Ken and the VC team seem to be legitimately interested in the views of the double rifle community. Let your voice be heard!

Question:
Would you like to see VC move to make a small splinter forearm standard on their double rifles -- relegating the beavertail to special order status instead of the other way around?

Choices:
Yes
No

 

I voted yes. My new VC has their "splinter" forearm. While a huge improvement over the beaver tail, it still has a long way to go to be a true splinter as it is still too wide and way too long. The VC rifles are really nice looking in the first place, but putting a proper "splinter" forearm on the rifles would elevate them overnight, IMO.

Here are a couple of pics of my rifle's "splinter" forearm. The bottom pic distorts the forearm's profile as the rifle is turned a bit onto it's back. The top pic show the profile much better.

Mike, Ken is on safari right now so you might not get a response from him for another week or so.

Still love looking at that rifle, Todd! Very Very nice! I do think the issue with VC is one of ratios. The forearm on your rifle looks great but I agree they could be shorter. When they make the forearms shorter however, they will also need to move the rear sight and rib back to maintain a proper placement. Shortening the forearms will also probably mean moving the rear sling swivel back a bit too. Once that is done, they will be 80% of the way to having the things be just perfect....especially the round actions!

I'm still on the fence. I like Todd's "compromise" Splinter, but the beavertail sure does a good job of keepingmy fingers away from those hot barrels. jorge

Classic splinter =19mm long but this will be difficult to achieve due to the small size of the action.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder as will everyone's form vs function. Here is my Gibbs with 28" barrels and the guild's idea of a proper length fore-end.


It has been my understanding that a fore-end's purpose was to hold the barrels to the action and house the ejectors or extractors

Man I love that rifle. My idea of perfection in every way...

John, I agree with you concerning the need to move the sights back and change the rib as well if the forearm is shortened for esthetic purposes.

However, just going more narrow would be a huge improvement, even if the length were left alone. The splinter shouldn't be wider than the action at any point. Mine is. Again, it's much better than the beaver, but it's still almost as wide as the barrels, and definitely wider than the action.

As far as length is concerned, I think it could be shortened by 1/4 to possibly as much as 1/3rd. I like to feel just a bit of wood in the palm of the hand with nothing but barrels in the fingers.

Jorge, I hear you on the hot barrel issue. However, when shooting my doubles, I always wear shooting gloves. That solves the heat issue. For hunting, I always wear fingerless leather gloves, similar or exactly like the ones used by weightlifters or bike riders. They have a bit of padding in the palm, are lightweight and open in the back, and the fingers are bare from the middle joint to the finger tips. I find these effectively handle the hot barrel issue while at the same time offering the protection needed from thorns or rocks when having to crawl or butt scoot getting close to game, yet still giving full tactile feedback through the fingertips. Jorge, remember how we used to cut the fingertips out of our flight gloves when flying around the boat? Same thing here.

I actually like the splinter that Butch Searcy is making these days.

quote:

Originally posted by Zephyr:
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder as will everyone's form vs function. Here is my Gibbs with 28" barrels and the guild's idea of a proper length fore-end.


It has been my understanding that a fore-end's purpose was to hold the barrels to the action and house the ejectors or extractors

I would say that fore-end's proportions are just about 100% to my eye! And I agree with your last statement as to the function of the fore-end. Just there to hold the barrels to the action and house the ejectors. NOT something to hold onto while shooting a heavy recoiling double rifle. One should hang onto the barrels, not the forearm!!

Nice rifle sir!

I voted yes in the poll, and the reasons are more than just the shape and size of the forearm!

I absolutely love the VC double rifles. Even the off the shelf VC doubles fit me very well. The three the DRSS had down at 4K to run through the ringer, were very well made, and were very accurate as well. If I could order one for myself there are four things I would change. Three all having to do with the forearm wood and construction, and one to do with the retainer screw the holds the ejector rods in place.

On the forearm wood #1 I would defiantly ask for a splinter .



Splinter forend. A slender English-style forend on a break-open gun, designed to retain the barrels on the receiver when the gun is opened and to house the ejectors---not necessarily to provide a hand-hold. Splinter forend guns are more properly grasped by the barrels just ahead of the forend. The closer one's hand is to the line of the bore and to the line of sight, the better one's hand-to-eye coordination. Many people consider the splinter forend more graceful than a beavertail forend on a classic double gun. ~ above blue text from the HOLLOWELL definitions!



#2 the screws that hold the wood to the forearm hanger need to have steel escutcheons under the screw heads to avoid splitting the forearm wood over time.

#3 is something I don’t think they would change, is the Anson fore arm latch, but I could live with that, but would rather have a turn lever or Deeley lever latch. I have double with all three types. But as long as we are taking change!...........


#4 The other thing is the retainer screw that holds the ejector rods in the bottom of the barrels. The maker would make this better if they installed a tiny set screw at one side of the retainer screw to avoid the retainer screw backing out. This has already been posted as happening causing the rifle to be impossible to close after a re-load. Of course that can be fixed with a tiny bit of blue lock-tite on the threads so like the Anson latch I could live with this as well. I would, however, have JJ install a set screw there.

I would definitely ask for the splinter, and I agree that the splinter should be standard, and the BT forearm wood as optional.

I voted for the splinter. On several occasions I have been tempted to buy either a VC or a Chapuis, but couldn't do it because of the beavertail fore-end.

The British, Germans, and Belgians never used beavertails in the hey day of gun building. Fore-ends were simply meant to hold the action together, not to be used for the fore-hand of the shooter. The fore-hand should extend comfortably onto the barrels, which improves hold and swinging ability of the shooter.

And like Todd said, if barrel heat is of concern, simply use a glove. That's what the Brits & Scots have always done.

But who's to say what's proper in these days?

I find the front grip on my VC 600NE to be a little wide,I think it would be a little more elastically pleasing with a tapered grip.

quote:

Would you like to see VC move to make a small splinter forearm standard on their double rifles -- relegating the beavertail to special order status instead of the other way around?

_____________
But the VC is French! When it comes to automotive work, gun work; anything mechanical, it is common knowledge that the French copy nobody; nobody copies the French!!

Here is my V-C 600NE:

Mac

I don't like the Anson push rod, but H&H also uses the Anson push rod.

Ken has told me they(VC) has even quoted doing a Rigby type swing lever forend release. If my recall is correct it wasn't cheap, and made the push rod much easier to get past.

In the end I think many of us desire the look and feel of a pre war product from England. I don't understand why somebody dosen't offer just that for under 25K.

I will say this, and this goes for Heym aswell as VC. They are getting better, VC has made great strides over the last 4-5 years. Both the VC and Heym examples at shows this year are improved versions.

I think we owe this directly to the input Chris and Ken have directed at their repective companys. They are hearing us.

Many Thanks

Brett

The other option when practicing with a double and and dealing with hot barrels is a leather hand guard that slips over the barrels. I use them when shooting clays with my SXS shotguns instead of a glove. I could see using gloves during hunting as Todd W recommends.

I think the splinter does indeed look better but there is utility in the beavertail. You just have to pick your poison I guess. I have both and I don't find either to affect the utility of the gun. Having no particular preference, I didn't vote. I think we obsess over this to much. After all, it's just a matter of aesthetics. I like them all.

Just a matter of aesthetics . . . just a matter of aesthetics! Double rifles are in large part a matter of aesthetics. You are starting to sound like a Blaser man . . . all your taste is in your mouth.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Just a matter of aesthetics . . . just a matter of aesthetics! Double rifles are in large part a matter of aesthetics. You are starting to sound like a Blaser man . . . all your taste is in your mouth.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Just a matter of aesthetics . . . just a matter of aesthetics! Double rifles are in large part a matter of aesthetics. You are starting to sound like a Blaser man . . . all your taste is in your mouth.

And a bad taste that Blaser leaves!!

Give me the shorter British style splinter fore-end over the longer Beaver or Splinter any day. They feel great and don't move around on the barrels ether..

The short WR for-end above.


The longer splinter bellow in 470;

quote:

Originally posted by tendrams:
When they make the forearms shorter however, they will also need to move the rear sight and rib back to maintain a proper placement.

tendrams,

Quite a few of the british doubles had the splinter finishing level with the end of the quarter rib so there would be no need to change the VC quarter rib.

As to my 2 shillings worth,
A classic double should have a short, slim, scalloped splinter, it's the proper thing.

.

ozhunter,

What is your V-C chambered for?

Lovely rifle!!

NN

"I don't like the Anson push rod, but H&H also uses the Anson push rod."
_______________
There is nothing at all wrong with the Anson push rod; it is much easier to fit and restore than the Deeley. It secures as well as the Deeley. The Deeley always was, and still is, preferable by the German makers, while the rest of the world makers have, correctly, pretty much gone with the Anson. The Deeley inletting fouls up the real beauty of excellent wood grain, which is an abomination. I much prefer the Anson system, for numerous reasons, but to each his own!

Doc, I would say the splinter on your VC 600 is a further step in the right direction from my rifle. Was yours built after mine? I know the rifle was built prior to mine but IIRC, you had a new set of barrels and forearm made in order to reduce weight? Scheduled delivery of mine was October 2012.

It just appears to me that yours represents further evolvement of the VC splinter, with it being even more slim in thickness (top to bottom) toward the muzzle end. I'd like to see a pic from directly below however as it appears it could still be thinner in relation to the width of the action and barrels. Looks like it still wraps around the barrels just a bit? In other words, if you view it from directly underneath, do you see barrels on either side, or does the fore-end still encompass the full width of the tubes?

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
I used to buy this crap about how a rifle should look but I dont anymore.The most important thing in any rifle is how it balances so the iron sights can align with your eyes very comfortably and efficiently.It could be that for this to happen a forearm should be made a certain way and it may not make for a sleek design.

Are you well versed in the American Colloquialism of FOAD?

Take a look at this Heym. It has a beavertail forearm and I think it looks pretty good:

http://www.heymusa.com/88_B_Safari.htm

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Take a look at this Heym. It has a beavertail forearm and I think it looks pretty good:

http://www.heymusa.com/88_B_Safari.htm

Pretty but not as pretty as a splinter.

Mike:

I'm betting you can order a Heym with a splinter forearm but I sure wouldn't turn this gun down on the used market because of the beavertail forearm.

Here is another example of a perfectly proportioned beavertail forearm:

http://www.chapuis-armes.com/a...ne-agex-brousse.html

I like Chapuis doubles but they will not make a splinter forearm. I don't know why. As I said, I think the splinter looks a bit nicer but I wouldn't reject a gun that had a beavertail forearm just because of that. The price point in more important to me.

Splinter!¡!¡

I have never understood where the beaver-tail concept came from! I mean I like beaver and I like tail but the two together...

Didn't they come along in the 70's with Leisure suits???

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Doc, I would say the splinter on your VC 600 is a further step in the right direction from my rifle. Was yours built after mine? I know the rifle was built prior to mine but IIRC, you had a new set of barrels and forearm made in order to reduce weight? Scheduled delivery of mine was October 2012.

It just appears to me that yours represents further evolvement of the VC splinter, with it being even more slim in thickness (top to bottom) toward the muzzle end. I'd like to see a pic from directly below however as it appears it could still be thinner in relation to the width of the action and barrels. Looks like it still wraps around the barrels just a bit? In other words, if you view it from directly underneath, do you see barrels on either side, or does the fore-end still encompass the full width of the tubes?

I believe mine was finished up a few months after yours so that may be the reason.

As I recall, the wood does wrap around the barrels a bit.

As far as aesthetics, I prefer the splinter in Mac's first photo above to that in Ozhunter's first photo - which is too short to my eyes.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Splinter!¡!¡

I have never understood where the beaver-tail concept came from! I mean I like beaver and I like tail but the two together...

Didn't they come along in the 70's with Leisure suits???

Lane the beavertail forearm wood was a California thing among skeet shooters who fire courses of hundreds of rounds a day in practice and tournaments, where shotgun barrel got very hot. The styling went right along with early Weatherby’s CALIFORNECATOR stocks with roll over Monte Carlo cheek pieces, and thumb hole stocks of the Winslows. Leisure suits came much later, but people with the same taste bought them all!
..........................

The clay shooters in the UK, and Europe used the slide on hand guards and shooting gloves with splinter fore-arms.

Double rifles on the other hand were used for a quick one, two punch with a follow-up of another pair, all starting from cool barrels, and rarely fire more than six shots without the barrels being cooled. Even in practice or load development is to fire the first two from cool barrels, and two more quickly there after, then let the barrel cool before the next four. SO! There is no need for a ugly beavertail fore-arm or a reason to not hold the barrels on a double rifle.
......................................................................

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Mike:

I'm betting you can order a Heym with a splinter forearm but I sure wouldn't turn this gun down on the used market because of the beavertail forearm.

Here is another example of a perfectly proportioned beavertail forearm:

http://www.chapuis-armes.com/a...ne-agex-brousse.html

I like Chapuis doubles but they will not make a splinter forearm. I don't know why. As I said, I think the splinter looks a bit nicer but I wouldn't reject a gun that had a beavertail forearm just because of that. The price point in more important to me.

I have been wanting to order a Chapuis Brousse in .375 Fl, but if they won't built it with a splinter fore-end, then forget it. Double rifles cost too much to not get what you want.

Who cares which way it is, as long as I can get a splinter forend? It sure shouldn't cost extra though.

ozhunter, you have such nice classic rifles, I we ever met I'd kick you out of jealously before I shook your hand to say hello! Well done!

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Mike:
Here is another example of a perfectly proportioned beavertail forearm:

http://www.chapuis-armes.com/a...ne-agex-brousse.html

I like Chapuis doubles but they will not make a splinter forearm. I don't know why. As I said, I think the splinter looks a bit nicer but I wouldn't reject a gun that had a beavertail forearm just because of that. The price point in more important to me.

I have been wanting to order a Chapuis Brousse in .375 Fl, but if they won't built it with a splinter fore-end, then forget it. Double rifles cost too much to not get what you want.

In the first place there is no such thing as a perfectly proportioned beaver tail forearm!

If I wanted a Chapuis double rifle I would just order one, and tell them not to checker the forearm wood. I would then simply reshape the wood, checker it and finish it myself! Some times when you get lemons you need to make lemonade!

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

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:

In the first place there is no such thing as a perfectly proportioned beaver tail forearm!

I think Ken has his answer. At least in the USA, make the splinter the default forearm and the beavertail optional for those that want it. Perhaps in France they prefer the beavertail. Like most here, if I was ordering a new gun, I would probably order a splinter if it was available but if not, I wouldn't turn down a gun with a beavertail forearm. Must be obvious cause I own two Chapuis doubles and I think they are great guns.

I have been wondering since this thread started if are there are any mechanical reasons that might compel a beavertail forearm. Are beavertail forearms stronger perhaps or maybe the French resisted building something that looked so English? Maybe Ken can give us and answer.

I realize you will not be prone to shoot excessive rounds in a hunting situation. I can tell you when I was practicing last summer in July/August in Texas those barrels warm up fast. Way to hot to handle with bare hands. I have a Heym 88 and thought at some periods the forarm on it was not enough on a hot day with 10 rounds through it.
I have shot SXS shotguns over 40 years and I have two distinct guns. One type for shooting doves that has a slender beavertail and all the upland guns as splinters.
I HATE GLOVES! and those leather barrel sleeves are just something to loose and they do not feel right to begin with (IMHO).
Guess I should not shoot so many rounds in a fast mode.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:


Here is another example of a perfectly proportioned beavertail forearm:

No such thing in existence Dave!!

Goes right along with the Blaser S-2 two barreled abomination! (BTW, I finally figured out the meaning behind the S-2 designation ... "Shit 2" barrel design)

Lane, I'm with you sir. What would possess a man with good taste to even suggest putting those beaver tailed, ugly chunks of wood on a such a fine weapon as a double rifle? It's beyond my comprehension. The splinter is functional in getting the fore hand closer to the line of sight, making the double rifle superior in terms of pointability for that unmatched quick R/L (no, not L/R unless you're shooting a left hand DR [this means front trigger first BTW] ), in the same way a fine SxS shotgun points better than a Remington 870 or even a Browning A-5, both great functional guns, but not fine or "refined" guns. IMO, putting a beavertail forearm on a double rifle is "dumbing down" the overall design in general and is one step above a Single Triggered DR (oh, the horror ).

Just so no one misunderstands my point with all the sugar coating I've done here in this post, I prefer "splinter" fore-ends on double rifles! Just in case that wasn't clear!