What is the thinking on the quality and function of the Chapuis doubles as available today?

I have shot a couple of Chapuis and they shot well. There have been rumors about them not holding up well due to being built light. But I have not seen that.

My experience with Chapuis is that they seem to be very accurate, and well made. A friend of mine has one chambered for 9.3X74R that is extremely accurate, and he has had no problem with it at all! There are things about them I don't like, but they are personl likes, and dislikes, and not pertaining to quality. I don't like BEAVERTAIL fore stocks on even a shotgun, and certainly not on a double rifle. Secondly, I will not buy anything "newly" imported from France. I would consider a used one imported before 9/11, however!

Good guns, i've owned 3. They shoot well and all have held up fine.

The only donwside is euro/dollar exchange rate, which is not in your favor of buying a new one.

I have a 9.3X74R and it's phenomenally accurate. seems to hold together pretty well and has decent wood and metal fit. Considering you can buy one for about $5K thats a real steal in the world of double rifles.-Rob

I have shot and hunted with my 9,3x74R Chapuis quite a bit, and it is still very tight. It is my favorite hunting rifle under 40 cal.
I have shot 3 other Chapuis doubles in 470. All of them shot very accurate, and regulated very good.
According to a fella who works on all types of doubles he considers the Chapuis to hold up very well.

Recently purchased a UGEX in 7X 65 R , so far have not found anything the gun really likes, will shoot heavy bullets reasonably well w/o the scope. With the scope on , it is miserable. Quality wise, the gun is very nice, considerably lighter than my other doubles, but in this caliber a heavy gun is not necessary. Anyone with any experience experimenting on regulating? Anyone having grouping problem with and w/o scope ?

quote:

Originally posted by CarlosGray:
Recently purchased a UGEX in 7X 65 R , so far have not found anything the gun really likes, will shoot heavy bullets reasonably well w/o the scope. With the scope on , it is miserable. Quality wise, the gun is very nice, considerably lighter than my other doubles, but in this caliber a heavy gun is not necessary. Anyone with any experience experimenting on regulating? Anyone having grouping problem with and w/o scope ?

Sounds like it was regulated w/out the scope.

My 9,3 was regulated without the scope, however it shoots good with the scope and iron sights using the same loads.My rifle was regulated with the 293 gr TUG. I use several different 286 grain bullets with thew same powder charge and they shoot to the same zero to 200 yards.
My double also shoots 232 grain Norma factory loads good as well.

I have heard of doubles that shoot well without a scope but shoot poorly with a scope. Perhaps mounting the scope introduces stresses on the barrels which affects how they vibrate, in turn affecting where the bullets land. It would seem that claw style mounts might be worse for that than other mounts.

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
I have heard of doubles that shoot well without a scope but shoot poorly with a scope. Perhaps mounting the scope introduces stresses on the barrels which affects how they vibrate, in turn affecting where the bullets land. It would seem that claw style mounts might be worse for that than other mounts.

I'm not sure of the exact physics involved, but a maker will regulate a double one of two ways... with or without the scope.

Some may have guns that shoot well with both. In which case, I'd say they are definitely in the minority.

I just had my FN-Browning o/u 9,3x74R re-regulated for the softer 285 Norma Alaska (it shot perfectly with my former Blaser 286 CDP's but I found them too hard and not expanding enough). I went to the range and shot some of the left over ammo (fresh Norma factory loads) that was used for regulating. 2x2 shots grouped within 1" at 50 m, Ok thus. Then I tried some 15 year old ammo (same factory load, same Norma reference, which I bought at a bargain price) and was appalled to find that with these, the bbls. were crossing 5" apart. Evidently, both factory loads were not the same. I'll dismantle them and try reducing the original powder charge by a few grains so as to lower velocity a bit and counteract the crossing, in order to bring the bbls. together. Hopefully, I'll be able to use up my old ammo stock that way.

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
I have heard of doubles that shoot well without a scope but shoot poorly with a scope. Perhaps mounting the scope introduces stresses on the barrels which affects how they vibrate, in turn affecting where the bullets land. It would seem that claw style mounts might be worse for that than other mounts.

The barrel dynamics on a double rifle are not effected much by Hormonics (Viberations) as the barrels are tied to gether very solidly. What does matter is the recoil of the rifle coupled with the speed of the bullet! The recoil effects the regulation by the amount the barrel rises before the bullet exits the barrel. This is effected greatly by the mounting of a heavy scope, and rings/bases. The heavier the scope and ring/bases the more it will effect the regulation.

NE 450 No2 is lucky because his rifle shoots perfectly with several different bullets, and with the addtion of two scopes, and rings/bases.

I'd say if the scope and rings are a bit heavy that is your porblem. When I mount a scope on a double rifle I mount the lightes scope I can find, and in as LOW rings as are available. The taller the rings are the more tork they transmit to the barrel flip, magnafying the extra weight!

One of the nice things I like about the Chapuis 470 is the fact that most of them are already cut for a scope mount. Even If I never planed on shooting the 470 with 500 grain bullets with the scope I would have a scope fitted for my 350 grain loads for lion, leopard, and black bears over bait, as well as pigs.
Every 470 Chapuis I have shot had been very accurate.