doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Lightweight Guns

I wonder if there will be more of the lightweight 20ga guns as hunters become older and fewer younger ones coming along. My 20ga is getting three-quarters of the action now because it's easy to carry and no handicap on birds. To come right down to it, I'm using heavier 12s more out of sentiment than utility.

Post deleted by King Brown

LG what Chuck said.

In the Panhandle of Texas Quail season runs from late October thru late February and you can find me and my hunting buddies out every week chasing quail or pheasant. Last year there was a drought year here and we went to New Mexico, Kansas, and Oklahoma in pursuit of flushing birds.

I hunt on foot behind pointing dogs. I carry a 5-3/4 pound English boxlock extractor 16 gauge. I don't own an ATV. The difference between carrying a 5-3/4 pound gun and a 6-3/4 pound gun is very signifigant - especailly after 3:00PM. I shoot heavy guns at clays and dove - because they recoil less and I shoot them better.

Best,

Mike

Dig et al.,
Seems to me like a half loaded question/issue. For sedintary high or even medium volume shooting a heavy gun is needed. No matter the loads, if you are going to shoot 100 plus shells a day the extra weight is necessary. Not to mention, how it helps with gun swing. However, for carrying a gun all day in the era of low bag limits (especially if in hills or difficult terrain) a light gun is wonderful.
Like Chuck and Rev, I was fortunate to be able to spent some time in So. Dakota this year chasing the wily ringneck. Lots of good strong wild birds and the season was almost a month old. One day I carried a 12 Perazzi and 3 days I carried a 20 Sterlingworth with 26" barrels. I would not even take the Perazzi again. The little 5'13oz. Sterlingworth worked like a magic wand. For some reason I shot it well and with one oz. #5s it just flat WHACKED the birds and at pretty significant distances. And, it was a real pleasure to carry.
Now, I ain't takin' the Sterly out to the range to shoot one or two hundered clays even though I can't wait to get it in the field again.
Different tools for different jobs.
The wood pigeon shoot sounds like a great one.
Regards, Jake

I'm so happy with my sub $300 5&1/2lb 12br 30" that I might nix my Sterlingworth and GM 201e. I simply don't need them anymore.

For targets and high volume shooting, I like my 6 lb.-15 oz. MX20.

But for real hunting I like game guns...

AH Fox 16 -- 5-15
Lindner Daly 20 -- 5-10
Harkom 16 -- 5-8
Dickson 12 -- 6-3

When hunting, I carry a gun far more than I shoot it, and find that 1 oz. or less of shot seldom leaves me wishing I had more.

One point many seem to forget is the British Game gun was designed & built around "High Volume" shooting in comparsion to most any hunting situation encountered in the US. Althoug I have never been there from reading it would seem that many of the shooters in the heyday of the driven shoots, many shot as many rounds as the normal US target shooter, & they did it with their game gun. The weight of those guns decreased over the yrs, they did not become heavier. This also appears to have occured over years in which the amount of shooting was not necessarily declining, so was not because of less shots fired.

Hi Miller:

I read in Burrard or Thomas that the typical British game gun went from a 6&3/4 pound gun with 30 inch barrels shooting a 1-1/8oz load to a 6-1/2 pound gun with 28" barrels shooting a 1-1/16oz load. I don't consider 6-1/2 pounds particularly lightweight, more like medium weight.

Best,

Mike

Going lighter to compensate for lot's of miles helps for me due to a few too many neck injuries from the years. I did find going too light was a problem on the whippy side, having to come back to the bird and the gun bouncing all over. But keeping in the 6 1.2lb. range (give or take a few oz.) seems to work for me. But for the waterfowling, laying about on the Missouri River, I like going up to the 7 1/2 lb. range for the 12 ga. Only having to carry it from the boat to the bank is still possible. At least that's how is feels this year!

I thought, based on the British penny weight concept

A 1 1/8 oz load was intended for a 7lb gun

A 1 1/16oz load was intended for 6lb 7oz gun

A 7/8 oz load was intended for a 5lb 8oz gun

Maybe I have bass ackwards, but I was told that, during the early days of smokeless powder, it was thought that if you shoot a 5 1/2 lb double, 7/8ths oz was the most that should be shot from it...otherwise your subjecting the face of the buttstock to forces that the stockmaker hadn't intended. This obstacle was eventually overcome by many French artisan/gunmakers by utilizing "faux corps de plantines" (which means false body of the sidelocks). What was previously thought of as "false sideplates" were assigned a utilitarian function by French artisans trying to overcome the penny wieght thinking. The sideplates were used to not only encase the head of the boxlock stock, but to add a sizable amount of surface to the area considered to be the face or bearing surfaces of the stock. In the early days of nitro powder, when most makers just moved toward more robust guns, the French sportsmen continued to demand lightweight fast handling doubles. Some of the French doubles of the period are among the lightest ever produced. If your lucky enough to find one thats triple proofed, you've got the zenith of a particular thoroughbred double.