Mike,
Sorry to drop out like that, but have been busy all day with Mother's Day meal and company and such.
Have enjoyed all the back and forth, but still await an answer for the question I put forth (twice). From post #366059:
"I mean, why in the world would a barrel man put two barrels together with a converging angle, which is to counteract the recoil which pulls the gun to one side or the other, then make the bores parallel?"
The shot charge will be leaving the muzzle guided by the direction given it from the last bit of bore, right? If there was, say, 6 inches, of parallel bore the shot charge would leave basically in the direction given it by that last 6 inches, right? Then, why build in convergence, which you admit exists? The parallel bores would nullify the convergence given by the built in angle.
Think with me through this a minute. The shot charge begins moving down the left bore, and the gun begins to rotate left because of the recoil being off-axis to the centerline of the gun. The angle of convergence will counteract that rotation if left alone. But, now the shot charge hits a bend in the bore and begins to move back left, the opposite direction from where it needs to be directed.What is the reasoning in this? Help me out here.
SRH
