doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Forend release preference.

There was a time when I believed the Anson button release forend was simply the right way for a double gun to be built. It looks classy, gives the engraver something more to work his artistry on and lends some sophistication to the takedown of the gun. I considered the snap forend the poorer sister of the Anson. Always seen on the lower end American boxlocks, that was the easy conclusion to come to. But, my preference is evolving. The Anson style forend always seems to have a bit of movement, when it is closed, and as the gun is opened, and it glides across the knuckle. The movement seems exagerated in ejector guns, but, I don't seek those guns out, and have owned few. That movement, slight as it is, bugs me. The retaining spring can only be fitted so tightly, or you couldn't push the button in to remove it. The snap forend, doesn't seem to suffer that problem, at least not in the examples I've owned, including, among others, a higher grade MacNaughton boxlock, and a lowly Nitro Special. The wood is held tightly in the better examples I have seen. I remember reading a Michael MacIntosh article, years ago, on what to do if your Anson button got stuck, but, don't see the need for that same article on a snap forend.
Since someone will likely point it out anyway, yes, the front wood on a Darne is rigid, and doesn't move, period, unless you remove some screws. It is my favorite system, but, I use and enjoy other guns. The guns fitted with the lever forend seem to be tighter as well, but, save a lone German gun that went down the road long ago, I've not owned any.
I'm willing at this point to cut the poorer sister design some slack, and remember it is mostly fool-proof and simple to use, and to fit or repair.
Excellent traits in a hunting implement.

Best,
Ted

Jan Novotn� of Praze is my favourite due to ease of use. Not sure who's design, but probably some Deeley - Edge variant?

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

I have all three: Anson, Deeley, and snap on. They're all O.K. but I've also come to admire the simplicity of the snap on. It certainly holds the forend firmly to the knuckle. And it's brain dead simple. Only problem I've encountered is sometimes the spring weakens and the forend comes off too easily. But that's simple to fix.

Ejector guns are better if they have a catch rather than a snap .Especially if the ejector work is of a type where the kickers are under tension such as the Deeley box . Personal preference is a Anson push rod , Deeley catches are OK but if the wood gets worn /oil soaked or the often single screw comes loose then there can be problems . They are also a pain if re for-ending as it was the stocker who originally fitted them up when new .The strongest catch in my opinion was the so called Rigby/Wilkinson turn /screw grip used in many double rifles and a favorite of .

I'm curious how Wilkinson was worked into the Rigby/Wilkinson variant as Charles Harvey looks to have filed for protection? The Rigby style latch was a staple of many of the Vienna mechanics.

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

I like the Hackett marked snap forend (the kind with the small roller at the end of the spring) on my Lang. Seems efficient and simple.

The Deeley style on my Greener FP was good with excellent fit, finish and function. Feel like there is more to go wrong there in the long run though.

Conversely, I feel a little bit of slop/play in my low mileage Citori with a Deeley style forend...I understand it can be an issue with the Berettas as well although my Silver Pigeon was tight if memory serves.

I like either the Deely Lever or the Anson Button. The Push Button design on some Lefevers was very good in my opinion. Most of My Lefevers have the snap on. They are secure, even with ejectors but do have a rather stiff pull-off. The catch on Lefever snap ons is in front of the barrel lug.
I absolutely ABHOR a snap on in which the lug is engaged from the rear. This pushes the forend iron back against the knuckle of the gun & is actually pushing the barrels away from the breech. Just seems the wrong way to go to me & adds un-necessary friction to the hinge in opening & closing the gun. Best I recall the only gun I currently have with this type is a 16ga Baker Black Beauty.

Count me as a fan of the Anson Pushrod design. I also like the vintage crosswedge style, but I'm in a minority.

My all-time favorite lever release is on a circa 1887 John Blanch Back-action ejector that now resides in North Dakota. I believe it is a Scott patent design.

I've personally always favored the Deeley latch because it's secure and I think it's the most attractive. As for the snap on; I've been told there are a lot of shotgun forends of the snap on variety in the deep blue due to their tendency to pop off at the worst of times. The Anson latch is all right and I have examples so equipped.
Jim

AH Fox ejector snap on forends work well. Bobby

I have both and have had no problems with either, but I think the Anson push just looks more classic.
Karl

I dance with who brung me. I've got at least four different methods. I have an LC Smith that takes a tool (for me) to release the forend...a wheel, and a piece of dowel tapered down to lever the forend off is the tool.

They all work well...lever, wheel-lock, push-button, snap-off. Some are somewhat (IMO) unnecessarily complicated, for whatever reason. Seems it took a long time to figure out a relatively simple solution.

I do like the release that Raimey posted. Since I mostly have L.C. Smith's, I like the Curtis type for-end. It seems to be a modified Anson style.

Genelang, I had the same tool for an Ideal grade. I finally got tired of using the dowel and gently filed the tip of the "J" spring. It now comes off by just using the roller release.

I'm not knocking the Anson pushrod, but these look darn good to me too.

Circa 1875 John Dickson double rifle:

[/URL

Later Lancaster wristbreaker (note the later William Evans in the background w/the by then ubiquitous Anson):

The Nitro Special seems to function in this way, that is the bad news.

The good news is, it has functioned this way since 1937, with no ill effects, near as I can tell, the barrels are only going to move as far forward as the lock up system will allow them to (not much, the lever is well right of center) and there appears to be less resistance than those fancy self opener guns (hard closers) feature.



At age 55, I'm pretty sure I don't have the time to wear this one out. I might not have time to get it well broken in.


Best,
Ted

Another not mentioned so far is the lever in the middle of the forearm of the Manufrance Ideal. It locks up very tight

I think that one is similar to the lever on the German gun I mentioned, but, I don't know the technical name or patent. It wasn't going to come off with the lever closed. The wood didn't rattle around, either.

Best,
Ted

Ted;
I have over the past years shot several guns using the "J Spring" forend fastener. Some were perhaps a few thousandths off face, none really excessively so. That still doesn't prevent me from seeing the concept is just the wrong way to go.
As I stated the only one I currently own with this fastener is the Baker. The bolting on this Black Beauty is essentially identical with the Nitro Special. A wedge shaped bolt extending from the top lever swings into the rib extension from the side. An excellent system for holding the barrels shut & the Wedge is self compensating for bolt wear. This system however does "Absolutely" Nothing to keep the barrels on face, that is strictly left to the hinge pin. It just doesn't seem a matter of good design to accentuate the friction on the hinge joint every time the gun is opened & shut.
I will not that I have two guns, both over 100 years old which use a Deely type fastener & do not have bolt wear compensation, the lever always stops at center. Both are tight & on face.
The reason levers go left on compensating bolting is from the rubbing (Friction) wear in opening & shutting them. Anything which reduces the friction I deem as a plus, while anything which increases it I see as a definite minus. Thus my dislike of pulling the barrel & hinge joint together under spring pressure.
As I recall W H Baker was the inventor & patentee of this design & he referred to it as his compensating forend. Only real problem is it was compensating in the wrong direction.
It did keep the barrels from feeling loose when the gun was open, Big Deal.

I thot that I would amaze and astound you all with the Perazzi approach but then I decided that it was too much trouble and you wouldn't be able to appreciate anyway.

have another day
Dr.WtS

I can handle that more beautifully than you can, anyway, Dr. Sane.

Think Beretta, on steroids. End of discussion.

Miller, you are indeed correct, the Nitro isn't held on face by the opener, just by that skillfully fitted hinge pin, put there, what, most of 80 years ago? And, not in danger of failure, anytime soon. Someone may have some trouble with it, some day, but, it won't be me or you.

It is possible to over think things.

Best,
Ted

Ted;
My thinking is that when this design was developed some "Overthinking" was done. I mean if you get just .001" of clearance in the hinge when the gun is opened you can feel a bit of looseness. This forend was designed to prevent that looseness. It however does absolutely nothing to prevent that clearance but is much more apt to accelerate the wear of the joint due to the increased friction.
Yes I admit I have used guns with this type of fastener with no apparent problem. We were however speaking of our personal "Favorites". This one is on the absolute bottom of my Totem Pole of favorites.

There are some snap ons that snap on a lot easier than they snap off. And if they don't give you any room for a finger to gain purchase . . . but then Ansons can be balky too. Often, opening the gun slightly will enable removal of an otherwise balky forend.

I don't give a flying rip what kind of fore-end fastener the guns have. If it works, and I can hit wild birds and fowl with it, carry on.

I only wish I could live long enough to wear out a gun with the worst possible fore-end fastening system.

SRH

Stan,
Wish granted. Find a WInchester (Cooey Arms) model 840 single shot, the one with the plastic end on the wood that meets the knuckle of the "Winchester Proof Steel" receiver, and the die cast, pot metal opening lever. Proceed to fire 50-100 rounds of some form of clay bird practice a week.

You won't make it two birthdays before it is shot. Promise.

You don't ask for much.


Best,
Ted

Stan, you have a kindred spirit in Pato, Jaycee's friend in Chile. Note forend "fastener" and stock "repair" on his well-used old Baikal. Photo posted originally by Jaycee a few years ago. Gil

I remember that photo, Gil. Thanks for the reminder.

I've owned and shot a lot of guns ............ still do, but I've never had one with a fore-end fastener that failed me. Guess I just need to shoot more.

SRH

In all fairness, Ted, do you think the 840 was designed to be shot 50-100 rounds a week? Using it for clay bird practice is a bit of a stretch in regard to it's intended purpose, I think. That gun, and many other inexpensive single shots, were marketed with the occasional squirrel, turkey and rabbit hunter in mind, and maybe to be a kid's first gun. I really don't think it was ever intended to last for a lifetime of clays, or hard hunting. It may well be the sorriest break-open shotgun ever designed, I dunno, but comparing it to the guns we use for hard shooting/hunting is straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel.

SRH

Stan,
You said worst. And, "lifetime" is, I'm hoping, more than two years.

For me, anyway.


Best,
Ted

I had a friend back in my teenage years who had a single barrel similar to that one. He used to hold the forearm on by wrapping his hand around it and over the top of the barrels which keep the forearm on during firing. Kinda made the front bead useless!
Jim

And with another 90 degree rotation of the lever, the forend moves forward to lock in place on the barrels, and allowing the barrels to come off the action.

Great feature for those of us who easily lose things.


Mike

That's a sweet picture GLS

I used to think that the j spring of the snap on forend was what kept the forend snug to the frame, until I fitted an orphan set of barrels to an LC Smith that I own. I was able to fit the barrels to the frame in a few minutes, but fitting the forend to the frame and barrels took a few hours, because the length of the slot in the FE iron is fitted to the FE lug to control the friction between the FE iron and frame knuckle. If the slot is too short, the FE won't go on and if the slot is too long, the spring causes binding and excessive wear and galling. I solved the problem by installing a headless set screw in the front of the barrel lug to adjust the clearance between the FE iron and the lug on the barrel.

My Gastinne Renette 20Ga sxs has the following forend release, which I like. BillK

My dad's old Eastern Arms (Stevens) .410 single has the same style forend fastener, but the tape's a different color. I'm pretty sure I can remember when it had a fastener that actually worked, because I used to clean it after we'd gone hunting. Come to think of it, however, I may not have detached the barrel. Just opened it and ran a cleaning rod.

Tom;
That is a plus for the L C Smith. That however is not generally true of most forends fitted with a J spring. The original purpose of this J spring was to cushion the stop of the barrels upon opening thus not putting pressure forward on the barrel lug. This is covered in W H Baker's patent #228,165 of June 1, 1880. As normally fitted it also puts this undesirable pressure on the hinge.
A separate barrel stop/check seems a much better solution to preventing placing a strain on the barrel lug in my opinion.
The earliest Smith I have owned was an 00E. To be totally honest I did not notice if it had this feature to prevent putting pressure on the hinge or not. I do note that even at that date Smith had seen the wisdom of putting a supplementary latch on their ejector guns to prevent the forend "Releasing" unintentionally.
A well fitted forend with mechanical release in conjunction with a simple barrel check is my "Favorite". I have shot & enjoyed shooting many guns which did not meat these specifications, but this subject was about our "Preferred" methods. I have just stated mine.

Thanks to Gil for re-posting the Pato picture. I can't even name all the birds at his feet. Eared dove, gambil quail(?), perdiz (tinamu) and a few more; I recognize those big rabbits though! I flushed one in a pasture in Argentina on my 1st perdiz hunt down there and was amazed with how big it was.

I've considered stocking some of those on my property, but I'm afraid the deer hunters would shoot'em all up by mistake on doe day!...Geo

George, the photo keeps it all in perspective as some of us look for the perfect shotgun that "it ain't the arrow, it's the Indian." Gil

Nah, it's gotta be the shotgun...Geo