|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics39,752
Posts565,103
Members14,618
| |
Most Online9,918 Jul 28th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,925 Likes: 1515
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,925 Likes: 1515 |
3" of drop, alå a good portion of "soulful" Parker double gun production, is still 3" of drop.
If you are going hunting, soul won't help you to hit squat. Especially if you have to use steel.
Glad your safe is full of soul-miss some birds for me real soon with it, would you? Best, Ted
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,574 Likes: 167
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,574 Likes: 167 |
If you had a Steel Shot Special, you could have bought steel shot instead of those Kent loads, and saved a ton, Larry. If you tell me you have a Boss pigeon gun from between the wars, that needs the Kent loads, I'll know we pay retired Lt Cols too much! I hope you have lots of years popping off expensive rounds, in any event, Larry. Best, Ted Ted, I wouldn't have saved anything on shells. One outdoor writer "secret"--which I have "blown" on occasion in the past--is that we can get reasonable amounts of ammunition, for field test and review, for free. So the price was definitely "right" on those few boxes of Kent TM's! No Boss pigeon gun here. But I do have a pair of Army & Navy BLE's from between the wars, originally ordered by a British brigadier. And by God, they can take away my stars on doublegunshop, but Uncle Sam didn't demote me from COL to LTC upon my retirement. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,935
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,935 |
I'm so tired of whiny-babies getting bent out of shape over stock drop. As if having to bend your neck an extra 1/2" is going to ruin your shooting experience.
The average Parker has killed more game than 5 modern guns ever will. If the old timers were able to use those crude weapons 80 years ago we can do it too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 180
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 180 |
I'll take all the 3 in. drop guns you guys want to get rid of. They seem to fit me just fine - in fact I prefer them!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,574 Likes: 167
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,574 Likes: 167 |
I'm so tired of whiny-babies getting bent out of shape over stock drop. As if having to bend your neck an extra 1/2" is going to ruin your shooting experience.
The average Parker has killed more game than 5 modern guns ever will. If the old timers were able to use those crude weapons 80 years ago we can do it too. Actually Greg, if a stock has too much drop, it would be a question of NOT bending your neck. If you bend a little to cheek it like you would a gun with less drop, that's when your vision is blocked out by the barrels. That's why people talk about a more "head up" shooting style with old American guns. Brit guns of the same age may well have killed even more birds if they were used for driven shooting, but likely had a whole lot less drop. It's more a question of what you're used to than what's "right". And the simple fact is, most people used to modern stock dimensions are not accustomed to 3+" of drop at heel.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,935
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,935 |
OK, whatever. I have no problem shooting a 3" drop gun or a 2" drop gun. The human body is instantly adjustable within that range.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,883 Likes: 21
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,883 Likes: 21 |
I don't think any accomplished shooter would have much problem shooting 3" drop guns, but rather most shooters will have some difficulty shooting them to the same consistancy as a gun that has been fitted in the more modern fashion. If anyone can shoot a 3" drop gun as consistantly as a modernly fitted gun, he is a fortunate and gifted shooter.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,935
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,935 |
Didn't shooters 100 years ago do well with 3" guns?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,883 Likes: 21
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,883 Likes: 21 |
I beleive the modern dimensions are an evolution, not a revolution. That is; most shooters of 100 yrs ago could have benefitted as do current shooters, from the increased mounting consistancy and thus increased shooting consistancy. People are not so different as they were then. They just have another 100 yrs of shooting experience to draw from.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 528
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 528 |
Interesting point Greg. I am not sure the realy good ones did deal with a 3" drop. Every turn of the century competition gun which I have handled with a history of use in this country, has had what would be considered modern drop. Pigeon guns were the acme of the breed and L.C.'s and Parkers of the type have much more in common with their English cousins than with their own lesser field grade brethren. That doesn't mean that great grandpa couldn't hit with his dog leg stocked gun, but I bet he would have hit better with something less than 3".
|
|
|
|
|