The following questions are for the 450/400, 470 and 500. I realize that the answers for bigger and smaller guns may be very different. Thanks for your thoughts.

Beavertail forearm, good or bad idea? I know that some people are afraid that under recoil there is a possibility a shooter could actually pull the forearm off the gun, but has anyone actually seen this happen on a modern made gun or would you just sleep better with a splinter forearm?

Multiple blades on the rear site, I think they look neat but does anyone actually use the extra leaves? Seems to me that there is always the chance of having the wrong blade up if you need the gun in a hurry after its been carried in the brush.

Front night site with flip up white blade/bead, again I like the looks, but it actual use is this just something else that has the possibility to be in the wrong position when you throw the gun up?

Ejectors, anyone feel strongly that a gun should not have them?

Frame “reinforcement†around the exterior of the standing breech and watertable, would you pay $750-$1000 more for a otherwise identical gun that had the reinforcement?

Scope mounts, I personally do not like the looks however with my old eyes I am forced to use them more often than not. If you were to order a 470 or 500 would you ask for scope bases machined into the rib? Same question but now for the 450/400?

Now, what type of mount? I have used claw mounts and MAK type pivot mounts on double rifles. They can be quickly removed but neither is instantly removed and I have come to the conclusion that in most cases they need to be put on (or taken off) before the action starts. I like the looks of the Tally bases and they are probably the least expensive option (I also realize they are probably the slowest to put on and off). Anyone using Tally bases/rings on their 40 cal and up double? What do you like or dislike? Other options for scope moounts I have not thought about?

Scalloped action or flat back action? Would you worry about the wood on a scalloped action being more prone to stress cracking over time?

On my limited experence of 2 doubles I'll tell you I've never used the 100 or the 150 yard leaves. I had a splinter on one of mine and a simi-bevertail on the other. I still hold the gun by the barrels. So what ever floats your boat. I like a good ivory bead up front that is easy to see on the 470-500. The action reinforcement- ask a gunmaker I've had them on both mine. Scopes, Well on the two guns I've had did not have a scope (470,577), but am looking into a gun right now that will. My eyes are not what they used to be.

505ED

I've never seen a forearm come off of a rifle.
This sounds like a bolt trash urban legend!

I prefer the smaller splinter forearm, however my new Chapuis will have a larger forearm. That's what my budget would allow!

I have a flip up "Moon" sight never had a problem with it either.

My eyes are getting bad. That's why I got the Chapuis with a Khales 1.1X4 Circle Dot illuminated scope.

My 450/400 I have a choice wear my cheater and have the sights in focus or don't wear them and have the game in focus.

Claw mounts have been there done that! I know folks like NE450#2 who have the piviot mounts and love em. My Chapuis will have Talley mounts the are made the Chapuis.

Bottom line get what you like and can afford.

No one likes change. Most of all double rifle shooters! However, things do change and sometimes for the better! You're the one paying for and shooting the rifle. Get what you like!

Lots of questions. Well with the caveat that opinions are like a-holes, everyone's got one and they all stink, here goes:

1. I prefer the feel of the beavertail forearm. I think I get a better grip on the rifle with the beavertail. Regarding the forearm being pulled off, I have never had or seen it happen. I wrap my fingers around the beavertail and onto the barrel in any event.

2. I have always just used the standing leaf and have never used the flip up leaves. That said, it is hard for me to imagine that one of the leaves could get accidentally flipped up. If you are shooting an open sights double rifle at more than 100 yards, more power too you. I would probably get one flip up but would not worry about the 200 and 300 yard flip ups. 300 yards with an open sights double, give me a break.

3. In my experience front sights are one of the weak points on most double rifles. Many are a real pain to see. I personally prefer the white beads to the brass beads. I see little use for the flip up, I would get a decent white bead and leave it at that.

4. You will hear a lot of noise on this one. I like extractors. It is interesting to me that Pondoro Taylor talked about buying ejector guns and disabling the ejectors. Ejectors make the rifle hard to open since you are cocking the ejector. They also make noise when they eject. Extractors were good enough for Taylor, they work for me.

5. I would be focused more on the maker of the rifle. If it is a good quality, reputable manufacturer, I would not worry about this.

6. I would not put a scope on .470 or .500. Ruins the look and you are likely to end up looking like Spanky's dog on the Little Rascals.

7. See 5 above.

quote:

Originally posted by Kebco:


Beavertail forearm, good or bad idea?

That one I must leave to personal preference.

quote:

Multiple blades on the rear site, I think they look neat but does anyone actually use the extra leaves? Seems to me that there is always the chance of having the wrong blade up if you need the gun in a hurry after its been carried in the brush.

Seems overcomplicated to me, and I doubt that I will take 300 yard shots with a double using iron sights.

quote:

Front night site with flip up white blade/bead, again I like the looks, but it actual use is this just something else that has the possibility to be in the wrong position when you throw the gun up?

\

Bad idea. Better to have removable caterpillar blades (such as from NECG) to be able to change elevation of POI quickly and easily.

quote:

Ejectors, anyone feel strongly that a gun should not have them?

Non-ejector guns are easier to open, which I think is an advantage.

quote:

Frame “reinforcement†around the exterior of the standing breech and watertable, would you pay $750-$1000 more for a otherwise identical gun that had the reinforcement?

Yes.

quote:

Scope mounts,

No.

quote:

Originally posted by Kebco:
Beavertail forearm, good or bad idea? I know that some people are afraid that under recoil there is a possibility a shooter could actually pull the forearm off the gun, but has anyone actually seen this happen on a modern made gun or would you just sleep better with a splinter forearm?

I've never heard of this with any but the "modern" guns as they're the ones that have beavertails. I've never seen it happen personally, but have seen them in repair shops and have heard from guys that have had it happen. It doesn't seem to be a chronic problem, but it is an issue. If I bought a rifle with a beavertail, I'd convert it to a splinter. No good reason to set it up for the possibility. KISS.

quote:

Multiple blades on the rear site, I think they look neat but does anyone actually use the extra leaves? Seems to me that there is always the chance of having the wrong blade up if you need the gun in a hurry after its been carried in the brush.

All of mine have had one standing and two folding. I've never had one fold up accidentally. I've used the 200 yard folders, but not the 300. They were all filed in and dead on too. The problem with the folding leaves on many of the modern rifles is that somebody had to try something new. The leaves on some of the newer ones don't fold flat, and that's a bad idea. Not sure, but I think the NECG is set up this way as well.

quote:

Front night site with flip up white blade/bead, again I like the looks, but it actual use is this just something else that has the possibility to be in the wrong position when you throw the gun up?

Mine have had the folding moon bead, and I consider it one of the most valuable options. I've never seen one fold up accidentally. Properly designed, I can't imagine how it could. The good ones with a large convex white bead and platinum center wire in the rear V are a great help in low light, although they are not for long range. I definitely use them enough that I would miss them were they not there.

quote:

Ejectors, anyone feel strongly that a gun should not have them?

I've used both for years, and the double rifle I use most has ejectors. I'm not a fan. Not arguing with the other posters who said ejector guns were harder to open, but, conventional doubles cock the ejectors with the RISE of the barrels, making them noticably harder to close, not open. Not a particularly endearing trait. Personally, I consider them an annoyance with no redeeming virtue, but it is a simple matter to deactivate them if the rifle has them.

quote:

Frame “reinforcement†around the exterior of the standing breech and watertable, would you pay $750-$1000 more for a otherwise identical gun that had the reinforcement?

This is "modern" lily gilding to sell guns. The vast majority of British boxlocks built 100 years ago did not have bolstered frames, and there were no chronic problems with frames cracking at the break off in full nitro calibers. They weren't needed then, and they certainly aren't needed now. Just a benign marketing tool.

quote:

Scope mounts, I personally do not like the looks however with my old eyes I am forced to use them more often than not. If you were to order a 470 or 500 would you ask for scope bases machined into the rib? Same question but now for the 450/400?

Now, what type of mount? I have used claw mounts and MAK type pivot mounts on double rifles. They can be quickly removed but neither is instantly removed and I have come to the conclusion that in most cases they need to be put on (or taken off) before the action starts. I like the looks of the Tally bases and they are probably the least expensive option (I also realize they are probably the slowest to put on and off). Anyone using Tally bases/rings on their 40 cal and up double? What do you like or dislike? Other options for scope moounts I have not thought about?

Personally, I wouldn't scope anything over .375. On a double, I can't see considering anything but the claw. Others can work, of course, but the claw is faster and stronger than the others.

quote:

Scalloped action or flat back action? Would you worry about the wood on a scalloped action being more prone to stress cracking over time?

No, I don't think this matters at all.
------------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

quote:

Originally posted by Kebco:
The following questions are for the 450/400, 470 and 500. I realize that the answers for bigger and smaller guns may be very different. Thanks for your thoughts.

Well as someone said,opinion is a personal thing, and are the answer to all the questions posed here! However, here is my preference, and some of the WHY answers, in my view.

quote:

Beavertail forearm, good or bad idea? I know that some people are afraid that under recoil there is a possibility a shooter could actually pull the forearm off the gun, but has anyone actually seen this happen on a modern made gun or would you just sleep better with a splinter forearm?

As I said, many of these things are simply personal choice, and this is a perfect example of that fact. I personally do not like Beavertail fore-ends on any gun, or rifle, and is one of the real reasons I've turned down some pritty good buys on Chapuis! I think the worry about the forend wood being ripped off, is far more likely on very heavy recoiling double rifles, and is not needed on a double rifle anyway. The whole reason the beavertail was invented was for nonstop wing shooting, or shotgun compitition, where barrels become so hot you can't touch them. A double rifle is rarely fired more that four shots in a string, so the burn guard in not needed.

quote:

Multiple blades on the rear site, I think they look neat but does anyone actually use the extra leaves? Seems to me that there is always the chance of having the wrong blade up if you need the gun in a hurry after its been carried in the brush.

The multiple blades, on the rear sights on double rifles were put there for a reason, and are very usefull if your rifle is shooting loads that are proper for the regulation of the rifle, which not the case in many of the so-called good loads posted on theis very web-site, as being perfect. A double rifle is regulated to shoot side by side, or paralell, and the center of each barrels group do not cross no matter how far you shoot. Individule shots will cross, but not the centers of each barrel's group. SOOOOOOOOOO, if the load is proper, the rifle will shoot to those sights at the range they are set for. IMO, the downrange blades getting accidently fliped up at the wrong time has never happened to me, and I don't know anyone who has had that happen, I don't think it is a problem!

quote:

Front night site with flip up white blade/bead, again I like the looks, but it actual use is this just something else that has the possibility to be in the wrong position when you throw the gun up?

Here again, as long as the night bead is installed properly, it is not an issue. As far as usefullness, it is very usefull, and is much larger than even a large front bead for general shooting, and is used much the same as a shotgun bead for close range, in poor light, or with a lot of bush as background, that some time causes one to loose the front bead in the mix. This bead is only used with the standing rear sight, usually a wade "V" type, and the standard bead used with the downrange blades, or for percision shot placement in the open! The down range flip-ups should be cut with a narrow "V", and to be used with smaller bead.

quote:

Ejectors, anyone feel strongly that a gun should not have them?

Ejectors are a personal thing as well, but do have some value! I always buy with the ejector option, then disconnect. The reason for this is, when you get ready to sell, the fact that it has auto ejectors, will draw a premium. and when disconected are simply extractors, and are one less thing to cock when openion the action, and noise is eliminated.

quote:

Frame “reinforcement†around the exterior of the standing breech and watertable, would you pay $750-$1000 more for a otherwise identical gun that had the reinforcement?

I like the re-enforsement bolsters, but if the rifle is quality and doesn't have them, it is not a buy breaker for me. IOW, I like they way they look, and every little thing that helps to stringthen the action, is desirable.

quote:

Scope mounts, I personally do not like the looks however with my old eyes I am forced to use them more often than not. If you were to order a 470 or 500 would you ask for scope bases machined into the rib? Same question but now for the 450/400?

Regardless of what some say, a scope is simply a better sight than irons, for most shooting, and on a double rifle they are still a better sight than irons. However, the uses a double rifle are put to by most the irons are all that is needed , a full 90% of the time. I find it strange that those who wouldn't think of only useing irons sights on all their bolt rifles, still claim a scope on a double rifle is a no-no.
A scope on a double rifle is for specialized shooting, and is not primary, but usefull still, for special opperations, or for use by those with bad eyes. The size of the chambering has nothing to do with the usefullness of a scope on a double for special applications, but the more recoil the rifle generates,the more thought one must take, when decideing which scope to use!

quote:

Now, what type of mount? I have used claw mounts and MAK type pivot mounts on double rifles. They can be quickly removed but neither is instantly removed and I have come to the conclusion that in most cases they need to be put on (or taken off) before the action starts. I like the looks of the Tally bases and they are probably the least expensive option (I also realize they are probably the slowest to put on and off). Anyone using Tally bases/rings on their 40 cal and up double? What do you like or dislike? Other options for scope moounts I have not thought about?

Everyone, has the wrong idea about how to use a scope on double rifles! On a bolt rifle the scope is usually the primary sighting system, and the iron sights are only back up. The scope is rarely removed, unless something happens to the scope, or the need arises to change to a different type of scope, for a special purpose,like a lighted reticle, in a very large bell to gather light for shooting Leopard on bait. The Irons are only used if the scope is broken, and they are a back up to finish out a safari.

On a double rifle, the scope is carried off the rifle till needed, and the irons are the primery sighting system. Scopes used on a double rifle require some real thinking, as they can change things for the worse if the wrong one is chosin. Things like eyerelief, weight, and highth of the mounting are critical, because the weight, and the hight above the bore center, will effect the regulation to verying extent, depending one ofr more of these things.

In addtion, contrary to popular opinion, scope are not removed in the middle of a fire fight! That is not the reason for the QD setup! The QD is simply so the scope can be removed without tools, and return to zero, when replaced. This is done before the action starts. Like you let a wounded Bull get into the high grass, where shots will likely be in 10 feet or less, the scope is removed,from either bolt, or double, and the night bead is flipped up before entering the weeds.

The other example is, you spot a Buffalo standing behind bush, and your double has QD scope system, you snapp the scope on the rifle, and pick a route through a hole in the bush that is free of sticks, to the vitals of the buff, and click off a killing shot through a hole where the naked eye cannot detect sticks, that deflect your bullet, then remove the scope again for follow-up!

The bolt rifle is carried with the scope mounted,till the irons are needed,then the scope is stowed, the double is carried with iron, and the scope stowed, till it is needed.

quote:

Scalloped action or flat back action? Would you worry about the wood on a scalloped action being more prone to stress cracking over time?

NO! If the stock is fitted right, and it is maintained properly, there is no difference. One is simpluy prettier than the other, ans costs more.


Of course all these things have pleanty of valid reasons to do the opposite in all cases, as the shooter likes!
This long winded answer session, is only opinion, and not chizeled in stone anyplace I know of, so it is not a mandate on anyone's actions on their own double rifle, just on mine!

My 2 cwnts worth.

I prefer a splinter foreend and believe it is more natural and comfortable for me. I am used to shooting SxS shotguns with splinter barrels though. Try each style and pick what you like.

Multiple blades that lay flat and are spring loaded to stay that way are nice. The second blade on mine is used for lighter non dangerous game loads which tend to shoot lower in my rifle.

I have a flip up white "night" bead and it is useless adornment. It is no more visible in the bush than a properly bevelled and polished brass caterpillar bead. Same in low light. On the other hand, there is no way it could flip up by accident, and even if it did, The rifle shoots to the same POI at any range that makes a difference. Subtends too much target, even at 25yds too. My front bead and flip up are replaceable so changing bead diameter or elevation is no issue. The inserts only cost $50 or so so no big deal a flip up night bead to try if your rifle is similarly equiped. If you really think you will have trouble seeing the bead you can always try the "fibre optic" inserts. Not politically correct on a double but they are incredibly visible and you should order one beadsize down from a properly beveled and polished brass bead to increase visibilty about 100% over the larger cut and polished bead. Dureability is a little suspect to me but I've had one on a hooded 375H&H with no problems. I carry a spare of either in the grip cap flip open compartment. The blade insert can be had field replaceable without tools or using a small allen set screw. Get the field replaceable ones if possible. Put an allen wrench in the kit you have the trackers carry if not.

I very strongly prefer ejectors. Others will argue that extractors are nearly as quick to reload. This is just false. No matter how you choose to reload - from a belt, two in the palm, two between the fingers... there is an extra step ot two to reloading an extractor rifle. I would hunt with a rifle without them though.

Frame reinforcements for $750 or $1000, yes if they are good looking.

I wouldn't scope a double rifle over 375. If I were to scope a double rifle it would be with claw mounts. Also, I've had repeateability issues with Talleys. No variation so big that I wouldn't hunt most game but enough to be annoying.

My thoughts.

Good luck with your choice.

First I have heard about repeatability issues with Talley‘s, is this a common problem?

Thanks to everyone that took the time to give me their thoughts and ideas. I am in the process of placing a order for multiple guns, many of them will be built for resale and your thoughts will be used in helping me make decisions on how these guns are built.

On the Talley's.

Shoot three, remove scope. Replace scope, shoot three, remove scope. Remount scope, shoot three... If you drew a line connecting each group subsequent to the first group, the results equaled a rectangle three or four inches wide and two or three inches deep at 100yds. First group in the center of the rectangle. Rifle capable of repeated three shot sub 1" groups.

Repeatable error too. You could resight the rifle and repeat the test and the same rectangle would result.

BTW, I still use Talley's but won't remove the scope and then go, say leopard hunting. Need to rezero first.

JPK

JPK-
Thanks for the details, guess I will rule out the Talley rings on my own gun.

If you want a scope on a double, German claw mounts are the way to go.

OK so typical Brit

But, don't you guys mean a fore END and a BOLSTERED action?

"Two common peoples seperated by language"

JPK