[quote=L. Brown] A Fox with No. 1 barrels . . .totally different expectations than a Fox with No. 4 barrels. Although if you stuck with the hottest ammo available in 2 5/8" for that Fox, I'd say your chances are a whole lot better even with the lightest barrels.
How do I politely say this?
Bullshit TB, you're contradicting yourself. Down the line, you talk about pressure acting within the chambers of a shotgun barrel. Of course British and other in the know gunsmiths would tell you that you need to look for a thin spot ANYWHERE along the barrel . . . although they're more dangerous the closer you get to the breech (more pressure . . . even holes in the barrel out at the muzzles--aka ports--won't hurt anything). So, why do you suppose Fox bothered with 4 different weights of barrels--if not to help the heavier guns better withstand the pressure AND the recoil (remember, gun weight offsets recoil) from higher pressure, faster, heavier loads? Why were the Super Fox and the Elsie Long Range Wildfowl made a whole lot heavier--if, again, not to mitigate the effects of pressure and recoil?
But hey, if you want to go ahead and shoot the same shells in a 6 pound double as in an 8 pound double and expect the former to suffer no more harm than the latter . . . blaze away!
Last edited by L. Brown; 08/10/09 03:28 PM.
