16ga.com ~ View topic - the how and why of shotgun stock evolution further explored

Larry, 1-5/8 drop to comb is still not a lot of drop. In fact, many 12 ga guns still have that much drop to comb. My 12 ga Citori Lightning and field models have this much and they are not hard for me to hit with nor do I need to lift my face up to see over the block. However 1 -3/4" is gettting into that territory whereI have to liftmy cheek a bit to see over the back of the action. Having talked to a number of folks, this seems to be a common measurement.

One issue that is very hard to track is the amount of drop to comb on smaller gauge guns built on smaller frames. Today, its very common for smaller ga/frame guns to have less drop to comb.

I've measured the drop to comb on a number pre-1940 repeaters, especially Ithaca 37 pumps. The 16 and 20 ga guns show about 1-1/2 inch drop to comb. Even some of the 12 ga guns show less than 1-5/8 inch. These may or may not have been skeet models. However, I have no way of knowing this as I've yet to see one so designated.

However, this might be considered picking at the very fine points of the matter. I think I've come to an understanding of the how and why of shotgun stock evolution. It took a historian steeped in the lore of 17th and 18th Century fowling pieces to set me straight. I am lucky to have tapped into the right source. you mentioned the 97 pump gun. Was this a bird gun or a defence or trench gun? And when was it made? This might exlain the dimensions on this one.

Any other historical insights you might have are welcome. BTW, you've not mentioned your own preferences about stock dimensions. What do you prefer for drop to comb and heel. LOP, etc.? On doubles? on repeaters? gaugewise? Etc?

Well, you gentlemen have sure got me nervous. After reading all these posts on the right guns and the right way to shoot. I hope I can hit anything on my next trip up to the pheasant run. I've been hunting since I was a kid and that's sixty years ago. The only one I don't want to dissapoint is my dog. If I miss he knows and doesn't even go after the bird. When I knock one down, he's on it like stink on you know what. I know what are good guns for me. Maybe they won't suit you, but that's your problem. Your guns probably wouldn't suit me. I'm sorry but this has been beat to death.

Oldhunter, I generally welcome any informative info about guns, reloading, shooting, gun and hunting history, etc. I think Its good to learn about our past and to try to put it into perspective with how things are today. I've tried to gain some insight from your posts on the subject, but frankly, all you've seemed to do is attack the topic. That puzzles me.

All I've wanted to do is trace the history of how American shotguns came to be stocked the way they are and why they evolved differently than English double guns. It has puzzled me, especially since the two types have ended up so similar today.

I really do not understand your antagonized feelings about my quest to gain some insight into the past. Nobody has attacked you here. You are most certainly free to shoot what you want, how you want, were you want and when you want as long as it does not violate the law or anyone else's rights.

You are free to post whatever you want here as long as it is not overly offensive, or an unwarranted personal attack on one of your fellow members. You are free to disagree with anyone's opinion. We all do that from time to time. You are also free to just simply not read or follow any thread you find uninteresting. However, you seem to be caught up in this one, or you would not have posted in it so many times.

I shoot guns with modern lines, better than guns with some of the older, pre-1900 lines. Shotguns with more modern stock styles just fit me better. This does not mean I dislike old guns, or have not tried them. Far from it. To me, they are articles of our past. I love history. I love old things. I shoot old style muzzleloading rifles all the time, and I shoot them with cast lead, patched round balls or picket balls and hand measured charges of real black powder just like folks did back in the 17 and 18 hundreds. I do quite well with them and have taken my share of game and of awards and prizes with them too.

However, I don't find it offensive if the next guy shoots a modern in line, with replica powder and a saboted modern pistol bullet. Why should I? That is his right. By recognizing his right to and not trying to interfere with his doing so, I believe I am being a good American. Is that not our creedo-- freedom and a mutual respect for each other's right to pursue happiness as we will?

So please, if you would, tell me honestly why you find this search of mine into our past so offensive? What really has your tail in a knot? If you have found it so offensive, why do you keep posting here? Do you honestly think that I am hurting you some how or thqat you are compelled to take part? If so, please, tell me how and why?

Okay. You seem to imply that the skeet shooters and others shooting at clay pigeons have defined our shotgunning skills. I have shot skeet and do not enjoy it. I've also shot trap and do not enjoy that either. I'm not taking away from the people that do enjoy those things. Maybe I came on a little to strong. For that I apoligize. Nothing wrong for looking into history. I can't go back and ask my grandfather why he used the gun he did. I have the gun. My father used it and I have completely restored it. It's a sears pump made right after the first world war. Browning patent. Why did he use that gun? I will never know as he died right after I was born. Why did my dad use it? I'll never know that either. I started going in the field with my dad when I was probably 6 or 7 years old. I and my cousins walked between our dads. Never heard any of them mention dop or cast or doc. Just enjoyed hunting. I started my sons when they were 5 years old walking the fields. I had a farm at the time loaded with pheasants. I hunted with that old gun, then I bought an A-5 16, been hunting with it ever since. I hunted with one fellow used a model 12, another used an Ithaca 37, another used all browning superposed. Nobody mentioned DOH, lop, doc, we just enjoyed hunting. That is what I consider the history of huning and shooting. Going out with good friends and good dogs(although I consider all dogs good). To me the sport of shooting is a day in the field with good friends, nice dogs and good BS.

Joined: 18 Feb 2006 Posts: 52

Mr. Harris. I did write i a couple of the other posts on this subject. On was just apost on the drop at heel on my guns. I was told that didn't matter. Drop at comb was important. Well maybe as all my guns I shoot have the same drop at comb. The next post I did was in answer to an insinuation that all the old hunters were ground swatters. I posted the lesson I learned from my father while pheasant hunting as a young lad right after the second world war. I've carried that lesson with me to this day. The history of firearms is interesting and imprtant to this country. I think the only people that can tell us why the stocks have got straighter is the people that decided they should be.If a person wants to hold his cheek on the comb or if he wants to shoot straighter up is his choice. Boy have I ranted tonight. I do apologize to anybody that I've offended. My pup would apologize also, but I think he's got one of my boots.

Old hunter, you are free to hunt and shoot as you like. I would never say otherwise. I do shoot trap and skeet. I also shoot sporting clays and hunt with a shotgun much like you. However, I'd never get upset because someone doesn't shoot targets Why should I? Why should anyone?

When I said that in the past, folks shot game as they could, I was referring those folks who had to subsistance hunt for food to feed their families. This was long before conservation, game laws, and sport hunting. If you were to tell one of these folks back then that shooting a sitting duck was not right, he'd have looked at you like you had two heads, then either laughed at you, or would have run you off at gun point. It was the normal way to hunt back then. An 18th century flintlock fowler makes a darned poor wingshooting gun.

Even into the 20th century, there were times and places where folks had to shoot wild meat or go hungry. They could not afford to sport hunt, nor could they risk letting their families go hungry on a chancy wingshot. This was not sport hunting, nor was it wrong under those circumstances. Faced with the same situation, I'd have shot game on the ground rather than see my kids go hungry if it was the only way I could get food. Wouldn't you do the same?

We both are most fortunate that neither of us ever had to really want for food. Both of us learned the skills and had the guns available to us to shoot birds flying. We are now and always have been sport hunters. I for one will not condemn someone who was or is less fortuntate than I. Would You?

Perhaps you understand where I'm coming from now. history has taught me that times and how folks do things change. We have better guns and ammo today. People do shoot better today, because the better guns and ammo allow them to. These better guns evolved from many sources of influence and from many different folks' ideas. Both skeet and trap shooting and the lessons learned from those two shotgun games certainly had an inluence, but niether were they the only sources of influence. I don't think anyone said that.

Today very few Americans are poor enough and hungry enough to have to hunt wild meat. Even in you grandfather's and your father's time and place, they did not have to if what you tell us is correct. but this was not true for all folks in those times.

All I'm saying is that perhaps history might teach us to look beyond the end of our own noses, before looking down them at others or before we get upset at how other folks do things.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for you Bob L., seems like you've gone off half-cocked again. I will pass on the powdered donuts thanks, I like jelly donuts better. I think you have an agenda concerning old double guns and somehow, I've upset your apple cart. I don't know how, but then again, I'm not going to lose sleep over it. You are most welcome to rant as you see fit. It's still a free country. Wink

Member Joined: 26 Apr 2005 Posts: 743

Guy, I shoot an LOP of about 14 1/2", maybe a little less if I'm wearing winter clothing. I have a Brit 12 that measures 1 5/8 x 2 3/8, and a Parker Repro 28 that goes 1 7/16 x 2 1/4. For me, the more important measurement of the 2 seems to be DAH. I definitely don't like anything more than 2 1/2, and a bit less is better. Could be the higher measurements for the 28 work well because it's a smaller bore. I've heard that theory put forward previously.

The Model 97 figures I gave are for the standard grade gun--only one listed in the catalog I have. Interestingly enough, Model 42 measurements are 1 1/2 x 2 1/4, which are quite high--but then it's a 410. They don't list drop for the Model 12.

Factory stocks can certainly vary a bit, even though dimensions are supposed to be "standard". Dave Erickson and I once took two Merkel 1620's, laid them down next to each other. It was obvious that one had at least 1/4" more drop than the other.

I think the popular clay target game of the moment does have an influence on field guns. Right now, it's sporting clays, with a preference for longer barrels. Not so long ago, field doubles with 26" barrels were quite popular, especially in the smaller bores. Currently, the trend seems to be towards smallbore doubles with 28-30" barrels.

I can't add to the discussion on repeaters. Neither own nor shoot them. They are tools of the devil . . . unless you're in the military. Smile

Thanks Larry, I appreciate the info. As circumstances would have it, the dimensions on my Citori 12 ga. Lightning and hunting models are the same as on your English 12 ga double. English and American shotguns pretty much share the same stock dimensions now.

The smaller gauges I have all reflect less drop to comb and heel too. Tools of the devil or no, Laughing

even the repeaters have very similar dimensions as both O/U and SxS guns. This also applies for the smaller gauges here too.

Of course, LOP is the most commonly customized measurement for good reason. Even though most human males have very similaer facial dimensions, we vary considerably in height and arm length.

Perhaps that old 1897 Winchester was stocked with what then were traditional stock dimensions. However, I do not ever remember seeing a model 12 stocked like that. I can shoot even the oldest of them quite comfortably, at least the ones I've handled. good shooting to you Larry.

You know, about 2 pages ago I could have given my opinion on this matter: WHO CARES!!

Oldhunter, you and I came out of the same Shooting School!

My first (and only, for many years) shotgun was my dad's old Savage 16ga. 775a. I never heard stock dimensions discussed; as far as I knew they were all the same. My dad was about 5'8" and probably weighed 140 lbs. soaking wet. When dad shot it, birds fell. I'm about 6'0" and 200 lbs. but when I shoot it, birds fall (sometimes Very Happy

).

When I decided I wanted a double gun, my first was a 16 ga. Springfield (Stevens) 5100 from the 40's. Again, never worried about stock dimensions - too dumb, I guess. When I shoot it (and I still do), birds fall (same sometimes). When I decided I wanted a little better gun I settled on a 16 ga. Fox Sterlingworth. And guess what? When I shoot it...well, you know.

The reason? I go back to my dad's statement which I posted in another thread: Get a gun and learn to shoot it. It's fine to be interested in all this from an historical standpoint, but beyond that, WHO CARES!! People who obsess about this stuff need to expand their interests.

I spent 20 years+ in the music business, both as a performer and in retail. There were always folks who obsessed about their instruments: had to be the right brand, had to be adjusted just so, had to have all the right accessories, yada yada. They were looking for the easy way out; trying to get the instrument do their work for them. The best players could play anything and make it sound good. See any parallels here?

I better go; this is getting to be as long as one of 16GG's posts Laughing

!

Fin

I think you did Fin, about three pages back. Shocked

At least you haven't tried to sabotage the thread with an offer of powdered donuts. I don't mind expanding my understanding of shotguns and their history, but I've already overexpanded my mid region on my own without any outside help thank you very much. So many shotguns, so little time--and donuts too. Rolling Eyes

What did I do three pages back? Unless I missed it, there's no other post by me on the thread. I will take a donut, though Very Happy

!

I think it was in the first go round. However, I think that I lost track after all the overheated posts came flying in when I inferred that some of our ancesters might have shot birds on the ground or swimming a long time back.

I never realized in all my born days how many folks here had grandfathers and fathers that were excellent wingshots and used antique smoothbored flintlock and percussion muskets, fowlers, and foraging guns to do it with. Not only that but boy, did these guys lived a long life. Most would have had to be at least 150 years old and still spry enough to bird hunt back at in the late 1700's through the 1880's or so.

I guess those donuts really cut down your life span. You sure you still want one? Laughing

Reckon I'd shoot one on the ground too, if my eating depended on it! No dishonor in not starving to death, as near as I can figure.

I probably had some ancestors who shot those guns but I never met any personally; I'm old but I'm not THAT old! However, my granpa once claimed that he found several birds sitting on a fence (the species evades me); he figured he'd never get more than one with his shot, so he shoved the ramrod down the barrel and speared them all; that's about as close as I got. Never did ask him if the gun was stocked for shooting game on the ground, on a fence, or in the air Very Happy