I think the comments by Vangulil, above, are probably correct.
Guns are tools; but, in their evolution, the gun designs and their fabrication have been refined to the point of becoming art forms. In fact the art form is now emphasized in many ways over the functionality of the gun as a tool by us, as purchasers.
It appears that guns are rarely critically evaluated by their owners for their function as a tool, such as patterning or the point of impact divergence under discussion in this thread / topic. It takes work and time to do so. This reality appears to not have gone unnoticed by the manufacturers. The manufacturers deliver quality in those features which can be easily / directly evaluated -- essentiallly what can be seen and evaluated in the purchase process. These are basically art form attributes. From the facts, accumulated over time by many contributors in this thread, it appears that the emphasis on the functionality of the gun, as a tool, has regrettably become a "second order" consideration for many manufacturers. We, as buyers of these products, need to turn this around. More emphasis in the gun reviews should be given to functional capabilities and in particular to patterning which characterizes the primary function of the shotgun. As noted in the comments above, many of the, so called, critical shotgun reviews do not report on patterning evaluations. Rather, they report the atributes of the gun which reflect the art form. Many of these, art form, attributes are certainly important. But, if the gun does not shoot where it points -- the art form attributes are reduced to being meaningless in the overall context.
Regards,
Don Henderson
Last edited by Don Henderson; 01/31/09 04:48 PM.
