I was re-reading my John Taylor and saw where he described two .470 doubles, one a Rigby, the other a Manton, as the best balanced rifles he ever used.

Of course, Taylor was a great DR fan. After spending 30 years in the bush hunting DG with many different DR's, if there is a more knowledgeable person, I don't know who they are.

Balance and fit in a DR is important. Ideally, it would shoulder naturally and point like a bird gun. At worst, it would have the grace of a 3-legged goat.

To those of you who have been fortunate to handle many DR's, which has the best balance? Does any particular make seem to balance better than others? Or does, say, a 500 balance well in one brand, while the 470 is front heavy? Are there national tendencies? Do British doubles balance differently than continental doubles? What is your experience?

British AND Best!

love the balance of my Webley & Scott 450/400 3 1/4"!

quote:

British AND Best!

I have a Francotte .470 that handles like a dream. It was proofed in 1927 and shots as well, if not better, than some British gun I have shot in the same caliber.

If you don't believe me, ask some of the DRSS guys.

But by and large, I have found most all British DRs I have handled balance very well in my hands.

I'm no expert, but a friends Manton 470 shoulders like a fine shotgun. I have played with several DR's lately: H&H, Heym, Thys, and all the $10,000 priced guns. I thought the Manton stood out on handling...even compared to the fore mentioned names. I am big fan of H&H, but not fat enough in the wallet.
I was told that Manton has not built guns since 1920's? Have to agree with John Taylor...they are SWEEEET!!!
ND

I have owned 13 English doubles in big bore calibers in the past. They have ranged in quality from Westley Richards, Jeffery and Lancaster down to Boswell and Watson Bros, with several other makers in the mix. The best balanced was the Jeffery in 450/400 3". The worst was a WR in 470 with 28" barrels.

I prefer a neutral balance with the majority of weight between the hands. Most of the English rifles while having neutral balance, had too much of the weight in the barrels and butt stock. The Jeffery was near perfect.

The best balanced rifle I have ever owned is my German make Gustav Genschow 500/465. It is perfect and when you throw it up feels like a Purdey shotgun. It has been custom stocked and I doubt that it was as well balanced with it's original stock. I don't know if the perfect balance was a function of a good stock makers expertise or his accident. My Searcy Deluxe 470 comes in 3rd. Better than any of the English doubles except the Jeffery.

I have not been impressed with the balance of Merkel, Heim or Chapius doubles. In fact two years ago I handled two Merkel 500 doubles at the SCI Convention and couldn't believe how different they felt.

465H&H

Even my old Manton 10 bore @ 14.5Ibs is well balanced. Its not ofcouse a 6 1/4 ibs Purdey, but considering everything in pointability, and balance, I have been standing with repeters of lesser weight, that has been so much worse. I have been standing with a few of the doubles of modern make like Merkels etc..most of it has a balance of a telephone-pole

Gentlemen A double rifle may be ballanced perfectly according to the formula, of 1/3rd the weight between the hands, and still handle like a fence post with woodpecker holes on it!

The ballance of any double rifle has to do with fit, nothing more. If the rifle fits you properly, it will always feel ligher than it actually is, and will swing like a dove gun! If it doesn't fit you, it makes little difference who made the rifle, or what country it was made in, it will feel like it is bent, or broken in places! However that same rifle may feel perfect to me!

The asking which rifles ballance best, regardless of the name engraved on it, is just silly. If you walk up to a booth like Champlin's with a dozen used double rifles, maybe two out of the ten will feel right. This is because every one of those rifles were made for a different customer by the maker, and they may have been re-done by a half dozen other owners since then.

The next time you walk up to a booth where double rifles live, and ask to be measured for a double rifle fit, then apply those measurements to the rifles they have for sale, and I believe you will see what I am saying, these things are not "one size fits all" Rem mod 700s!

The off the shelf double rifles today are so-called "One size fits all" but once you get the rifle and add the recoil pad, to adjust the length of pull, maybe shave off a little wood in spots, I think you will be surprized at the difference in the feel of that so-called JUNK GUN!

I have owned Westley Richards, Hinrich Berrela, V. Haffner, Winchester, Valmet, pedersoli, Merkel, Heym, Army & Navy, Francotte, Holland & Holland, "EDIT OUT" and many other brands of double rifle over the past 51 yrs since I bought my first one in 1958, and of all these, the ones that fit me best, are the Berrella, Haffner, the Heym, Westley Richards, and a pair of Merkels! However I owned those same brands that didn't fit me well either!

Big 5 called my attention to my inclusion of BOSS, as a double rifle, and in fact it was a 12 ga shotgun! Edited out of this post! Sorry for the confusion!

The word is FIT, FIT, FIT, FIT, and in the end it is FIT!

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
Gentlemen A double rifle may be ballanced perfectly according to the formula, of 1/3rd the weight between the hands, and still handle like a fence post with woodpecker holes on it!

The ballance of any double rifle has to do with fit, nothing more. If the rifle fits you properly, it will always feel ligher than it actually is, and will swing like a dove gun! If it doesn't fit you, it makes little difference who made the rifle, or what country it was made in, it will feel like it is bent, or broken in places! However that same rifle may feel perfect to me!

The asking which rifles ballance best, regardless of the name engraved on it, is just silly. If you walk up to a booth like Champlin's with a dozen used double rifles, maybe two out of the ten will feel right. This is because every one of those rifles were made for a different customer by the maker, and they may have been re-done by a half dozen other owners since then.

The next time you walk up to a booth where double rifles live, and ask to be measured for a double rifle fit, then apply those measurements to the rifles they have for sale, and I believe you will see what I am saying, these things are not "one size fits all" Rem mod 700s!

The off the shelf double rifles today are so-called "One size fits all" but once you get the rifle and add the recoil pad, to adjust the length of pull, maybe shave off a little wood in spots, I think you will be surprized at the difference in the feel of that so-called JUNK GUN!

I have owned Westley Richards, Hinrich Berrela, V. Haffner, Winchester, Valmet, pedersoli, Merkel, Heym, Army & Navy, Francotte, Holland & Holland, Boss, and many other brands of double rifle over the past 51 yrs since I bought my first one in 1958, and of all these, the ones that fit me best, are the Berrella, Haffner, the Heym, Westley Richards, and a pair of Merkels! However I owned those same brands that didn't fit me well either!

The word is FIT, FIT, FIT, FIT, and in the end it is FIT!

Mac,

So, would you say fit was important in a double rifle?

A rifle may fit you perfectly and still not be balanced.

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
A rifle may fit you perfectly and still not be balanced.

465H&H

That is true as well, but if it doesn't fit you ballance is out the window!

Mac,

You mention a BOSS D/R. I thought BOSS did guns, and only guns. Would you take the time,
maybe in a new thread, to give details of the BOSS D/R? I'd really enjoy that read.

I have handled quite a few doubles the last three years, anything from brand new Purdeys to european O/U's and it is quite right that a gun is better balanced when it is fitted to you. But on the average, the guns that have "hit" me most when I throw them to my shoulder and I just get th feeling "ohh my god" is Purdey 400'ds they are so well balanced and good siced. Normaly Purdeys are on the heavy side, but these 400 calibers are unbeliavable.

And I would also want to forward a secound place, Woodward "the automatic"wich I have one in 300H&H. these ones also swings like a red hot knife in butter.

quote:

The word is FIT, FIT, FIT, FIT, and in the end it is FIT!

+2

fit is nice and a very good start, but fit is nothing without weight between the hands.

for balance and quick handling, there is nothing better than 50% of the total weight in the 1/3 of the gun between your hands.


Jack:
boss did make dbl rifles, most of them early on:


BOSS & CO.
A .500 (3 1/4 IN.) BLACK POWDER EXPRESS ROTARY-UNDERLEVER DOUBLE HAMMER RIFLE, serial no. 3847,
27 3/4in. black powder only barrels with broad matt rib, under rib engraved 'BOSS & CO. 73 ST. JAMES'S STREET. LONDON.', open sights and leaf sights for 100 and 200 yards, gold bead foresight, Jones patent rotary-underlever, carved percussion fences, non-rebounding back-action locks with bolted hammers, border and scroll engraving (worn), brushed finish overall, 14 3/8in. highly-figured pistolgrip stock with cheekpiece, sling eyes, engraved steel pistolgrip-cap and chequered steel buttplate, grip-catch fore-end, weight 10lb

best regards

peter

quote:

Originally posted by BigFiveJack:
Mac,

You mention a BOSS D/R. I thought BOSS did guns, and only guns. Would you take the time,
maybe in a new thread, to give details of the BOSS D/R? I'd really enjoy that read.

You are correct! Boss is known for shotguns only, and the boss I has was indeed a 12 ga shotgun, not a rifle! The addtion of BOSS in that post was a brain fart of an old mand writeing to fast, and thinking too slow! Sorry about that! I'll go back and edit that out, to avoid confusion, Good catch! Big5!

quote:

Originally posted by JohnDL:
To those of you who have been fortunate to handle many DR's, which has the best balance?

John:

I think I understand what you're asking, but I don't think the proper question is really "balance". Per se, "balance" is whether or not the weight of the rifle is distributed equally on either side of a fulcrum in an appropriate location (at or just forward of the hinge pin). If it doesn't, yeah, it'll have the "grace of a 3-legged goat", and neither you nor I would buy it. The fact is, the vast majority DO "balance", so that isn't really the point. The fact that the weight of the piece is distributed equally on either side of a correct point does NOT mean that it's distributed in the same way, and the common differences in weight distribution can and do make a graphic difference in the way a double rifle handles.

quote:

Originally posted by JohnDL;
Are there national tendencies? Do British doubles balance differently than continental doubles?

Generally, YES. Weight distribution in black powder express double rifles was much the same. As Nitro, and the need for more steel to contain it, appeared, British and Continental approaches to ideals diverged in the evolution of their designs.

Generally, the British "formula" values "weight between the hands" - 50% of the weight in one-third of the length. A larger action requires barrels of larger diameter at the breech end to mate to it. Of cylindrical diameter over the chambers, the barrels then follow an agressive, swamped contour, resulting in much thinner tubes up front. This permits the rifle to arrive at a correct for caliber weight with most of the weight concentrated in the action and breech end of the barrels - between the hands - obviating the need to add weight to the butt in order to accomplish balance. The pre-war Jeffery double rifles built by Leonard (Jeffery was a retailer that didn't build any of their own rifles) probably represent the extreme of this formula, and those built by Webley typify it.

The Continental "formula", especially the Teutonic, stresses slimness of design over weight distribution. Smaller, slimmer actions require less barrel diameter over the chambers and, thus, don't permit as much weight in the breech ends. If the rifle is then to arrive at a correct weight for caliber, it isn't possible to have much contour up front, resulting in barrels with a mild taper, sometimes almost none at all. This means that there's more weight up front, which often requires addition of weight to the butt in order to achieve balance at the pin. This results in a slimmer rifle, with much more weight in the ends. The current Merkel, Krieghoff, and large bore Chapuis are representative of this formula.

Quality rifles built to either formulae "balance" perfectly, but handling dymanics are very different. Keep in mind that the above is general, and that there are both British and Continental rifles that are exceptions.

quote:

Orignally posted by JohnDL:
Or does, say, a 500 balance well in one brand, while the 470 is front heavy?

Yes. For example, I like the handling of the Chapuis in 9.3, but in scaling up to their .470, proportions seem to get lost. Another example is the Krieghoff. All K-gun DRs are built on the same action. That compromise is great for keeping prices down, and profits up, but it's utterly impossible to obtain an ideal in all calibers - the 7X65R and .500 NE can't handle equally well.

quote:

Originally posted by JohnDL:
I was re-reading my John Taylor and saw where he described two .470 doubles, one a Rigby, the other a Manton, as the best balanced rifles he ever used.

I agree with him. What Taylor didn't know is that there was almost certainly a reason he picked those two. Pre-war Rigby boxlock Nitro DRs were overwhelmingly built for Rigby by Webley and are either Webley's PHV-1 or A & W C. models. Same is true of those retailed by Manton's of Calcutta. The London trade couldn't make money making boxlocks, so virtually all of the London makers "bought in" boxlock DRs from Birmingham. The Webley DRs were valued highly by the London makers because of their high quality and superb handling qualities. Taylor's Rigby and Manton were almost certainly the same Webley built rifles, just engraved with different retailer's names.

The difference in handling dynamics can be unmistakable. I just returned from working SCI in Reno. I'd place a Merkel .470 in a prospective buyer's hands and have them mount it, swing it, and just get used to it for a while. Then I'd hand them one of the new Heyms, and just watch for the light to come on, saying nothing. It never failed to, and some were simply stunned. Which you like is personal preference and what you're willing to pay for.

Handle and shoot as many as you can, paying attention to action size and barrel profile, and decide which approach you like, then choose the maker of that type based on all the quality you can afford.

In terms of popularity, there's no controversy that the British "formula" won hands down. However, the matter is intensely personal, and both have adherents. Personally, I strongly agree with Taylor (and Husky above) and prefer the handling dynamics of the Jeffery/Leonard and Webley DRs to that of all other double rifles, including British best sidelocks. Nobody can tell you which you like best. You have to decide for yourself. Just be educated about the difference. Of course, fit is also crucial.

I appreciate everyone's input. Obviously, there is no substitute for traveling to a shop with many in stock.

JohnDL,

Heed 400 Nitro Express. That's that...

The best balanced and to-me-fit double rifle I have had the privilge to handle was a pre-war sidelocked Rigby in .350No2...it came to the shoulder like a balanced shotgun...