Double Rifle Misconceptions

[Ray B]

the original @DUGABOY1 posting is quite informative but I take issue with his somewhat derogatory comments to writers using the term barrel harmonics when talking about barrel flip. I suspect the writers in general were versed on the topic but were using terms commonly used, although incorrect. Other examples I commonly hear are referring to a cartridge as a caliber and a cartridge as a bullet. For purposes of conversation or a magazine article the meaning is understood and a lot of print isn't spent boring the reader. Otherwise, the article as noted above, is quite good.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

I am an engineer by education and trade so take comments literally. You said incoming at full tilt at 20 yards in the post I responded to.

So, if it is incoming then the angle to do a heart shot from the front of the chest would be interesting.

On the next post you mentioned shooting it broadside.

Shot twice before it fell down. Guess you missed that part.

I have a PhD with significant post grad work in physics, chemistry, and biology. I'm not an idiot. An engineering degree doesn't overly impress me. Why on earth would you think it's impossible to shoot an animal that size through the heart with a frontal shot at twenty yards? Or through the shoulder and heart with a passing shot? Not like it was laying on the ground. Your logic might have some merit if I was a fifty foot giant shooting at a dik dik antelope. Remind me to avoid driving over any bridges you've designed.

 

[rookhawk]

I am an engineer by education and trade so take comments literally. You said incoming at full tilt at 20 yards in the post I responded to.

So, if it is incoming then the angle to do a heart shot from the front of the chest would be interesting.

On the next post you mentioned shooting it broadside.

I try to stick with simpler things like double rifles, rather than delving into the mysteries you’re questioning:

 

[rookhawk]

It is interesting. I have been reading posts here for a few years. We are blessed to dialogue with men and women who have hunted literally all over the world. Many have taken hundreds of different game animals in a host of different environments. Still others, some of whom are the same people, shoot thousands of rounds of sporting clays, competitive pigeons, and/or game birds each year. Still others have spent time in combat, utilizing weapons in a far different and somewhat more consequential way.

Of those remarkably diverse and experienced people, I can't think of one who feels compelled to brag about his shooting ability or make assumptions about guns or rifles about which he has no personal experience - or worse, to make assumptions about the abilities, experiences, or knowledge of other contributors. The people about whom I speak are those who have seen and done enough to fully realize there is a great deal they do not yet know.

I certainly learn something almost every time I open this site.

Fair enough. I still don’t understand:

 

[Tanks]

Shot twice before it fell down. Guess you missed that part.

...Why on earth would you think it's impossible to shoot an animal that size through the heart with a frontal shot at twenty yards? Or through the shoulder and heart with a passing shot? Not like it was laying on the ground. ...

I guess it is too simple for a PhD

It is coming at you from 20 yards at 60km per hour (full tilt, your words not mine). It would cover the 20 yards in a tad over a second. You shoot it and while it has momentum coming at you, you shoot it again after manipulating the bolt before it gets to you all under a second.

At 1.20 meter height at such a short distance and at that speed the angle for a heart shot might just be a tad difficult especially if it is leaning its head forward at full gallop.

However, all this arguing is pure conjecture as later you stated that you did not shoot it coming at you, but broadside through the shoulder.

No need to argue more about this. We all admit you are a regular Annie Oakley reincarnated .

 

[Ontario Hunter]

I guess it is too simple for a PhD

It is coming at you from 20 yards at 60km per hour (full tilt, your words not mine). It would cover the 20 yards in a tad over a second. You shoot it and while it has momentum coming at you, you shoot it again after manipulating the bolt before it gets to you all under a second.

At 1.20 meter height at such a short distance and at that speed the angle for a heart shot might just be a tad difficult especially if it is leaning its head forward at full gallop.

However, all this arguing is pure conjecture as later you stated that you did not shoot it coming at you, but broadside through the shoulder.

No need to argue more about this. We all admit you are a regular Annie Oakley reincarnated .

It was shot twice. Once in the chest incoming and again through the shoulder AS IT RAN BY probably dead on its feet. If you have any experience at all with heart shots, and I seriously doubt you do, then you would know the animals typically run like hell after hit till they run over themselves, usually about forty to fifty yards. I didn't give it a chance to run over itself because it was too close ... and too dangerous. Of course I already made that all clear enough.

Just because you think I shoot better than you do doesn't make me something special. I'm sure there's a hundred other guys on this forum that can shoot better than you.

60 km/hr is the "maximum" speed of gemsbuck. Clearly they are an animal that's not built for sustained high speed or easily navigating uneven ground (they can't jump a 4' fence). This cow was spotted running towards us by a tracker on a knoll a half mile away. It was several minutes before she came into sight over a hill about a hundred yards away. She immediately ran into the acacia. I was on the sticks and could see her head bobbing in there as she continued to gallop towards us. I came off the sticks when she emerged from the thicket and shot her in the chest. She was galloping but I didn't have a radar gun to measure the exact speed. Then I shot her again as she ran by at twelve yards (paced off by my PH). Hope that clears it up for you.

 

[Ray B]

I think the PM function is the appropriate avenue for personally pointed comments.

 

[Hunting Hitman]

I always enjoy these threads spiraling out of control…I myself am happy to occasionally connect on an animal and happy when everything works out.
Happy Sunday (Tanzania Time Zone) jumping on the charter for bush camp in the Selous.

HH

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

A good article. I will disagree with just one point, and that is that CNC machining is good for rough work only and finishing will always need to be by hand. I think with the extremely fine cut tools of various types that CNC can now call upon since this was written we are already there. Regulation could be robotic performed too, but would you want that?

 

[Challer]

A good article. I will disagree with just one point, and that is that CNC machining is good for rough work only and finishing will always need to be by hand. I think with the extremely fine cut tools of various types that CNC can now call upon since this was written we are already there. Regulation could be robotic performed too, but would you want that?

As an example, Longthorne barrels are machined from a single ingot. Yes it’s a shotgun but the principles are very similar. CNC is profoundly more advanced than even a decade ago. Eventually we will have additive printed barrels similar to how some suppressors are manufactured presently

 

[Ontario Hunter]

A good article. I will disagree with just one point, and that is that CNC machining is good for rough work only and finishing will always need to be by hand. I think with the extremely fine cut tools of various types that CNC can now call upon since this was written we are already there. Regulation could be robotic performed too, but would you want that?

Would the consumer know the difference?

One of the chief benefits of CNC machining is the computer can be programmed to detect when the machine is wore out and needs parts replaced. With hand machining the customer has to rely on the machinist and his ability (or willingness) to check for deviation caused by excessive wear. Theoretically, we should prefer CNC machined guns produced entirely by robots and computers. Theoretically, they should be better made ... and cheaper. Never heard of a CNC machine striking for higher wages.

 

[Rare Breed]

I think Kevin’s point may have been missed. He like myself enjoy how a fine DR is made not as just a tool but knowing it is regulated by hand adds to the enjoyment of the rifle itself. Call me a romantic which I am and that’s fine…when I hold a nice DR knowing the craftsmanship that went into it as I take it to Africa adds a lot to the total experience. Probably sounds boring but it is part of who I am. It is why I enjoy reading about the fine gunmakers and have such high respect for their handy work.

 

[BRICKBURN]

Another common misconception about double rifles:
People think that just because a double rifle is regulated for a particular brand of ammunition, it will consistently keep delivering accurate results with that same brand of ammunition regardless.

This is not necessarily true. I have personally seen and handled a Butch Searcy .470 Nitro Express sidelock ejector which was regulated for Federal 500Gr Trophy Bonded Bear Claw & Federal 500Gr Trophy Bonded Sledgehammer Solid cartridges in 1998. The rifle delivers spectacularly accurate results with Federal cartridges from that vintage. But when used with 2016 manufactured Federal cartridges, the word “Depressing” could best be used to describe the rifle’s accuracy & grouping.

If I had to guess, I’d have to say that somewhere between 1998 & 2016… Federal made some slight changes to their .470 Nitro Express ammunition without telling anybody.

Picky eaters double rifles are. But I still greatly love them.

Interesting insight and great heads up. I think every tube with rifling is likely just about as picky. I know that cartridges from different "lots" in the same year have yielded substantially different results in my single barrels.

 

[BRICKBURN]

I certainly learn something almost every time I open this site.

I just did.

 

[Tanks]

I think Kevin’s point may have been missed. He like myself enjoy how a fine DR is made not as just a tool but knowing it is regulated by hand adds to the enjoyment of the rifle itself. Call me a romantic which I am and that’s fine…when I hold a nice DR knowing the craftsmanship that went into it as I take it to Africa adds a lot to the total experience. Probably sounds boring but it is part of who I am. It is why I enjoy reading about the fine gunmakers and have such high respect for their handy work.

Yep, when I went to Rigby's workshop a month ago, I was amazed at the meticulous work that was being done. In reality their guns are a bargain if one counts the man hours that goes into each gun.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

I think Kevin’s point may have been missed. He like myself enjoy how a fine DR is made not as just a tool but knowing it is regulated by hand adds to the enjoyment of the rifle itself. Call me a romantic which I am and that’s fine…when I hold a nice DR knowing the craftsmanship that went into it as I take it to Africa adds a lot to the total experience. Probably sounds boring but it is part of who I am. It is why I enjoy reading about the fine gunmakers and have such high respect for their handy work.

I'm with ya. I did say "theoretically." CNC is a step forward (or backward?) from stamped metal and rivets which was the technological advancement of the last century. At least now, theoretically anyway, quality CNC fully machined guns can be be made almost as cheaply as the mass produced scotch-tape-and-staple guns of the last half of the 20th century.

 

[rookhawk]

I'm with ya. I did say "theoretically." CNC is a step forward (or backward?) from stamped metal and rivets which was the technological advancement of the last century. At least now, theoretically anyway, quality CNC fully machined guns can be be made almost as cheaply as the mass produced scotch-tape-and-staple guns of the last half of the 20th century.

You cannot CNC machine AND regulate a double rifle, at least not one with exceptional regulation. One cannot program a computer to calculate for the idiosyncrasies required for regulation because a CNC can only duplicate.

So a robot makes two barrels that are perfectly intersecting within .00001” of an inch at 60 meters. Will the gun shoot correctly? No, it will not.

Because a right handed gun is cast off. The stock is angled. The weight of the stock is not uniform because it is wood. The detonation of the charges in left and right barrels are not applying rearward recoil nor muzzle rise equally or identically when fired.

Thus, a double rifle must be hand regulated because of all of the above, plus the weight of the human, and their shoulder resistance, and the powder type in the cases which changes the timing and duration of muzzle rise while the bullet may still be in the barrel, etc, etc, etc.

This is why there are about 100 people on planet earth that can regulate a double rifle barrel.

 

[geoff rath]

Would the consumer know the difference?

One of the chief benefits of CNC machining is the computer can be programmed to detect when the machine is wore out and needs parts replaced. With hand machining the customer has to rely on the machinist and his ability (or willingness) to check for deviation caused by excessive wear. Theoretically, we should prefer CNC machined guns produced entirely by robots and computers. Theoretically, they should be better made ... and cheaper. Never heard of a CNC machine striking for higher wages.

I sure know that I'm wore out ...

 

[geoff rath]

You cannot CNC machine AND regulate a double rifle, at least not one with exceptional regulation. One cannot program a computer to calculate for the idiosyncrasies required for regulation because a CNC can only duplicate.

So a robot makes two barrels that are perfectly intersecting within .00001” of an inch at 60 meters. Will the gun shoot correctly? No, it will not.

Because a right handed gun is cast off. The stock is angled. The weight of the stock is not uniform because it is wood. The detonation of the charges in left and right barrels are not applying rearward recoil nor muzzle rise equally or identically when fired.

Thus, a double rifle must be hand regulated because of all of the above, plus the weight of the human, and their shoulder resistance, and the powder type in the cases which changes the timing and duration of muzzle rise while the bullet may still be in the barrel, etc, etc, etc.

This is why there are about 100 people on planet earth that can regulate a double rifle barrel.

... and the mere fact that we can have two "perfect" barrels that by themselves are way sub-MOA capable, then we have to join them together with all the stresses involved to do it as a pair. THAT'S where the hand fitting comes into play... By-the-by, do, or should D/R barrels have opposing twists??

 

[Tanks]

...

Thus, a double rifle must be hand regulated because of all of the above, plus the weight of the human...

I don't think the weight of the human goes into it much if at all. Otherwise, none of the used rifles would be even close to their original regulation. For example my Heym .500 NE was owned by a guy that was 60 lbs heavier than I and he bought it at the SCI show. Regulation is still under an inch with me shooting it with Hornady ammo.