Stanton: the .410 you're describing would certainly fit into the realm of "highly specialized" firearms.
Edit to add: Keith...these new gun laws are a bitter pill, no question. Colorado was a wonderful place when I got here 41-years ago, it simply isn't any more. Not sure how that gets fixed?
My description of my pending acquisition got this mild rebuttal from another fly fisherman on that same web page yesterday:
"With a shorter shot column, the 2" 12 gauge shell is basically an improved 20 gauge patterning the same 7/8 to 1 ounce loads better that the standard 2 3/4" 20 gauge. It's the same pattern advantage that the 28 gauge shell shooting the same 3/4 ounce load as a 3" 410 bore delivers with a wider, shorter shot column. "
I'd never considered this perspective before, so I appreciate his input.
Does his argument have any merit?
My ongoing experiences would have me say "no". My little Dickenson 28 is indeed a lovely option to have, but....my perception (after hunting it several times over several years "up Nort") is that it kills slightly less-efficiently than my 16 does and that both are slightly less-efficient than my 6 3/4 lb Arrieta 12.
Operating on the theory that 12 bores do the better job here (but that they extract a slight weight "toll" on long-term carry situations) I'm hoping this 2-inch gun is the "Golden Mean" for my particular set of circumstances up there. Time will, of course, tell. I am just grateful for the opportunity to give it all a try.
Yet another unscientific survey, eh?
Last edited by Lloyd3; 07/21/26 09:10 AM.
