doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com 16 gauges built on 20 gauge frames?

Thanks everyone.

"Is the true scale of a frame the important factor? Or is adequate strength at minimum weight and balance enough?"

John

It just seems like you have to get them built on a 20 ga frame to get the weight down and improve the balance.

The Ithaca M37 is scaled per gauge as well. Gil

Holland and Holland 16 bore built on 20 ga frame.....28� barrels, 5 lb 13 oz....sweet.

Generally most of the older American built shotguns were on 20 gauge frames while European shotguns normally built a specified 16 gauge frame.

+1



IMHO, "scale frame" has been left seriously undefined. Does it mean a size smaller than the next larger gauge (12 on a 16)? Does it mean the smallest frame a given gauge can be built on? Or, does it just mean the size a gauge is usually built on? 20 ga frame is not exactly one single thing.

As above, which size 20 ga frame are we talking about? Way too much has been made of the idea of 16 ga on 20 ga frame. If you can build a 16 ga on any given frame, is it not a 16 ga frame? No doubt that you can build a 20 ga frame that would be unsafe for building a 16 ga on. Why no hue and cry to build 20's on 28 ga frame of 28's on ,410 frames?

Sub 6 1/4# guns quickly become difficult to handle for most/many shooters. 12 ga guns have been built down into the mid 5# range with 2" chambers.

Thus endeth the rant.

DDA

A.H. Fox immediately comes to mind. The old Philadelphia ones especially higher grade came with 4 or 5 different barrel weight. The ones with lightest barrel profile are truly "toyish". When I examined "C-grade" 16 I had to rub my eyes and when I looked back it wasn't 20ga as I thought but still a 16ga, amazing. If you want something else I suggest 12-20 concept pioneered by an English company and propagated by some Basque makers.

It could. Or, does it mean the opposite ........... "a size larger than the next smaller gauge"? Seriously, my understanding of it is simply that each gauge's frame is built proportionately smaller (or larger)than the adjacent gauge frame. Or, put another way, no two gauges (or bores, as in the case of the .410) are built on the same size frame.

I'd never considered that there was as much confusion about the term as you suggested. Ignorance is bliss, as they say.

SRH

I simply prefer a SXS that weighs around 6 1/4 pounds with 29" barrels.

I had a Piotti King that was just that and it was a joy to carry and shoot. I'm sorry I sold it. It had 2 3/4" chambers. I've also owned a Greener built with 28" steel barrels in 1898 that weighed 6 pounds, 2 ounces with 2 1/2" chambers. I should have kept it and had a stock made for it. My AYA 4/53 in 28 ga has 29" barrels and weighs less than 6 pounds 1 oz. It is a delight to carry and shoot.

Having 29" barrels helps to keep weight forward for a smooth swing even if the gun is "light", at least for me it does. Thus, my search for a "light" weight SXS in either 16 or 12 gauge (either 2 3/4" or 2 1/2"). I have an AYA 4/53 in 12 gauge-also with 29" barrels that weighs 6 pounds 11 ounces-that I use for South Dakota pheasants, waterfowl (with Briley thin wall choke tubes) and Sporting Clays.

The search is always great fun.

I bought a 16 gauge Fox sterlingworth with 28 inch barrels and ejectors last year that weighs 5 lbs 13 ounces. Bobby

Parker built at least one 28 gauge on the 000 .410 frame. It belonged to a neighbor so I was able to measure the firing pin separation to confirm it was a true 000 frame. It was displayed at an Ohio Gun Collectors show a while back when the PGCA annual meeting was held at the Ohio venue. I don't know where the gun is today. The owner of this and a similar gun has passed away.