Larry,
I agree that weight is a major factor on short barreled guns. Short and light SxS's is what the manufacturers and outdoor press told us we needed in the early 70's and we bought into that. All of my field guns had "fashionable" 26 inch barrels. I can remember passing on a Parker CHE because the barrels were too long. One of my larger gun buying mistakes. And don't forget that era's white line spacers.
Regarding Mr. Churchill and his XXV's. Perhaps the design was a solution to a problem that didn't exist. Mr. Churchill wanted to sell guns and had great marketing skills and shooting ability. I believe that those points were responsible for the XXV's success.
I can't remember seeing a single XXV on a driven shoot. Today barrels are likely to be over 30" and probably an O/U.
Dennis
Dennis, an XXV would certainly be out of place on a "high bird" shoot. But then from what I've read (having shot only "normal" driven birds for the most part), ANY sxs is regarded as a less efficient tool when one is after the very high ones.
I agree that Churchill was looking for something different, and seems to have found it. Those guns, I think, were popular enough "in the day" to show that it wasn't all hype. But fads come and go. For a pretty long time, a game gun with 30" barrels was a pretty tough sell. Now, with longer barrels being the current style, they're more sought-after.
