O/U v SxS

[degoins]

SxS double rifles look cooler......period!!

 

[Tucketed]

@degoins, I agree with your statement. I am not yet an owner of a DG double but own numerous O/U and SS double shotguns in various gauges. In the field I prefer the SS. I feel that there is another “feeling” I get carrying it. It’s beautiful and holding it gives me much more pleasant “feelings” than my over and under. Much like hunting with your bird dog vs no dog.

 

[Red Leg]

Ukraine is a dangerous place. The Daily Beast says mortar rounds, but then does say HIMARS at the end. The Kyiv Post article is more thorough. Apparently UA had intel about the Russian equivalent of a USO show just inside its border in the occupied Donbas region. They apparently moved a HIMARS launcher to the front lines to gain the necessary range (still a nearly fifty mile engagement) and launched two missiles at the building where the show was taking place. As one might imagine in the Russian Army, few in the audience likely would have been junior frontline troops.

Until it was discovered that Menshikh also had been killed in the strike, the Russian MOD had been denying that any such attack had occurred.

Russian Actress Killed Singing Onstage at Pro-War Concert

Polina Menshikh was singing her heart out at celebrations for a Russian military holiday when a Ukrainian strike cut the party short.

www.thedailybeast.com

Moscow Choreographer Entertaining Russian Marines Among Dozens Reported Killed in HIMARS Strike

Modern dance professional Polina Menshikh was on a morale-building visit to Russia’s elite 810th Marines when precision-guided rockets smashed the auditorium her troupe was performing in.

www.kyivpost.com

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

Ah, at last something I know a little about. I have owned and shot a fair bit with both O/U and SxS double rifles and here are my conclusions with both of these so far:
1. No appreciable difference in accuracy, once both are fired with ammunition that suits their regulation they are equally accurate. The sighting plane does not seem to be a factor, and remember that doubles are not meant to be tack drivers.
2. Speed of loading - no appreciable difference.
3. Handling - they do sit in the hands differently. I don’t think one is better than the other, it is just personal preference. I find the O/U feels as if it will handle faster, and the barrels don’t burn you as much as a SxS.
4. Mechanism and reliability. This is a big one. The barrels of the O/U obviously sit at different distances above the pivot line and the top barrel exerts roughly double the opening moment about the pivot point as the bottom one does. Doubles, especially in large calibres, exert massive forces and this translates to large turning moments that work to open the action. Where the action isn’t strong enough the breach can pivot up and open. This happened to my O/U double repeatedly and I have since discovered two other identical cases.
Sure, you could engineer the action to be strong enough, and a third lockup between the breach and fences it a good improvement, but SxS doubles are far less prone to this effect, especially if they have a third lockup like the Heym cross bolt. In this case there is virtually no chance of accidental opening at all.
5. Looks. The SxS is in my view the more classic and elegant, especially in an African context. The O/U is beach worthy as TT says, but looks out of place with a pith helmet!

 

[rookhawk]

I don't mean to start the apocalypse but why is the SxS preferred over the O/U when it comes a DR? Is it purely the angle of break when you have to reload or is there more to it?

It would seem that regulating a SxS DR it's a bit of a pain in the butt. O/U seems so much easier.

I have never fired a SxS or O/U DR but to my inexperienced self it seems the O/U is better in terms of regulation and alignment when the chips are down.

Maybe its because the only O/U I have ever fired is my dad's O/U 12G Barretta circa 1976.

Is SxS nostalgia or is there a practical angle to this?

The gape is much less on a side by side which allows you to load and reload faster. An O/U gape is so much larger, the chance of a jam or hang up on load or eject of the bottom barrel is greater.

As to swing of a gun on a moving target, SxS rifles and guns swing better on a horizontal plane, O/U guns swing better on a vertical plane. (e.g. live pigeon shoots, anything that is going up)

O/U double rifles tend to be heavier out front, screwing up balance, simply because they require a lot more forend. Those forends are usually three piece, and more prone to maladies.

O/U doubles occassionally have single triggers, clearly built to appeal to the O/U shotgun customer. While not all O/Us have single triggers, they are disgusting things on a double rifle, are unreliable as a category, and preclude function of the gun if one barrel/spring/hammer/trigger breaks on safari, whereas a two trigger two barrel arrangement has almost total redundancy.

 

[Red Leg]

Ukraine is a dangerous place. The Daily Beast says mortar rounds, but then does say HIMARS at the end. The Kyiv Post article is more thorough. Apparently UA had intel about the Russian equivalent of a USO show just inside its border in the occupied Donbas region. They apparently moved a HIMARS launcher to the front lines to gain the necessary range (still a nearly fifty mile engagement) and launched two missiles at the building where the show was taking place. As one might imagine in the Russian Army, few in the audience likely would have been junior frontline troops.

Until it was discovered that Menshikh also had been killed in the strike, the Russian MOD had been denying that any such attack had occurred.

Russian Actress Killed Singing Onstage at Pro-War Concert

Polina Menshikh was singing her heart out at celebrations for a Russian military holiday when a Ukrainian strike cut the party short.

www.thedailybeast.com

Moscow Choreographer Entertaining Russian Marines Among Dozens Reported Killed in HIMARS Strike

Modern dance professional Polina Menshikh was on a morale-building visit to Russia’s elite 810th Marines when precision-guided rockets smashed the auditorium her troupe was performing in.

www.kyivpost.com

Have no idea why I posted this here! I could plead too little coffee and too early but .........

 

[rookhawk]

If your talking shotguns then you will hit 30% more with an over & under.
Thats why you see them on clay shoots. The O&U will also recoil definitely than the S/b\S usually under barrel first which means the recoil is low down in the shoulder which means less muzzle jump. Easier to get back on target for that second shot.
The main thing for the shotgun regardless of barrel configuration is that it fits you. Thats why many left hand/eye shooters have such a hard time. Your standard factor shotgun off the shop floor will be cast for a right hander.
As for Double rifles. The only disadvantage when shooting that I could see is when reloading in a hurry. The S/b\S has to be faster for two reasons.
1 not opening the gun fully with the O&U and the bottom barrel won’t eject.
2 it needs to open further than a S/b\S
Not sure on the regulation of the barrels, why the O&U is easier to regulate.

The 30% comment is completely untrue and isn't based on any study. It's all in how you shoot.

I've never competed with O/U although I own a few. Whatever modest trophies I have laying around my office were all with SxS guns. About ten years ago a State skeet championship was won with a Model 21, so I'm not the only person shooting SxS.

I'll give you a few reasons why O/U shotguns are competitively more popular:

1.) High gun shooting aligns your sight straight down a rib of an O/U. If you hold a SxS at your shoulder for a prolonged period of time, your sight picture gets less precise as you're staring across two barrels and a rib.

2.) For very long shots in FITASC and sporting clays, an O/U is going to pattern only high/low for a given distance, whereas a SxS is going to have the patterns drift left/right at various extreme distances which may cause a lost shot under competitive circumstances.

3.) Game guns have traditionally been SxS guns that are lightweight, designed to carry and be at ready position very rapidly. O/U guns have traditionally been designed for clay target events, focusing on heavy guns to moderate recoil and to create a smooth swing. (please don't counterpoint me by posting a woodward O/U and a Model 21 Skeet...yes, there were and are exceptions)

4.) Cost. The better SxS guns by design have to be hand inletted into the head of the action, necessitating high prices. The average to very good O/U has a through-bolted stock made to 98% fit on a CNC, dramatically lowering the price of construction of a Kolar, Perazzi, Krieghoff, Merkel, or Blaser O/U compared to the cost to hand build and inlet a SxS stock that is not through bolted.

5.) Warranty and repair. Pursuant to point 4, if you break the stock on an O/U it is very cheap to make another stock, and the manufacture can use very cheap but appealing wood to over build the stock for clay guns. The $6000 stock on a Perazzi or equivalent may be worthless and unusable if it was a svelt stock without a throughbolt designed for a SxS. A SxS necessitates in most cases, a better piece of wood and if the wrong wood is selected, a more likely warranty cost to the manufacturer.


Those are all objective reasons, but none of them is the "you'll shoot 30% better" hypothesis. Even out of practice, I assure you that I can keep up with the better clay shooters IF we do not have a pre-known menu at a station and we're shooting low gun. Speed of acquisition and instinctive shooting practices all tilt towards SxS guns, premeditated fluid actions on known target trajectories, and at long distances will tilt towards an O/U.

 

[Red Leg]

I disagree completely with the reload time argument. I shoot both systems extensively. It simply requires a slightly different technique, and anyone can prove to themselves who has and shoots both designs regularly. Moreover, unless the SxS double rifle is very well used, or a rare assisted opening model (and thus hard closing) the typical A&D action can be quite stiff - particularly on the ones leaving manufacturers today.

I suppose it is theoretically possible for a OU to be heavier toward the muzzles due to the forend, but the vast majority of that weight is still between the hands. It also provides a far more natural grip for modern shooters than holding the barrels ahead of the splinter on a classic double (don't forget your glove on the left hand).

I think the vertical and horizontal swing notion is disproved daily on every skeet and clays range in this country, and on every driven bird shoot in the UK and Spain. What is true for an OU shotgun is equally true for the single sighting plane of an OU rifle (or bolt gun for that matter). And I can't remember very many vertical plane shots in the pigeon ring or many SxS's in use on a driven boar range.

A single trigger on a double rifle, regardless of configuration,, does indeed defeat the whole purpose of the thing.

Again, and as I have written in these various threads many times, I am convinced the only reason the SxS double is so popular is due to the outcome of World War I.

 

[Red Leg]

The 30% comment is completely untrue and isn't based on any study. It's all in how you shoot.

I've never competed with O/U although I own a few. Whatever modest trophies I have laying around my office were all with SxS guns. About ten years ago a State skeet championship was won with a Model 21, so I'm not the only person shooting SxS.

I'll give you a few reasons why O/U shotguns are competitively more popular:

1.) High gun shooting aligns your sight straight down a rib of an O/U. If you hold a SxS at your shoulder for a prolonged period of time, your sight picture gets less precise as you're staring across two barrels and a rib.

2.) For very long shots in FITASC and sporting clays, an O/U is going to pattern only high/low for a given distance, whereas a SxS is going to have the patterns drift left/right at various extreme distances which may cause a lost shot under competitive circumstances.

3.) Game guns have traditionally been SxS guns that are lightweight, designed to carry and be at ready position very rapidly. O/U guns have traditionally been designed for clay target events, focusing on heavy guns to moderate recoil and to create a smooth swing. (please don't counterpoint me by posting a woodward O/U and a Model 21 Skeet...yes, there were and are exceptions)

4.) Cost. The better SxS guns by design have to be hand inletted into the head of the action, necessitating high prices. The average to very good O/U has a through-bolted stock made to 98% fit on a CNC, dramatically lowering the price of construction of a Kolar, Perazzi, Krieghoff, Merkel, or Blaser O/U compared to the cost to hand build and inlet a SxS stock that is not through bolted.

5.) Warranty and repair. Pursuant to point 4, if you break the stock on an O/U it is very cheap to make another stock, and the manufacture can use very cheap but appealing wood to over build the stock for clay guns. The $6000 stock on a Perazzi or equivalent may be worthless and unusable if it was a svelt stock without a throughbolt designed for a SxS. A SxS necessitates in most cases, a better piece of wood and if the wrong wood is selected, a more likely warranty cost to the manufacturer.


Those are all objective reasons, but none of them is the "you'll shoot 30% better" hypothesis. Even out of practice, I assure you that I can keep up with the better clay shooters IF we do not have a pre-known menu at a station and we're shooting low gun. Speed of acquisition and instinctive shooting practices all tilt towards SxS guns, premeditated fluid actions on known target trajectories, and at long distances will tilt towards an O/U.

Absolutely concur. My best clays round, sadly fired about fifteen years ago, was a 98 shot with a Lang SxS 12 bore with 1 ounce loads of no. 8. Always enjoyed the looks of the OU clays devotees furiously cranking those choke tubes.

 

[rookhawk]

Absolutely concur. My best clays round, sadly fired about fifteen years ago, was a 98 shot with a Lang SxS 12 bore with 1 ounce loads of no. 8. Always enjoyed the looks of the OU clays devotees furiously cranking those choke tubes.

I had an 1898 Lang & Hussey imperial sidelock ejector years ago. A lovely 12 bore in its original case, but without anything but border engraving on the locks. I had some of my best rounds with that shotgun as well so you're not alone.

Langs
Lang & Husseys
Grant & Langs
Atkin, Grant & Langs

Of the tier-2 makers, I find them to be the finest quality at the most reasonable price of any London gun. I'd like to own another in the future as my daily driver.

Tangent: @Red Leg your Lang didn't happen to be a keylock gun? I've always wanted one.

 

[Red Leg]

I had an 1898 Lang & Hussey imperial sidelock ejector years ago. A lovely 12 bore in its original case, but without anything but border engraving on the locks. I had some of my best rounds with that shotgun as well so you're not alone.

Langs
Lang & Husseys
Grant & Langs
Atkin, Grant & Langs

Of the tier-2 makers, I find them to be the finest quality at the most reasonable price of any London gun. I'd like to own another in the future as my daily driver.

Tangent: @Red Leg your Lang didn't happen to be a keylock gun? I've always wanted one.

Sadly no. It was indeed actually a Lang & Hussey as well with game scene engraving from just before the first war. In a questionable moment I traded that extraordinary little sidelock for a wonderfully long and elegant MacNaughton. Not sure which of us did best in the deal, but the long Scott has dropped a lot of pheasants. But I do miss the little Lang.

 

[Hunter-Habib]

Sadly no. It was indeed actually a Lang & Hussey with game scene engraving from just before the first war. In a questionable moment I traded that extraordinary little sidelock for a wonderfully long and elegant MacNaughton. Not sure which of us did best in the deal, but the long Scott has dropped a lot of pheasants. But I do miss the little Lang.

Is it a skeleton action MacNaughton ? Those look particularly unique.

 

[rookhawk]

Sadly no. It was indeed actually a Lang & Hussey as well with game scene engraving from just before the first war. In a questionable moment I traded that extraordinary little sidelock for a wonderfully long and elegant MacNaughton. Not sure which of us did best in the deal, but the long Scott has dropped a lot of pheasants. But I do miss the little Lang.

I suspect your gun was earlier than you think, although yours may have been in the white and proofed at a later date if you have definitive info to suggest your dates. Hussey got caught robbing from the till in about 1903, Webley fired him, and he set up shop as Hussey, Ogden, Stiers, & Hussey, and Harrison & Hussey thereafter. The Lang & Hussey guns were the best of the bunch.

Those guns reek of 1920s best grade guns, but they were made 1898-1904. Southgate ejectors? Yep. 5 and 7 pin locks? Yep. Sir Joseph Whitworth Fluid Steel Barrels? Yep. Cocking indicators? Yep. Diamond grip stocks? Yep. Drop points? Yep. Their style and materials were way ahead of the rest of London.

 

[Tundra Tiger]

Beach volleyball for me

I suspect that is true for most... but not all of us. @Doug3006 ... help me out here.

 

[Doug3006]

I suspect that is true for most... but not all of us. @Doug3006 ... help me out here.

Ha! Yes, there’s nothing wrong with fuller figures! However, I must say that women’s beach volleyball is mankind’s greatest sporting achievement. Why it’s not televised 24x7 is hard to understand!

 

[WAB]

Well we’ve shifted to shotguns so I will weigh in.

1) The O/U is more precise than the SxS. There is no arguing that a SxS will cost you birds in competition, but it’s nothing close to 30%. I recent did a very limited test in low gun skeet. I shot 50/50 with my O/U and 49/50 with a double trigger SxS. There is a reason serious competitors with money on the line shoot O/U guns, and it has nothing to do with availability. If the market demanded competition SxS guns we would have them.

2) A SxS game gun requires a slightly different technique than an O/U. A very good overview is ‘The Better Shot’ by Ken Davies. Ken is a died in the wool SxS shooter. There is lots of great info in the book, but the key sensitivity in shooting a SxS well is, the gun needs to fire pretty much as soon as it hits your shoulder. This is desirable with an O/U as well, but the narrow sighting plane is a little more forgiving is you drag it out a bit.

I shoot both, but if I am expected to bust everything, I shoot an O/U. Interestingly, many of my friends in the London trade personally shoot O/U’s.

I rarely shoot for score anymore as I refuse to participant any competition that allows a mounted gun. We have a penchant for dumbing down shotgun games on this side of the pond. Rant over.

 

[BeeMaa]

Well we’ve shifted to shotguns so I will weigh in.

1) The O/U is more precise than the SxS. There is no arguing that a SxS will cost you birds in competition, but it’s nothing close to 30%. I recent did a very limited test in low gun skeet. I shot 50/50 with my O/U and 49/50 with a double trigger SxS. There is a reason serious competitors with money on the line shoot O/U guns, and it has nothing to do with availability. If the market demanded competition SxS guns we would have them.

2) A SxS game gun requires a slightly different technique than an O/U. A very good overview is ‘The Better Shot’ by Ken Davies. Ken is a died in the wool SxS shooter. There is lots of great info in the book, but the key sensitivity in shooting a SxS well is, the gun needs to fire pretty much as soon as it hits your shoulder. This is desirable with an O/U as well, but the narrow sighting plane is a little more forgiving is you drag it out a bit.

I shoot both, but if I am expected to bust everything, I shoot an O/U. Interestingly, many of my friends in the London trade personally shoot O/U’s.

I rarely shoot for score anymore as I refuse to participant any competition that allows a mounted gun. We have a penchant for dumbing down shotgun games on this side of the pond. Rant over.

I shoot low gun for clays as well. According to @HankBuck it's extremely low being held across my body at the waist. He said I could break about 10% more clays with a higher mount, and he's probably right. But I rarely walk through the field with the gun mounted looking for birds. If I know a shot is likely to present, of course I'll have it in the pocket of my shoulder, but until then it's normally being held in both hands at my waist.

 

[WAB]

I shoot low gun for clays as well. According to @HankBuck it's extremely low being held across my body at the waist. He said I could break about 10% more clays with a higher mount, and he's probably right. But I rarely walk through the field with the gun mounted looking for birds. If I know a shot is likely to present, of course I'll have it in the pocket of my shoulder, but until then it's normally being held in both hands at my waist.

I agree with @HankBuck. When you are hunting in the field and a bird takes off, you should take a short step toward the shot with the foot on your leading hand side. As you do this the stock comes up below your armpit. The target is now addressed and you move, mount, shoot. Your approach implies that you don’t address the target prior to initiating the shot. There is much more time than you think when a bird presents itself. The trick is taking the correct amount of time to address and execute the shot. Not too slow, not too fast.

 

[BeeMaa]

I agree with @HankBuck. When you are hunting in the field and a bird takes off, you should take a short step toward the shot with the foot on your leading hand side. As you do this the stock comes up below your armpit. The target is now addressed and you move, mount, shoot. Your approach implies that you don’t address the target prior to initiating the shot. There is much more time than you think when a bird presents itself. The trick is taking the correct amount of time to address and execute the shot. Not too slow, not too fast.

I completely understand and have my fair share of birds that have fallen for me. But most of the time is spent walking, not stalking like Elmer Fudd looking for wabbits.

 

[PCC600]

I had an 1898 Lang & Hussey imperial sidelock ejector years ago. A lovely 12 bore in its original case, but without anything but border engraving on the locks. I had some of my best rounds with that shotgun as well so you're not alone.

Langs
Lang & Husseys
Grant & Langs
Atkin, Grant & Langs

Of the tier-2 makers, I find them to be the finest quality at the most reasonable price of any London gun. I'd like to own another in the future as my daily driver.

Tangent: @Red Leg your Lang didn't happen to be a keylock gun? I've always wanted one.

Stephen Grant was never a tier 2 producer . In his time he only produced best guns and had plenty of Royal Warrants .