easily fixed with a little elbow grease!

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Providing, of course, that the breech plug is properly fitted and the lock works O.K....

 

[benvenuto]

I never said there was a problem with them being in India, but I did say they need to go on a diet.
:haha:

You are getting an assembled working gun for the price of an American made kit, but if you are not satisfied with the proportions and the wood (which I am sure will eventually get to most historically minded people), I can see someone spending the same amount of time working on an indian gun to get it looking and handling right as they would buiding a good kit. :hmm:

But ask me again after I build my TOTW Fusil de Chasse :rotf:

 

[cricket]

Just got into BP pistols. Has become kinda of a sickness for me as I only hunt once a year with a BP rifle and just enjoy taking one of my pistols to a range and only having to clean it. Middlesex guns are like others say, working guns. Not things of beauty, more like rugers compared to a colt. I will say that I would rather have a MVTC pistol than any spanish made pistol. In fact, I like my MVTC better than my 300.00 Pedersoli Kentucky. There made like tanks but lack the grace and lovely lines of custom flinters. But, hey where are you going to drop three bills and get something that goes off everytime and will still be working long after were all gone. Hand forged metal, tested locks, too much wood. Not a bad compromise for the $$$.

 

[Bob Riegl]

:hmm: While I will agree on the "Indian" manufacturing being a wee bit off---I have a recently acquired German Matchlock which was most typical of their manufacture with careless use of wood screws and failure to properly seat machine screws. However, I don't feel your comparison of Colt vs. Ruger is viable---for the most part Ruger revolvers are preferred to Colt as their (Rugers) manufacturing standards had by-passed Colt 20 years back---while Colt does not manufacture many Rifles except for some military gear---you cannot compare the quality in even Rugers lowest priced entry, the 10/22. JMHO :thumbsup:

 

[cricket]

You are correct. I guess I mean that in some poetic sense. It use to be 30 years ago, a Colt Python was the "Caddilac" of revolvers and the the rugers were working guns. Not by any means does that poorly chosen analogy apply today. I stand corrected.

 

[Bob Riegl]

:bow: Boy you are right about the Python---I still have mine from 1960---it's still as good looking and looks NIB. It has been shot and holstered on occasion, but still like new---the price I paid then was $125 New. Looking at the 4 figure price for it now makes me shudder. That is the greatest of Colt's revolvers this side of the S.A.A. of which I have an original and a First version repro by Colt. :hatsoff:

 

[spudnut]

I had to do some slight work to the locks on both my MV guns one a pistol the other a musket.The musket stock on mine is not too clunky and handles very nice.The pistol has not had any wood removed from the stock,But then it is an all steel construction Murdoch :blah:

 

[cricket]

Here, Here for the Python. I kept mine as well and will probably leave it to my daughter so she can pay off one of her credit cards when I am gone. They are beautiful and Like you I can hardly believe what they are asking for them now. Thank goodness I shoot mostly BP now, so that should keep it new for many years to come.