doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Single trigger Side by Sides?

My impression, although possibly inaccurate, is that single trigger SxS guns have a greater likelihood of having defective, troublesome triggers than single trigger O/Us. Is this impression valid and if so why are the single trigger SxSs more troublesome? Are single trigger SxS most often inertia or mechanical, and I am asking about guns made in Europe or Japan rather than "classic" American? Thank you very much.

Might not be a fair comparison. There are different types of single triggers, and the safeties used to actuate them.
My O/U has a single trigger, a non selective version. It has acted up twice, once when my Father had a recoil pad installed, and once when it was simply dirty. The recoil pad, as installed, was too soft to let the inertia mechanism work. When the pad got older, and harder, it resumed working correctly.
It was most of 50 years time between these two incidents.

Not a single trigger guy, incidentally. But, the Beretta O/U allows for gloves to be used.

Best,
Ted

Ithaca SKB shotguns made in the late 1960s into the 1970's in Japan were (and are) reliable single-triggered guns. Same as the Browning BSS guns also made in Japan and are reliable. Gil

Are you looking at current production guns or at guns overall? With current production guns I see no difference. With old side by sides there might be a slight difference. Part due to age and wear and part due to older design. O/U get the benefit of a perfected design while early doubles used multiple transitional designs as all the bugs were being worked out until they worked nearly perfectly. I figure 90% of side by side guns are pre WWII made and 99% of O/U guns are post WWII made guns. So the O/U get the advantage of all the trigger design improvements over time.

The only comparison I could make that would be apples to apples is Yildiz. Yildiz O/U guns have crappy single triggers. Every one I've ever been around had issues. But, I've been around 4 Yildiz S x S single trigger doubles and all of them have flawlessly functioning triggers. Maybe a little heavy, but function perfectly.

SRH

^^ This sums it up; single triggers were originally developed on s/s guns - and it took quite a while and a lot of different designs to sort the 'good from the bad'. I would always have double triggers, but that is a personal preference.

The problem with single triggers in most side-by-sides is the wood. The only thing that maintains the relationship between the upper and lower tangs and the sears etc. is aging wood which dries and contracts, absorbs moisture and expands and gets oil soaked and spongy. Modern guns which include most over/unders have steel maintaining the relationship between all the parts and a drawbolt holding the stock on. If all single trigger Fox doubles had been built on a drawbolt frame --



that may have helped.

From simply a use standpoint, I prefer double triggers.

My Citoris, Rem 101, and one SKB Ithaca are the only doubles I have with single triggers. They all work flawlessly of course. It is simply a matter of personal preference.

With double triggers I essentially have two guns. I have had a firing pin break at inopportune times. With two triggers I still have a functioning barrel. With a single trigger the first barrel would be okay if the second barrel pin broke. If the second barrel was the only one that worked I'd have to snap, rap the butt with my palm and then be ready to fire.

Alan

Alan, at least your SKB/Ithaca would be running. Just push the button to get left barrel first. Single triggers with select fire are okay for that reason. I have a couple of the SKB/I's. Nice guns for the dollar for sure.

In the mid 1880's the Brit gun trade began to recognize that a significant part of the shooting population simply were unable to master double triggers. Lock work and bolting were solved and ejectors were making good progress. So, a lot of creativity was turned to single triggers. The actual mechanics behind a workable single trigger is a bit complex and took a good deal of trial and error. Recognition of the involuntary second pull (a reaction to recoil) was key to working single triggers. Many of the early models were, shall we say, "fussy."

I suspect this quote originated with a master speaking to an apprentice in reference to servicing single triggers, "You are a KYrow praktor and I am a New Row surgeon. You don't cut nuttin' unless I say so!"

DDA

You know, I am a little embarrassed about it, but I forgot all about the button. Haven't ever had the occasion to change the firing sequence in 40 years.

Alan

Agree. Those are two excellent examples of sxs that were quite popular, easy to find on the used market, reasonably priced, and have good single triggers. The SKB's is an inertia trigger. Unless I'm misremembering, the BSS is mechanical. Or were they some of each? I think they used two different ST's.

I used a pair of Winchester Model 23's in Columbia and Argentina in the 80's and 90's and their 23 Heavy Duck with no problems with one exception: if the stock bolt got loose the trigger would act up. This was all high volume shooting with changing of left and right barrels(which to shoot first)often.

The only single trigger shotgun I would own would have a mechanical trigger! I like M21's. Jim

What triggers are not mechanical? I have never seen a shotgun with an electronic trigger.

Are you saying you don't like inertial triggers?

Some Parker Reproduction single triggers had problems. I used my Repro, so eventually I had it changed to DT. I prefer DT and have them on two Beretta O/Us, too.

All down through the years I have always heard single triggers as being either inertia or mechanical. While freely admitting an inertia set is, in fact, mechanical in the strictest sense I would definitely take that was the meaning. I prefer double triggers myself, but if I were to get a single trigger gun I would not want it to be inertia set, an inertia block would be fine.

When they work you never notice triggers but when they fail you just one time you never really trust them again. Kind of like being married to a cheating gun.

I can shoot double or single triggers with no problems but I don�t like non selective single triggers. I want the freedom to decide which barrel first. That�s part of why I like doubles. Choices. Trigger creep is ok but not fond of light trigger pulls on doubles but don�t mind heavy ones up to a point.

I inherited one double with a nine and a half pound trigger pull on the rear barrel and four on the front trigger. Great Uncle, who shot it was a big man, but nine + pounds is a lot. His hands were massive and even at 70 he could do things with strength that most would not attempt. Ever see a man toss full grown hog like a sack of feed? Watched him do it as a boy. The hog did not enjoy it. I sure did.

Found out he carried his gun with his finger on the rear trigger often and had it altered to such a heavy pull. He shot the rear trigger first then moved to the front one if needed. Both barrels were full and ink dot full. Had it reduced to four plus pounds. Left the chokes as they were. Ever see a gun break both wings on a Dove? Ink dot tight is scary in the field.

Give us a break, BrentD. Mechanical triggers are just that, they are mechanically reset by the pull of the first barrel, thus accentuating the action of the second trigger, not requiring an inertia, or recoil mechanism. An inertia trigger requires recoil to render the second trigger effective. A mechanical trigger does not, by nature of the mechanism. Inertia triggers are �faster� triggers by their nature, as opposed to mechanical. Come on man, study up a bit. You are a Professor, for Lord�s sake.

Some of the guns Freddy the freeloading BrentD is referring to didn't have barrel selectors.

Out of his field. What most people should know about triggers is that they look simple. What they must know is that simple things can be a [censored] to fix and more so after a few repairs. A good trigger man is only slightly rarer thanna good ejector repairman.

The old Browning Superposed single/double triggers worked great until they didn�t and then even Browning would not repair them. I have one which works perfectly and I won�t even pull the stock on that gun. Working well is as good as it gets. And don�t fix what�s not broken.

WAY out of his field, no argument there. Nevertheless, BrentD refuses to contribute in any meanigful way to Dave�s forum, including monetarily with even a miniscule donation.....plus, to encourage his own agenda, he discourages others from contributing to this forum as well, combined with his nothingness fund of knowledge, as evidenced by the plethora of know nothing dumbass questions, such as the mechanical trigger question, and others, shows he�s a whole lot more than just �out of his field�. He wholly qualifies for the Doublegun bbs DUMBASS award, no question there. He pumps his chest up stating he�s not going anywhere despite the fact he won�t contribute, coupled with a very inferior fund of knowledge, who gives a hoot. Yeah, he�s out of his field. He�s a know nothing.

I think of mechanical as being well described by simple Newtonian physics, inertial fits in pretty well there.





Both of the guns I'm referring to do have selective triggers. They are sitting in my safe right now.

I rarely select the left barrel first but occasionally I will when shooting clays that are not well adapted to the first barrel. When hunting, it is a little too slow to select the barrel after the flush. I far prefer double triggers, like most here, but the SKB is still a good gun and will function with one firing pin, even if just the left barrel.

I got that SKB in 1978. It was a gift from my father. He gave one to my brother-in-law also at the same time. Those were the days when shotgun shells were around $3 a box and I was still counting pennies to buy them. I hunted quail and doves with that shotgun. It was hell on quail but a little iffy on pass shooting doves. However, It was excellent for that last 30 min of daylight at a water hole for doves. Close, fast shooting is what 26" Imp/mod barrels were made for.

Alan

Looking at a classic English side by side with only one trigger is like looking at a dog with only one ear, Something is terribly wrong.

Only thing uglier is a SxS without hammers....

What this guy said.

Best,
Ted

That be true.

I like single triggers. I also like pistol grips and beaver tails. I realize that makes me some kind of double gun heretic or something. And I�m ok with that.

Even a one-eared dog looks pretty good when he never misses pointing and holding a covey, or never fails to retrieve a bird. I prefer a "meat dog" to a Westminster winner.

In the eyes of many, who are much more serious than us about their shooting, pretty is as pretty does. Which is why you never see a double triggered gun at a pigeon shoot when the shooter is serious about the stakes, or in the hands of an Olympic competitor, or........... ad nauseam.

True, double triggers "belong" on a classic English double gun, but it is not accidental that the single trigger dominates the market in new doubles produced today, and for the last 50 years, give or take. You and I don't have to "like it" or even accept it. The world, at large, does.

SRH

Interesting discussion. I am confused regarding Miller's post. I'm unclear as to the dinstinction between "inertia set" and "inertia block". (I realize I am exposing my ignorance here; no problem with that. There are plenty of things I don't understand. Almost all the triggers I work on are double triggers.) thanks

What's more popular doesn't necessarily equate to what's more reliable. There's nothing wrong with double triggers from a reliability standpoint. Matter of fact, they have an edge over single triggers--much as pumps have a reliability edge over autoloaders. The fact that you don't see many DT's or pumps in competition these days doesn't have anything to do with the fact they don't work--any more than the fact that you see more automatic transmissions than manual means that stick shifts don't work. If your car with an automatic transmission won't start, you won't be able to solve the problem by popping the clutch. If your single (inertia) trigger doesn't work, you're stuck unless it's selective and you flip the selector. Much quicker if your front trigger just goes click to go to the back trigger.

Problems with DT's have nothing to do with mechanics. The system worked well for a very long time. The problems are either with the individual shooting the gun, or with external conditions--like maybe very cold weather, not enough space for a heavy glove, something like that. Problems with single triggers, in contrast, are almost always mechanical--unless maybe it's shooter error choosing a load that's not heavy enough to actuate the inertia mechanism, or not seating the gun tightly enough to do so. Shooting in a skeet league yesterday, I apparently trapped the trigger on my Parker Repro a couple times. Cold day, wearing gloves, didn't get off the 2nd shot at doubles. And the Repro trigger is mechanical, so it wouldn't be a question of not resetting. Impossible, on the other hand, to have that happen with DT's. As long as there's enough space between the triggers, you can get to the rear one and make it go bang.

Gil;
That may not have been worded well, but didn't really know the exact correct terminology. What I was speaking of in the Inertia is uses inertia to switch from one barrel to the other, Thus if the first barrel should for some reason fail to fire a 2nd pull on the trigger will not fire the 2nd barrel.
What I was referring to as the Inertia Block is actually blocking the trigger pull with an inertia block. Some single triggers use this design. When the first barrel fires the recoil moves the inertia block over the trigger blade or elsewhere preventing the trigger from being pulled again until the block releases from spring pressure. This prevents the gun from doubling from the involuntary 2nd pull. In the event the first barrel doesn't fire the block, of course, doesn't move & as the trigger actually switches "Mechanically" a mere release & repull of the trigger will fire the 2nd barrel.

I resemble that remark.

When it comes to competition, maybe what works and doesn't work, goes hand in hand with what's popular. The better and more serious a wing shooter, the more likely some attention is paid to gun fit. It may not make much sense to worry about fit, and then change the front hand position and length of pull for every double target presentation.

I have never noticed a good shooter, in contention, limp through an event with a major problem like a dead battery, and come through with a win. They come with very reliable equipment, and serious plan B's. For the rest of shooting it only comes down to preferences. Why pay for a Cadillac of a double, and then split hairs about whether it's as reliable as a VW bug or a late sixties Chevelle?

Now that we're down to splitting hairs, I've had one "break" in 75-plus years of shooting---a defect, a chip from chamber face of .22 Ruger pistol--and there are members here who shoot more in a week or two than I have in my entire life.

I find quite precious the attention to gun fit, hand positions and length of pull, from experience of shooting bare-armed with mosquitos flying and multi-layers of clothing to keep warm during serious winter waterfowling.

Just an observation, of course, which may or may not represent a majority who haven't experienced nor anticipate breakdowns of their shotguns from "regular" use. Nor does it make different experience of less value to me.

(The .22 mishap happened on vacation out of province. I telephoned the Ruger number in an outdoor magazine and Bill Ruger answered it in his Connecticut garage. He sent gratis a bull-barrel replacement, which I still own.)

I like single triggers also. My DC12 has a single trigger like the MX8. Flawless. And as far as looks, it looks pretty good.

Nothing wrong with a single trigger unless it's on a hammer gun.

A ST makes sense on any sort of clays gun - you know in advance which barrel you want to fire first and there is no advantage at all to DT.

And for almost any sort of hunting I'd rather have DT. I haven't found any system for barrel selection that is as fast as DT.
I've never had a problem with my DT guns; had had a failure on my Benelli 626 ST when the rivet on the iniertia block slipped out of place and wouldn't allow it to reset. Sure wish the gun had 2 triggers.

Actually, a good friend has an Italian-make hammer pigeon gun with a single trigger. It�s a cool gun.

It's a bit hard to pin down "serious" when it comes to competition shooting. If you look at the classifications of shooters at a big shoot (I've both scored and pulled at the Wisconsin Iron Man, where there will be several hundred shooters), you'll likely find more shooters in lower classifications versus higher ones. Which means they possess lesser skills . . . maybe just as "serious", but maybe not. I shoot in a winter skeet league and will likely shoot in a summer league this year. Am I "serious"? Well, I'm not driven to the point that I obsess about score . . . but I do shoot all winter, which requires some degree of "seriousness" if you happen to live in northern WI.

And I don't think I've ever seen anyone change their FRONT hand position between shots at pairs (I know that I don't) due to shooting a DT gun. Some do change their rear hand position a bit. Mine moves very slightly. But, on the other hand, shooting on a cold day, I can't possibly trap the trigger on a DT gun when shooting a pair.

And if you haven't seen issues with even very expensive guns in the hands of very experienced shooters, Craig . . . you need to get out more. Meanwhile, the venerable old Remington 1100, which certainly isn't expensive, has an enviable reputation for reliability.

Yep, if you've got a drawer full of O-rings, and like to clean a gun meticulously after each use. If not, get a Beretta.

I'm not talking from an armchair. I shot a 1100 so long the magazine tube came out of the receiver (they're soldered in, which is a stupid idea seeing as how other brands are threaded in and can even have the ends reversed). Sent it off, and had it resoldered, and reblued, obviously. Shot it awhile longer. It came out again. It went in the safe like that ................. about 15 years ago. 1100s are okay for the occasional shooter. They're a piece of crap for someone who shoots a lot.

We have a "standing line" for those who shoot sporting clays with us, and shoot autoloaders. When they fail to feed after the first bird on a report pair, and the shooter clears the jam and still kills the second bird, we say "You can always tell a man who started out on a Remington!"

SRH

The 11-87 was an improvement over the 1100, but my experience in Argentina was that if you did not clean it at lunch, you'd shoot single shot all afternoon...Geo

Stan, I know of quite a few moderate to heavy shooters of 1100s that have had very different experiences. Never heard of so much trouble as you describe.

Amen



And, I know longtime shooters of 1100s who can clear a jam faster than you can say it. That comes from lots of practice.

SRH

How did we get to talking about junk gun like a 1100...shew.

Double triggers were left over from hammer guns.

Well, I sure am glad I unloaded my 1100 on someone else before it all went south. Especially nice knowing that Frank would approve.

I always liked an 1100 for skeet. Good skeet guns in 12 ga with their forward weight. Swing great on skeet targets. Better keep them clean, though.

It's not a big deal Larry.

I mentioned the 'winner' as the yardstick to pin down how I was using the term "serious". I wasn't thinking about lower classification seriousness, though clearly through scoring, there is a difference, right?

You mentioned pump guns. Have you ever shot a double with one without moving your front hand? I one hundred percent take your word that you are a serious shooter, but you were the one that had the story about not getting off a second shot because you didn't know the gloves you chose were inappropriate. Maybe, you weren't serious enough to win on that day, or maybe you weighed the value of the fun of being there.

Remington 1100's aside, you previously mentioned it was impossible to not get off a second shot on DT gun as long as you can squeeze a finger in? C'mon Larry, if I'm not mistaken, you've given out advise about getting DT's serviced. Think about it Larry, us fellows that don't get out much, sit around and read stuff from the gun writers.

I appreciate the follow up comments, but weren't you making a point about competion shooting choices not mirroring side by sides and double triggers?

JOe'fewshus say...

Man get so full of self he for get go bathroom....for long chit back up and man be so full of chit he stink but he know smell.

Just saying Larry Clown

Well Craig, if your definition of serious is only "the winner", then you're not talking about very many shooters, are you?

As for moving your hand with a pump . . .well, obviously. But your hand is in the same position for both SHOTS. If it isn't, you just short shucked your gun and you won't get off a 2nd shot. Your front hand moves BETWEEN shots, but has to return to the same place it was for the first shot in order to get off a 2nd shot.

Shooting in northern WI in the winter, it's likely you're going to wear gloves. Possible to trap a trigger with a glove on a ST double (whether OU or sxs)? Sure. Impossible to do so if you shoot a DT gun. But then you have to make sure there's enough space between the triggers or you have another problem. When shooting in cold weather, you pays your money and you takes your chances. But then most of the really "serious" competitive events in this part of the world don't take place during the winter.

And ALL guns--ST or DT, pump or auto--require servicing from time to time. I hope to heck you're not suggesting that a ST double--OU or sxs--requires less attention than a double with DT.

When I read this (mis)statement it jumped right out at me as being in error. I shoot in several big shoots a year but, more importantly, I watch the scores at many others to see how several of my friends and acquaintances do. I have known for many years that the largest number of shooters in any class at a big shoot is the Master class, which is the highest class. Next in high number of participants is the AA class, which is second from the highest. This holds true at almost every big shoot of 300 participants or more. The possible exceptions are the shoots where guns and stuff are given away for every class, three deep, like the NWTF shoots, or DU shoots.

If you want to lump AA,A,B,C,D and E together and call them the "lower classifications", then sure there will be more in them, all added together, than there will be in Master class alone. But, since you said "higher ones", plural, you had to be talking about, at the very least, M and AA .............with the rest being the "lower classifications". And, your statement is wrong in that regard.

You can go on either ScoringPro or WinscoreOnline and look at the total number of entrants in every class at every major shoot in the US. Go there and look for yourself at the numbers. Master is always, by far, the biggest class at a major shoot, sometimes making up over 25% of the total of all the classes, by itself. Add M and AA together and you are way over 50%.

Maybe you should go by the real numbers on the registrations, Larry, and not so much by your impressions as a scorer and trapper, or be a little more specific about what you call the higher, and the lower, classes. I've got no interest in the specific debate for which you intended that statement. I just wanted everyone who does not participate in these big shoots to know the actual numbers. Look for yourself under "Tournament results"......

http://www.winscoreonline.com

........... or, "View Scores"

https://www.scoringpro.com

SRH

Well Stan, I guess we're just exceptions to the rule up here in the North Woods. Wisconsin Ironman: 332 entrants, of which 47 were M and 23 were AA. Not a NWTF/DU/PF/QF/RGS shoot or anything like that. Wisconsin State Sporting Clays Championship: This one is closer, and M was the biggest class with 92. But there were 330 entrants, and only 155 of them were M or AA. So not a majority in that shoot either.

Maybe we just plain have more guys shooting who aren't real seriously into competition.

Larry, I went to the WI state shoot last year. Lots of Kolar guns and even more real good shots, is what I noticed.

You guys are both correct. the difference is the Wisconsin iron man shoot maybe a large local shoot but it is not a major shoot.

John, note that the Ironman draws almost exactly the same number of shooters as the state Sporting Clays Championship. And it draws them in spite of the fact that it is a 400 bird two day shoot, with 100 birds shot at each of 2 clubs (70 miles apart) on one day, and the other 200 at another club the other day--that club being 130 miles away from the furthest of the other 2. All 3 of those clubs are located in the northern third (and least populated part) of the state, while Wisconsin's major population centers are all in the southern third. Put all that together and it doesn't add up to a very good plan to attract over 300 shooters if it were just a "local" shoot.

It's a very popular local shoot. but it's not a major shoot. there is a huge difference.

John, just how does a guy from SC determine that a sporting clays shoot in Wisconsin with as many participants as the state championship shoot isn't a major shoot? It's a registered shoot. They're shooting sporting clays. What's the "huge difference"? What defines a "major shoot"? Seems like participation would be one consideration.

And "local"? My dictionary defines that term as "not widespread". Well, you've got a spread of 130 miles or so from Navarino on the east to Medford on the west. That's a pretty fair spread right there. But shooters come to the Ironman from well outside that already quite widespread "local" area.

Don't argue with Larry. He is civil but relentless...Geo

It's because of his religious afiliations...

People who are dedicated registered shooters who take competition seriously know what shoots are considered to be "major", that draw shooters from across the country.. Regionals especially, but several others on the East and West coasts, The Gamaliel Cup in Nashville, a couple or three in Texas, along with the Nationals. You could ask either Wendell Cherry or Anthony Materese, just two who quickly come to mind, about those that are referred to as "major". The Wisconsin Ironman is not one of those., But I'm sure it's a good shoot.
JR

I forgot it's more important for you to win an argument then to seek the truth. so has everybody else here. this discussion is complete, and you obviously don't know what you're talking about. done Larry.

Larry, let's say all of the shooters are serious in their own unique way. In the big northern Wisconsin shoots, how many of them demand the ultimate in reliability, the double trigger? How many of them demand, or at least strive for a better score for themselves?

I would like to ask though. If a front hand can return to exactly the same position after shucking a pump action gun, why do some folks shift their rear hand ever so slightly when using double triggers? Wouldn't some of these movements, both intentional and unintentional, be eliminated with other gun configurations?

Does he ever ?

Well John, if you can't define the terms you use (like "major shoot"), then how does one seek the truth? John Roberts says it's a shoot that draws shooters from all over the country. I'm not sure that definition would apply to ANY sporting clays shoot we have in Wisconsin. The Iron Man does draw shooters from all over the STATE, as does the state Sporting Clays Championship. I think that's about the best we can do.

Me and a couple of buds went to the Spring Grand yesterday, a major trapshooting event--120 5 man squads for the doubles, more for the handicap event. I am not shooting registered trap any more-just went to look at the vendors row.
Walking the line Bill and I noted that it looked like the guns have taken a huge turn towards gadgetry! High ribs, spring stocks etc. We saw LOTS of vendors guns over $20,000.
This is a major tournament of course but it seems like the contest is who can spend the most $$ on hardware.
I am happy to be shooting for fun with my humble Remington FE, I hope that as I can shoot some vintage shoots it doesn't turn out like what I have described above.

Craig, I think you know the answers to your own questions. Most guns with double triggers are sxs. How many shooters today start out shooting sxs? If they start out shooting an OU, that's likely what they're going to continue to shoot.

As for one's rear hand . . . which hand guides the gun, Craig--front or rear? The rear hand is just along for the ride, and to pull the trigger. A very slight movement of the rear hand isn't likely to make much difference.

Let's face it . . . those of us hanging out on this BB are an anachronism. We're misplaced in time, by about a century. We should count ourselves lucky that we're not much worried about the influenza epidemic and don't have to worry about prohibition of alcohol in the near future.

Ah - ah - ah, Larry. You're not going to twist this one from what you originally said, to now being only about Wisconsin. You said this, initially..........

"If you look at the classifications of shooters at a big shoot (I've both scored and pulled at the Wisconsin Iron Man, where there will be several hundred shooters), you'll likely find more shooters in lower classifications versus higher ones."

Notice where you said at a big shoot? You didn't say a Wisconsin shoot and you didn't mean one. That was what caused me to post a rebuttal. You absolutely were not talking about only Wisconsin shoots, which you now seem to want us to believe.

You may be trying to pee on my leg, but you ain't making me believe it's raining. You're wrong, you know you're wrong, but as John said, you won't admit it. And, with that, I'm done with it too. Squirm on.

SRH

Exactly right Stan.

Wrong? Darn Stan . . . looks to me like a smokescreen for your own error. I went by your definition of a "big shoot"--"300 participants or more"--looked at only 2 of them. And guess what? BOTH were exceptions to what you told me above. Master class was NOT the biggest class in one case. And in neither case did Master and AA combined have more shooters than all the other classes.

Hey . . . for a guy who tells us we might find a gun that used Whitworth barrels to sleeve it (but can't show an actual example), you're telling me I'm wrong--when I just found two exceptions to what you told me I should expect. Looks to me like you're way "wronger" than I am . . . unless, of course, you can come up an actual example of the exception you proposed . . . as I did.

Eagerly looking forward to seeing a gun that was sleeved using Whitworth barrels . . .

He's veering off course, Stan. Standard tactic.
JR

Veering? Well Mr. Roberts, your definition appeared to be pretty exclusive--and certainly excluded any shoots in this part of the country. Stan's definition was less exclusive: what holds true "at almost every big shoot of 300 participants or more." He didn't say: "Larry, don't look at shoots with 300 participants or more in Wisconsin, because they're an exception to the rule." And Mr. Jankowski made no attempt whatsoever to define a "major shoot", other than to say that there's a huge difference from other shoots. But either couldn't or wouldn't explain what the "huge difference" is.

Kinda hard to have an intelligent discussion if we can't come up with a common definition of what we're talking about. Failing that, in this case, I went back to Stan's criteria (the only one with a quantifiable element: number of participants) and applied it to shoots of that size in WI. Went back and picked up 3 more years' worth of state shoots. Out of 4 of those, in just 1 year did the number of M and AA participants exceed all other classes combined. If I really wanted to load the results, I could have looked at the Iron Man (meets the size criteria) for the last umpteen years, and I'm confident that the lower class numbers would ALWAYS exceed M + AA--by a significant margin. But I thought that wouldn't be fair, so I didn't include that.

But hey . . . if it makes you guys feel better to move the goal posts and tell me that WI shoots are an exception to the rule (even though they meet Stan's size criteria), then I have nothing else to add . . . being unwilling to research shoots of 300+ participants in other states to see if the results are any different.

Hard to win a tag team match when you have no partner Larry.

Just saying.

Hey, man. It's not my criteria. You never stated what you meant by "higher classes". I took the initiative and decided to use M and AA. What was your criteria, Mr. B? I've given you an out here ...........you can answer with anything you want. But, keep in mind, a lot more members than me have "got your number".

Since you won't offer what you meant, I'll step up to the plate. The reasonable way to understand your postulation of higher/lower classes is the top 50% are the higher classes, and the lower 50% are the lower classes. That would put M, AA, A and the top half of B into the higher classes, and the bottom half or B, C, D and E in the lower. You don't even have to include the top half of B in the higher to begin to see that the registrations are heavily weighed toward the higher, not the lower, as you claim.

Gator Cup 2019 - 729 entrants - 440 in M, AA and A

http://www.winscoreonline.com/view_resul...mp;class_id=All



SRH

Larry, major shoots draw most of the master class shooters based on sponsorship requirements as well as money offered and all America points, etc.. that's the difference

I think you guys are confusing mr.Larry...

Top clay target shooters shoot what they think will help them break the most targets. If they thought they could break more targets with a DT sxs, that's what most of them would be shooting. But they don't. By and large they shoot an OU. That's not because they started out with one.

True but no one wants to admit it...

I'm living proof one can miss equally well with anything.

So Stan . . . I accepted your criteria. Both as to size and classes in a "big shoot". And you're complaining because I did . . . and then found that what you said I should expect to find didn't apply to the shoots I looked at? You're awfully darned hard to please.

Here you go, Larry. I moved this for you. I thought it might be too confusing for you to see that I had added info to my previous post at the same time you were posting.

"Since you won't offer what you meant, I'll step up to the plate. The reasonable way to understand your postulation of higher/lower classes is the top 50% are the higher classes, and the lower 50% are the lower classes. That would put M, AA, A and the top half of B into the higher classes, and the bottom half or B, C, D and E in the lower. You don't even have to include the top half of B in the higher to begin to see that the registrations are heavily weighed toward the higher, not the lower, as you claim.

Gator Cup 2019 - 729 entrants - 440 in M, AA and A"

http://www.winscoreonline.com/view_resul...mp;class_id=All



SRH

Im wondering why he's not in Florida at one of really big the big shewts..

John--Thanks. Working on those criteria, the Wisconsin State Shoot, I think, would qualify. One year I looked at had top money of $2,000, and just over 100 Master Class shooters participated (out of a total of roughly 300). All-America points also awarded.

The Iron Man, using those criteria, would not qualify. Top money last year was under $500, and fewer than 50 Master Class shooters participated (out of a total of 300+). But it is interesting to note that the same shooter took the top prize in both of those shoots.

JHJ, not sure I understand your meaning. Are you saying that the reason so many M class shooters show up at big shoots is that their sponsors require it, and because of the money pay outs?

Only a fraction of the M class shooters at any large shoot are sponsored. And, money is usually paid out 5 deep per class, plus HOA and RU.

Out of those 440 M class shooters at the Gator Cup I'll bet good money not over 40 of them are sponsored by someone who would require them to be there. And, only 7 of them could win cash. Wonder why the rest shot ? ................. love of competition. That's why. They're serious.

SRH

Stan, I always believe in bowing to superior knowledge/experience. I did so and played on your field with the goalposts you set in the case of "big shoots". You were the one who suggested shoots with 300 or more participants, and M and AA as the higher classes.

Must've been an earthquake or something, because it now seems that one of your goalposts--the "higher class" one--has shifted. Rather significantly. You might as well bump up the number of participants to 500 or more, which would conveniently eliminate ALL Wisconsin shoots.

Let's do this, Larry. Answer plainly and clearly what you meant by higher and lower classes. Would you do that? I was simply trying to figure out what you meant.

And, you never specified Wisconsin shoots. Did you?

SRH

Some southerners don't want to risk getting whipped by Yankees again....

Hey there, Ho-Jo-- wonder why, as a Vol State gent, you wanted to bring up the "War of Nawthern Aggression" into this thread.

I am NOT a SC shooter now-a-days-- best I ever did was a 39/50- maybe 12 years ago- in MI- shooting a friend's Beretta O/U-- another squad member was shooting a M42 .410-- and he shot a 46/50--
So, that was a "eye-opener" for me-- Now you give me a crack at some decoying barn pigeons or crows, and that's a "whole 'nother ball game"-- RWTF

Stan, one more time: I accepted YOUR suggested criteria based on your greater experience and knowledge of "big shoots". If you now wish to split higher from lower class right down the middle--upper half of B and above vs everything below--well then, the WI Iron Man (which is the shoot I'm most familiar with) still has more on the lower side than the upper side. Wisconsin State Shoot, more on the upper side. But apparently we're also now excluding all Wisconsin shoots, so those are irrelevant anyhow.

I concede that by throwing out all Wisconsin shoots and by changing where you suggested we divide upper from lower classes . . . you win. All it took was not only moving your own goalposts, but by insisting that we can't include any Wisconsin playing fields. Obviously only very minor modifications to the rules of the game.

Stan, you seem determined to build a fire. What the hell for?

What a bizarre conversation. Even Frank has problems beating this one.