So Jack . . . no proof of Churchill either producing or marketing his XXV before the war ended? Thought not. The way he MARKETED the XXV was clearly a response to the gun market in England as it existed following WWI.
And his opponents were proven "wrong" on only one issue, which was their claim that the XXV was deficient in velocity when compared to guns with longer barrels. But that does not prove Churchill's hype of "exclusive merit" for his guns--unless you are going to tell us that the XXV is inherently "better" than a gun of similar quality with 28" barrels, based on nothing other than barrel length.
Claiming exclusive merit for a minor modification which is not an improvement over existing designs is the very definition of a marketing ploy. Churchill found something to set his guns apart (a different barrel length) and promoted them as being superior, based on that difference. That's good business--and that's all it is.
Forensic ballistics has to do with solving crimes; shooting style can be applied to any type of shotgun with any type action, let alone barrel length. He was no more an innovator in the gun world than Bob Brister, although the latter certainly deserves recognition for his work on shot string, involving moving targets. John Browning was an innovator in the gun world. There is a fairly significant difference.
