doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Lengthen Forcing Cones - $75.00 per hole

Oh, please do. Pretty please?

Larry; As I said in my post I was not even discussing the Pro's & Con's of whether or not to open the chokes, that will depend on the gun in question & the individuals thought on the subject. All i stated was that unless yo get a smith who knows exactly what the Fox choke configuration was & to open the chokes to that same configuration, someone who cares "Can Tell" it's not original. With this gun having been re-stocked that's probably immaterial as you say. Sounds like a nice hunting gun, not a collector & if it were mine I would not hesitate to open the chokes on it. Someone who knew there stuff though could definitely tell it had been opened.
Ted;
Yes I believe a Utica built 16ga Sterlingworth would have had 2 3/4" chambers from the factory. Offhand I don't recall the exact date that Savage bought the Fox Co, but I believe it was late enough for the 2 3/4" chambers. Assuming that restock is sound & well fitted this gun will likely take anything Larry Can & I have no idea how recoil sensitive he is.

Ted, I'm sure Researcher could tell us when Savage went to 2 3/4" chambers on their 16's. Best I can recall, it was mid-30's. By SN, this is a 1939-40 gun, and it's stamped "16GA--2 3/4 IN CHAMBER" on the right barrel. My Shooter's Bible tells me that the 3 1/4 DE, 1 1/8 oz 16ga load was available then, and if I felt it necessary, I wouldn't hesitate to shoot that load at the occasional pheasant--but probably won't. The 1 oz Game Loads (2 1/2 DE) don't recoil so much that they're a problem shooting a couple rounds of skeet.

It was Hunter Arms (LC Smith) that was very late in going to 2 3/4" chambers in their 16's. I seem to recall it was about 1940 before they made the change.

Hi Ed. I had Seminole in Fla lengthen the cones in my Citori to 5". The reduction in recoil was very apparent. After the cones were lengthened, I've never switched out the I/C chokes as the patterns became denser and more even. I had the cones on my Iver Johnson Hecules lengthened and the recoil reduction was apparent. The front trigger no longer bloodied my finger when shooting the back trigger. I bought a reamer and did my 20 ga Savage single shot and again saw a recoil reduction and the patterened tightened noticeably. Regardless of what the other guys might tell you, I'm a fan of longer cones.

Mergus

Mergus: I'm guessing lengthening your forcing cones diminished 'perceived' recoil but not the 'actual' recoil in your shotguns.

I'm sure all of the advantages mentioned are true, real, not exaggerations, whatever. What they all are is a waste of money and results that could be accomplished by the use of lighter loads. Most of us own dozens of shotguns, some hundreds, and find that sending them all out in the mail to be exhausting and financially ridiculous. Remember, I said I believe everything you guys have said, no exceptions.

Ddid you do a very accurate velocity check both before an after that cone lengthening. "IF" it reduced the recoil then it is about 150% Positive the reduction was due to a loss of velocity. As Eightbore said the same thing can be accomplished by a lesser charge of powder, which saves a few pennies rather than having to be paid for.

But if you think you NEED a load that is heavier/faster for whatever reason (likely for hunting, less likely for targets), then you may not want to either lighten or slow down your load. In which case lengthening the cones would seem to make sense if you've found that it reduces recoil. Or maybe improves patterns--although that can sometimes also be accomplished by reducing velocity.

Hello All...Buzz, percieved recoil is all that matters to me. I'm not a scientist, I'm an obsesive duck hunter. I shoot 3" magnum non toxic shells in my Citori and A5 and 2.75" in everything else. All my guns have recoil pads, not because I can't take the pounding, but because less recoil allows one to get back on target quicker. Numerically quantifying recoil holds no appeal to me.

Eightbore and 2 Piper, its entirely possible you are right in that the reduction in percieved recoil is due to lower velocity. However, I am inclined to belive it is due to the peak of the pressure curve having been spread out over a few extra milliseconds. Absent ownership of pressure trace equipment or a chrongraph, speculation on top of observation is all I can offer on those subjects.

Lastly, the use of lower speed/lighter load shells for late season divers (goldeneyes) would be counterproductive. I pride myself on having a very low birds lost to birds shot ratio. That ratio was improved immensly when I went to using steel shells at 1450 fps 1500 or so fps. However in a point that somewhat proves your advice about using a slower shell, when I tried Remington Hyper Velocity at 1700 fps, my shooting went to hell. And truthfully, I think I was flinching. The second finger on my right hand was getting beat to pieces by the rear of the trigger guard. I only shot a half box and gave the rest away to a friend with a 3.5" Benelli.

Heres a question for you guys that have been shooting doubles longer than I have....Would the lower perceived recoil (perhaps due to a pressure spike that was spread out over a longer amount of time)slow down the rate at which hinge pins wear? Would a gun with long cones that was shot a lot take longer to loosen up compared to a gun with "standard" length forcing cones?

Mergus

I think the hinge pins WILL last longer--short forcing cones being akin to sharp, abrupt speed bumps, and long forcing cones to longer, smoother speed bumps. Hitting the sharper forcing cone has to jolt the gun more...JMHO Steve