Are we demanding high enough standards for double rifle regulation?

Some folks seem to think "minute of buffalo" is sufficient for double rifle regulation, and this on brand new rifles, but allow me to illustrate what hunters of yore once enjoyed!
Elim Dimidoff, a Russian hunter of the last century, carried a double rifle into the Russian Altai. In the book "Hunting Trips in the Land of the Czar" he first makes a 120 yd. shot on Ovis Ammon--easy chip shot. He later writes of another ram, "He was about two hundred yds from me in a straight line....Placing myself in a comfortable position, and putting up the two hundred yard sight, I took a long aim and, confident in my Purdey, fired. The bullet told, and down he rolled to the very bed of the stream, stone dead."
Next chapter, Col. H.G.C. Swayne, carrying a 450 cordite, made a 150 yd. shot on Ovis Ammon, killing a sheep which was recovered the next morning mere steps from where last seen.
My own 9.3X74R REGULARLY placed shots into a three inch group at 100 yds, BUT GET THIS--both barrels shot 1 Moa to the exactly same spot every time. They just happened to be three inches apart. Either barrel could be depended upon to place a shot with Moa accuracy! With open sights.
Years ago, I read an ad for a Borovnik double 375 H&H (O/U) which touted having targets proving a 3/4 inch group at 100 meters.

So why is it that some mighty expensive doubles today are proclaimed "good to go" if they shoot a three inch group at 50 Yards!!! I think the manufacturers can do better--after all, they did 100 years ago!

For a double from say 7mm and up to 9,3x74R 3-4 inch groups up to 100-120m is to be expected..

A large bore double rifle is a short range weapon so 3-4 inch groups at 50-80m is quite ok in my book..

My .470 Krieghoff deliver 3 inch groups at 80m..

To your cited historical examples, any rifle that'll hold 10" or so at 200 would complete those shots just fine. We know the rifle in question manages 2.5" at 50 on that basis, nothing more.

Based on my own experiences with older rifles, they're not generally as accurate as modern stuff either. People didn't care, nobody was messing around with MOA nonsense.

Practical accuracy mattered: I aim at my target within a couple hundred yards, is the rifle consistent enough to kill the animal? If yes, then job done.

'Sniper' spec Lee Enfields in WW1 were only expected to do about 2MOA. Acceptance standards for the infantry grade ones were 5MOA at 100yds. That makes sense. It does the job, the rifle hits any human torso I want to hit out to 300-400yds. I can't really pick out a target beyond that with irons anyway, so who cares?

Every other rifle at the time was probably in the same ball park.

Even after WW2, the old 1950's parker hales etc that I've shot certainly aren't doing MOA... a lot of them are old milsurp actions anyway. They worked just fine. Still do, really.

As for modern stuff? the 'useful' questions are simple;

1. Does it shoot better than you in the situation you'll use it?
2. Is the accuracy insufficient to allow you to take a shot you may otherwise have taken?

Once again, practical accuracy is useful accuracy, theoretical performance is just theoretical.

For a double rifle, in a hunting situation, standing, under pressure, I don't think I'd do any better than 2-3" at 50yds. Off a bench, with all the time in the world, sure, but in the field? Either way, anywhere within a couple inches of the aim point is equally effective for the job at hand, so...

For any shot within 200yds, a 8-12" circle seems about as good as I can reasonably manage with irons, standing, in a hunting situation. That's a very long shot for a double rifle and again, is still perfectly good for a buff or whatever, so again, who cares? You're not going to be sad if you hit within 6" of your aim point, and neither is your PH, so what's the problem?

A smaller caliber double, especially an O/U might be held to a slightly higher standard as they were commonly used on the continent as more 'general' hunting arms, but even then, a couple inches is just fine.

Getting worried about the theoretical accuracy of a rifle that you'll never use to that potential anyway is just silly. Yet, that's the modern shooting world...

Some vintage double rifles are very accurate though..my .450/400 3.25 NE Joseph Lang from 1906 give 30mm groups at 45-50m with 1960´s Kynoch ammo.

A 3 inch group at 50-60 yards with express sights from two barrels that are probably an inch or slightly more apart center to center minus the bullet diameter is pretty good, especially as a mixed composite group of soft and solids. Quite a lot of bolt rifles won’t do much better.

when I hear a gun shoots three inch groups I assume they are talking about both barrels. The gun you reference in the story shot three inch groupsyou say so in describing the barrels as both moa three inches apart.

That’s the difference between single barrel accuracy and regulation. My 450/400 will shoot one hole groups at 50 yards and slightly larger than that at 100 form a single barrel. Using both barrels it is about 2 inches at 50 yards and 3-4 at 100.

My Ken Owen regulated .470ne Sabatti @50yds with bogpod shooting sticks.

My trusty Heym 88B in .458 Win will hold 2 shots from each barrel with the 2-barrel groups less than 4" at 100 yards. Once I dropped a cull giraffe at a laser ranged 116 yards. My rifle shoots well with my handloaded Cutting Edge Safari Solids and Raptors in both the 450/420 and 00/470 weight combinations.

My only other double presently is a Blaser S2 in .375 H&H that shoots MOA with each barrel and holds all into a 2" group at 100 yards. I think the convergence would be close to 200 yds. Yes, that is definitely a 200 yd capable double rifle.

If you want your double to shoot smaller groups, start experimenting with different velocities, bullets, and/or powders. If you do not handload, I think you are missing the fun!

My Beretta Silver Sable 9.3x74R is a "keeper". I had it re-regulated by JJ Perodeau for my preferred load, Norma Oryx 286 gr.
It shoots both barrels extremely well. Below is a target set of three firing sessions at 100M, shot bottom barrel first then top barrel immediately after. I moved the scope setting up between two shot "groups". The square black aiming point is exactly 1"x1"
Last week I used it to kill a calf elk, hit precisely where I aimed with the first shot, at a measured 210 meters.

uplander01 said:

A 3 inch group at 50-60 yards with express sights from two barrels that are probably an inch or slightly more apart center to center minus the bullet diameter is pretty good, especially as a mixed composite group of soft and solids. Quite a lot of bolt rifles won’t do much better.

Click to expand...

uplander01 said:

A 3 inch group at 50-60 yards with express sights from two barrels that are probably an inch or slightly more apart center to center minus the bullet diameter is pretty good, especially as a mixed composite group of soft and solids. Quite a lot of bolt rifles won’t do much better.

Click to expand...

Your saying alot of bolt guns wont do better than 3 inch groups at 60yds?!?!?!?!

farmer_john said:

Your saying alot of bolt guns wont do better than 3 inch groups at 60yds?!?!?!?!

Click to expand...

I’m guessing he meant bolt guns using express iron sights too. Most modern scoped bolt action rifles are capable of minute of angle or close to it at 100 yards with the right loads.

Longwalker said:

My Beretta Silver Sable 9.3x74R is a "keeper". I had it re-regulated by JJ Perodeau for my preferred load, Norma Oryx 286 gr.
It shoots both barrels extremely well. Below is a target set of three firing sessions at 100M, shot bottom barrel first then top barrel immediately after. I moved the scope setting up between two shot "groups". The square black aiming point is exactly 1"x1"
Last week I used it to kill a calf elk, hit precisely where I aimed with the first shot, at a measured 210 meters.
View attachment 797041View attachment 797042View attachment 797043

Click to expand...

I always liked the look of those silver sables...probably should have bought one--scope sighted.