Well, it does look externally like unto a sideplate Stevens, but I'd want a lot more documentation than the presence of a Bullard buttplate and a dealer's say-so. I'd also want to see the internals.   If the provenance does prove out, it will be an interesting addition to the Stevens legacy.   

BTW that gun has been for sale for quite a long time now.

was this model covered at all in any of Grant's books ? if so which one.

I spent much of the winter with Jamison's Bullard books, especially the second one.  Really good scholarly work.   

Throughout 1885, Bullard was in financial difficulty.  Production had exceeded sales, they had legal and cash flow problems.  Bullard management was trying to keep their skilled workers employed and not lose them to other manufacturers.   

W. Milton Farrow was a Bullard employee ("assistant manager") and the first Farrow, with a brass action, came out of the Bullard shop in late 1884.  Farrow stocks were made by Bullard's chief stock-maker.

Bullard single shots appeared shortly after that, designed by two Bullard employees, looking for a market niche and designed to use parts already on hand for the Bullard repeaters.   

If someone had an idea for a single shot like what we now call a side-plate Stevens, the Bullard company would have made a brass prototype on something like a time and materials basis. 

Did that happen?  Who knows?  I don't think the seller has offered any proof.  Price is far too high for a gamble.  Maybe divide the asking price by 3 if you were a gambler or serious Stevens guy.

I'm often puzzled how anyone could accept an unsubstantiated claim from a seller who is attempting to profit by the sale of a firearm. I would hope most buyers would be cautious enough to ask the seller for proof of his claims prior to bidding.
Without some proof to back it up, it's just a fun story, and worth nothing.

marlinguy wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2017 at 6:22pm:


Ebay THRIVES on it!  Call any kind of pre-WW II scope a "sniper scope," and the dopes & know-nothings line up to bid on it.  I'm actually surprised that the "Bullard Side-Plate" BS hasn't persuaded some fool to part with $3500.  But Bullard collectors are a pretty small club; had the buttplate been marked "Winchester," it would probably be sold by now. 

Bent_Ramrod wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2017 at 7:51pm:


I don't doubt it, and since Gun Report croaked, there's no easy way to request a copy; on top of that, I've heard John is now so hard of hearing he dislikes talking on the phone.   

Horr's name is one I've heard before, but can't remember where.  Not in Grant's books, as I just checked the indexes.  Was he an employee of Stevens?

This gun has been around for a while and discussed here before. Sure looks like a Stevens Sideplate to me with a different butplate. I have a couple and check out every one that comes up for sale. Never saw one with a brass frame and the research I have done says the frames were cast iron to the best of my recolection so i'm not sure what it is.

slumlord44 wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2017 at 8:59pm:


Think Grant may have mentioned a brass frame, but no idea which volume.

If the seller could be persuaded add a close-up photo of the butt of the stock with the buttplate removed, we'd know a lot more.  Assuming, of course, that the buttstock is deemed original and that the seller truly wants to substantiate his story.

Bill Lawrence

The Google Patent came up clear for me, pictures and text, a few years ago.  They've done something to their Search function since, and it isn't as straightforward as it used to be.  Also, even back when I was collecting patents, it appeared that they scanned in the pages by the bale, and some of the words got corrupted in the search index.  Looking for "Browning" under "Inventor" wouldn't get you a great number of hits, because a lot of the words would get into the Inventor search indexes as "Beawning" or something similar.  Putting "Browning" into every category would get you much more, because the word wouldn't have been corrupted throughout the patent application.

I would imagine the ASSRA Archives would have The Gun Report, for anybody who wants a copy of the article.

Horr lived in Chicopee Falls, MA.  He may or may not have worked for Stevens, and may have shopped his idea to them rather than assigning it to them at the beginning.

Bent_Ramrod wrote on Jun 4^th, 2017 at 1:30am:


That's putting it mildly.  Furthermore, I'm not interested in trying to make sense of an error-packed transcription of the original document, I want to SEE the original document, as I've done previously on the US Pat. Office website here:  (You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

But, plugging the # into the above search box produces nothing but a blank page.  Shouldn't be ANY problem if you have the correct pat. no., as there often is if the only data you have is a date or name. 

thank you. as always I learned a lot again from all of you.

marlinguy wrote on Jun 4^th, 2017 at 2:48pm:


THAT is what I failed to do!  But when I did, it was shown in full exactly as I was expecting.  Much obliged for the tutorial.

wow !!! this is like watching CSI-SS rifles. I thought the Mounties were the ones who always find their man.

and as long as I keep asking questions about things I read 25 years ago and have forgotten and then gave all of my books and magazines away.

Bullard parts were not made by Bullard, but by a 3rd party foundry.  In any event, if the maker was in or around Springfield, Mass., finding such a buttplate ought to have been easy.   

This gun (no longer a rifle, since it is a smoothbore) ought to attract a serious Stevens collector, but not us shooters.

I made an  Horr Sideplate action from the patent drawings. I enlarged the drawings so that they were  the same size as the large Stevens sideplate as shown in DeHass Single  Shot  Rifles and Actions . Its 25-20 Win. caliber and it shoots really good. I made a temporary stock for it out of poplar but I have walnut for a permanent stock, I might make one like this so called Bullard/Stevens. Paul.

Have seen Paul's Horr patent action. He did a very nice job.
Chuck

RJM wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2017 at 11:07pm:


Also would not require the long hours of heat treatment that is necessary to make a malleable iron casting.