|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics39,710
Posts564,495
Members14,612
| |
Most Online9,918
Jul 28th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 14,108 Likes: 1879
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 14,108 Likes: 1879 |
This has been hashed and rehashed here many times, but deserves repeating. The weight of the gun is far less important, in terms of how easily one can adapt to it, than where that weight/mass is located in the gun itself. Don Amos spun that little .410 pictured above about a year or two after I got it, and got proficient with it. He found that, and I quote him, "It's moment of inertia is almost identical to that of a 12 ga. English game gun". I didn't understand and he explained it to me. When more of the weight/mass is in the extremities of the gun, i.e. the buttstock and the barrels, it increases the effort needed to swing the gun (MOI), or move it around it's center. That is exactly what you need in a very lightweight gun, for it to slow you down in your "move". An English game gun will be heavier in the action but lighter in the barrels and butt, thus causing the MOI to be different than a more "normal" double.
In the case of the gun pictured above the action is a lightweight alloy. This causes more of the percentage of mass to be on the ends and makes it handle better (slower).
May God bless America and those who defend her.
|
|
1 member likes this:
Parabola |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2022
Posts: 123 Likes: 124
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2022
Posts: 123 Likes: 124 |
I have trouble with my Wm. Powell .410 single, converted from a Rook rifle... VERY light at the barrel.
HB
|
|
2 members like this:
Parabola, Stanton Hillis |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2020
Posts: 1,270 Likes: 605
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2020
Posts: 1,270 Likes: 605 |
In 1920 the powers that be, afraid of Bolshevik revolution, put all rifled cartridge arms on Firearm Certificates.
I suspect the fact that, when we did have a General Strike not a shot was fired,,owed nothing to the Firearms Act 1920. It was all very British.
The need for Firearm Certificates, the expense of the ammunition and the improvements in .22 Long Rifle -with Non-Rusting you could shoot a couple of rabbits for supper and not need to clean the rifle - killed the market for Rook Rifles.
Many were bored out to .410 as no certificates were needed for shotguns until 1968. Most of those also had the front part of the barrel turned down ahead of the fore-end.
This, along with the metal bored out to .410 threw the balance well back towards the butt. I find those where the barrel exterior was left untouched handle better as .410 shotguns.
|
|
1 member likes this:
earlyriser |
|
|
|
|
|
|
