What country hasn't used hounds in the pursuit of game? Birds squirrels rabbits hares fox coyote wolf cougar hog bear deer and moose have and are hunted with dogs across the hunt able world
The allure of the British gun
- Thread starter Pinfire
- Start date
Yeah, cage grown foxes make for a great challenge
Not to put too fine a point on your stupidity, but fox hunting has nothing to do with shotguns. Or anything that has been discussed here in this thread.
Can you show us on the doll where the nasty English lord touched you?
You may want too, as I've never hunted cage grown foxes with 3 dozens of horses and dogs.
Right. And I haven’t free solo’d El Capitan. What does fox hunting, have to do with a discussion about shotguns.
Last edited:
You may look into the British Allure of the Gun and what them used them for at this "allured time period".
I'm not going to do your research, just sayin'...
Take care rivers do rest.
I’m not defending fox hunting. But the deal is, it’s the hounds that kill the fox. You keep barking up the wrong tree.
You clearly have some axe to grind that has nothing to do with anything but you. Certainly not anything in this thread. Your behaviour here is classic troll. I may, for the first time in almost 20 years, ask a mod to clean up the parts you polluted.
Last edited:
sillymike
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Ok, how did a discussion about shotguns turn into a discussion about royalty, or a nations past actions?
- using this logic, we probably not discuss French/German/Russian/Italian/American guns... because at one time or another, they all did bad things...
I was going to make a joke about the difference between conservative and liberal, when they don't like something... but I wouldn't want to derail the thread.
So lets get back to talking about excellent craftsmanship...
- using this logic, we probably not discuss French/German/Russian/Italian/American guns... because at one time or another, they all did bad things...
I was going to make a joke about the difference between conservative and liberal, when they don't like something... but I wouldn't want to derail the thread.
So lets get back to talking about excellent craftsmanship...
Sillymike, is that a 25" Churchill? What a beauty!Ok, how did a discussion about shotguns turn into a discussion about royalty, or a nations past actions?
- using this logic, we probably not discuss French/German/Russian/Italian/American guns... because at one time or another, they all did bad things...
I was going to make a joke about the difference between conservative and liberal, when they don't like something... but I wouldn't want to derail the thread.
So lets get back to talking about excellent craftsmanship...
Scalloped-back action, Smith self-opening system, beautiful decoration, I'm in love...
I expect that's why apprenticeships were usually 7 years or more. Apprentices would have to prove to their master that they are capable of doing the work flawlessly, before being unleashed on a commission where mistakes would be costly to fix. For engraving, I'm sure there are many tricks to cover up or disguise minuscule errors and tiny overruns that would require a lens and a careful eye to spot. Part of the magic is the occasional imperfection, and that's why laser-etching lacks soul. I think it would be much harder to correct a mistake on a game scene, than on repetitive scrolls and borders. It must have happened, though, leading to a shortened career path?
I feel the same way about inletted stocks. I'm in awe of stockers.
The one post a page or two back was epic
Licensed to kill
CGN Regular
- Location
- Peace Country Alberta
I’ve seen a few better guns with mistakes in the engraving. Some mistakes can be fixed ( by slightly modifying the design) most are just left as is. In regards to inletting, there are a few ways to correct an “oops” depending what that “oops” is but corrections can be anywhere from easy to fix to impossible but most fixes are not a big deal. Checkering is the one operation that pretty much HAS to be perfect first try because most mistakes on checkering are unfixable.
The engravers are like monks and their hand-written manuscripts
Still convalescing, and thinking about earlier posts and commentary, as one does when mobility is limited.
Hunting is humankind’s most ancient pursuit, despite our being ill-equipped for it. We’re slow and weak compared to other predators, but we’re tool-makers, a game-changer in the long run. We tailor tools for different tasks, including the guns we use. Continental sportsmen favoured walked-up shooting, so guns were naturally equipped with carrying slings. German hunters hunted feathered and four-legged game concurrently, so craftsmen created ‘drillings,’ and far-flung hunts in game-rich lands called for ‘cape’ guns for ball and shot. North American hunting was always a ‘meat for the table’ affair, and mechanical repeaters ruled, and continue to rule, be they pumps or autoloaders. Two-shot guns are seen today as seriously old-fashioned and antiquated, unless the barrels are stacked instead of side by side, a distinction which seems quite odd to me.
Guns in Britain, and yes, I’m staying on topic, have also evolved according to the species of game and styles of shooting. I use the term ‘shooting’ here because in Britain, hunting is something you do with horses and hounds, and taking game with a gun is shooting. As for the species sought in Britain, there is the native Grey partridge, and the Red-legged partridge, a Mediterranean species introduced to Britain in the 17th century. In the grouse family, there is the Black grouse (which has other names that can’t be spelled on CGN), which I find reminiscent of Ontarian Spruce grouse, and the Capercaillie, a 7kg monster, found in northern Britain (though only about 500 birds are estimated to still survive in Scotland). The famed Red grouse of Scottish heather and moors is a close relative of the Willow ptarmigan. The common, or Ring-necked pheasant, was introduced to Europe by the Romans and brought to Britain by the Normans in the 11th century. Other species that fell to the gun included snipe, woodcock, wood pigeon, an array of long-legged shorebirds and plovers, ducks, geese, swans, and many more. And the choice of game determined the choice of gun, the barrel bore and length, and pellet size, much as we do today. Whereas we might choose different field and magnum loads, the Brits chose different gauges, which is why guns included 4-bores, 6-bores, 8-bores, 10-bores, 12-bores, 14-bores, 16-bores, and so on. The fact that there was a vast range of target species at the time the game gun was in full evolution mode is the reason there was much variety in forms and systems, the best of which were later copied by other countries.
Some impacts on gun choices were subtle. A muzzle-loader needed to have its butt on the ground for reloading, and the breech-loader did not; for shooters in a wet environment going after snipe, the choice was clear. For partridges, a 14- or 16-bore was sufficient, and the 12 was an all-rounder, as it is today. The speed of the driven shoot necessitated quick-loading guns, sturdy snap-actions, and preferably pairs of guns and a loader (the latter usually being one’s manservant, reflecting the class nature of shooting in Britain).
The standard pin-fire game gun was intended for pheasant, partridges and grouse. With it came the driven shoots, for which it was ideally suited in terms of weight, balance, and form. A good reason why the few that have survived are in a ‘pitted, pityful [sic], rusted state,’ is the hard use they were put to. And in pointing out changing perspectives on sportsmanship, CGN-er Riversrest is not wrong. The great Edwardian shoots, in the tongue-in-cheek words of one author, provided the opportunities of a WWI machine-gunner, but with an infinitely better lunch (!). In the search for bigger ‘bags,’ sportsmanship, civility, and ecological principles took a decidedly nasty turn. By this time, the sidelock and boxlock hammerless ejector ruled, though hammer guns, and even pin-fires, would still have been in the field. Prominent ‘shots,’ as sportsmen were then known, kept excellent records of individual days, and also annual totals. For instance, Lord Burnham and his guests shot 3,937 pheasants on December 18, 1913, surpassing Lord Nunburnholme’s tally of 3,824 on December 5, 1909. Lord Leicester’s party shot 1,671 partridges on the Holkham estate on 7 December 1905. As for the noble Red grouse, Lord Sefton and friends shot 2,929 birds at Littleton on 12 August 1915, surpassing R. H. Rimington-Wilson’s tally of 2,843 birds at Broomhead on 27 August 1913. Individual numbers could be high, as Lord Walsingham himself shot 1,070 grouse on 30 August 1888. Birds weren’t the only quarry; on 1 October 1898 at Blenheim, the Duke of Marlborough and his fellows shot 6,943 rabbits, in addition to the feathered game. As to yearly numbers, the 2nd Marquess of Ripon’s personal totals for 1882 included 3,025 grouse, 2,123 partridges, 2,370 pheasants, 21 snipe and 44 ducks. The year must have included a trip to Asia, as he also bagged two rhinoceroses and two tigers (the latter being a step down from the nine tigers he bagged in 1880). In his shooting career, the Marquess shot a total of 241,224 pheasants. Not surprisingly, he was known to use a trio of guns, with two loaders, explaining bags of 2,006 grouse, 7,002 partridges and 6,498 pheasants in 1890, and 2,179 grouse, 2,019 partridges and 8,647 pheasants in 1906. For those interested in challenging game, you’ll be happy to know the Marquess took down 229 woodcock and 462 snipe in 1874, his best year for those difficult targets. Guns were used hard, and game-bird husbandry and wild-bird management required much-needed improvement.
All posts need pictures, so here is an interesting one. It is an 8 lb 3 oz 10-bore pin-fire from James Woodward of London, made with parts from a Charles Moore percussion pellet-lock, sometime after 1862. In 1827, Charles Moore promoted the "isolated" or "bar-in-wood" lock. Such locks are found on his pellet-lock guns, which pre-date the copper percussion cap, and which were favoured for waterfowling due to their dependable ignition in wet conditions. It appears that this gun was built by Woodward, using Moore isolated locks that were fitted and adapted to a breech-loading action, with parts taken from unsold stock or a gun returned to the maker. The 30 11/16" twist barrels suggest an early date and may have also been adapted from a Moore gun. Another clue to the mixed origins of the gun is that the style of engraving on the lock plates is different, featuring a more open foliate design rather than the tighter scroll found elsewhere on the gun. 10-bores were popular for waterfowling and competitive pigeon-shooting. Charles Moore and James Woodward were partners at 64 St. James Street between 1843 and 1848. When Moore died in 1851, the firm's name was changed to James Woodward, and it became James Woodward & Sons in 1872.
As to odd-sized guns (by modern standards), here is a 14-gauge pin-fire by Edward Paton of Perth, Scotland:
And a 14-gauge central-fire gun by Charles Lancaster of London. My local Canadian Tire is all out of 14-gauge shells, I’m afraid.
Hunting is humankind’s most ancient pursuit, despite our being ill-equipped for it. We’re slow and weak compared to other predators, but we’re tool-makers, a game-changer in the long run. We tailor tools for different tasks, including the guns we use. Continental sportsmen favoured walked-up shooting, so guns were naturally equipped with carrying slings. German hunters hunted feathered and four-legged game concurrently, so craftsmen created ‘drillings,’ and far-flung hunts in game-rich lands called for ‘cape’ guns for ball and shot. North American hunting was always a ‘meat for the table’ affair, and mechanical repeaters ruled, and continue to rule, be they pumps or autoloaders. Two-shot guns are seen today as seriously old-fashioned and antiquated, unless the barrels are stacked instead of side by side, a distinction which seems quite odd to me.
Guns in Britain, and yes, I’m staying on topic, have also evolved according to the species of game and styles of shooting. I use the term ‘shooting’ here because in Britain, hunting is something you do with horses and hounds, and taking game with a gun is shooting. As for the species sought in Britain, there is the native Grey partridge, and the Red-legged partridge, a Mediterranean species introduced to Britain in the 17th century. In the grouse family, there is the Black grouse (which has other names that can’t be spelled on CGN), which I find reminiscent of Ontarian Spruce grouse, and the Capercaillie, a 7kg monster, found in northern Britain (though only about 500 birds are estimated to still survive in Scotland). The famed Red grouse of Scottish heather and moors is a close relative of the Willow ptarmigan. The common, or Ring-necked pheasant, was introduced to Europe by the Romans and brought to Britain by the Normans in the 11th century. Other species that fell to the gun included snipe, woodcock, wood pigeon, an array of long-legged shorebirds and plovers, ducks, geese, swans, and many more. And the choice of game determined the choice of gun, the barrel bore and length, and pellet size, much as we do today. Whereas we might choose different field and magnum loads, the Brits chose different gauges, which is why guns included 4-bores, 6-bores, 8-bores, 10-bores, 12-bores, 14-bores, 16-bores, and so on. The fact that there was a vast range of target species at the time the game gun was in full evolution mode is the reason there was much variety in forms and systems, the best of which were later copied by other countries.
Some impacts on gun choices were subtle. A muzzle-loader needed to have its butt on the ground for reloading, and the breech-loader did not; for shooters in a wet environment going after snipe, the choice was clear. For partridges, a 14- or 16-bore was sufficient, and the 12 was an all-rounder, as it is today. The speed of the driven shoot necessitated quick-loading guns, sturdy snap-actions, and preferably pairs of guns and a loader (the latter usually being one’s manservant, reflecting the class nature of shooting in Britain).
The standard pin-fire game gun was intended for pheasant, partridges and grouse. With it came the driven shoots, for which it was ideally suited in terms of weight, balance, and form. A good reason why the few that have survived are in a ‘pitted, pityful [sic], rusted state,’ is the hard use they were put to. And in pointing out changing perspectives on sportsmanship, CGN-er Riversrest is not wrong. The great Edwardian shoots, in the tongue-in-cheek words of one author, provided the opportunities of a WWI machine-gunner, but with an infinitely better lunch (!). In the search for bigger ‘bags,’ sportsmanship, civility, and ecological principles took a decidedly nasty turn. By this time, the sidelock and boxlock hammerless ejector ruled, though hammer guns, and even pin-fires, would still have been in the field. Prominent ‘shots,’ as sportsmen were then known, kept excellent records of individual days, and also annual totals. For instance, Lord Burnham and his guests shot 3,937 pheasants on December 18, 1913, surpassing Lord Nunburnholme’s tally of 3,824 on December 5, 1909. Lord Leicester’s party shot 1,671 partridges on the Holkham estate on 7 December 1905. As for the noble Red grouse, Lord Sefton and friends shot 2,929 birds at Littleton on 12 August 1915, surpassing R. H. Rimington-Wilson’s tally of 2,843 birds at Broomhead on 27 August 1913. Individual numbers could be high, as Lord Walsingham himself shot 1,070 grouse on 30 August 1888. Birds weren’t the only quarry; on 1 October 1898 at Blenheim, the Duke of Marlborough and his fellows shot 6,943 rabbits, in addition to the feathered game. As to yearly numbers, the 2nd Marquess of Ripon’s personal totals for 1882 included 3,025 grouse, 2,123 partridges, 2,370 pheasants, 21 snipe and 44 ducks. The year must have included a trip to Asia, as he also bagged two rhinoceroses and two tigers (the latter being a step down from the nine tigers he bagged in 1880). In his shooting career, the Marquess shot a total of 241,224 pheasants. Not surprisingly, he was known to use a trio of guns, with two loaders, explaining bags of 2,006 grouse, 7,002 partridges and 6,498 pheasants in 1890, and 2,179 grouse, 2,019 partridges and 8,647 pheasants in 1906. For those interested in challenging game, you’ll be happy to know the Marquess took down 229 woodcock and 462 snipe in 1874, his best year for those difficult targets. Guns were used hard, and game-bird husbandry and wild-bird management required much-needed improvement.
All posts need pictures, so here is an interesting one. It is an 8 lb 3 oz 10-bore pin-fire from James Woodward of London, made with parts from a Charles Moore percussion pellet-lock, sometime after 1862. In 1827, Charles Moore promoted the "isolated" or "bar-in-wood" lock. Such locks are found on his pellet-lock guns, which pre-date the copper percussion cap, and which were favoured for waterfowling due to their dependable ignition in wet conditions. It appears that this gun was built by Woodward, using Moore isolated locks that were fitted and adapted to a breech-loading action, with parts taken from unsold stock or a gun returned to the maker. The 30 11/16" twist barrels suggest an early date and may have also been adapted from a Moore gun. Another clue to the mixed origins of the gun is that the style of engraving on the lock plates is different, featuring a more open foliate design rather than the tighter scroll found elsewhere on the gun. 10-bores were popular for waterfowling and competitive pigeon-shooting. Charles Moore and James Woodward were partners at 64 St. James Street between 1843 and 1848. When Moore died in 1851, the firm's name was changed to James Woodward, and it became James Woodward & Sons in 1872.
As to odd-sized guns (by modern standards), here is a 14-gauge pin-fire by Edward Paton of Perth, Scotland:
And a 14-gauge central-fire gun by Charles Lancaster of London. My local Canadian Tire is all out of 14-gauge shells, I’m afraid.
Last edited:
?????
What's your major malfunction? If you don't agree with the premise of the thread, move on. No one here is particularly interested in mudslinging. Lots of threads going down that road on CGN. Please refrain from ruining this one.
