I believe the most intelligent and insightful book title in shotgunning was Bob Brister's Shotgunning: The Art and the Science. It accurately depicts the challenge of defining shotgunning because it is are both clear science and malleable art.
The variables when swinging a gun to put its pattern on target are greater than most of us imagine and because they interact differently for each of us they cannot be completely grasped.
I see gun fit as part science and part art. I have had guns fitted and none have the same dimensions, yet each of them when shot against the patterning board come out about the same. However I must sadly admit that the gun I seem to hit best with was one the was fitted like the others, then bent, and after the fit bounced back some (1/4 inch) I now hit with it better.
My point is not that fitting is a waste, it is not. It is that fitting is only part of the variables. Shooting style consistentcy is a foundational necessity for gun fit to work. If you are inconsistent in mount and or swing, then fitting is a waste. This is why when starting your kids get a gun about the right size and have then shoot a bit (maybe years) before any detailed fitting should be bothered with.
One comment on cast. While some do not believe it is an important dimension to concern yourself with, I disagree. I find cast is very important for me, as is length of pull, I find drop less important. But that is me and each of us is different. You will never know which variables matter more or less to you without experimentation.
Some of us are blest to stumble on what works. If you do then do not change it.
The true key to competent shotgunning is repetition. Shoot alot of shells, play around with the variables and find what works for you.
Last edited by old colonel; 06/30/12 10:30 AM.
