I'm not sure what that has to do with that Darne that you used to own and that I bought on your advice. I thought you might be referring to JJ Perodeau, who told me that it is quite common for Darnes to be poorly or simply unregulated. Sadly, I did not speak to him until after I bought it. I did listen to you prior to buying it, however, since you had owned that particular gun. That proved to be a somewhat costly mistake.
Geez Ted, the Nutty Professor is obsessed with blaming you for the way a gun you never fired patterned.
So as I understand this sad tale, you briefly owned this Darne, but did nothing more than cleaned it and then sold it to someone else. And that person subsequently sold it to the Nutty Professor, apparently without disclosing if he ever shot it or knew of any patterning problems. And now we are cursed with hearing the Nutty Professor cry about it for all eternity, and blame you for the way it patterned. That's just pathetic on so many levels.
I read through the other Thread you provided the link to, and the Nutty Professor complained that:
The patterns were essentially tangential and remained so over any distance or load that I wished to try. I'd bet it was the gun, not the shooter.
So I would take this statement to mean that the patterns resulting from firing both barrels would be something like a figure 8... with the eight laying on its' side, or horizontally.
And it did that at any distance or with any load. So that would mean that the center of each barrels' pattern had to be diverging at pretty much the same rate as the patterns were opening up as distance increased. Since a correctly regulated double will have patterns that converge and cross at some point, wouldn't you think there would almost have to be a noticeably unusual spread or solder gap between the muzzles?
But here, we have the Nutty Professor claiming that JJ Perodeau says Darne's are quite commonly "poorly or simply unregulated". I know Darne's aren't the most popular shotgun in this country, but there are a lot of them. And we do have plenty of guys from other countries posting here. So it seems odd that only the Nutty Professor is crying that they are prone to poor regulation. And you are the logical scapegoat in his mind, even though he knows you never fired the gun, let alone actually patterned it. And he didn't buy it from you. That's just nuts.
You know, this all sounds eerily similar to the tale of woe the Nutty Professor told us when he blew up his Rock Island Arsenal built Springfield Model 1903 Rifle. He blamed the rifle, and the proven handload. He blamed the powder used. He blamed everything except his own carelessness. But when he sold the remains and metallurgical testing was done, the results showed that even though the heat treatment wasn't optimal, the blow-up was caused by a single high pressure event... which sounds like a careless reloading error.
Some people just aren't wired to ever admit to being wrong. This makes me think the Darne in question was probably just fine, but the Nutty Professor just couldn't shoot it well due to flinching or perhaps some dystonia problems induced by French guns. I also wonder who bought that Darne, and if the Nutty Professor disclosed the problem he keeps whining about. It would be interesting to hear from that buyer to get another version of how it actually patterns.
Then there was this from another Thread... Where are the Civility and Poor Manners Police when you need them?
Only for you, Ted. And that I do not really care about.
A ''rifle thingy'' is certainly above your bar, but take notes. Someday you might catch up.
And one more ' thingy''. It ain't all about you. Get over yourself.
How many rifles have you blown up Ted? If the answer is zero... then "Someday you might catch up"... to this Nutty Professor who is carrying a Darne grudge. And then, who will you blame???
