Michael458 and srose did extensive testing on my Sabatti 450-400 in Michael's supersecret underground bunker. As you may recall, I said that I would post the results - good, bad or indifferent.
Michael458 has done his due dilligence and he and Sam gave it a good work out no holds barred, as as I requested, told it like it is.

Here (fifth post down on page 145) is the beginning of Michael's and Sam's posts on their experience with my Sabatti ...

The truth is what it is ...

Looks like Mac was correct with his concerns over this regulation method.

Hell's bells, now that is something that makes me shudder.

I'm glad it still shoots for you though.

.

So if the left barrel shoots around tree's that are in the way, is that a bad thing????

quote:

Originally posted by 2kuduhunter:
So if the left barrel shoots around tree's that are in the way, is that a bad thing????

............

So shooting the factory ammo that it was regulated with, it appears to get good marks in accuracy as well as the rifles overall fit and function. Overall pretty good for 5K.

I'd say I'm satisfied but not happy with accuracy, regulation and terminal performance.

Satisfied AND happy with the wood-to-metal fit, the figuring of the wood, the finish of the metalwork, the mechanics, the handling and how it fits me. Love the way it shoots.

If I can find someone to counterbore or cut and re-crown the barrels then re-regulate with CEBs for a fair price, I'll have that done.

If not, I'll stick to DGX and DGS and bring it with me to Namibia as back-up for my elephant and for plains game in November.

quote:

Originally posted by JCS271:
So shooting the factory ammo that it was regulated with, it appears to get good marks in accuracy as well as the rifles overall fit and function. Overall pretty good for 5K.

Hi Guys

Well the above statement would be fairly accurate in my opinion. I really wished that the rifle would have just done everything perfect and I could have had a better report for it, but things are what they are, as CCMDoc has said. This rifle was very tight, remained so throughout the shooting and test work, mechanically no issues at all. All my loads used Federal 215s and several different powders, including RL25, RL22, Lot's of IMR 4831, H-4831, and IMR 4350. Both barrels were very consistent with all powders, loads, and bullets, they just were not right/left compatible.

It's for sure regulated with Hornady Factory Ammo, which is shot both solids and DGX very well, and they are right/left compatible.

This regulation by filing the inside of the crown, does without doubt, cause stability issues both in flight, and more so in terminal penetration. It does have an effect, end of story.

On this rifle there was no effect between having a scope on, or having it off. The Hornady Factory ammo remained regulated with the scope and without, and all other bullets showed the same effects, scope or no scope. Scope on this particular rifle was of no consequence at all.

Personally, while this particular rifle as it is would do fine with the Hornady ammo on buffalo and such, I would have great concerns about other rifles regulated this way. If they will not shoot a proper flat nose solid, such as the North Fork or CEB BBW#13, at least these bullets are capable of "self-stabilization" during terminal penetration, lesser bullets cannot self stabilize. I would have concerns using these in the field with anything of a serious nature. Sam has concerns about the large amounts of bearing surface on the Hornady DGS, and no doubt it is a hard bullet. So there are many things to consider in this matter as I see it.

I also cannot see this method of regulation as being a proper thing to do. Take a look at the photos posted, it's rather evident.

Wish I had something better for all of you. Sorry!

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by CCMDoc:
I'd say I'm satisfied but not happy with accuracy, regulation and terminal performance.

Satisfied AND happy with the wood-to-metal fit, the figuring of the wood, the finish of the metalwork, the mechanics, the handling and how it fits me. Love the way it shoots.

If I can find someone to counterbore or cut and re-crown the barrels then re-regulate with CEBs for a fair price, I'll have that done.

If not, I'll stick to DGX and DGS and bring it with me to Namibia as back-up for my elephant and for plains game in November.

Doc

Sounds like a very viable and reasonable plan, A and B. I concur! I think the DGX shoots very well, both barrels, terminal stability with expanding bullets is not much of a concern, as very deep and straight penetration is not required, and with expanding bullets much of the time the act of expansion and less penetration to begin with act together to stabilize anyway, and even if they don't, so what? DGS did far better than I expected it to do! I freely admit I would not have give it high marks, but it did very well in the terminals, right barrel better of course. Left barrel shows it's instability with the HOrnady.

Good Plan!

Sam sent some bullets for us to try one more thing before sending it home to you. I will test those, and get it on the way, with full report on the loads, bullets, data, the works. When you start loading, it won't be so hard for you.

Michael

You guys are the best.

Thanks for doing the "heavy lifting" for me and being open and objective with the results.

Stay well and thanks again,

Paul

After reading that report and seeing the crown/rifling work I wouldn't touch one of those suckers with a ten foot pole. No offense to you guys who own them but I don't go for that kind dodgy quality on any rifle much less a 5K double gun.

Mac wasn't the only one to express doubts, by a long shot. But I recall it was he who said that it would be fickle with different bullets, and this would be compounded by the rifling changing over time with use.

I would never consider one of these rifles, as, like many, at one time had. Even if one could be had, special order, UNregulated. Are the barrels joined in the traditional way that would allow this?

And as was noted in the past that the 9.3s are a real value at $3K, I said then, consider that it's an extractor gun, with dogshit wood, and dogshit pad, and regulated in this manner. Take that same $3K, add the cost of ejectors, add the cost of nice wood, add the cost of something like a nice pad or nice checkered buttplate, add the cost of proper regulation (and proper barrel joining?). Then what do you have? A Chapuis! A Chapuis at $4600 far outstrips the Sabatti in terms of value alone, not to mention overall quality.

The Sabatti does well, with the Hornady ammunition they regulated it with. Remember this is the one that Cabela's somehow beat Luxus Walnut out of the contract he thought he had. This might be why he was talking about two-grand higher MSRP. I shot my Chapuis 9,3x74R last April, and loved it. I just think I am a Searcy fan, and that my double(s) will all be .470 NE or larger in caliber.

Rich

So, because I bought a Sabatti in 45-70 before I deployed, and have no access to it to verify if the crown is cut in this manner or not.


Supposing the gun is cut this way, and Cabelas, because of the time thats gone by, will not refund me my money. Would it be possible to cut the barrel back 1/2 - inch or so and re-regulate these guns in the traditional manner?

All the Sabatti rifles that Cabela's is having brought are regulated in this way. I THINK I read here (I know I heard from someone in the know) that JJ told an AR Sabatti owner, that if the gun were to need reregulating, he'd cut it, recrown it, and then have to regulate it again in the same manner. At issue also was the method with which the barrels were joined, that they couldn't be reheated, the joining material was too hard. Look, search and ask around here.

After reading these posts I took another closer look at my Sabatti .45-70. This is one of the deluxe grade rifles that looks much like the African series.

I had previously stated here that mine had not been muzzle ground to regulate it but I was wrong. This time I wore my magnifiers and I could clearly see where the "gunsmithing" had been done.

I'm unsure as to what I'll do next. The rifle shoots great and I like it a lot. I've had it since last fall and have done quite a bit of work on the stock so I don't know what I CAN do. If I hadn't taken this closer look, I'd have just gone on being fat, dumb and happy! I imagine I'll just keep it and enjoy using it.

I retired from doing Research and Development work for a major U.S. manufacturing company and several times saw large quantities of product scrapped at great cost to the company because it didn't meet our standards. Obviously, Sabatti has an entirely different viewpoint concerning their responsibility to their customers.

It's a shame because they were about 95% of the way to making a rather nice finished product for the money. A bit of time at the range with someone who knows how to regulate while the barrels are still in the white has to be cheaper than expecting the customer to ship a gun and pay retail for custom gunsmithing re-work.

This is such a shadetree gunsmithing trick for a manufacturing company to do that it makes me suspect that Sabatti has severe financial problems and are willing to do anything to turn a buck!

quote:

Originally posted by MACD:
The rifle shoots great and I like it a lot. I've had it since last fall and have done quite a bit of work on the stock so I don't know what I CAN do. If I hadn't taken this closer look, I'd have just gone on being fat, dumb and happy! I imagine I'll just keep it and enjoy usingit.

Me too though I've nothing more into mine than original cost. As I mentioned, if I can have the barrels counter-bored or cut and re-crowned and re-regulated for a reasonable amount, I'll do that otherwise shoot factory DGX and DGS quite accurately, efficiently, successfully and happily.

What's "reasonable" money for this in my opinion? Under $700 all said and done.

If I find someone capable and willing, I'll post that with their permission.

Cabela's asked for a specific product delivered at a specific price and Sabatti said yes. Cabela's had to know where corners were going to be cut. If it shoots well, isn't breaking, and nothing is wearing out at an accelerated rate, then it should be OK. Remember, there's at least one PH here who bought one and takes it to work every day!

MACD, CCMDoc, and others that have Sabatti rifles.

quote:

The rifle shoots great and I like it a lot. I've had it since last fall and have done quite a bit of work on the stock so I don't know what I CAN do. If I hadn't taken this closer look, I'd have just gone on being fat, dumb and happy! I imagine I'll just keep it and enjoy using it.

If you have one, and it shoots, does what you want it to, then there really is not an issue in my opinion! CCMDoc rifle shoots the Hornady Factory loads as good as you could ask of anything in that category. If you know there is some instability with the barrel that has the crown cut, then work with that. It's not going to win any target shooting contests, but what double rifle is? It is not going to be versatile with other bullets, but many doubles are not versatile anyway--that's why I would not have one personally. Doubles are not versatile in my opinion, they have but one mission, dangerous game, close and personal. 50 yards is LONG RANGE SHOOTING and as far as I am concerned about max range one should consider for dangerous game anyway. Life is real at 25 yds and closer. This rifle of Docs is damned dandy at 25 yds! While honestly I would have reservations with elephant and that left barrel, I would also have reservations of 450/400 size bullets and hornady solids and elephants as well! Will it do? Yes it will. Buffalo, hammer down and start shooting, no issues at all!

So while I think that Sabatti could get a rather bad rap from the test work that Sam and I did, it might be a little harsh and unjustified to slam it too damned hard! Sit back and think of what purpose these rifles serve first before doing so!

Don't forget that this rifle was and is very tight, mechanically good to go, took a scope with no issues at all, and shot very well with the scope. So more than likely depending on many things, probably just as many good points about this particular rifle than bad points?

We must keep things in perspective, and remember our objectives with the rifles we choose to carry to the field, and the main purpose they serve. If you have one, don't let the test scare you, or concern you that your rifle is now useless because of the test work--it probably does not shoot any worse now than it did before I published the test eh? HEH HEH,,,,,

Michael

We are damn lucky to have someone like Michael to present the real truth for us!

to Michael458

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
We are damn lucky to have someone like Michael to present the real truth for us!

to Michael458

Couldn't agree more!

Based on the findings I would assume the mfg. started out with fully rifled barrels and test fired, altered bore/rifling until desired results were attained?? Would they do this for whatever caliber the rifles are offered??
The report would suggest the rifle is overall of good quality, but this approach to regulating shot placement is unheard of by me until this time. Some would call this creative engineering, but curious if any other mfg.'s of double rifles apply this unique method of regulating their barrels?? Been on the verge of buying double rifle, cancelled one last year and bought Harley Davidson instead(double rifle would have been less costly!)and may still end up with a double, but will definitely check the bore/muzzle out prior to purchase.

Like most of you I find Sabatti's regulating ( I call it butchering) method disgusting.
But if I already owned one and it shot reasonably well it is still a pretty good value. It would stay with me and see some serious hunting use and be damned with what the crowns looked like.

But in no way shape or form would I ever buy one now. If corners were cut in regulating then you know other corners were cut as well. Some of you guys were right, you do get what you pay (or don't pay) for.

Great report and it makes me feel MUCH better that I could not live with that kind of regulation so back it went to Cabelas and I obtained a full refund in less than five days, no questions asked. So, that refund went towards my "bespoke" V-C jorge

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
My 450 shoots 1.5 inch (or less) pairs all day with DGS and DGX and both muzzles are wallowed out. I saw those 2 minutes after I bought it last summer so I knew how they make a double rifle for $3500 (Cabelas markup is the rest of the $5k; mine is an extractor). I don't know why anyone should care how that performance is achieved. If it shoots within spec, and if you didn't know about the method of regulation, no one would be complaining about a $5000 double rifle. But now, suddenly the darling of the cheap double rifle market is a pariah. Sort of like finding out your beautiful girlfriend achieves her looks with makeup and hair color (and falsies). Same performance, but you just don't like the method by which she got it. Humans are strange creatures.

As several of us suspected the method of "regulation" yaws the bullet and prevents it from fully stabilizing which in turn will affect penetration, especially with solids, as the tests on Paul's rifle have borne out. Anyone who has ever done any benchrest shooting or long-range varmint hunting understands the importance of proper crowning to bullet stability, might be okay on paper but not something I would care to hunt DG with.

quote:

Originally posted by Cane Rat:

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
My 450 shoots 1.5 inch (or less) pairs all day with DGS and DGX and both muzzles are wallowed out. I saw those 2 minutes after I bought it last summer so I knew how they make a double rifle for $3500 (Cabelas markup is the rest of the $5k; mine is an extractor). I don't know why anyone should care how that performance is achieved. If it shoots within spec, and if you didn't know about the method of regulation, no one would be complaining about a $5000 double rifle. But now, suddenly the darling of the cheap double rifle market is a pariah. Sort of like finding out your beautiful girlfriend achieves her looks with makeup and hair color (and falsies). Same performance, but you just don't like the method by which she got it. Humans are strange creatures.

As several of us suspected the method of "regulation" yaws the bullet and prevents it from fully stabilizing which in turn will affect penetration, especially with solids, as the tests on Paul's rifle have borne out. Anyone who has ever done any benchrest shooting or long-range varmint hunting understands the importance of proper crowning to bullet stability, might be okay on paper but not something I would care to hunt DG with.

Excellent point. Many people consider a double rifle a short range rifle but there are exceptions to that rule and sometimes longer shots must be taken.
In my case I watched a hunting partner miss a nice bull moose three times and it was either shoot or watch the bull walk over a hill and disappear. I chose to shoot and dropped the moose with my Chapuis and the distance was lasered ranged at 287 (or maybe 283, forgot). If the rifle would of been a Sabatti I'll go out on a limb and say it never could of made the shot. But with the 9,3 Chapuis I had enough experience at the range hitting the 300 yard gong that I knew it could do it if I did my part.

Snowwolfe,

That's an Awesome shot! How much hold right/left do you have to use shooting your Chapuis 9.3 at 300yds?

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
I don't know why anyone should care how that performance is achieved. If it shoots within spec, and if you didn't know about the method of regulation, no one would be complaining about a $5000 double rifle. But now, suddenly the darling of the cheap double rifle market is a pariah.

dpcd

Because their is a right way of doing things and a wrong way. It's called standards and not cutting corners - and if standards drop in one area, corners have often been cut in others areas.

OK, to give you another example. When I buy any 2nd hand DR, I do a quick test fire of it, have a quick look how it shoots and send it off to my DR gunsmith for a strip, clean, tighten (if needed). So, lets say it needs tightening. he can tighten it properly or, he can squeeze the hook a vice to spread it and make the gun "tight".

So the gun is tight, everything else works, doe that make it OK to do it that way ?
IMHO, NO.

And I reckon you (and anyone on AR) would be pretty pissed off if someone sold you a DR that had had a bodgy tighten job on it.



As for DR's being used up to 50 yards, at least over here they are used past that,
especially on 2nd shots and if lighter / smaller calibers and pigs involved, even more so.

We use our DR's over here for heaps of things - deer, I've used my 375H&H on foxes as practice, I've even shot a few wild horses and a heap of dingoes with my 500/465 and I've shot quite a few pigs with them and i know a few who use them on Donkey's.

.

quote:

As several of us suspected the method of "regulation" yaws the bullet and prevents it from fully stabilizing which in turn will affect penetration, especially with solids, as the tests on Paul's rifle have borne out. Anyone who has ever done any benchrest shooting or long-range varmint hunting understands the importance of proper crowning to bullet stability, might be okay on paper but not something I would care to hunt DG with.

Canerat, this is the issue with the rifles and that sums up very well what the main problem would or could be. Most of all with the various solids used. In the case of the CEB BBW#13 and some few others, the meplat size and nose profile, these solids are capable of self stabilization during terminal penetration. Some lesser solids are not able to self stabilize. If the rifle is not capable of regulation with a solid such as the CEB BBW#13 then there is even more of an issue. On this particular rifle we see that the BBW#13s did self stabilize in the left barrel giving more than adequate straight line penetration, and where the Hornady DGS was not able to do the same, 2 out of 3 shots. The problem is, this rifle won't regulate with anything but the Hornady bullets. We also see that in the right barrel the Hornady DGS performed far better than I expected it to be capable of.

So in this particular rifle we see the left barrel has the issue, while the right does very well in stabilization. If one were hunting buffalo, right barrel would have the expanding, left the solid (As I understand you boys operate these things-Right first-Left Second). For second shots on buffalo, I would think the hornady would suffice, even with it's stability issue, it will perform better on tissue than in the test medium. If elephant, then both barrels would be stuffed with solids, right being first and able to stabilize reasonable, and the left would be quick follow up--just load quickly, and shoot some more fast as you can! HEH....... So if nothing else done with this rifle, one could compromise and work with it, knowing what it's limitations are.

quote:

Many people consider a double rifle a short range rifle but there are exceptions to that rule and sometimes longer shots must be taken.

Snowwolfe

There are always exceptions to the rules, no doubt, and for sure that would be an incredible shot. But as you say, it is an exception, and while a bull moose can and has been many times an exceptionally dangerous critter, it is also not the normal cape buffalo, lion or elephant, bear that we would bring to mind with DG. I dare say that you would not take a shot such as that on a lion, elephant or even buffalo. I know no one that would, unless of course the dance has already started and this is one of the follow up shots to stop an animal from escaping.

And 500N once again the above answers your statement as well, (2cd shots--lighter caliber and pigs) Same goes.


Damn near everything we do in choosing rifle, caliber, and bullets in shooting can and does become some sort of compromise, to facilitate a more important (to ourselves) goal. So regardless of our choices, there are compromises to be made. The chap who selects a Single Shot to hunt with is severely limited with 2cd shot capability. I have done this before myself. The chap who chooses a double can in many cases be limited to the selection of bullets he might be able to use as well. One can justify this by demanding that very fast second follow up shot, or because of nostalgia or any number of reasons, but none the less still a compromise. The chap who chooses a bolt gun also has some limitations, while a fast second shot is possible on DG, not as fast as a double, but a 3rd is faster than the double? So there are compromises made on all of the choices we make.

DG is near a sin to shoot past 50 yds--I have in the past committed these sins, but always strive to be close, or else what is the point? I consider 50 yds a long distance on DG, and would much much prefer to be inside that 25 yd mark, and for the most part in my DG career have been there. I have a rule of thumb, for myself only--Start inside 25 yds I have you 100% in control--50 yds that percentage starts to drop to 75% of having the scenario under control--75 yds drops to 50% control, and 100 yds is out of control! Give me 25 yds and inside every time if at all possible. This should be Double Rifle territory, and 50 yds getting on the outside--ESPECIALLY if you limit yourself to iron sights as most of you do! With irons that Control Range starts to drop drastically! Or it for sure would for me!

Now let's look at these 50 yd results, on paper. Here you will see groups fired with the left and right barrels at 50 yds, Hornady DGS and DGX with both scope and iron sights. The target with irons has a couple of CEB BBW#13s, right and left also.

First two targets are with the scope in place.






Not bad for the Hornady Factory ammo. The CEB BBW#13s are around 4-6 inches apart right and left at 50 yds with loads in the same or better velocity range. So at 50 yds a compromise has to be made--Hornady Factory ammo.

Here is a target shot at 50 yds with Iron Sights. Not much difference in right and left. This showing the rifle has little regulation issues with a scope attached, or not. Which is a good thing in my opinion.




Now, what did I just say about the ranges for Dangerous Game???? I don't give a damn if I am shooting a very accurate bolt action with a low power scope---Which I do and have done for my entire DG career, 99% of the time, 25 yds and inside is where I want to be!!!! That's where I have the most control of any situation.

So the Sabatti here at 25 yds, this is where the compromise is mostly in RANGE--



Here at 25 yds, the CEB BBW#13s do pretty well for their intended purposes. Let's assume that one would choose to hunt elephant with this very same Sabatti 450/400. Let's assume that one wishes to have the very best bullet performance that one can have for such an adventure, my opinion, .409 400 gr CEB BBW#13 Solid. Well, we know for a fact in this gun the CEBs are 4-6 inches apart right and left with this bullet at 50 yds--but 25 and less that gap narrows to an inch or so. Well normally one does not start the dance at 50 yds with elephant, but if you do, and I have, then you don't be stupid and do brain shots, you take heart shots--the heart on an elephant is a lot bigger than 6 inches, and I doubt that you will get a six inch spread at 50 yds during the heat of battle! Let's scenario up and say we are inside 25 yds now! Not much of a compromise at 25 yds and in, where most reasonable elephant hunting should be anyway.

Don't get me wrong here, I am not defending, nor being offensive to the Sabatti or any other double for that matter. I may just be looking at things in a different light, or in multiple layers and options. Ya'll know me or should by now, I am not a double type of chap, and won't ever be. So really don't have a dog in this fight, nor really care one way or the other. What I do care about are you guys that choose the doubles, and just would like for everyone to see all the options, and not get hung up on any one thing and make decisions based on one thing or option only.

Of course these are opinions, and mine is worth what you paid for it! LOL

Michael

i was the first one to order a sabatti 600 damn am i glad they never made it here and thank you CCMDOC for letting yours go every one of us dreams about getting your first or for that matter any double but this just goes to show you can only cut so many corners when building a double rifle and have it the was it was intended to be

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
Great report and it makes me feel MUCH better that I could not live with that kind of regulation so back it went to Cabelas and I obtained a full refund in less than five days, no questions asked. So, that refund went towards my "bespoke" V-C jorge

Hey Amigo, that was a sterling move! The VC is twenty times the rifle the Sabatti is, and only a little less than twice the price.

Every one of the VCs we shot down at the 4K ranch DRSS get-together shot like they are supposed to. I saw zero shortcuts in those rifles, and they exibited features normally found on far more expensive rifles! IMO the VCs are value for money spent.

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
Great report and it makes me feel MUCH better that I could not live with that kind of regulation so back it went to Cabelas and I obtained a full refund in less than five days, no questions asked. So, that refund went towards my "bespoke" V-C jorge

V-C well made rifles that will stand the test of time..Now we gotta get you in is a custom fitted Bolt Rifle

Ihave been following this issue as well and have the same concerns about sability and penetration. I call JJ on Friday and was told they no longer work on Sabatti.

quote:

Originally posted by 20 below:
Ihave been following this issue as well and have the same concerns about sability and penetration. I call JJ on Friday and was told they no longer work on Sabatti.

Really, that's interesting.

Did he give a reason ?


Any guesses to how long it is before Cabela's drop the whole Sabatti line of guns
and leaves it to someone else ?

.

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
Great report and it makes me feel MUCH better that I could not live with that kind of regulation so back it went to Cabelas and I obtained a full refund in less than five days, no questions asked. So, that refund went towards my "bespoke" V-C jorge

I hope you enjoyed her while you had her. It sure was a shooter. You did the right thing.

If you see a real hot young lady, you know only one thing for sure. Some where there is a guy who real tired of her BS.The money was spent on makeing the SAB pretty not a real value.

JD

He said they have attempted to re-regulate a couple of these and won't do it again. Not worth the time and effort for the results or the lack there of.

quote:

Originally posted by Express_Rifles:

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
Great report and it makes me feel MUCH better that I could not live with that kind of regulation so back it went to Cabelas and I obtained a full refund in less than five days, no questions asked. So, that refund went towards my "bespoke" V-C jorge

V-C well made rifles that will stand the test of time..Now we gotta get you in is a custom fitted Bolt Rifle

I've spent enough money! Besides there's nothing my Model 70s won't do. I'm spending the coin on a Safari!

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
MACD, CCMDoc, and others that have Sabatti rifles.

quote:

The rifle shoots great and I like it a lot. I've had it since last fall and have done quite a bit of work on the stock so I don't know what I CAN do. If I hadn't taken this closer look, I'd have just gone on being fat, dumb and happy! I imagine I'll just keep it and enjoy using it.

If you have one, and it shoots, does what you want it to, then there really is not an issue in my opinion! CCMDoc rifle shoots the Hornady Factory loads as good as you could ask of anything in that category. If you know there is some instability with the barrel that has the crown cut, then work with that. It's not going to win any target shooting contests, but what double rifle is? It is not going to be versatile with other bullets, but many doubles are not versatile anyway--that's why I would not have one personally. Doubles are not versatile in my opinion, they have but one mission, dangerous game, close and personal. 50 yards is LONG RANGE SHOOTING and as far as I am concerned about max range one should consider for dangerous game anyway. Life is real at 25 yds and closer. This rifle of Docs is damned dandy at 25 yds! While honestly I would have reservations with elephant and that left barrel, I would also have reservations of 450/400 size bullets and hornady solids and elephants as well! Will it do? Yes it will. Buffalo, hammer down and start shooting, no issues at all!

So while I think that Sabatti could get a rather bad rap from the test work that Sam and I did, it might be a little harsh and unjustified to slam it too damned hard! Sit back and think of what purpose these rifles serve first before doing so!

Don't forget that this rifle was and is very tight, mechanically good to go, took a scope with no issues at all, and shot very well with the scope. So more than likely depending on many things, probably just as many good points about this particular rifle than bad points?

We must keep things in perspective, and remember our objectives with the rifles we choose to carry to the field, and the main purpose they serve. If you have one, don't let the test scare you, or concern you that your rifle is now useless because of the test work--it probably does not shoot any worse now than it did before I published the test eh? HEH HEH,,,,,

Michael

Macd I think I'll stick with you and just be fat dumb and happy, I LOVE my .450NE and it flat out shoots with factory rounds. Everything I want in an affordable double! I think I need to spend more time with my rifles and less time on the internet worrying.

Michael thanks for the test write up and the voice of reason on expectations for this type of weapon.

Now turning off computer and heading outside to shoot...........

I disagree that a double is only for close in work on dangerous game.
Use mine for moose, black bear, and grizzly. To date, have never shot an animal with my Chapuis under 75 yards away and the longest shot was just under 300. The long shot is not recommended but I would have zero reservation about shooting any deer sized animal or larger up to 200 yards away with the factory iron sights on my Chapuis.

To many people read the same articles about doubles being only good for short range close in work. Most of the owners of the smaller caliber doubles would agree they are more useful rifles than non double owners give them credit for.

quote:

Originally posted by Showbart:
Snowwolfe,

That's an Awesome shot! How much hold right/left do you have to use shooting your Chapuis 9.3 at 300yds?

I was really lucky and not sure of how much of the bead I held up. The lucky part came into play because the last two trips at the range prior to the hunt had me and my son shooting at a gong on the 300 yard range and I found out I could hit it damn near every time after the first couple of sighters. A bull moose offers a huge killing area. And even though I held up quite a bit the bullet just barely clipped the heart.
Lucky as shit if you ask me. But it gave me bragging rights for more than a few drinks around the campfire that hunt

I been finding out the more I practice the luckier I get.