Okay, so we all know how the English gun is held up as the pinnacle of perfection in the shotgun making world, and often it is said things like "The English sure knew how to get it right, they've been at it for a long time". Or, "The English had perfected the shotgun before anyone else even began to figure it out".

Let's examine this for a moment. While I am quite willing to give the English credit where due, and there is much due, just which gunmakers have been around the longest, and arguably the most successfully?

The oldest American gunmaker is Remington, dating it's beginnings at 1816. The oldest English gunmaker that I am aware of is Westley Richards, who it is said began in 1812. Then, where do we go? Let's see ........ well, I guess we must give "honorable mention" to those Italians, eh? The inimitable Beretta, who began supplying the gun making trade in , uh, hmmm, .......oh yes, the year 1526. Getting mighty close to 500 years of continuous gun making.

There should be another word to use to describe Beretta besides "iconic". The word falls short of conveying fully what the company represents. But, age isn't everything, you say. Quality must account for something, too. Can anyone argue that Beretta figured it out a looong time ago? The world is saturated with Beretta doubleguns that just keep on going, and going and going, seldom if ever being returned to the maker, or a gunsmith for repair.

Just who really got it right? All you boys, tighten up your knickers, tilt your sporty driving cap jauntily to the side and give it your best shot. Just who in the gun making field can come close to the reputation and success of the Italian firm Beretta?

SRH

If Remington had only built guns for Royalty then I suspect they'd be as nice or nicer than a Purdey.

Don't forget Smith & Wesson made all men equal....

Way to go Stan, kick 'em while they're down. Just kidding, really.

While they have some great guns here and there, I think Beretta is more of a manufacturer than a maker. I suspect if they were primarily makers, they would exist to sustain the name, and would probably be a shadow of some past heyday. I think they stood the test of time because they are first and foremost business people.

We have a winner!

Great Post!
Could it be that the world was different in the 1800's The British made guns for their market.... while the Italians, made guns for the world? The Brits' (and I love them dearly... even though I am 100% Italian), had the world revolving around them or at least that is what the elite of the driven shoot thought.

Just a thought, but my best friend who is a competitive sporting clay shooter says.... walk around any big shoot and your find a bunch of guys with Perrazi's switching their triggers, Kreighof's fiddling with their guns and the Beretta and Browning guns just working without a hitch.

As much as I love the feel of the British guns I have handled, I'll bet they can handle the pounding of a good Beretta at the clay range.

Jerry

Stan, I'm not sure I see you're point. You seem to be saying Beretta are the best firm. But you have also bought British gunmaking into your thinking, alongside Remington and how long the firms have been going. Oh and by the way, it's Anglophile, nothing to do with telephones!

I'll take it that what you're getting at is that you feel Beretta are the greatest. I believe this is an extremely subjective area and that we'd all end up arguing for those firms that we especially like, follow or support. It's much the same as some folk think Bentley is better than Rolls, or Lotus is better than Porsche, or Ford better than GM. Get a pub full of enthusiasts and they'll back whichever firm they feel most interested in, most loyal to or which they've followed for longest. Much the same for followers of football teams - or cricket teams, since you bought the Brits into it!

Either way, it'll make for lively discussion.

Tim

"The world is saturated with Beretta doubleguns that just keep on going, and going and going, seldom if ever being returned to the maker, or a gunsmith for repair."

In Charles Daly's heyday, A&F, VL&D, all these bygone pre-war American sporting goods firms imported fine guns from Prussia, Belgium and Great Britain to sell under their own names. I've seen the old catalogs, I've lusted after Lindners, I own a lovely Francotte made for A&F, etc.

I have to ask, who imported Beretta's into the US before WWII?

If Remington had only built guns for Royalty then I suspect they'd be as nice or nicer than a Purdey.

Don't forget Smith & Wesson made all men equal....


AND WHAT STRONG DRUGS ARE YOU ON NOW.

They made and still make very good game guns. You do not have to settle for English game gun if you don't want to. Excellent alternative is quality French game gun. We should remember the French were to game shooting what Samuel Colt was to revolvers.

Didn't Colt 'Peacemaker' make all men equal? I always thought Colt were the original revolvers and Smith & Wesson ones were made to resemble Colt products.

That above statement is a bit hard to understand.
Could you please clarify the intended meaning.
O.M

Boss " Makers of Best Guns only"

I had no idea Beretta had been around for that long. Fair play , that's impressive. Their modern guns clearly have a well deserved reputation too, as do Browning with their brilliant designs which was said earlier.
Cogswell & Harrison have been in business since 1770 and there were a great many gun making firms which were in business before that but didn't survive as long, but I'm guessing it's breech loading shotguns were talking about here.
I think the brit gun trade borrowed/refined several European designs (french and German ?) Which led to the handful of much copied actions we still see in use today. The A&D boxlock springs to mind along with the famous sidelock and O/U designs. Maybe it's things like choked barrels and reliable ejector and trigger systems and the non stop research into balance, patterning and ammunition that helped give the English/British shotgun it's fine reputation back in the day. We also churned out millions of basic trade guns and some patent guns which didn't really work very well. Some were tools, some were built for the more discerning customer and other firms chose only to make the finest guns (even if many of these were born on a bench in the Midlands next to a utility grade gun the same pair of hands were working on.)
One thing is clear, there were amd still are superb guns made in many countries.
Some firms such as SKB had been around for a surprisingly long time too . Beretta may take some beating though.

Are there any really old Berettas that survive....

Not a Beretta historian but I thought the Italians mostly made junk guns until 60 or 70 years ago and got where they got by copying others designs.

My point is that the Italians do not receive proper credit for their amazing domination of the market for fine double guns. Not only the continuous operation of one gunmaker, Beretta, but the innovations that have come from the little region of Brescia are astounding when taken into consideration. English names such as Boss, Woodward, Westley Richards, and Purdey cast a large shadow, but there is possibly a greater presence of gun making excellence. The monicker "London Gun" has carried an aura of near awe, and has been held up as a banner for two centuries. But, the awe might well be better placed now with the term "Brescia Gun".

Consider not only the high end guns of the goliath Beretta, but the likes of Rizzini, Piotti, Guerini, Zanardini, Poli, Perugini & Visini, Famars Abbiatico and Salvanelli, and to ramp it up a notch or two ...... Perazzi, Bosis and Fabbri. And there are many, many more small shops in operation there today turning out the finest double guns with some of the finest engraving the world has ever known

I'm not casting aspersions on the great English makers, but by all means give all credit due to the finest competition, and hunting doubles in the world that come from the the Val Trompia, and surrounding area.

SRH

They filled a void left open by the English gun makers....

What always puzzled me at my gun club was every time you look around someone is having trouble out of their Perrazi yet the following remains.

The trade in Italy took a HUGE hit with the last economic downturn and is on life support at best, save Beretta. Most of the smaller makers and some decent sized ones like A&S are no longer in business. I think the Italians are wonderful at bolino style engraving and target guns. Game guns? Not so much. They try but I believe the term London Best continues to this day for a reason. I'll keep my 20's vintage H&H self-opener thanks.

The royalty angle is amusting. If Purdey depended on royalty and nobility for his living he would have gone bankrupt. The shaming of fellow lords and nobles by Lord Henry Bentinck to pay up their debts to Purdey is well documented.

The ledger books of Purdey and other makers feature more plain Misters and middle army ranks than lords and princes. The untitled were and are the bread and butter clientele.

Designwise, there is not a boxlock made anywhere that can rival the Beretta 626. In sidelocks their 451 can stand against any other. In OU sidelocs the trapezoid shoulders yield a shallower and NARROWER gun than any Boss derived OU.

As for what can be done if you go seriously custom, the photo is of a humble Essential 686 that was customised by British gunmaker Casleton. I post the link because photo posting here is such a pain

http://oplognosia.com/?s=Casleton&submit=

That thing is butt ugly...

The English gun has been tested over and over again on more than one continent in the harshest conditions and under the most dangerous of circumstances for centuries. No other has been put to that extreme test for that amount of time.

Yes, it was Colt, specifically Colonel Colt who made all men equal.

The Paterson was in operation in the 1840's out west.


"Most significant, however, were those revolvers reissued to units of the Texas Rangers. Among these border horsemen the Colt revolver first won its reputation as a weapon ideally suited to mounted combat. Using Paterson Colts purchased in 1843, Col. John Coffee Hays commanded a Ranger contingent in several uneven battles against depredating Comanches."

Here,


https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/lnc01

"God created man, but Samuel Colt made them equal."

Stan, I think you make an interesting point when you raise the fact that Beretta has been in business for 500 years. Although, when you look into it, the direct linkage to 500 years in the past has a few tenuous links. Unlike say, The Hudson Bay Company, current parent to Sak's Fifth Avenue and Lord & Taylor, which will shortly be celebrating 350 years since they were chartered by the British Crown in 1670, a full 100 years before your tea party.

And I have no argument with the idea that Beretta currently can make some lovely guns. But when was the last time anyone on this board wanted to discuss some lovely pre war Beretta? Or any pre war Italian gun? When we delve into the world of sporting doubles, which is what this board talks about when we aren't crapping on liberals, the Italians are noticeably absent until the post war era.

Which, to my mind, confirms the point Craig made way back at the start. The Beretta family can't hold a candle, long term, to any of the storied British gunmakers, nor some of the French or Germans, as "gunmakers".

But no other firearms firm that makes sporting shotguns can touch Beretta as a business enterprise. There is where the Beretta's family's genius lies.

By the same token, there is only one other firearms COMPANY that comes close as a business, IMHO. And that would be FN, the Belgian joint venture whose early years were driven by none other than Henri Pieper.

Beretta only dominates the vertical half of the doublegun market. They never have, and never will, dominate the horizontal half.

And just which one of those makes up the lion's share of doubleguns, Larry? Obviously it is superposed guns. Even the British shoot Italian O/Us now. Wonder why?

SRH

I believe you need to follow the money. In order to produce high quality firearms you need to have wealthy people. During the Victorian era England had a large number of wealthy people with significant amounts of discretionary income. That's why the number of high quality gun makers were centered there. The highest number of wealthy people were centered around London. I'm not saying that there were no other high quality gun makers in other countries but the number of high end manufactures centered in England. High quality requires skill and the number of high end manufactures in England produced many highly skilled tradesmen. It's well know that these highly skilled tradesmen frequenty moved from one company to the next, most likely to increase personal wealth and this resulted in a critical transfer of technology from one company to the next. This technology transfer and melding of one technology with the next is what really accelerated quality in English guns and in my opinion, for what it is worth, is why English guns in general are the highest quality and those made in London are at the very top.

The volume of guns produced really has nothing to do with the highest quality. Although manufacturers such as Beretta and Remington produced good quality and perhaps high quality guns, they did not produce the highest quality firearms. Even their high end, hand made guns did not reach the level of quality seen in the highest quality guns in and around London IMHO.

Its
"God didn't create all men equal Samuel Colt did."

The Brits made upland guns and the Americans made duck guns. England developed the industrial revolution. The US improved manufacturing. During the early days of the industrial revolution the US was involved in an exhausting civil war. It would not be until the middle of the 20th century that Briton would be brought to it's knees by two world wars. The Americans have never built a a quality SxS the Brits have never made a good pump gun.

Would you say that the demand for low price basic models had taken the lions share of the sales during the 20th century ?
To draw a parallel, the firm who could make an ever lasting stay sharp razor blade would probably only sell one to each person who needed one . What would they do then ? I assume they'd need to put a hefty price tag on that product or it just wouldn't pay.
That's off on a tangent from the original post but I wondered if a similar scenario contributed to the decline of the Brit gun industry.
There may be more guns on farms than in wealthier people's cabinets , while the wealthy may climb over a stack of beautifully balanced well made Belgian guns to pick a gun with a famous household name, did the market for a cheaper basic and solid gun which would probably see its owner out take over the world market ?

Not so.
The Brits made all guns. Light game to heavy waterfowl.
O.M

Yes PB is company in business to make a profit. They aren't going to dominate market that essentially does not exist. The English boutique shops cater like they always had to those with disposable income and time to enjoy shooting sports. From historical point of view in USA guns were a necessity often used to feed families. They went into the bushes shot twice and almost always ate what they shot not so in Great Britain. They almost never ate what they shot and had game chased to them by peasants waving arms and making noise. The wealthy US tycoons came later in USA than England took passenger liners to England and bought their guns there, no?

Image. In certain niches of our society it matters what you eat, wear and use.

I think all of the great British makers just could not figure out how to stay in the general market, so they generally moved to niche markets. Chances are, Beretta's longevity and strength is in their ability to react and diversify.

People who contend that the Italians can't make game guns clearly do not have a clue. I refer you to Nobili's books for elucidation and enlightenment. And as a whole, the current crop of Italian engravers would be difficult to fault for either execution or originality. That is not to say that they are unique for there are obviously many American, for example, engravers of incredible skill, etc.

As to the fragility of Perazzis. Contentions to that effect are as well clearly made by those who don't have a clue. The Perazzi MX based series was designed as a competition gun and not adapted form anything else, pure and simple - with the emphasis on simple. Which is also its curse since it is so simple any meathead can take a look at it and think - nothing to it, I can fix that. Which of course is not only just stupid but wrong as well. Simple does not mean imprecise and precision demands expertise. Elite competition shooters worldwide rely on Perazzis not only for medals but massive purses. Personally it seems contradictory that a gun that breaks down incessantly would be their choice. The problematic Perazzis that I have seen were in the hands of people that had absolutely no business having them.
Over the course of the last nearly three decades and a number of Perazzis I have had to replace one broken firing pin and one broken hammer spring. For some while my wife and I were putting +/- 500 rounds a week thru the things and I still shoot 200-300 a week. So a modest estimate of 10K/yr for 30 years. Make of that what you will.

prolly not JMO

Interesting that in the discussion no one cares to discuss the McKinley tariff intent and impacts.
Jeremy

I thank you for what you said. I love Italians. They are warm, kind and generous people from place with old and interesting history. It makes me very happy when I buy Italian shoes, shirt, noodles, spaghetti sauce,.....

Hey wonk! Perazzis are great but out of reach for many of us. Is there a gun sort of like a Perazzi but much cheaper?

Vostok MU-8. Those can still be found in very good to excellent condition. This is important because they haven't been made in many years so parts are likely made of unobtainium.

I first started to see the Beretta 680 guns in volume as trap guns in the early 80's.

The saying was 'good gun for the money'.

That's the key to their success even today.

Beretta sells these by the boatload, due to price/value. Simple as that.

I've seen 3 of the 680 series guns break a hammer, one of them was my 1985 vintage S682X trap gun at about the 50,000 target mark. Rich Cole sent me a hammer, and it dropped right in.

The Italian gun makers certainly have a long proud history, but they tooled up for CNC volume production at just the right time with sound and serviceable designs.

I currently have 5 PB's including 2 of their excellent automatics, and I can keep them running without 'returning them to the maker'.

I'm unaware of any Brit guns that were ever made in volume for a really mass market. The 'copies' like the Ithaca SKB and the Spanish H&H clones likely sold more units than the originals. It's just a whole different world, and I'm not well enough funded to participate.

For a very nice SxS Italian made gun, look at B. Rizzini.

There are several good O/Us that are made with similarities to the Perazzi, but they ain't Perazzis. I've shot them all, I think, and nothing, but nothing handles and shoots like the the original. A Google search will bring up the brands that share similarities with the Perazzi.

Actually, the gun that is the closest to feeling like my MX8 is the 32" Beretta 682 Gold E.

SRH

Exactly. With a nice light barrel set.

'Lively' is the word, the opposite of a K-80.

I've only shot clays with a Perazzi once. They are quite an amazing gun. They feel so natural it's almost unnatural.

If you really want a Perazzi, and the cost of a new one is just too much for your budget, as it was for mine, be patient and watch hard ....... put feelers out. A used gun with many thousands rounds of life left in it can be had without breaking the bank. My first one was an old Ithaca imported MX8, well worn and needed a little TLC, but it was a Perazzi. I got into it for about $1400, as I recall. Had a new bolt installed, ribs relaid and the gun reblued later for another $800. Sold it after getting the one I have now for way more than I had in it.

The MX8 I now shoot is a Winchester imported gun, so still an oldie, but was in much higher condition when I was offered it. I bought it for $2550, in the original hard case. I have shot it hard for ten years or so, and had a new bolt installed in it once. It will outlast me, I'm sure.

Point is, you don't have to take a second mortgage on your home to get into a Perazzi. Just watch, and be patient.

SRH

Shotgunjones makes some sound points:

"Rich Cole sent me a hammer, and it dropped right in."

"The Italian gun makers... tooled up for CNC volume production at just the right time with sound and serviceable designs."

"I currently have 5 PB's... I can keep them running without 'returning them to the maker'."

I would add that the top English makers also went over to CNC, but the benefits were not passed on to the clients.

Service by the maker sounds cute but expensive. Ten thousand dollars for a restock, more for a new pair of barrels and the gun must travel to the maker and stay there for months.

Sending guns to the maker, across international frontiers is a major project. Within the "common market" of the EU a return to the maker across borders requires four import-export permits, each one needing applications, fees and time.

Owner, or at least local gunsmith, serviceability trumps quaintness every time.

My Zoli z-gun Expedition 20 gauge with its 29.5" bbls., open Woodward style grip is a pretty "gamey" like gun with competition gun roots. The gun is built like a tank, but it's balanced perfectly. The trigger group is small, compact, coil spring driven, trigger pulls are like a competition pistol and it's also removable for cleaning, lube isn't necessary because all of the trigger components are coated. I believe the Zoli Kronos is a direct competitor to the Perazzi MX series in the European clays arena. It's a very highly regarded gun. There are a lot of people who also like the characteristics of the Marrochi line of competition guns.
In the last few years, at the clubs I shoot at, guys who shot K guns and Perazzis have been shooting Blasers. There's a lot of them out there and guys seem to really like them.

For me a Perazzi is kinda like Jill St John I can love them with out wanting them. Both are more then I can handle. I don't like to shoot clays. I like to hunt primarily to get to walk with my dog out in a field. I don't want to ruin my hearing any more then it is already by a bunch of shooting. I did have a Ithaca imported Perazzi once. Great gun but not as great as a modern Perazzi.

That Perazzi ages better then either me or Jill St John.

I had gotten the opinion that the Zoli guns are very good, too. Also, some of the Guerinis. Some of them are stocked too high for me, as a general rule, but that does not take away from the quality of the gun. It just requires a bit more personal fitting. I have a Beretta 687 SPII Sporting 20 ga., which comes with 30" barrels .... probably a very similarly handling gun to your Zoli Expedition. It may well be the most perfect dove gun I have ever held in my hands, though I've never had the privilege of trying a Perazzi 20 ga. game gun. Some say they are exquisite for doves.

As for the Blasers, I believe they are very well made, have tried out a couple, but they seem to lack some unquantifiable handling characteristic that my MX8 has. As near as I can tell, it is my ability to get on the second bird in a true pair quickly enough, but I can't say what it is about the guns that causes that. I will say that I was talking with a friend who shoots the live bird circuit pretty regularly, and we were talking about the Blaser. He said he knows at least 20 very serious shooters who have tried Blasers and gotten rid of them because the perceived recoil is so bad. When you talk about recoil in a competition gun you are not always referring to the "ouch!" factor, or always to the fatigue factor from recoil, real though those two may be. To a serious sporting clays shooter or a live bird shooter, the ability to recover from the recoil of the first shot and get on the second bird, or the same bird in the case of pigeons, without "wrestling the gun" back into line under recoil, is crucial. That is what I noticed with the Blaser. I am not convinced that couldn't be dealt with, but for now the Perazzi guns have it "built in", IMO.

SRH

And Smith & Wesson made it better...

This may be the only thing we agree on...

Find a reference during the 1840s or 50s in the old west where a Smith & Wesson revolver was being used by anyone. I'll save you the trouble there isn't one.

Which is better now, I don't know, but that's completely subjective.

How about 1890 when Colt was still stuffing their out dated single action revolver down the Army's throat. Lugar, Mauser and Brochart were developing automatic pistols that worked.

Still subjective Pooch,

When Sir Richard Burton in 1856 began to gather his expedition to go in search of the source of Africa’s Nile River, he made it a point to acquire a pair of Colt 1851 Navy revolvers for his personal sidearms.


Where was your Luger then?

Still just a spurt in Lugers dreams...

A short while later a big game hunter held off an entire African tribe with a broom handle Mauser....where was your slow loading Colt then ?

Audience is important, Stan. The audience to which you're speaking HERE tends to be more interested in the leftover share of the doublegun market rather than the lion's share. More articles about OU's or sxs in Double Gun Journal??

A 'short while later" Joe? A half a century or more later is not considered by anyone as a "short while later."

No, Larry, YOU need to consider the audience, by rereading my initial post. Nowhere in it did I specify S x S guns. I intentionally directed the thread toward doubleguns, which most certainly include O/Us, no?

After all, this is the DOUBLEGUN Journal website, isn't it?

SRH

Of the 10 Remington SxS's I own, only one has needed repairs other than a occasional top lever spring. And I like the way they feel and swing when shooting SC's. The heavier weight than a light English gun takes up the recoil better. My Parker hammer guns have never needed a repair. Wait, one needed a firing pin. I feel my American made guns have stood the test of time quite well and have never felt the need for foreign made guns. There are still parts available if needed.

Stan, your eyes are horizontal, shouldn't your barrels be the same ?

Will horizontal barrels be enough to ensure a maker survives for the long haul?

I have used that same line in jest, Paul, and I own way more S X S guns than O/Us. But, this thread was not about S X Ss exclusively. It was intended to be concerning doubleguns , inclusive of O/Us. Some just can't seem to get past the fact that O/U guns are the pinnacle of the evolution of doubleguns. They are too hung up in the Victorian and Edwardian eras to be objective.

SRH

Actually Stan . . .no, it isn't the Doublegun Journal website . . . unlike the Shooting Sportsman Magazine or Pointing Dog Journal websites, which are run by the magazines in question.

Your initial post covers a lot of ground . . . starting with a significant amount of condensed history. There are indeed more OU's being produced now than sxs . . . although since you started your history in the 16th century, I'd point out that the popularity of the OU is really quite recent. And Browning rather than Beretta certainly deserves credit for producing the first truly popular (in terms of numbers sold) OU with their Superposed. Beretta only jumped aboard the train that was riding on rails laid down by Browning.

Regardless of the OU's popularity, it is the sxs that rules with those who visit here. If you want to go by number of guns sold, then surely we can go by number of threads dealing with sxs vs OU's. So while Berettas are popular with some people, here you will find more fans of classic American, British, or Continental sxs. By far. Assuming your aim is for the topic of your discussion to have the most appeal here.

And Ford sells more vehicles than Mercedes, which makes Ford the winner if you count numbers. Quality? Maybe not so much.

All kinds of ways to determine who's on top. The Packers didn't even make it to the Super Bowl, but you visit your average bar in Wisconsin and you'll quickly learn which is the favorite team.

Here you go Stan.

A 'modern' Brit O/U in the works.

https://www.theexplora.com/will-westley-richards-introduce-a-new-ovundo/

Any guess on the price?

Speaking of price... Browning, of course, never 'produced' any O/U guns. He gave up factory work when he sold his first design to Winchester.

Ironically, today the FN Herstal operation owns the Browning name. Can you still order a B-25? Last I heard, they had gotten rather pricey.

The English gun trade turned out quite a few heavy weight 12 bore guns, up to eight pounds for waterfowl & live pigeon shooting.
O.M

It could be that given Beretta's longevity, the side by side game gun is also a quite recent product for them. Go Pack? Maybe, they're making the right off season moves.

You're trying to skirt the point, Larry. Doublegun is the key word, whether Doublegunshop, Doublegun Journal, or whatever. They're all doubleguns if they have two barrels, hardhead.

And you shouldn't make assumptions that I post something in order to get the "most appeal here". Not at all.

SRH

I rather think Beretta has been making side by sides all along.

A quick look at their history shows game guns being made in the late 1800's. And they did their early monoblock side by sides at least as early as 1903

You know guys, you are discussing apples and oranges. If you want and can afford a $200.000 gun, yes it is going to be one of the best but if you are talking about $1,000 gun, it is totally different. the maker can put more time and refinement is the $200,000 gun than the $1,000 gun. Berretta's history is very impressive but with the new cnc machines making guns now, there will soon be very little difference in how a gun is made, the older English, Germen and other were great guns. I own many and enjoy all. I enjoy taking my Purdeys out or Browning's or Parkers. They are different guns but are all fun to shoot.

P.S. Is hell froze over because I have to agree with h0meless about the broom handle. It does load fast and it was a great gun to shoot.

Most if not all cartridge handguns will tend to load faster than a percussion revolver. But, in 1856 there was no such animal.

So, equally hardhead . . . you now agree this really isn't the Doublegun Journal website, in spite of the similar (but not identical) name? We're making progress.

Actually, I'm fairly certain your initial post was more in the nature of trying to ruffle feathers, since I'm sure you understand that the main interest of most folks who hang around here is sxs rather than OU. And my simple response was that however much Beretta has succeeded in the OU market, they never have and never will dominate the sxs market. Not that they don't make decent sxs . . . but it's a very small slice of their business. But a large slice of the level of interest on this BB.

From one hardhead to another ...... I did misspeak when I called it the Doublegun Journal website. My bad.

What you will not accept is that I was not referencing S X S guns to the extent that you are, but doubleguns in general. One more time with a correction, this is a doublegun website, is it not? Even though the larger focus of most here are S X S guns, there is not a separate sub-forum for O/Us, is there?

SRH

To make this site better the webmaster has expended offerings by providing us with several sections. "Feel free to use this system to discuss your doubles, drillings, combination guns, other fine firearms, and related material. The rules are really......" I suppose members should decide what constitutes other fine firearms.

Cost is not as much of a factor in the ownership of good double guns as most posters would make us think. Gun buyers who "don't get out much" truly do have to pay through the nose for high quality guns. However, gun shows, clay target shoots, the internet, if used to find guns, are the way to great guns at reasonable prices. I have been shooting Krieghoffs in competition for decades, paid $775 for my first one, and not much more for the ones that followed. My Beretta 682 was bought directly from the company for $1200. My English guns were bought a bit on the cheap also. Just keep your nose to the ground. They are out there.

Jagermeister, are you really going to use that to justify the fact that you, a guy who doesn't own even one Double Gun, posts regurgitated crap about semi-autos and pump action riot guns here on a DOUBLE GUN forum?

I'd like to discuss why we should believe anything you say when there have been so many inconsistencies in your claims. You have lied to us about the guns you claimed to purchase. You have lied to us about the number of guns you own. And you have lied to us about your reloading activities. Then yesterday, when you got busted in lies about your reloading activities, you compounded that lie with another lie as a lame and unbelievable excuse:


Post # 472881 on 2/22/17- Thread :" 16 ga loads not filling the hull?"--

Post #475337 on 3/17/17- Thread: "Reloading Herter's 16 Gauge Shells from Cabela's"--

SO WHAT DOES A LIAR WHO SAYS HE NEVER RELOADS SHOT SHELLS USE GREX FOR ???

Post # 476288 on 3/37/17- Thread: "Information on Gunmaker Rivolier Pere et Fils"


That's a good one Jagermeister. Does the Grex do a good job of keeping your shells cushioned in the boxes? Why do you have to repackage your shotgun shells? Is it because every other one is positioned backwards in the original box, and it gets confusing when you load your gun? Does the Grex make a mess and get on your clothes when you take shells out of the box? Do people around you at the skeet club you think you have dandruff?

Sorry for going off topic. Perhaps I should start a new thread to discuss repackaging shot shells in Grex. More people need to learn about you and your new and creative use of polycarbonate shot buffering granules.

The Internet is full of frauds and liars.

And don't we all know that!

I'm not sure that the O/U is the pinnacle of anything but fad. It has been subject of more development, and marketing, but nothing has been arrived at that is not xferable to SxS's for the most part. And personally I feel that O/U's are subject to more compromises of design than SxS's by far. Much is made of how difficult it is to produce a SxS compared to an O/U and I say that is just BS. There is certainly nothing that modern production techniques cannot accommodate. Beretta and others build/have built perfectly fine SxS's for little or no more than a comparable O/U at any price point.
Get serious people - the SxS is a victim of fad and marketing and making excuses as an explanation is tired. If George Digweed were shooting a SxS guess what every wannabe would have to have? And I'm certain that a 21st Century SxS would impose no handicap to him.

Chances are, that would be playing to a tiny choir that knows of the fellow. What would you propose for the general market? I'd doubt composite stocks and banana clips on a side by side would appeal to the weekend wanna be merc. What would have to be screwed onto a side by side to make it a 21st. century competition gun, Perazzi parts until it handles like a good OU, then flip the barrels?

The SxS defeated Sturm, Ruger & Co., a well financed modern design and production operation if there ever was one.

An unaltered market defeated Ruger, trying to sell to a market that was unimpressed by the product.

"Chances are, that would be playing to a tiny choir that knows of the fellow. What would you propose for the general market? I'd doubt composite stocks and banana clips on a side by side would appeal to the weekend wanna be merc. What would have to be screwed onto a side by side to make it a 21st. century competition gun, Perazzi parts until it handles like a good OU, then flip the barrels?"

That is all stupid enough that a reply is unnecessary

Major competitions would have to be shot and won by SxS shooters. What is needed is for people who go to shooting clubs on consistent basis is to see guys using mostly SxS shotguns with only few O/U or other types. It would help if that show with "Duck Commander" started using SxS shotguns exclusively. Another way SxS admirers "shoot themselves in both feet" is having the so called "Side by Side Shoots". I can understand no semi-autos or pumps but why can't a fella with vintage field grade O/U with fixed chokes plus double triggers shoot along with SXS guys? That is not allowed correct?

The vast majority of people I know who shoot game and clays use O/U, from silver pigs to high grade FN Brownings. I keep hearing something a lot from them. It'll be a story about the old guy on the shoot who shoots an old SXS. It may be hammer or hammerless, 20,16 or 12 but the same thing crops up in the conversation every time.
"Bloody hell he shoots well with it" or "I don't know how he drops those birds with that old thing"
I never tire of hearing those tales

No big deal, I completely understand. I wonder what keeps Perazzi in business, not just a buzz word. A handful of elite shooters that can use the tool to its utmost, or customers buying the name with no real intentions of using its capabilities.

IMHO, the popularity of the O/U is also a generational issue, as the SXS lost it's popularity after WWI, in no small part due to it's higher cost. After that, young gunners were raised on less expensive single barrel guns like pumps etc. Moving up to an O/U provides the same type sighting picture as opposed to a SXS, which can take a little getting used to.

Regards
Ken

I spent 30 years in the sports equipment business, where name brand and elite athlete endorsement is critical to success, both for any particular company as well as the introduction of any significant new technology.

If for some reason, a gun company decided that they could be more profitable/gain market domination, by switching to a SxS design, it's easy to make the market follow. Most people, despite what they wish for themselves, are susceptible to good marketing.

Sign up the top 10 most successful/influence shotgunners alive today. Get as many outdoor programming shows as possible to feature users of SxS. Deluge the print media with ads and stories by "independent" outdoor writers extolling the virtues of 21st Century technology in these new SxS shotguns. Create sales environments at LGS and the big box guys that have the sale staff pushing SxS (Easy to do with spiffs and sales/product training seminars for the staff).

10 years from the start of a program like that and SxS will be on the ascendancy and O/U and semis with be "your grampa's shotgun".

It is combination of things not perception of 'your grampa's shotgun' alone. Last quality affordable modern sporting SxS shotguns were the SKB 385, SKB 485 series. Fine mass produced SxS guns with modern features equal to BSS Grade II BLE. Problems were SKB unlike Beretta or Browning is not particularly popular they were heaver than typical game gun and made in Japan. Young people did not want "grampa's shotgun' and older folks who served or had their parent(s) serve at Pearl Harbor, Leyte Gulf, Okinawa,......could not warm up to them.

JM, have you been on the inside when the technological development and marketing schemes for ground-breaking, game changing consumer products have been created? Have you had to compete in business against the same? I have. I'm talking about athletic shoes, golf equipment, tennis racquets, downhill ski gear. I've been on the inside while all theses industries were turned upside down by new technologies and/or the very best marketing money can buy.

People are people and the vast majority are susceptible to the same things. Nothing special about guns or hunters/sport shooters.

You don't know what the shit you are talking about and you say stuff just to add to your post count.

One more way you are an idiot.....I guess that old Japanese thing really screwed Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Mazda and Suzuki, right.

Ruger would not have designed, tooled up, spent money on advertising, and finally after a fashion 'produced' a SxS gun for a market they had not surveyed.

People were indeed asking for a an American made SxS. The same folks financed the RBL project and waited through long production delays for delivery.

Neither gun was going to sell in huge volume. The Benelli or Beretta 390 series customer isn't the target audience.

Given the already small unit numbers, all the profit whatever there was from the Gold Label disappeared when a significant number started coming back with regulation issues. Project abandoned.

Limited edition and specialty items are not uncommon in industry as a whole. Automotive in particular is full of low volume models that serve as 'flagships' for the brand even if they don't sell many units and might even lose money. It's a prestige thing. A Corvette is not marketed to soccer moms or pickup men and that's who keeps the company going.

I recently found a very nice B. Rizzini SxS. That's a company known for their O/U products but they keep a SxS in the line also even though they are pretty scarce. It shoots to point of aim too.

It is clearly a doublegun website. No separate forum for OU's . . . although clearly there should be. Every time the subject pops up, I have to tilt my head 90 degrees when reading about stack barrels.

Seriously, my first doublegun was an OU. American-made, no less: Savage 420 20ga. Only made for a few years, late 30's-early 40's. A Savage 420 is a good example of an OU that can turn someone into a sxs lover in a hurry.

Good number of cars from those makers are assembled in USA. We still see lot of Fords, Buicks, Chevrolet cars which carry American name but are assembled here from components made abroad. I don't mind stuff made in Japan or China, but I heard and seen on war footage films many that served in WWII went through terrible experience. I can't blame them for choosing products made outside of Japan.

OMG, Quite showing how dumb you are!!

Those Japanese companies have assembly plants in the US because their sales successes with Japanese made cars A) tipped the balance of trade in favour of the Japanese, resulting in a rise in the value of the YEN against the USD, making their cars cheaper to build in the US than in Japan for the US market because of currency rates, and B) because of the threat of additional tariffs and duties combined with incentives from individual states to bring jobs.

These are the RESULTS OF SALES SUCCESS, not the cause. The cause is they made great cars, out competed the US Big Three and stole giant portions of market share.

But yeah, no one wanted to buy Japanese stuff because of, you know, Pearl Harbour.

Idiot!

I'm not criticizing Japanese companies or companies from other countries putting stuff together in USA or elsewhere because they save money in the production process. One example is fine Browning Auto 5 Sweet 16 assembled from components made all over at undisclosed location. It isn't USA because if that was so Browning would be more than happy to put that on their gun and wonderful box it comes in.

Browning's new (and I can hardly stand to even type it) 'A5', is made in Viana Portugal, as American Rifleman reported in 2012.

Browning's website says as much, without actually stating it.

They also now use the once derogatory term 'humpback' as a sales feature. I've never understood that... show me a 'hump'.

A Browning with a Sjogren inertia action. Sheesh.

The barrel doesn't move? No glory? Nothing is reaffirmed? Too bad I lived to see it.

JM, I am taking you to task, not because you don't like Japanese companies but because you used that lame and inaccurate excuse....Americans won't buy Japanese products because of Pearl Harbour and WWII.

Don't pick on him too much, I think he also gets to vote.

All this talk about ways to get the public to move toward S x Ss by having top shooters start using them, or having some TV personalities shoot them, is ignoring the obvious. Top clays shooters will never abandon the O/U for the S x S because ......... their scores will go down. It's a fact. You can deny it all you want, but if you abandon emotion and sentimentality, the O/U wins on points.

I've been a competitive sporting clays shooter for so many years I am beginning to have a problem remembering when I started. I grew up shooting a S x S, so there's no shortage of sentimental attachment to them, for me. I hunt with them most of the time, and shoot them well enough at game that I don't need to switch to something a hair better. I love competing against other S x Ss with mine, and do so in S x S events. I have several that are suited to the sporting game, probably the best suited is the 30" BSS. But, I cannot shoot as high a score with it as I can my MX8 Perazzi. I tried, Lord knows I did. I wanted to be the man who took a S x S and beat the rest with their O/U guns. But I can't, and most others can't, either.

Get out of denial and admit what the rest of the world knows. The O/U is the king of the sporting, and most of the other, clays games. Because it works better for them. It is much easier to shoot in the 90s on a tough sporting course with a good O/U than it is with a good S x S. I know what many will holler ....... "Well, that's just because nobody builds a specialty S x S for sporting clays." Hogwash, anybody can put one together that wants to badly enough, and there are some out there that are already pretty specialized for target work. If you had rather shoot a good round of clays with a S x S than shoot a great score with an O/U I've got no beef with you. My hat's off to you actually. But don't try to pee on my leg and tell me it's raining, that a S x S can go head to head with an O/U and come out on top. It may once in a blue moon, but the odds are stacked against it.

The handwriting's on the wall ...... read it and weep. Beretta and the rest of the brilliant Italian makers read it, and acted on it. And ...... they're doing quite well and positioned for the future. My hat's off to them.

Just because you'd rather live in the past does not make it good business.

SRH

Brister told a story in his 'Art and Science' book about the 'Quail Championships'.

Turns out most of the gentleman hunters who previously wouldn't be seen without a small bore double showed up, when the money was at stake, with 12 gauge Remington 1100 skeet guns.

Shotgunjones,

It echoes my experience. All except one of my friends and acquaintances who own "best" guns hunt with Italian autos.

And guys who shoot Darnes hunt with Mossburgs....

Don't ever hold one in your hands...

I guess we could compare OU vs sxs to aluminum vs wooden bats. Aluminum has a bunch of advantages . . . but they still use wood in MLB. I expect part tradition, and part the fact that the top pros are willing to challenge themselves with an "inferior" piece of equipment.

There are relatively few "full race" sxs target guns out there. Too many shooters these days have never used them, so they're going to stick with OU's. In the same way, a lot of OU's now being used in driven shooting in the UK. Mainly because that's what those shooters learned on. And even the really good sxs shooters will advise that if you're after the really high birds, you're better off with an OU. Yet they continue to shoot sxs. Maybe because the challenge is more important to them than the score.

The shooting games all started as off season practice for hunting. Especially true of skeet (invented by grouse hunters) and sporting clays (originally called hunters' clays in this country). The focus then shifts to score. Let's see . . . let's allow skeet shooters to mount the gun before calling for the bird. And no variable delay. Voila . . . lots more 100 straights. But since you don't premount when you walk in on a point, and you never know exactly when the bird is going to flush, it's no longer as valuable as practice for bird hunting as were the original rules.

No reason one can't get very nice target type SxS......

SxS competition type shotgun....

Looks very impressive.
The only place I seen pics of one in USA was at Fieldsport LTD site.

The twelve gauge versions are nothing special, but the Sweet 16 is sweet indeed. It's only a little uglier than the original steel receiver ones. If one wants prettier version of original one with same mechanism but more advanced alloy action there is the legendary and well-proven since ca. 1948 Franchi 48AL. Very, very nice upland shotgun.

Lot of successful folks use Italian semi-autos. Not long ago distinguished gentleman brought in old Browning 0/U two barrel set to trade for new ancy Benelli with engraved receiver and wood stock. A member from ShotgunWorld ended up buying the Browning.

I love my doubles, even tho I have only kept a couple, BUT (shame on me) if I only had ONE gun it would be a Benelli SBE. I bought one of the very early ones and shot it hard for many years. Sold it when I left the country...

I don't know if it's a good comparison, but in a way, I think it is exactly how equipment is chosen at the highest level. I think the top pros in baseball would gladly use anything that gave them an advantage and are constantly caught for cheating, but they are constrained by a rule book NOT a willingness to challenge themselves. Where top shotgunners are free to choose a competitive edge, they do so.

Driven shooting? That may be the most exclusive and expensive shotgun activity. It may be more about desires and appearances, maybe not the best place to justify one configuration over another.

I read in The Field or Shooting Gazette that those on "driven game circuit" (wealthy shooters hopping around Great Britain from one estate to another) used Perazzi 0/U guns. Not wanting to give all the business to Italians. DMB designed 8lb 0/U with long 30" or 32" barrels. It is bored to accept paper cased cartridge with felt wad and old style chilled shot. Well known English shooting instructor established British Vintagers on US Model indicating that perhaps SxS shotguns are even less popular in British game fields than they are in the USA.

Doesn't look like anything special to me at all. I suspect that close to no one here even knows what a current O/U competition gun looks like.

A final note on Perazzi - as I understand it Perazzi makes 2K-3K guns a year and the US comprises barely double digit % of that. I freely admit that their operation in SoCal makes that hard to believe but ............... AFAIK and FWIW

Having owned and shot both SxS and O/U guns, inept and limited as I am I find the difference to be for me only in the ergonomic functionality of the particular gun. I have seen only one SxS that had been seemingly optimized ergonomically for one person and that was sorta strange but I suppose he liked it. Clearly if functionality is to be gained then some meaningless concept of antique aesthetics cannot be imposed on it.
I certainly have some affection for my Perazzis but at the same time I am unable to discern any intrinsic functional superiority in O/U's in general.

shoot what you like - - think what you like - - makes no dif to me

This is such a s....d statement that I'd more than tend to agree. Did it look like the unseen current O/U comp. gun with the barrels tipped ninety degrees?

Nope. I saw it. It was more like 270 degrees.


___________________________
How's that for s....d (?) (.)

Stan, I forgot to qualify my comments a tad.

First, I was basing it on the idea some were putting forth here that there is no real disadvantage to using a SxS. That the value of the single sighting plane is exaggerated and the dominance of O/U has more to do with inertia....that's the action everyone uses because that's what everyone uses so that is the type that gets tweaked for competition.

And second, as long as the competitive disadvantage isn't too great, the top guys will switch if the money makes it worth while. Case in point. In the 1970's, every single top golfer in the world used forged irons. All the PGA, all club professionals, all top amateurs. Everyone. On the PGA Tour, it was common knowledge that the very best forged irons were made by a smallish maker called Ram Golf. Estimates range as high as 70% of all Tour players used Ram irons, even those who were signed to other, bigger companies like Spalding, Titlist, Hogan, Wilson etc. They would carry the bag and tape over the name on the club.

Around that time, cast iron heads started to become popular with higher handicap players because, although you lost "feel", the clubs heads were more forgiving to mis-hit shots. The pros would go on and on about how they would never give up their forged clubs because at their level of play, they needed the "feel".

Until they didn't. Until the amount of money and the demands of the marketing ends of things insisted they play with cast clubs because that's what the companies wanted to sell. You can make a cast head way easier and cheaper than grinding to shape a forging.

Pros can and will use the best equipment they can that also makes them the most money. Then you will likely find that the sliver of advantage afforded by a certain technology is not that critical to their success. Tiger Woods was going to be the dominant player for 15 years no matter what club he played with.

The same is likely true with competitive shot-gunners. Only difference is there is not the same motivation for the companies to change the status quo.

My dad says that "steel feels"
So don't go hurting the feelings of your guns by how you speak of them. Kick the dog, so to speak.
In this vein, a hand made, hand fitted & finished gun feels & even smells to me better than a 1 year old CNC nickel plated chrome bore wonder with a synthetic stock.
If it is to sit in the gun kennel & stroke one of the pets, then the English double reciprocates more love to me.
When it is as inclement outside as at the moment, the Turkish gun is still willing to hunt. I love him for that.
The Beretta of my youth has a new home & he used to do all things but I do not pine for him.
I feel more of an affinity for old Brit doubles, & you can't argue with feelings.
Your head can work over & rationalise anything, but your heart tells you the truth.
O.M
Colonial Anglophile.

canvasback,

You're absolutely right about the pros using what the money pushes. But, in competition shotguns we are talking about brands, not types. You couldn't give my buddy Bill McGuire enough sponsorship "perks" to get him to start shooting a S x S against the rest of the "big boys". Nor any of the other top shooters on the NSCA and PSCA circuits. Winning is important to the sponsor, and they know they wouldn't get the wins necessary to sell their sponsors guns, and the next thing that would happen is that the sponsor would drop them. This is all just my opinion, of course, based on what I've seen.

moses,

You say that "your head can work over & rationalize anything, but your heart tells you the truth". I would add the caveat that, in the case of really serious shooters who want to win above all else, the scoreboard is what really tells the truth. And, that is why O/Us dominate when the money is on the line.

SRH

The granddaddy of the target games was Trap Shooting, and that meant flyers. Our forefathers considered pigeon shooting senseless in the absence of stakes. There's no 'practice for hunting' involved, the shoot is for money and bragging rights.

It's possible that the first celebrity endorsement of a commercial product was in 1851 when noted player and author (and blowhard) Howard Staunton recommend a practical chess set design to the public. He received a piece of the action for lending his name to the 'Staunton pattern'. It's the standard set even today, but on it's own merits.

A few years later, the top shooters were backed by sporting arms makers and the trend snowballed from there. Trap shooters were famous back in the day, and their recommendation sold guns.

Perazzi got on the map due to Olympic success. Nobody ever heard of Perazzi before 1968.

People are impressionable and desire to project an image, and that image is sold to them. You need look no farther than Shooting Sportsman magazine to see the marketing of pretentiousness. The XX 'most interesting man in the world' ad campaign is a brilliant spoof on this basic human trait so we can laugh at it, but it does sell beer. Lots and lots of beer.

Remember 'stock car' races back when there was such a thing? The winning brand sold the most cars Monday morning. Because, of course, people want to be identified with a winner, the highest style, the 'hippest' thing.

The equipment you choose is a more complex decision than you probably even know. Why does a certain gun appeal to you? A little frank self analysis may prove insightful.

Me? I like them all. There is no cure and I am doomed.

Motivation? After they paid him, the companies that Woods endorsed made multi millions of dollars not only from their regulars, but a whole new batch of customers that showed up overnight. Try asking a weekend hunter or some fellow looking over shotguns at a show if they recognize the names of any clays competition heros.

The game gun market may be small and shrinking. It's probably asking quite a bit of any company to go out on the limb of trying to resurrect a known product that hasn't sold like hotcakes for quite some time. If ten years of pricey marketing show some signs of moving the needle, what's stopping the usual under cutters from dumping a bunch of coach guns on the market?

We need your help. Can you think of a celebrity that'll get little kids to bug their folks for shooting gear and lessons, like Woods did for golf? Or, are there other long odds to overcome?

And "The Hunger Games" did wonders for archery.

Good point about not many people (other than competitive shooters) who know the names of the top pros.

Given the size of the OU market compared to sxs, it's interesting that a lot of writers whose columns and articles you read regularly in outdoor magazines--especially those in the bird/dog/gun "niche"--are sxs shooters. I think nostalgia plays a much greater role with hunters than it does with competitive shooters. Although note that there are several big sxs shoots (which are more about fun and the guns than they are about competition) that are doing quite well. And if I were to mention the name of someone who just won a big Sporting Clays shoot, I'm positive that it wouldn't ring the same bell with sxs shooters as if I were to mention Gene Hill or Michael McIntosh, or Steve Smith or Tom Huggler or Tom Davis.

We're really talking about two different worlds that, while they touch each other, don't overlap very much.

Owner serviceability is an increasingly important feature when you consider the legal hurdles of sending a gun to the maker or a distant craftsman.

And it is obvious that "best", whether English or other, are not owner serviceable.

If I cannot pull the stock off, check the internals, clean and lube them, and reassemble in less than an hour, then I have a problem I can do without.

Then maybe best guns are not for you. My 20's vintage H&H has had no maintenance beyond a simple clean and oil in the ten years or so I have had it. I have pulled the locks and they show all original parts, no springs or screws replaced. It is not like these things break constantly. Mine is running in strong original condition nearly 100 years after it was built. They are not made of glass.

The maintenance issues are not a problem unless you drop it into a pond or swamp. If that happens you will need turn screws (very expensive screwdrivers that fit precisely into narrow screw slots). I had to grind inexpensive bits to fit specific screws because whatever I bought never fit quite right. More expensive ones were hand-fitted and finished making servicing easier. The downside is if some part actually breaks it has to be made and fitted or at least custom fitted.

Of course they will not give up their O/U's. A quick look at the SxS choices for replacement tells the tale of that. Who would? A modern gun and a motivated sponsor could attend to that big time. Money talks.

My Purdey pigeon gun will no longer win any box bird shoots, but the gun is not at fault. However, I will continue to use and respect it. The odd thing is that side by side double guns continue to win most of the money at our shoots. Thankfully, our shooters value tradition and "fun" more than purses. Stan, my good friend, is welcome to compete at our shoots with his Perazzi, but he may be overwhelmed by the Fabbris and Japanese Brownings that may be in the rack.

The last great champion of the S X S in the big money pigeon competition was Billy Perdue. He started out with a 21, switched to a Parker and shot it loose, shot a Purdey for 21 years after bending the barrels to shoot to where he wanted, then ordered a Fabbri. It came with 28" barrels which he didn't like so he ordered another. He had switched to a single trigger and believed that Fabbri had the best single trigger in the world. Oddly enough, one of the Fabbris had regulation issues and is still floating around the South with stickers all over the buttstock from flyer shoots around the world.

Just goes to show that good guns are where you find them. A big name and a big price tag guarantees nothing, even though it should. The pattern plate tells all, and never lies. As much faith as I have in Perazzis I would never blindly use one without patterning it to verify regulation and to make certain it shot where it was supposed to for me. I will go out on a limb and say that at least three-fourths of the shotgunners in America have never shot a pattern plate or paper to verify that their gun is shooting where it should, and that most of them are not!!

SRH

I agree there and guilty as charged. The last shotgun I patterned I only shot the left barrel to see how much range I had. Not a good idea.

Stan,
That's actually something I do each time I aquire a new gun. I pattern it for POA and pattern performance. You are absolutly correct about results, as I've be unpleasantly surprised more than once!
Karl

Wow ! Interesting can of worms opened by Mr. H. in his post.... and equally a large number of varied opinions from knowledgeable and experienced gun owners and shooters.... ( I am forced to try real Hard to see ANY substance in the drivel contributed by the prolific poster in Alaska , Mr. Jager........)
I am reading it from front to back because I find this site more interesting than TV news , regardless of the network...Rather housebound today due to a storm system across the South Plains....
Lots of interesting thoughts traded back and forth, mostly opinions, but a number backed by facts and experience .....
Since I'm mentioned in a veiled manner in one of Stan's responses I think I will venture an opinion myself. I believe it boils down to Personal Preference......I have shot them all, and find myself choosing the "tool" that best suits my goals for the outing at hand.....i.e. one choice for the dove field today,or the Quail pastures , where personal enjoyment is paramount.
An all together different set of choices for serious ventures in the Box bird ring or over the best Columbaires, or even for Helice. There I think posting a good score takes precedent over any other factor, so I choose accordingly......

Oh, yeah, I agree that the Italians are the cutting edge of shotgun design and development today, and going back 40+ years or so.