|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics39,489
Posts561,995
Members14,584
| |
Most Online9,918
Jul 28th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 14,007 Likes: 1817
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 14,007 Likes: 1817 |
Brister is 100% accurate about that, IMHO. However, he wisely never took it to the fringe of lunacy, as did M. McIntosh when he stated that choke boring is obsolete.
SRH
May God bless America and those who defend her.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743 |
My personal opinion is that cyl boring is about al most of us really need for most upland hunting as long as modern plastic wads with shot collars are used. For any still loading card & filler wads I would have to agree with Burrard that little is given up in effective spread but a lot of pattern uniformity is gained by use of a mild choke. Even with shot cups a J P Clabrough of mine with both bbls having about .010" of choke using mild (not extreme low pressure) 1 oz loads of appropriate shot size was one of the most effective guns I have had the pleasure of using in the uplands. That .010" or what the British called 1/4 choke is an extremely versatile choke. I certainly will not agree with Mac that plastic wads made it obsolete. In fact I can recollect no time that I felt that .010 of choke was a handicap in that Clabrough.
Miller/TN
I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350 |
A member in early days---maybe Gregor?--- was proponent of cylinder bore and I believe he had prizes to prove it. He may have been a Texan, a veteran who moved to Alaska. His posts were interesting. Anyone know of his whereabouts?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
