Shotgun handling

[Grumpy]

Why should a SxSs barrels be set up at a slight angle to each other ? If you`ve seen a gun with `squinty` barrels that`s because it hasn`t been put together properly........unless you`re referring to the barrel regultion ( the point at which the patterns cross ) in which case it also applies to O/Us, although in the vertical plane of course, rather than the horizontal.

There`s more to handlng than balance and fit. You can take a poor handling gun and stuff as much weight in the butt as you like - and have the gun fitted - but whilst you might improve the handling it will never be very good.

[HSharief]

There u go again Grumpy. You know what I meant by the angle/regulation. Looking down a SxS, we know they are regulated, even if they are laid out perfectly parallel to each other, just for arguments sake. They look like they are converging, just a bit, depending on barrel length. Just like you would see any two parallel lines when they're going away from you, train tracks for example. That is what I was referring to that throws some people off, although we also know that it is just an optical illusion, kind of. This same optical illusion is not present in a O/U, at least not to the degree of a SxS.

Doesn't fitting and changing weight around make the gun handle better ? Isn't that the whole point of a good handling gun ? how well the weight is distributed. I think a gun might even handle differently for different people, right vs left handers for example, basically, anyone with different dominance/strength in their hands either naturally or because of some incidents in their life.

What I'm trying to get to is that handling and fit would go hand in hand and just like fit, the same gun would handle differently for different people.

Attack mode on

While I might not have written correctly what I wanted to mean, I can ask you Grumpy, what do you mean by "whilst you might improve the handling it will never be very good." I'd think this is an oxymoronic statement. How can u improve the handling and not leave it "very good".

Attack mode off.

We're just talking here, so don't jump on me just because I am less experienced or have lesser English skills. Like I said, or because I might not have written what I tried to mean, but you know what I meant but jumped on me anyway

[Vikram]

Good to see the discussion warming up.

Before we proceed further,Sharief, I am not speaking for Grumps, but I do not think he intends to "jump" on any one or anything to show off or to make them look less knowledgeable. Knowing him, it simply is not in him.

Sharief, you raise the same point I raised in my first post re the subjectivity of the perception of handling

(I am just thinking aloud here). However, the Gough Thomas definition states that it is not subjective but a definable quality. Just to recall

" a good handling gun is one where the inertia of the extremities, the barrels and stock, does not resist the movements of the handler."

So, good handling involves the ability to mount the gun and swing and point unhindered or without difficulty.Can this be agreed upon?

Then comes gun fitting which is as subjective as it can get as one gun may not fit all. What exactly does gun fit aim to achieve? A well fit gun makes it easier to point where the shooter wants to and shoot exactly there?

Now we need to see whether these two qualities can be found in a gun alone, without the other factor ie good handling gun but an ill fitting gun or vice versa.

I think Sharief, you seem to suggest that both are inseparable.Grumps, I think, seems to suggest that both are two different things.

BTW, the weight,design of the action,balance etc contribute to handling but may have little to do with gun fit.(In my view again).

That's the reason I asked Grumps what exactly design qualities affect handling.Lets see what he has to say.

Best-
Vikram

[Grumpy]

Why should I jump on you ?
The convergence of the barrels of a O/U is the same as for a SxS if designed for the shot patterns to cross at the same distance - providing that the breech ends are of the same thickness. It`s not as apparent because you don`t look down both barrels of an O/U. The barrel taper is usually rather more obvious on a SxS also which is what makes the convergence so apparent.
Your statement about my quoting an oxymoron just doesn`t make sense: `Improve` does not equal `good`. If 10 is the ideal you can improve a 1 to ( for example ) 5 - but 5 isn`t 10.
Handling is about more than just balance - and adding/subtracting weight to the butt might improve the balance/ handling but won`t make a poor handling gun handle really well. The distribution of weight through the length of a gun is a major contributor to handling and can`t be improved by adding weight to the butt, only the balance can be improved - although improving the balance should improve the handling......although it has to be said that most guns are pretty well balanced as standard. Chopping half an inch ( or so ) off or adding half an inch to the stock to improve the fit will make only a fractional difference the balance. The stock, obviously, is important to gun handling but you are limited to how much you can bend, cut or lengthen a stock. You can cut down an overly high comb - a common procedure when `sporterising` a Trap gun - but you can only bend the toe down a very small amount.
You can`t alter the profile of a gun at all.
Basically you can`t make a silk purse out of a sows ear. You can make a purse ( which might be considered an `improvement` ) but not a silk one..............
As I said previously, you can only improve a poor handling gun ..... but you can`t make it anything like perfect.

[Ranjeet Singh]

Yes, the profile - in the case of shotguns - refers to the height of the action.

Thanks Grumpy for that...

Cheers
Ranjeet