Good day all, I finally shot my new Rizzini 28ga. BR550 Small action sxs yesterday on the skeet course. The gun functioned perfectly, and those around me thought highly of it's fit, finish, and scale.

I did not shoot it well first round, did better on the second with changing the chokes from IC/LM to Cyl/IC.

I did not get a chance to pattern for POI or POA yet....but will do at my next outing.

The dimensions are quite close to my other guns, but it is the only gun I have with a swamped rib. So I was wondering if that would cause me to place the barrels on a different part of the bird or not, such as covering the bird with the barrels? I was shooting WinAA #9's (only ones I could find). I hit all the birds on station eight, all four rounds, from low gun to boot, so not sure whats going on?

Any thoughts?

I despise swamped ribs. They are ugly and serve no purpose. There is probably something to your problem due to the swamped rib.
JR

I find that ribs,and beads are only used to confirm gun mount. After that you look at the bird, not the gun.
bill

Here's a recommended exercise to practice (and check) the gun mount. I have seveal guns with swamped ribs-all French. I like the way they shoot and look. Less can be more. The balance of the gun may be different from what you are used to.
By Chris Batha:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=waBaFgUapW4

Doubt if the swamped rib is the problem. It's something else about the gun. If you look at the bird when you shoot, you won't see any rib.

I have a couple of guns with swamped ribs and don't find them different to shoot.

Give it some time...

Yes, thinking too much
After you shoot it 10 rounds and get used to it
and just shoot it and not evaluate it on station
you just might see a difference.
FOCUS on the bird
Mike

p.s. I would also bet the comb is thinner than on your other guns.

Suspect all of the above are right. In my case, if I even notice the rib, that means I am not looking at the bird raised, sunken or otherwise, and I inevitably miss until I stop focusing on the rib. I try not to even sight the barrels anymore.

In the most serious shotgunning competition, Sporting Clays, Skeet, Trap, and live pigeon shooting, you will not find a ribless gun, which is essentially what a swamped rib provides.
JR

If the front bead is lower because of the swamped rib, it may be causing you to have an issue with where you are seeing the target in relation to the muzzles and where you are shooting as a result, same as if you have too much drop in the stock, causing you to shoot low.

Before everyone gets their panties in a wad about looking at the bead, please understand that is not what I'm getting at, only that you are not seeing enough of the barrels or the bead AS A REFERENCE IN YOUR SUB-VISION in order to make the pattern hit where it should. Go pattern your gun.
JR

Check poi and most of your problems should be simple. If it is ok then you just need to get use to your new sight picture. Over thinking things does not work with small bores or light weight guns.

How 'bout a picture of the rib on your gun?

Looking about the web that Al Gore invented, I find no models of gun as you have described yours, with a true, swamped rib. Most have a concave rib, like this one:

http://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-fo...un_id=100785485

We do have people posting here that don't know the difference twixt a concave rib and a swamped rib.

Trust me, they are not the same.

This is a link to a gun with an actual swamped rib:

http://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-fo...un_id=100797320

I've shot plenty of birds, clay and feathered, with swamped, concave, flat file cut, raised, or, sans rib, and can't understand what difference a rib should make to ones shooting.

The only thing I despise are mid beads, colored beads, or bulgy choke type devices.

If you are looking/thinking about the rib, you will miss.

Best,
Ted

Why does any of that bother you (I despise) if you are not looking at, or overly conscious of, the rib/bead ? Why would you despise it if you are oblivious of it? Obviously you are not.

It makes a difference to the subconscious. If it did not the best shooters in the world would not be using raised flat ribs.

SRH

Mike, that be the Okefenokee of swamped ribs. Gil

The things I mentioned are jarring to me. I can't ignore a Cutts Compensator, a glow pipe, or a mid bead. I can ignore a rib, and, a plain bead, usually.

Any of the worlds best shooters using a Cutts these days?

Does Purdey or Boss include a glow pipe with the new doubles it sells?

Not sure, but, I may not be alone.

Best,
Ted

Won't win a Limbo match, but it's "Swamped".

That is a perfect example of a swamped rib, which is smaller/lower at the middle, than at each end, John E.

Swamped ribs are an example of beauty not necessarily matching/following functionality, IMO.

SRH

But the question remains. Who looks at the rib while engaging a target? Which shooting flying method or school teaches to use the rib with point and shoot (instinctive), sustained lead, or pull away? If there are none that do then it follows that the rib is essentially cosmetic and in the same realm as engraving.

Agreed, but the question also remains, if the rib has no consequence whatever, why do all the world's best shooters shoot a raised, flat rib .... and, many shoot a high rib?

Methinks you may not understand the part the subconscious mind plays in "shooting flying".

SRH

Ahhh...I stand corrected. Thanks Ted. It is a concave rib then. I think...IMHO...that the sight line from the end of the barrels does make a difference. Maybe in a perfect world it does not. Most of my best shots are purely instinctive...where all I do is quickly raise the gun swing and pull the trigger. Don't think my cheek even touches the stock sometimes, nor do I feel the recoil. Most times if I think too much...or have time to think too much...I miss. Maybe why I love station eight and rarely miss on it...even with the twentyeight.

Top gunmakers have gone over to state of the art CNC and EDM machines, check out the Purdey, Westley Richards and Holland videos for confirmation.

And after they are done with the space age machines they resort to 16the century tinpot technology to fix useless ribs.

Alex Martin had the right idea, do away with all ribs. His ribless guns were built by Powell and as one of the Powells wrote, it saved a quarter of a pound from the muzzle end of the guns. Ribless doubles have no inaccessible nooks for rust to work unseen.

Oops, double post deleted

Stan raised an interesting point about top competition gunners using guns with ribs. It also raises another point: when was the last time a champion competitor won a national or international competition using a SXS??

I'd wager that the last major open shotgunning competition (not restricted to S x Ss) won with a S x S was won by Billy Perdue, of pigeon shooting fame. mel5141 could probably tell us the exact last championship Billy won, as the two were close friends for many years. Billy passed in 1997, but was a powerhouse on the clay ranges and live bird shoots around the world. He held many national records.

In an interview, Billy said that pigeon shooting was a game of elevation, which is why he favored the S x S for it. As I understood it, he believed the two barrels gave his peripheral vision a clearer idea of where he was, elevation-wise, as he focused hard on the pigeon.

SRH

A ribless sxs is hideous. Next in line would be one with a swamped rib. Aesthetics don't matter to some, but only some odd functionality advantage. These shooters are who these guns, without ribs or swamped ribs, were intended for.
JR

dla (sic), a gun with a 10" LOP is probably much too long for you, and is catching on your armpit.

Have a couple inches trimmed off and try again.

Owners of Manufrance Ideals don't consider their swamped ribbed guns as "hideous" or lacking "aesthetics."
http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=450160&page=9

Ted today shooters use guns with porting all the time. Cutts was the easiest way to both reduce felt recoil, change chokes and reduce muzzle jump. I knew several Skeet shooters who had custom made Cutts Expansion chambers made with the slots angled and more on the top areas instead of to the sides. With them doubles in Skeet were faster because they had less muzzle climb to bring down into line with the second bird. Angled slots towards the front also made the muzzle a brake which reduced rearward motion. The fellow who designed it worked for IBM and his buddy the machinist worked for Lear Jet. They were precision made and the design did work very well. They explained that they could reduce the expansion chamber diameter to almost normal size of the barrel but not wanting other to notice their custom design they kept them the same size as the Cutts. I did find the noise to be slightly louder than the Cutts. They later changed the shape of their gas slots and claimed that it was better than the Cutts.

So Cutts might not appeal to your esthetic views but they did serve a real interest. They just ruin the straight lines of a barrel.

Of course they don't.
JR

I'm not so sure that ribs have any more to do with shooting than these things have to do with excelling at professional sports.

http://www.seattlepi.com/business/article/Hasselbeck-among-athletes-wearing-titanium-1260351.php

Thanks kieth, your insults have been missed the last few weeks. I'm sure all here appreciate you bringing this very informative thread down to your level, but what else would anyone expect from you. Your such a hateful human being.

Aesthetics is a mostly subjective matter. But if the lack of ribs bothers, then an intelligent gunmaker would contrive a removable rib satisfying aesthetics while giving access to the space between the barrels. A removable carbon fiber rib weighs less than 30 grams, Benelli uses them on some models, they are adaptable to double gun construction.

Alternatively there is the Darne tactic of using only a top rib, thus saving weight while providing access to the barrels.

To cure this rib thing watch a rib relaying process and see the rust and pitting in between the barrels. Dewey Vicknair has some photos on his site.

And no, tinning is not a sure way to prevent between the barrels rust. Rib relaying ruins the bluing, thus for the sake of one single square inch of solder surface area (maybe even less) one pays the cost of total reblue. Sounds kind of backward but to each his own.

I have a Birmingham .410 with a semi-swamped rib, and I love it.

I have never handled an Alex Martin ribless gun, but I think I would like it.

You would. I have had the privledge of handling a boxlock and a sidelock, both were among the very best guns I have ever handled.

Opinions regarding shotguns are like belly buttons, everybody has one. Hey, most of the guys who have ejectors on a gun hold a hand over them to keep them from ejecting. A lot of them watch the ejected hulls fly, and then turn around, bend over, and pick them up.

Damn if I get it, but, whatever floats your boat.

Not sure why I could never wrap my head around a Cutts (the one I had threw good patterns) but, I have a theory, and that is that I have to close one eye at the shot, since I'm cross eye dominant, and any more bling out there is distracting, more so than it would be if I could leave both eyes open. A lot changes when you wink an eye shut, like, just about all your depth perception evaporates. So, less is more, for me.

The vented Cutts was LOUD, too.


Best,
Ted

Ever the helpful guy, let me see if I can help you "get it", for a few situations.

Dove shooting. Doves coming to feed in the fields do so in flurries, often. You may sit for an hour or two, with very little action, then all of a sudden "it's on". Droves of birds everywhere, coming from all directions. The limit is 15 per day. Semi automatics are favored these days, but a few of us prefer the old way, two shell guns. It is much, much easier to allow the shells to eject, reload quickly so as to take full advantage of the flights available before they are gone. When the birds are gone, or the host calls an end to the shoot so the remaining birds can feed, you have plenty time to pick up empties.

Duck hunting in a blind. Same deal, different locale and surroundings. Semi automatics rule again, but again many of us like the two shot guns. Let 'em eject onto the blind floor, or the boat deck, keep shooting while you can, pick 'em up later. No big deal. It saves time while the birds are in the air.

Clays shooting. Catching the two hulls in your hand as they eject is light years ahead of digging them out with your fingers as they extract. When you are shooting a tournament, or even a fun round with your buddies, and there are maybe six shooters on your squad, there are other squads behind you. You can be sure that six shooters pulling out shells that are extracted, as opposed to letting them eject and either catching them to put in your emptied pouch or just letting them hit the deck (hey, the range owners expect to have to pick up hulls ..... they have magnets on sticks to do so ..... do automatic and pump shooters pick up their hulls on a sporting range? No.) will slow things down to the point that squads will be backed up and waiting. Not good.

There is a vocal percentage on this and other chat forums who apparently love the moribund chore of pulling empties out of their chambers, and attempt to take the "high road" and play the littering card on those who prefer ejectors. I've not read where you have ever done that, Ted, but a great many of your compadres here have, and do. That's a shame, when no one takes on the automatic and pump shooters for the same thing. I'll bet that a great many more ejector doublegun shooters police their empties than automatic or pump shooters.

I like ejectors, and find little interest in doubleguns that don't have them. I get it, and they're one of the niceties that "float my boat".

All my best, SRH

Good grief. If we all liked the same stuff it'd be an awfully dull existence. I love the lines on my Ideal, plume ramp and swamped rib. I've also become so used to the clean lines of no top lever that after looking at some pics of round action Dicksons, I removed them from my bucket list. How's that for heresy? Stan- as usual, a lot of what you say makes sense for ejectors and how/where you shoot. Two observations: 1) If I were shooting clays and the guys behind me were so uptight about the extra second it took me for the extractors, I'd let them "play through" or find another clays course. 2) Where I hunt, often in heavy cover or shin high grass, ejectors suck. I've upland hunted with them and hated them. My Arrieta sent them out so fast and far, a friend (after they went whizzzing by him) asked me if I'd ever chronographed them. There is one sxs left on my bucket list (yeah, I know, but really), and I would not pass on it if it were to have ejectors. Where I hunt and what I do, extractors rock. Mike

I was mostly referring to tournaments, Mike, where there will be large squads on every station, depending on the squad ahead of them to be timely with their shooting so that yours can move up, though I did mention shooting with your buddies, too.. Delays in big tournaments, whatever causes them are frustration for everybody. I understand that some folks like extractors above ejectors. What I don't understand is how some people get so uptight and act like they hate them. Over the years, on here and other boards, I've noticed a tendency on the part of so many to bash ejectors, and the people who prefer them. I'd never think that way about someone who chose to use extractors. I hunt quail in high grass and brush, too. When I use an ejector gun I just catch them as they pop out. It's so easy.

It's nice to have choices, eh?

All my best, SRH

I acquired my first double back in 1954 at the age of 16. It was an extractor, J Stevens Arms & Tool Co gun. Over the years I have owned a few ejector guns but have primarily used extractor guns. I have nothing per se against ejectors & certainly no bad feelings toward those who prefer them. I just personally would not pay much of a premium for them. When you don't want your empties to hit the ground I have found little to no difference in time involved in "Digging" out the empties than in catching them. Perhaps it's just because I have been doing it so long I am used to it, but I honestly can think of hardly no time that I have felt handicapped by the lack of ejectors.
Bottom line is if the right gun comes along at the right price Ejector or Extractor is simply not a deciding factor to me.
I have had one gun which was best of both worlds, an A Grade 20ga Syracuse Arms Co. A mere flick of a little lever in the forend would change it from ejector to extractor mode. That was about the only feature of it I truly liked so didn't keep it long. It was a 7lb gun with 28" Krupp steel barrels, both full choke, a combo I had little use for. Traded it for a J P Clabrough SLNE 12ga with 28" damascus barrels both bored to ¼ choke & 2oz less weight. This gun I still have some 35 years later & it turned out to be a gun I could shoot better than probably any other gun I have ever owned, though I have had some which came close. Among those which are close is an FE Lefever which of course is an ejector gun.

I have observed the removal and relaying of ribs by many gunsmiths. There is a certain entertainment value in seeing the ingenuity of rib holding jigs and the heating methods employed in the process. Most impressive is the one where the rib holders are slices of drain pipe with wing nuts top and bottom to hold the ribs, while long electric heating elements are in the barrels heating them so solder will flow.

There is also disappointment in seeing how an otherwise good double needs rebarreling or sleeving because rust has worked for years unseen in the space between ribs.

Seeing a rare but dramatic total barrel blowout when a weakened barrel bursts on the inside, venting gases to the space between the ribs causing the whole kaboodle to end up in a twisted mess is educational. I have a photo but posting pics is problematic here.

The French swamped rib is a partial prevention for the above as it is an "I" sectioned piece that incorporates top and bottom flats that replace ribs. That is how it is done in the Ideal.

Overall, soldered ribs are an anachronistic remnant from muzzle loading and the best illustration of what the late Gough Thomas called "mental inertia" in gunmaking.

A method used in the currently manufactured Ithaca M37 pump is innovative. The rib is removable for purposes of replacement if damaged. One end fits into a slot near the muzzle and is secured at the breech end of the barrel via a small screw. The supporting stanchions are milled into the barrel billet.

GLS, useful info re the Ithaca ribs, Benelli employs a similar system on the models with removable carbon fiber ribs.

Perhaps a maker of double guns will see his way to offering the same lightweight choices someday.

Before blaming the rib, pattern the gun and see where it is shooting in comparison to a gun you shoot well.

I suspect the role of the rib is less important than the stock fit overall, the choking, the balance, etc.

As for the swamped versus other rib types, for some it makes a difference in shooting (probably very few) or aesthetically (many more). I do not find them of any particular negative or positive note. That said I no longer own any guns with one, but that is taste, not function.

Stan,
It isn't as if I named anyone who performs the chicken dance while using a gun with ejectors. There are times an ejector mechanism might be an advantage-a driven shoot with a matched pair, and a loader you are paying for come to mind.

That said, most of the time, I can live without them. And I've seen a few people curse them while hunting or shooting. They don't belong everywhere.

I have few actual "compadres" on this board, Stan. Perhaps four like minded individuals who send a PMs back and forth with me, and two people who I have actually met, and, consider me a friend inspite of meeting me. I shoot and hunt with them. There are also a couple guys who have washed their hands of the board who stay in touch.

What the hell are you talking about when you say "compadres", Stan?

I guess I usually pick up my empties, but, if I can't find one I don't make a stink about it. I know the actual friend I met on the board (a hell of a friend, I might add) and hunt with makes about the same effort, and I can't remember if we have ever discussed the subject. The other board friend hosts a shoot (another great guy) and I think he is a voracious reloader, so, I'm going to guess he picks them up. The 37 throws them at my feet, I guess I usually find those
I've missed a few empties when using my Dad's A5, but, I'm expecting that won't keep me from heaven.
Maybe I'm wrong, but, Dad missed a few along the way as well, so, we'll meet up eventually, I expect.
If I ever harped on picking up empties, I honestly don't remember it. I'm more inclined to harp about looking for the bird I just shot at, even if it didn't appear to be hit hard. If I find empties that someone else shot, I will make about the same effort to grab them, and throw them away, at home.

But, it really has nothing to do with how I feel about typical ejectors, Stan.

I really like Darne ejectors, but, if you've never used or seen them in use, it is a little hard to visualize. The empties just end up between the sliding breech and the extractor, that raises them slightly if you don't shoot. Grab 'em, and put them in your pocket, or, tip the gun and let them fall.
Use your ejectors in good health, Stan. But, at least admit, you've seen a guy or two who did exactly what I described, and, maybe, you got a laugh out of it, too.

Best,
Ted

I'm with Ted on this one (although I thought we were talking about ribs...lol), I don't really have a 'use' for ejectors myself. Lucky my rizzini allows for both.

Ted, by "compadres", I only meant those who do not like ejectors. I had the impression that you did not like them, but I see from what you just wrote that I must be wrong on that. I was not lumping you in with those who degrade ejectors and those who favor them ...... notice I said that I had never read where you had ever accused the ejector favoring guys of littering. I was addressing your lack of understanding about why some of us like them, If I understood your post correctly. The part about those who have the holier than thou attitude was not addressed to you, and maybe I should not have included it in the same post.

I certainly have seen people who litter irreverently with their hulls, but most of them have been automatic and pump gun shooters. The Darne ejection system certainly sounds unique, but until I actually get the chance to use one enough to get comfortable with it I will continue to catch them in my palm and either deposit them in one of my game pockets, or toss them in the trash drum at the station.

Thanks for the reply, SRH

Thanks for the clarification on the clays course, Brother Stan. I do not shoot well enough to ever experience said scenario.

Mike

So, at the end of the day, a least it seems everyone here now knows the difference between a swamped and a concave rib.
A good thing.


Best,
Ted

Ted, question about Darne R-10. In that it has a rib on top, but not on the bottom, what's the proper nomenclature--semi-swamped?? The MF Ideal is swamped on both sides, with a sighting "plume" extending downward a few inches from the breech on top and a smaller sight ramp at muzzle's end. Gil

Plume. That's the term. French translation is "feather", or lightweight. In Darne nomenclature, Plume is rib on top, none on bottom.

There were a dizzying variety of ribs available on Darne guns, most aren't seen here in the states. One could get a raised rib, with or without under rib, a battue rib, typical on slug guns, a swamped rib, with or without an under rib, a ventilated rib, again, with or without under rib, and likely a few I have forgotten.
There was a 1911 or so vintage live pigeon Darne R11 in the rack at Darne, in St. Etienne, the last time I was there, engraved to R15 level, with heavy weight barrels, an under rib, and a raised file cut rib, with 32" tubes, and a restock in a straight English style, a 9 pound brute of a clay crunching gun, that I would have loved to own. The R11 style of stock mount is considered to be the heavy duty version of wood mounting, and is also used on slug guns and double rifles.
I was out of money.

Nothing new there. But, that gun haunts me.


Best,
Ted

"Plume" carries over into other languages as well. In 2003, in Cordoba, Argentina, I was with a couple buddies who were shooting doves together. They both shot a close incomer at the same exact time and the bird boy shouted "La pluma!" as the feathers floated in the breeze.

SRH

When I see a swamped rib, it usually resides on a French double. They seem to make the bead "float" and I have one that smokes clays with ultra full chokes, but that is probably a matter of fit...

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the construction of Ideal barrels, as I believe Shotgunlover aptly noted, is as an I beam, with one central rib. Then there is what I call a front bead ramp, and then at the breech the plume. The plume is not, I believe, a sighting ramp, but rather La Manu's design for the doll's head, since that would simply be the extension of the top rib on other guns. In fact, very early production Ideals had top ribs, some with doll's head and some of the oldest with none. The doll's head extension ramp has to have enough length for sufficient contact area on the barrels, and of course it tapers as the radius of the barrels is approached. Thus it looks like a small bird feather, and is appropriately called le plume. Indeed, most Ideals have it engraved in a feather motif.

So then the question is, does the Ideal have a swamped rib as Ted has helped to clarify? As it has only a central, single rib that does not rise or fall with relation to the center of the barrels, with ramps- not full ribs- muzzle and breech, I think the answer would be non. But, if by "swamped" you include "sunken" or recessed...

Evidently, the term "swamped" has been around for a really long time, in relation to guns. The first use I ever knew of was in regards to flintlock longrifle barrels. When draw filed to final shape they are/were tapered, octagonal, from the breech end towards the muzzle to a point roughly one foot back from the muzzle, at which point they gradually taper back larger toward the muzzle. It added elegance to barrel and more importantly lost some weight which made offhand shooting easier.

SRH

Anything I know about Ideals (and, that isn't much) I picked up trying to learn more about Darnes. I have handled and shot enough Ideals that I know they simply aren't my cup of tea, but, I acknowledge that there are people who are thrilled with them.
A good friend owns a 16 that is everything an Ideal should be, nicely engraved, retractable sling, skip line checkering, perhaps 95% original condition.
Neither of us can hit anything with it. I seem to remember the chokes were beyond tight, and the chambers short. We both shoot his well worn Costo much, much, better. Both guns have swamped ribs, for what it is worth.
I'm pretty sure the Costo was also a Manufrance product, but, it is a far more conventional, and, pedestrian gun than an Ideal.
I love a Darne, of any grade, that fits me, and have owned literally dozens over the years. But, I also believe there is some truth to the old saw "Beware the man with one gun" and I'm not likely to struggle with a bunch of different designs of bird guns. I own a couple of autoloading 12s that haven't been touched in years.
They aren't my preference. I can manage a pump, usually. I ran one often as a younger man, and the lessons are still there.
I'm not looking for any more guns, but, I wouldn't mind being a better shot with the ones I have. There is always room for improvement on my score sheets, and I work on that more than anything else, with the hope my wingshooting skill rides up as well.
What rib I use between the guns I own, hasn't seemed to be a factor in my progress, unless, I am thinking about it at the shot.
Then, I miss.
So, I try, hard, not to think about anything, save the bird, at the shot, clay or otherwise.


Best,
Ted

"La plume de ma tante" is a well-known expression from French teaching, as it was done many moons ago: How to express possession. The French don't have our very handy 's to stick on the end of a word. So that's the only way to say "My aunt's pen"--"plume", in that case, going back to the time when one wrote with a quill.

Returning to shotguns and ribs, I'd suggest that "the world's best shooters" are a group determined by which ones break the most targets. And in most target shooting disciplines, the shooter is allowed to mount his gun before calling for the target. A raised rib simply gives him a more reliable reference point to tell him he has it in the right place than would no (visible) rib and just a front bead.

For the upland hunter, on the other hand, a rib adds weight. If you're walking and carrying a whole lot more than you're mounting and shooting, the weight saved by not having a rib, or having less of one, can make a difference. Probably worth noting here that you're not likely to see many swamped rib guns used by driven shooters. (These days, of course, many driven shooters are carrying those modern contraptions with barrels superposed rather than juxtaposed.) About the most "minimalist" rib you're likely to see on a gun at a driven shoot would be the Churchill variety, which extends the full length of the barrel but which narrows down very quickly from a wide start at the breech. They may not want extremely heavy guns (unless they're shooting extremely high birds), but they're not as concerned with weight as, say, someone out for a rough shooting day.

The world's best shooters left juxtaposed barreled guns a long, long, time ago. What they shoot, today, bears about as much relevance to our SXS guns, and the ribs they wear, as the Apollo moon landings would to a future Mars landing.
They both use propellent. That, is about it.

Best,
Ted

I don't know whether the best shooters left sxs, or whether sxs left the best shooters. Production really took a tumble in this country post-WWII, at which point autos and pumps were the guns to own. OU's didn't really surge in popularity until the Japanese guns started showing up in the 60's. Reliable, and far less expensive than the Belgian Superposeds, which were about the only very popular OU's up to that point. With the American sxs industry dead--and they had all made target guns, both trap and skeet, prior to WWII--it came down to a foreign sxs or OU if you wanted a 2 barrel field gun. But they also offered OU target models, which was not the case in the foreign sxs guns. More than anything, I think everyone in the States forgot that sxs had competed well in the target games prior to the war. Seeing some now again, from SKB for example, but for the very narrow niche market of the sxs competitions.

I don't believe that the new Perrazi double is setting records for sales, or, scores, Larry.
For whatever reason, the guys who do the best shooting, seem to shoot O/Us and un-singles and whatever, better than they do old style doubles.

I don't claim to know why.

Best,
Ted

I can shoot a S x S to within about 4 or 5 birds out of a hundred compared to what I can shoot with my MX8, on a medium to high difficulty course. I'll believe until I die that there is an advantage to the O/U for tougher targets, but like Ted I don't claim to know why.

Soft targets ....... I can shoot the S x S just as well.

SRH

First ejectors, and now you admit to owning a stack barrel. How the mighty have fallen. I shall pray for you, brother Stan.




ps. If you own a gauge other than 16, please don't tell me.
Mike

Ted, some would say it's the "single sighting plane" thing. I'd say it's the fact that very few people start out with sxs these days. Prior to WWII, lots of people started with sxs, so they naturally gravitated to sxs target guns. And American gunmakers supplied those, for both skeet and trap. Then WWII put semiautos into the hands of millions of Americans, most of whom likely had never handled one of those previously. Helped make semiauto shotguns a whole lot more popular after the war. By which time both Fox and Parker were out of the sxs market (or at least the higher quality part of it, in the case of Fox). And Ithaca and LC Smith didn't last very long. Easier to keep production costs lower on single barreled guns than on doubles. And it's worth noting that OU's never really caught on until they started arriving in large numbers and at reasonable prices from overseas makers--but imported by respected American makers like Winchester, Ithaca, and Browning. (Who also brought us some pretty decent sxs at reasonable prices.) But the OU was essentially the new kid on the block, and target shooters--most of whom were likely far more used to a pump or an auto than a sxs--took to them the way previous generations had taken to sxs. The usual excuse then (and now) for shying away from sxs being that it just doesn't look right when you shoulder it after you've been used to looking down just one barrel all your life.

But hey, it's nice to go to the club, grab your sxs, and shoot a round of trap or skeet or SC or 5 stand and remain competitive with the guys who are shooting purpose-built target guns. And it even convinces some of them to buy a sxs and give it a try, just for the fun of it.

Prayers always appreciated, Mike. I'm in constant need of strength to resist the temptation of believing I need another double, be it a two-story or a two-row gun. Actually, I've got two two-story guns right now, the MX8 comp gun and the 687 SPII Sporting 20 dove gun.

Doubles of both types are like grandkids, in a way. My wife would roll her eyes if she read that, but as efficient as my O/U guns are, there is a special place in my life for S x Ss, as that is what I learned to shoot flying with. One can never replace the other, and shouldn't vie for importance on my racks.

SRH