For those who favor ejectors, as I do, they are at least as useful as they were in 1921. Part of the enjoyment of owning a nicely built gun is the joy of seeing it function well, with all the little mechanisms inter-working properly. Above that, ejectors are useful to me when hunting doves, ducks and quail. Having spent one whole dove season shooting a Sterlingworth extractor gun I swore to myself that I'd never do that again. I can reload faster and with less fumbling with an ejector gun, by trapping the ejected hull(s) in my hand and quickly depositing them in my game bag. I never drop them on the ground, as some claim ejector guns are "good for". It would seem that anyone who has the manual dexterity to brush their teeth properly can learn to trap ejected hulls without dropping them. I taught myself to do so in order that I wouldn't cause range workers unnecessary effort picking up my hulls around the shooting stations. It just naturally carried over to field shooting.
Ejectors are a nicety, not a necessity, but they add much to my pleasure in the fields and wetlands. JMOYMMV.
Most of my doubles over the years were extractor guns. A “warm corner” for me is when two grouse or two pheasants flush together, and I didn’t really need to reload the gun faster anyway, so I got used to not having them. It is a lot more common to just have a single bird flush anyway. I own a few ejector guns, now, but, most of the time have a preference to regular old extractors. At least for hunting. When George Hoenig designed his masterpiece rotary action gun, he was adamant that two types of mechanisms would never be found on it-a single trigger, or ejectors. He had spent so much of his life working on them, he wanted nothing to do with them.
There are plenty of smart guys who don't care for ejectors, and there are plenty who do (not that I'm a smart guy). At last count I shoot sixteen ejector doubles, and have owned several more than that. I have had a total of one ejector problem in roughly 18 years with them. That failure did not even stop the ejector from functioning, and I repaired it myself.
Based on my experience some gun "experts" make a bigger issue out of ejector failures than is reality. Not casting any dispersions on Mr. Hoenig by any means, because I know next to nothing about him, but not ALL gunsmiths are always right, the same as farmers or print shop workers.
George is always right.😀. And if George wanted ejectors fitted on to his RR…..he would’ve put em there. He could’ve done anything he wanted, probably still can.
Regarding ejectors…I can do with em or without em. Doesn’t bother me either way. I’ve been in hot corners (both waterfowling and dove hunting) and having an extractor gun was never a hinderance. I guess I just never got that worked up or excited to care. I’d never turn down a gun because it lacked ejectors. I’d never look down on a gun because it had extractors. I use them all and when I do my part, they get with great effect. Ok, decent effect.
i like ejectors..they are cool...but they are an annoying distraction on the target range...high volume scores are about focus and concentration...one does not need to have to deal with flying empties...when working on breaking 25 straight...
Thinking about a comment reminded me that though my Parkers have ejectors, most of the time I catch the empty to avoid littering or having to bend over to pick it up.
And my double rifles have only extractors - who wants that expensive brass lost in the weeds?
the reason for the development of ejector guns in england, was so me load's loader could reload a pair of guns faster, so he could kill more pheasants as they were driven over his stand...not much sportsmanship in that...just killing as much as he could, as fast as he could...
ejector guns became popular here around 1900, due to the popularity of live pigeon shooting and pass shooting at flocks of waterfowl...
the demand to be able to put a lot lead in the air resulted in the creation of the winchester model 1893 pump gun...and others shortly thereafter...and there again its all about killing as much as you can as quick as you can...
and the ultimate high volume bird killing machine is of course the semi automatic self loading shotgun, beginning with the browning a5 in 1902...
it is a sad commentary, that so called sportsmen gave up the beautiful, graceful, elegant doublegon in favor of ugly, clubby, clunky high volume killing machines...
but, alas, as a result of the popularity of self loading guns, many fine vintage doubles wound up in the back of the closet and forgotten about...occasional one of these beauties surfaces and passes through my hands...what a joy it is to see, touch and handle them for a while, before they are passed to another who appreciates their special value...
i like ejectors..they are cool...but they are an annoying distraction on the target range...high volume scores are about focus and concentration...one does not need to have to deal with flying empties...when working on breaking 25 straight...
Written by a non-shooter. No empties 'fly'. They are popped into the palm of the grip hand, and removed from the barrel when about halfway out. They are then deposited autonomically in your shooting vest back pocket. There is no more conscious thought doing this than simply breathing.
Any grown-asp man that has the hand-eye-coordination to shoot a flying disk with a gun can surely cup his hand over ejectors and catch the empty hulls. What am I missing?
""In the nineteenth century the quest was for speed. The development of sporting guns was driven by the customers' desire for guns which would work faster. They opened quicker, closed quicker, all the rest of it."
Richard Purdey, chairman of Purdey in a Rural Life video.
Ejectors were part of this drive for more speed in driven shooting.
They have a measurable effect on used gun prices, look at auction catalogs for confirmation. So they are useful in a way, their absence keeps prices down.
Any grown-asp man that has the hand-eye-coordination to shoot a flying disk with a gun can surely cup his hand over ejectors and catch the empty hulls. What am I missing?
Nothing ........... it's easier for lots of people to blame an inanimate object for their shortcomings than it is for them to teach themselves a new skill.
With the cheap shells with steel bases we have now which sometimes swell when fired and are sometimes hard to remove from the chamber, even in ejector guns……. I’m guessing it’s even harder to get them out from extractor guns where there is no spring assist from an ejector. BTW, I never see non-ejector guns at an NSCA competition, only ejector guns. There may be some non-ejector guns, but I’ve never noticed one at any of the traditional NSCA events where I’ve participated.
of course, one can learn to catch ejected shells...but why deal with it, when simply lifting the spent shells out of the chambers is so much less distracting...
and for me, the real fun of skeet shooting is bringing back some of the joy of grouse and pheasant hunting...i neva hunted with an ejector gon...
of course, one can learn to catch ejected shells...but why deal with it, when simply lifting the spent shells out of the chambers is so much less distracting...
You have this backwards. The advantage, such that it is, in the 'distraction' sense is in all cases with the ejector gun. What could be less distracting than the empty shells simply disappearing when the gun is opened?
My primary singles and handicap trap gun is an extractor gun. There is zero functional difference on the trap line when saving shells between it and an ejector gun. The grip hand goes to the same place between targets and makes the same motions.
I have several extractor double guns. They do require a slightly different technique and it's the same when when saving shells or not. This is a complete non-issue to anyone who actually shoots much.
Get over the idea that you need to 'catch' ejected shells.
Originally Posted by Buzz
With the cheap shells with steel bases we have now which sometimes swell when fired and are sometimes hard to remove from the chamber, even in ejector guns…
I find the problems associated with steel head shells to be essentially limited to repeaters.
A bigger problem with break open guns is the lack of standardization of shell head dimensions between brands of shells. This results at best in shell rims behind the ejector and at worse to misfires.
With the cheap shells with steel bases we have now which sometimes swell when fired and are sometimes hard to remove from the chamber, even in ejector guns……. I’m guessing it’s even harder to get them out from extractor guns where there is no spring assist from an ejector. BTW, I never see non-ejector guns at an NSCA competition, only ejector guns. There may be some non-ejector guns, but I’ve never noticed one at any of the traditional NSCA events where I’ve participated.
People disconnect them on occasion. I prefer an extractor gun at shoots. No rushing between pairs.
Either one works for me. My very first shotgun, bought with my paper route earnings, was a hammerless single shot Savage 220A 20 ga. which had an automatic ejector. I still have it. With that, and subsequent auto ejector doubles, it is no problem to either catch the empties, or let them fly free to be picked up later. Extractor guns are fine with me too because I rarely find myself in a situation while hunting where I need to save fractions of seconds for quick reloading. For home defense, I have an unplugged pump gun that will spit out 5 shots quicker than any auto ejector double.
However, since most gun value sources say that auto-ejector guns will have a substantial premium in value, I do like it when I can buy an ejector gun at an extractor gun price. Only problem I have ever had with either system is an old worn extractor slipping past a shell rim.
While I'm not surprised that gents like their ejectors, I personally don't. They certainly work better for me on the clay course, as the two places I shoot most frequently don't require you to pick up your shells. So, ok...that's neat...shoot and reload.
But for hunting, I will take extractors. Yes, you can cup your hand, but even at that, I like it as simple as possble.
Keith,
It's funny you should mention the Savage 220. Have a 219 30-30 rifle (the earliest "-219-" Utica version), and over the years I've aqquired all the same era 220 shotgun barrels, and a couple other 219 rifle barrels to go with it...they all fit, just need to use a larger forarm for the 12 and 16 ga. Anyway, the ejectors on those things!!! Could take someone's eye out standing behind you! The shotguns are strong, but the rifles are murderous. Could actually injure someone at the shooting range.
I've taken the spring out and snipped it a bit on all of them. Now they merely extract.
Interesting discussion. I suppose if I had to form an opinion on one or the other or make a choice, it would probably go to the ejector guns. However, with that said, it really does not matter to me. The fit and feel and condition of a gun is more important to me than ejectors or non. I started hunting about 65 years ago with a Winchester Model 37 single in 20 gauge. I hunted with that until my 12th birthday when my dad give me my first double, a Stevens Model 311 12 gauge. That little 26 inch barreled beauty accounted for a goodly number of dove, quail, ducks, crows, black birds, and deer. But, of course, I soon "graduated" to the world of semi autos and pumps that included Remington Sportsman, Ithaca 37 pump, Winchester semi auto, and Browning A5s. The little 311 extractor gun sat in the back of my closet or gun cabinet for many years. I shot it off and on through the years just to keep it looking good and rust free, and yes, I still have that same 311 today. I started shooting it again several years ago now when I read an article in the Shooting Sportsman magazine about a duck hunter using his 'old doubles" to hunt with. The made me think about the little double 311. I pulled it out, and after researching what size steel shot I should use in it with its improved cylinder and modified chokes, I went duck hunting with it. Amazing what a joy it was to shoot and yes, I did kill a few ducks. Well, that was the beginning - again!! I purchased an Uggie Model 30 extractor gun in 12 gauge from a gentleman on this (or the SS board??) and alternated between it and the 311. Then came the 20 gauge guns. Then the 16's and the 28s and finally a .410. Out of all of them, the 311, Uggie, and the .410 are extractor guns, the remainder being ejector guns. With all of them, I catch some hulls and I let some fly for later pick up. I have rarely had an occasion where I was in such a "swarm" of birds that I could not load and unload, either manually or automatically, Soooooo, after this long and exciting (to me!!) story, the bottom line is that like one of the gentlemen said earlier here, if you can brush you teeth you can probably catch hulls. But is it necessary to have one or the other? My mind says no. There you have it - my opinion.