For Sale Fixer Searcy Double In 500/416 NE

[Supercat]

Since I said enough about Butch already I will just say that I feel very sorry for Matt who it seems pretty much got shafted and owns an expensive paperweight

 

[Von S.]

To me Matt seems like a nice fellow by what he's written at this site and it is a shame that he will be taking a financial loss no matter which way he turns.

 

[ActionBob]

To me Matt seems like a nice fellow by what he's written at this site and it is a shame that he will be taking a financial loss no matter which way he turns.

Yup, he loves his big bores but loves them to be perfect.

He is always free with advice on how to shoot them and to welcome others to shoot his Matt talked me into buying my first 505 Gibbs and when I had to send it back to Triple River for work, he helped talk me into a M70 416 Rem Mag for an upcoming hunt, where I used it to take my elephant and first buffalo. Then I did get to use the 505 on my second buffalo..... He's always there to encourage people to buy and shoot larger calibers....

 

[lwaters]

As much as Matt likes his big bores still loves his model 70 in 416 Remington mag. and he is right. The rest of the stuff is nostilga or stuff to humor us with.

 

[ActionBob]

As much as Matt likes his big bores still loves his model 70 in 416 Remington mag. and he is right. The rest of the stuff is nostilga or stuff to humor us with.

Len;
One of these days I'm going to stop by and let you shoot my 470NE double

 

[matt85]

first, I apologize to every one here for responding so late! for some reason I was no longer getting updates on this thread and I had assumed it had gone dead.

second, I have purchased a box of Hornady 500/416 NE and plan to try it out on a target the second I get a chance. its not the ammunition the gun was regulated for but the ammunition was on sale and I figured it was worth a try.

I would be game for a raffle but I think it would be a liability issue for the AH forum. I went over this with @AfricaHunting.com in the past and I cant remember the exact outcome but we decided against it.

-matt

 

[rookhawk]

first, I apologize to every one here for responding so late! for some reason I was no longer getting updates on this thread and I had assumed it had gone dead.

second, I have purchased a box of Hornady 500/416 NE and plan to try it out on a target the second I get a chance. its not the ammunition the gun was regulated for but the ammunition was on sale and I figured it was worth a try.

I would be game for a raffle but I think it would be a liability issue for the AH forum. I went over this with @AfricaHunting.com in the past and I cant remember the exact outcome but we decided against it.

-matt

Matt has a solid plan here. If Matt can demonstrate to his satisfaction that the gun regulates with a factory load, that's a win. If it regulates in the "piss-poor" to "mediocre" range (3" groups at 50 yards) I think that is pretty good too. I would wager, the harmonics of that gun has changed by Searcy's shave back of the breach face and re-ream of the chambers. It SHOULD be piss poor regulation. The ejectors are not working, thus the dogs aren't aligned, and the loop is probably loose. The forend SHOULD be causing poor regulation. My hypothesis: If Matt comes back saying that the gun has great, good, mediocre, or "piss poor" regulation in its present state, any one of those answers would give me confidence the gun can be made to shoot pretty darned well. The forend, barrel, and ejector work should alter regulation when those issues are corrected. It will change the lockup. It will change the forend tension. It shot very well initially, prior to Searcy doing his work, so if a competent smith can unravel the maker's issues caused by his breachface work, the gun can be salvaged.

In all my years, I've never seen a scenario with southgate ejectors and a deely latch or anson plunger, plus loop issues, cost more than $2500 to fix. That's worst case scenario. Adding/removing length from the dogs. Adjusting the loop by adding or removing material. Re-hardening all parts. Dealing with timing issues. Re-tensioning and adjusting the latch, etc. Worst case, that's inside of $2500 of costs to fix. It might be a quickie $500 and done, but that's worst case at $2500.

So the key is: does it shoot well regulated now, and does it eat brass or how bad does it eat brass.

As long as the problems can be cured with just dealing with forend and ejectors, there is a plan forward. If not, the barrel work and re-regulation can cost a bundle.

Matt, please keep us posted on your shooting experience with the gun. If it shoots inside of 3" groups I think it would be reasonably easy to sell the gun to someone willing to wait 6-24 months to get the regulation improved through dealing with the ejectors and forend issues caused by the prior repair.

 

[Tom Leoni]

Yikes. I understand that there are many potentially-valid reasons not to work on a gun--but for a business to come across as in-your-face belligerent is not a way to win customers. I wish the original poster the best of luck--I've been there too. As for Mr. Searcy, I hope his health is better and that he considers moderating his tone--people are fair and will give you a second chance if you don't come across as a bully.

BTW, JJ at Champlin's would have been my recommendation too--I have had work done by him in the past on a C&H double and there's nobody better in the USA IMHO.

 

[rookhawk]

Yikes. I understand that there are many potentially-valid reasons not to work on a gun--but for a business to come across as in-your-face belligerent is not a way to win customers. I wish the original poster the best of luck--I've been there too. As for Mr. Searcy, I hope his health is better and that he considers moderating his tone--people are fair and will give you a second chance if you don't come across as a bully.

BTW, JJ at Champlin's would have been my recommendation too--I have had work done by him in the past on a C&H double and there's nobody better in the USA IMHO.

Just my opinion here based on what I've heard on the gun 2nd hand. I believe Mr. Searcy tried to deal with the deformation of brass by assuming there was something wrong with the chamber. (he was probably right) It sounds like he chose to file/mill the breech face of the barrels so he could chamber-ream the chambers once more in hopes of cleaning up whatever was causing the brass to be ruined. (I believe he shortened the barrels from the breach) If that is true, it sounds like Mr. Searcy didn't consider the dozen things that happen when you try such an unusual repair. 1.) Forend hook/loop match up to forend changes. 2.) Ejector timing is now off. 3.) Cocking/Ejector dogs are now too long. 4.) Top lever doesn't bite the 1st or second bite at same engagement point anymore. 5.) Ejector spur is now thinner from the machining. 6.) Regulation changes because harmonics are different with all the slop introduced until points 1-5 are re-addressed. 7.) The length of ejector spur travel must be increased proportional to the amount of breach face removed.

I'm confident that Mr. Searcy didn't address any of these issues IF that is indeed what he has done for a repair. I can see before-and-after photos of the gun and the top lever doesn't bite correctly. (His alleged repair approach would do that) I can see that the top lever screw (a pitched screw) looks horrible and is out of time due to the geometry changes of lock up. (His alleged repair approach would do that too) A new, expensive screw would have been required. All the screws are out of time in the after-searcy repair pictures. (His alleged repair approach would do that too) Did he over/under torque them? Not give a crap and mix them up? Did he have to dress down the underbite after shortening the barrels, thus the screws don't time? Dunno. Clearly not the way the gun was in the "before" photos on this site.

What should have happened is the gun should have received new barrels by Mr. Searcy if the gun was made with defective chambers, that's a latent maker defect, not a wear or abuse based defect. The work allegedly done created a domino effect of many, many additional problems as a result of what I'm told (and I genuinely believe) was done by Mr. Searcy as he attempted a repair other than doing it the right way. Sadly, because its a 500/416 and the barrels are thin, there was no option to change the chamber and re-rifle to say .450-400, .470, or .500 as would have been possible with other cartridges...cruel twist of fate. So knowing you can't reuse the barrels, a set-back the barrels approach appears to have been chosen by Searcy which is honestly, a desperation play, not something a maker ought to do.

If it were me and I wanted to maximize my profit and I were Mr. Searcy, I would have taken the gun back, replaced it with another gun of used condition, and called it a day. I would have then reused the action with new barrels for a future customer order. I think the original defect, plus Matt's experience trying to get it fixed, plus Mr. Searcy effectively causing tortious interference on Matt's sale by saying he would never warranty or repair this gun for anyone (killing the value, harming Matt's sale), all are really unfortunate things that don't speak well for Mr. Searcy.

Matt just wants to recover some of his money. Would someone that has time and patience to rebuild this rifle in light of what needs doing, please buy it from him for a fair price?

 

[enysse]

If you could raffle the rifle, provided AH would enable you to sell the gun then maybe someone could afford to pay a gunsmith to fix the gun up.

A $100 raffle ticket and $2500-$4500 repair bill could equal a wonderful hunting rifle. Something to think about...

 

[sierraone]

@rookhawk Maybe you should start a weekend class on the operation and nomenclature of double rifles. There are many of us which could learn a lot even if we never put it to use!

 

[wesheltonj]

So you want to raffle off a gun that can't be worked on? I will pass, as Searcy will not work on it and JJ will not either.

 

[enysse]

So you want to raffle off a gun that can't be worked on? I will pass, as Searcy will not work on it and JJ will not either.

That's two gunmakers....there more out there. My point of view is there are more fish in the sea....
It's the same with houses. One person will say a house is a lost cause, the next person says the house has hidden beauty. The right contractor can fix most anything.
I'm not sure the gun is a boat anchor......

 

[matt85]

alright i managed to do a bit of shooting in front of my house before i left for work. please keep in mind this is not the ammunition the gun is regulated for. the Hornady ammunition shot about 4 inches low, 1 inch left, and about 2.5 inches apart. I fired 4 rounds but the first target was shot using a 6 oclock hold which meant the holes were on the bottom of the paper so I shot again yielding the target below. there was a bit more spread on the first target but the shots were more level. I inspected the four pieces of brass and im pleased to say there is little to no sign of warping which was what I sent it to searcy to fix in the first place. as mentioned earlier though, the ejectors did not work but instead acted as extractors.

 

[enysse]

Let the discussion begin...

 

[wesheltonj]

Well, if your close enough to hit the side of a barn, its ok.

 

[matt85]

Well, if your close enough to hit the side of a barn, its ok.

gonna guess you've never owned a double rifle.

the above group is actually not terrible considering its the wrong ammunition. it tells me that if the regulation is off then its not off by much seeing as the barrels printed on the correct sides and in general in the correct area. my Heym model 89 is perfectly regulated and it will produce a nearly identical group to the one above if I use Norma factory ammunition which is completely different from what its regulated for.

the gun was regulated for Superior brand ammunition loaded with Barnes 400gr TSX. this is vastly different then the Hornady 400gr DGX shown here. if someone is serious about buying the gun then we could try to get a small sample pack from Superior ammunition.

-matt

 

[wesheltonj]

gonna guess you've never owned a double rifle. . . .
-matt

Correct, only a double Parker Shotgun.

 

[geoff rath]

The unknown factor(s) we DON'T know about is/are details of the first owner's experiences with the rifle.
Until I hear/read those, I'll continue to withhold any judgement. To do otherwise would be ill-informed judgement.

 

[Von S.]

Oh how right you are.