Darrin, I very much like your rifle, and appreciate that you made it to serve as a hunting rifle, not as a highly finished piece. So perhaps it shouldn't be picked apart like a gun entered at Dixon's might be. However, since you said you really wanted a critique, and as one who's also been through the judging at Dixon's a few times, I'll provide the following.
First, I don't care for the trigger - the shape is awkward, the angle looks wrong as it slopes forward, and it looks like it's placed too far back in the bow;
second, while the metal is sweated up and looks well used and aged, the wood does not, but looks newly finished with no distress marks or heavy shadowing, which does not fit with the appearance of the metal surfaces. This is a common fault with many artificially aged guns;
third, the lock bolt placement is back too far;
fourth, the bevel along the bottom of the lockplate below the cock does not end as far back as it should to my eye;
finally, the background of the carving behind the cheekpiece looks roughly scraped, and does not match the finish of the rest of the rifle. I also don't care for the look of the rear-most scroll off of the back of the carving - it looks awkward.
Again overall, I really like the architecture and 'presence' of this rifle, and it looks like it will make a great hunting rifle. I only offer these comments because you appeared to seriously want to hear a critique, which I've tried to provide.
Regards,
Dave
