Side by Side Club

[panoma1]

7 minutes ago, oldypigeonpopper said:

hello, nothing Feminine about that classic beautiful English shotgun, worthy on any game shooting day, let us know how you get on ?

Shame there’s no drop points! 

[oldypigeonpopper]

2 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

Shame there’s no drop points! 

hello, i am sure the seller can give you that info, i would try a cheeky £2,000 bid

[London Best]

1 hour ago, Dibble said:

 

This is on Guntrader, Roland Watson, 2 sets of barrels 2250 pounds. maybe a little Feminine? but I'm going to find out more

Looks gorgeous to me! 
Recent refurb? Maybe a little over polished? Breech pin not tightened properly.

[wymberley]

11 minutes ago, London Best said:

Looks gorgeous to me! 
Recent refurb? Maybe a little over polished? Breech pin not tightened properly.

Yep, and as Dibble says it needs looking into. Just one point and as said earlier it makes no difference - plus the fact that I'm probably wrong anyway - as hard as I've looked these old eyes can't see the line and the extractors look one piece.

[bruno22rf]

Top strap pin not correctly aligned either - not a good sign.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

It is SCREAMING!

[wymberley]

7 minutes ago, bruno22rf said:

Top strap pin not correctly aligned either - not a good sign.

Is that LB's breech pin by any chance? It certainly looks as though it's had to be tweaked. Again on the face of it, it's not a real problem but if the barrel sets have been reproofed to remove damage/pitting a reasonable amount of metal will have been removed to necessitate the test. No doubt Dibble will ask the relevant questions.

[Blackpowder]

3 hours ago, panoma1 said:

Shame there’s no drop points! 

I think drop points spoil the line of the stock, much prefer the smooth swept away effect as in pic.  But each to his own.

 

Blackpowder

[London Best]

1 hour ago, bruno22rf said:

Top strap pin not correctly aligned either - not a good sign.

Yes, your ‘top strap pin’ is called a ‘breech pin’.

[panoma1]

1 hour ago, Blackpowder said:

I think drop points spoil the line of the stock, much prefer the smooth swept away effect as in pic.  But each to his own.

 

Blackpowder

Yep! That’s one we’ll have to disagree on then 😀.....I really like the look of drop points.

[islandgun]

22 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

Much depends on the style you have 'adopted' for shooting.  My (sadly late) godfather was a fairly tall lean 'stringy' man, about 6'2 or 3".  He shot 28" barrels with quite short (for his height) stocks of 14 3/4" with a lot of cast.  He had been trained by the famous Percy Stanbury and was an exceptional shot.  However, his 'style' was quite unusual;  he followed the target with his barrels before and as he mounted the gun, firing the instant the butt came into his shoulder.  It was impressive to watch and all done so quickly.  He kept the left arm near straight and tended to shoot well 'out in front' of the line when shooting driven game.

His style depended on a very closely fitted and very light gun.  His guns (there was a set if 3 matched and numbered 1,2,3) were 12 bore 28"straight hand  - and weighed just 6lbs.

In his day one of the major sporting agents of the time described him as "the best game shot I have ever watched" in an article on all time shots.

If he handled a non fittied heavy gun (he tried my Beretta SO6 once) he did not get on at all with it, since his whole style depended on the light and very fast handling of his guns.

I understood that this was the Churchill style

[wymberley]

15 minutes ago, islandgun said:

I understood that this was the Churchill style

And we can toss Maj. JEM Ruffer and his rufferites into the pot.

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, islandgun said:

I understood that this was the Churchill style

I think in that they both use the 'mount phase' to get the barrels moving up the smoke trail' of the target - they are similar.  The difference (I think) is more in the stance/footwork, which in the Churchill style is very 'square on' with the weight on both feet, moving from left to right as needed.  Stanbury favoured weight on the left foot (always).  Both were I think a mount style swinging through from behind rather than 'maintained lead'.

[islandgun]

13 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I think in that they both use the 'mount phase' to get the barrels moving up the smoke trail' of the target - they are similar.  The difference (I think) is more in the stance/footwork, which in the Churchill style is very 'square on' with the weight on both feet, moving from left to right as needed.  Stanbury favoured weight on the left foot (always).  Both were I think a mount style swinging through from behind rather than 'maintained lead'.

From memory from my old book collection, Stanbury favoured the smoke trail style and follow through, whilst Churchill the eye on the bird follow with the barrels [subconsciously] then mount and fire, his idea was that momentum gave the lead. I would have liked some lessons from either

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, islandgun said:

I would have liked some lessons from either

Join the club!

[London Best]

Now that would have been something, to be taught personally by either of those gentlemen.

As a young teenager I was struggling to ‘shoot flying’ until I read Churchill’s book and tried to use his method. Just now and then I managed to make it work a bit and started to hit stuff ( now and then). Then I read Stanbury’s books and found his methods sometimes worked for me too.

Dunno what I do these days, perhaps a mix of methods depending on the type of shot offered. Sometimes it works.

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, London Best said:

perhaps a mix of methods depending on the type of shot offered. Sometimes it works.

I think I am much the same, but some things stand out as 'problems' and 'naturals';

1. If a bird is simply moving towards/away (i.e. no change of angle), I find myself tending to 'see' the gun (and focus on it rather than the target) and use it like a rifle ......... the result is a miss.
2. If I am caught unawares (such as watching someone else!) and suddenly see/have called a bird and have to rush like hell to get a shot - I actually shoot rather better than expected
3. A heavy long barrelled gun (I'm better with a lightish s/s) makes me slow - especially on crossers - and I struggle to catch up in time for where I want to shoot
4. I struggle with some single triggers - Beretta are OK, but some others I don't seem to relax enough between shots - and then in trying to remember - I upset the natural timing - hence I much prefer double triggers.  I have come to the conclusion that single triggers were invented by the devil.
5. I cannot shoot in 'over ear' muffs (the stock hits them with a loud 'clunk' which is very offputting and makes me shoot high) - so wear custom (EMT/Emtec) plugs

[Lord v]

New acquisition - English ejector named as W. Hensman, no serial number. No info online, I imagine a regional seller of trade guns? If anyone has any info it would be appreciated. 

Sleeved barrels, but that doesn't bother me. Seems to be a good job. Proof mark is 1974, but I assume this was from the sleeving as there are some older marks barely visible on the flats. I believe the stock also dates from the same time. 

Some decent engraving and chocolate brown barrels. 

Quite happy with it! 

Edited January 18, 2020 by Lord v

[Blackpowder]

1 minute ago, Lord v said:

New acquisition - English ejector named as W. Hensman. No info online, I imagine a regional seller of trade guns? If anyone has any info it would be appreciated. 

Sleeved barrels, but that doesn't bother me. Seems to be a good job. Proof mark is 1974, but I assume this was from the sleeving as there are some older marks barely visible on the flats. I believe the stock also dates from the same time. 

Some decent engraving and chocolate brown barrels. 

Quite happy with it! 

A good honest gun there hope you enjoy shooting it.

 

Blackpowder

[London Best]

17 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I think I am much the same, but some things stand out as 'problems' and 'naturals';

1. If a bird is simply moving towards/away (i.e. no change of angle), I find myself tending to 'see' the gun (and focus on it rather than the target) and use it like a rifle ......... the result is a miss.
2. If I am caught unawares (such as watching someone else!) and suddenly see/have called a bird and have to rush like hell to get a shot - I actually shoot rather better than expected
3. A heavy long barrelled gun (I'm better with a lightish s/s) makes me slow - especially on crossers - and I struggle to catch up in time for where I want to shoot
4. I struggle with some single triggers - Beretta are OK, but some others I don't seem to relax enough between shots - and then in trying to remember - I upset the natural timing - hence I much prefer double triggers.  I have come to the conclusion that single triggers were invented by the devil.
5. I cannot shoot in 'over ear' muffs (the stock hits them with a loud 'clunk' which is very offputting and makes me shoot high) - so wear custom (EMT/Emtec) plugs

Looking at some of your points from my own POV:

2, ditto, same here, and I expect the same for many people. 
3, ditto again, same here. I know many ( most even) prefer a heavy, long barrelled gun but, like you, my preference is a light SxS. I find shooting with heavy, long barrelled guns to be like dancing with a pregnant woman. And that from a man who, as a dancer, is a good prop forward. 
4, to be fair, I have never had any problems on the odd occasion I have had to use a single trigger. But I agree they were probably invented by the devil. I wouldn’t have one as a gift. 
5, every gun I ever shot hit my over ear muffs until I got my present game gun eight seasons ago. The fit is such that I tend to shoot it more head up and it works with muffs on. But I still use emtecs on game days.

Edited January 18, 2020 by London Best

[Old Boggy]

23 minutes ago, Lord v said:

New acquisition - English ejector named as W. Hensman. No info online, I imagine a regional seller of trade guns? If anyone has any info it would be appreciated. 

Sleeved barrels, but that doesn't bother me. Seems to be a good job. Proof mark is 1974, but I assume this was from the sleeving as there are some older marks barely visible on the flats. I believe the stock also dates from the same time. 

Some decent engraving and chocolate brown barrels. 

Quite happy with it! 

Nigel Brown's book states under regional 'gunmakers' -:

William Hensman, 19 Bridge St. Boston, Lincs c.1913-c. 20.

Hope that helps.

OB

[Lord v]

6 minutes ago, Old Boggy said:

Nigel Brown's book states under regional 'gunmakers' -:

William Hensman, 19 Bridge St. Boston, Lincs c.1913-c. 20.

Hope that helps.

OB

Brilliant thanks! 

[matone]

10 hours ago, Dibble said:

 

This is on Guntrader, Roland Watson, 2 sets of barrels 2250 pounds. maybe a little Feminine? but I'm going to find out more

Lovely example of a gunsmiths ability but in todays market ? Short barrels,short wood and very lightweight .You would have to really want to keep it at that price ,I think.

[Dibble]

45 minutes ago, matone said:

Lovely example of a gunsmiths ability but in todays market ? Short barrels,short wood and very lightweight .You would have to really want to keep it at that price ,I think.

The best thing about todays market is I can afford to buy it and keep it!

[Lloyd90]

On 17/01/2020 at 16:56, London Best said:

Yeah, I know there were ‘shorty’ guns around in the 19C, but it was definitely Churchill who, shall we say, accelerated sales. I’ve never owned a 25 inch but I’ve used either 26 inch or 27 inch as my main gun since about 1966. My present driven game gun is a 26 1/2 inch Royal Brevis, used for eight seasons now. Before that I was using a 26 inch Wiseman best box lock for 23 seasons and prior to that a 27 inch Derby Charles Rosson for 19 seasons. My rough/pigeon/ducking gun since 1975 is a 26 inch Spanish box lock ejector.

Your not that old to have done that many seasons 🤪