I have handled (but not shot, sadly) a couple of Churchill XXV bests in the last month or two - one a 12, the other a 20; both were superb guns, made to fit and balance well rather than being whippy. I did notice that the 12's muzzles looked quite thick, and probably had thick barrel walls to maintain a good balance. Less inertia out in front seemes to offer good pointability. I am, for reference, shorter and stockier than the average; your mileage, may, of course, vary, but I really enjoyed handling them.
Where does all this talk of barrel length leave W.W. Greener's pronouncement (himself prone to self-aggrandisement too) that 40 calibres is an ideal barrel length? We're back to 29 inches for a 12 again! I personally like the idea of barrel length being proportionate to bore diameter, but is 40 the magic number? (Woodwards are often that length...)
RG
