doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Stupid comments time.

Rabbit, your post is all screwed up. Outdoor writers don't eat regularly because of the vast sums of money we're paid. However, one of the perks of the job is that it does leave us a good bit of free time to go out and kill lots of critters--which, by the way, is a legitimate business expense if you then write about it. That's why we eat so well. The money from magazines buys the booze with which we wash down the venison, pheasant, duck, etc.

A shotgun "forcing cone" could be machined to have any number of tapers or steps (unlikely). A true concentric cone has a consistent taper determined by the diameters of the small and large ends and length of the cone.

I read an article today written by an absolute moron. He was reviewing a new car, and mentioned "the engine is smaller than last year's model and provides better fuel economy." What does this man takes us for, fools? It is 1000% obvious a smaller engine will give better fuel economy. If anyone would like to donate a small arm, I will track this guy down and kill him dead. How dare he????!!! Hey Jim, care to join me? After we're done we can go track down that gun writer guy you hate so much, too.

I checked back and you're right, Larry; I clearly don't have a clear understanding of the perquisites and incentives of the journalistic craft. One of the big ones for Mr. S may be that copy & paste is a lot less taxing than pounding out all those words with an Underwood Upright or a quill pen. Speaking of which I just spoke of, those old Underwoods had a really great bell before the onset of "bells & whistles" and that wonderful old chrome return lever and the carriage which slammed to the right like the recoiling barrel of a big howitzer. . . . I hate it when I get all icky about what's gone but, say, I'll bet the words "Typewriter Journal" might look good embossed and gilded on a cover of genuine, simulated leather.

jack

I don't hate anyone GregSY. Certainly not Sisley or even you.

Rabbit, I banged out a bunch of articles on various manuals. Sort of a link to Hemingway, I guess. In fact, never owned an electric typewriter. Went straight from manual to computer. I think that was a bit like going from a flintlock to a Remington 1100.

Editors now pay us less because they know it doesn't take as long to achieve final copy. Hard to argue with that reasoning.

Greg, putting a smaller engine in a vehicle will not necessarily give you better gas mileage. I have seen six cylinder engines in a pick up truck get just as bad or worse gas mileage than an identical one with an eight cylinder engine. Especially with a load on it. The same would happen by putting a four cylinder engine in a Cadillac. A smaller engine that is not designed for the car/truck and has to work too hard can get pretty bad gas mileage compared to a larger engine that can pull it easier. Have you ever noticed or heard about this?

Last time I used an actual Underwood with the mechanical advantage of a very short lever was to do some accession records for a local industrial history museum in the mid-80s. I was able to cope with the darn thing because I learned on one in high school and understood the demands of aerobic typing. But we all soften with the opportunity; I like delete a lot better than Whiteout and overstrike.

jack

Well I just got around to opening this thread. It is well noted the standard taper of a "Chamber" is about .005"/inch. Thus in the above scenario if you added an additional 5.9" of this same taper to a 3" chamber for instance, you would end up with an 8.9" "Chamber" & a .1" forcing cone, a very short & steep one. While certainly anything is possible, I cannot recall ever seeing a forcing cone with other than a straight (conical) taper. I believe what Jim addresed is actuality as it exists, not fantasy which could exist. Had Browning put some radically different cone in, such as a venturi or a parabola, then a discussion of such would have been well called for. Otherwise various lengths of cones with their necessary change of angle have been batted all over the field, for at least 75 yrs. All which would seem necessary would have been to simply state the gun has 2" cones & let the purchaser decide if that suits his fancy or Not. Some of us understand your input Jim.

In the context of this discussion, you would have to define "smaller engine" as less displacement, lower power output, lighter weight, or lower installed volume. Or, most likely, some combination of these four. Fuel economy is a very, very complex subject. All of the above can factor into the economy, along with compression ration, asperation, fuel delivery, exhaust system, accessories, lubrication, cooling system, fuel and grade, etc. And, that is just the engine.

Generally, the heavier the vehicle and the driver's foot, the poorer the economy.