|
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
|
|
|
0 members (),
293
guests, and
4
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,499
Posts545,462
Members14,414
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 57
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 57 |
I've been reading Stephen Bodio's book "Good Guns" and he wrote that Parker's were known as hard recoiling guns because of their "short forcing cones or chambers". I've not found this to be the case, but I use 2 inch or 2 and a half inch loads. No duck loads yet. Has anyone else found this comparison to be true and if so, are there doubles of this vintage that are considered soft shooters?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,733 Likes: 52
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,733 Likes: 52 |
I think it all depends on the loads going through any gun. The more lead the more recoil. Also a gun not fitting right will seem like it has more recoil because it does not fit.
David
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 640 Likes: 6
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 640 Likes: 6 |
I had a 12 ga. Parker DH years ago that would regularly "double". Now THAT was a hard kicking Parker!
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114 |
I've been reading Stephen Bodio's book "Good Guns" and he wrote that Parker's were known as hard recoiling guns because of their "short forcing cones or chambers". I've not found this to be the case, but I use 2 inch or 2 and a half inch loads. No duck loads yet. Has anyone else found this comparison to be true and if so, are there doubles of this vintage that are considered soft shooters? The same book where Stevie discussed the Model 21 as coming on the market in 1941-ooops-make that 1931- A Mike McIntosh Bodio ain't--Although he does like the Model 12--
"The field is the touchstone of the man"..
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,964 Likes: 89
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,964 Likes: 89 |
This is a new one for me. I have been shooting original and unaltered Parkers for several decades and have not noticed anything unusual about recoil. Now, once upon a time I had an Elsie that would jar loose my fillings....
When an old man dies a library burns to the ground. (Old African proverb)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743 |
Sounds as if Bodio has been Believing all those fairytales about how yo can do all sorts of gimmicks to your barrel which will increase the velocity of the shot load while simultaneously reducing the Gun's recoil. "AIN'T" Gonna Happen Folks.
Miller/TN I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,935
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,935 |
Nothing worse than a gun that recoils too hard and hurts your breasts and vagina.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,961 Likes: 9
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,961 Likes: 9 |
Think of excessive drop, short chambers (2 5/8 on 12's), sharp combs, and short forcing cones. This can add up to recoil if you just grabbed a box at Walmart they are made to cycle an A-5 and kick hard in any gun.
bill
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,740 Likes: 97
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,740 Likes: 97 |
heavy loads in a light gun will kick more than heavy loads in a heavy gun... therefore logic dictates that one shoot loads that do not kick beyond ones tolerance for such...
back in the day, a light field gun was 6 to 7 pounds and was made to shoot light loads.
a heavy water fowling gun was 8 to 9 pounds and was made to shoot heavy loads.
and now we have the all purpose 7 1/2 to 8 pound gun...
Last edited by ed good; 01/30/16 10:47 PM.
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,600 Likes: 13
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,600 Likes: 13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|