Small Bore Double Rifles

[CTDolan]

In my mind there would be nothing more wonderful and elegant than a O/U double, chambered in .303, made on the Boss platform. To my way of thinking the O/U goes better with small bores than a SxS. But, that's just me.

Of course, one main stumbling block with regard to doubles in small calibers is regulation. Not that they cannot be regulated (obviously) but that, generally speaking, a person is more apt to want to have a number of loads at their disposal. Whereas in a large bore (a stopper, if you will, the double's main reason for being) it's basically one load (solid or soft...same weight of bullet, same conformation, same velocity), in a small bore a shooter is in want of several loads. Further, small bore rifles tend to be shot at long range (or, longer ranges), which is again problematic for the double.

Were it me, I'd not be bothered by any of the above (one load, minute of grapefruit accuracy), but the market at large has come to expect something different (the whole matter of cost, aside). I am in agreement, though, @Velo Dog , were any of the major makers to adopt a small bore double, they'd be surprised by the demand. Truly, I think that if Bill Ruger were still alive he'd have one in the works, if not on the market, by now. Such was his way...make it, and they will come.

 

[CTDolan]

Further, any double rifle (ANY double rifle, large or small bore) with barrels shorter than 25" should not be allowed to pass proof, on the basis of it being sacrilege!!!

 

[spike.t]

Is the 9.3x74R really considered small?

well now charlie ....compared to my .470 double or my .500 jeffery possibly....

 

[Saul]

well now charlie ....compared to my .470 double or my .500 jeffery possibly....

Nothing compares to your .500 Jeffery!

 

[CAustin]

well now charlie ....compared to my .470 double or my .500 jeffery possibly....

Ok as I am uninformed how does it compare to the 416?

 

[spike.t]

Even the evidently quite popular 23.6 inchers from Merkel, are just a little short for a double rifle, IMO.

"That's my rant for the morning I guess."

Cheers,
Velo Dog.

nah...come on Mr VD keep having a rant....you know how i like short barrels.......

but yeah am with you on those o/u things....proper double rifles are s/s as we know.....

 

[spike.t]

Further, any double rifle (ANY double rifle, large or small bore) with barrels shorter than 25" should not be allowed to pass proof, on the basis of it being sacrilege!!!

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

 

[spike.t]

Ok as I am uninformed how does it compare to the 416?

416 to which cal here?

 

[CAustin]

The 9.3x74 to the 416

 

[spike.t]

Ok as I am uninformed how does it compare to the 416?

ok sorry in pemba and been for great seafood platter and lunch went on... so not up to scratch....charlie i presume you are asking about 9.3x74r to .416 rigby? mmm well my favourite 9.3x74r load is the rws 293 grn load but most companies the heaviest is 286grn ...so not sure on all the ballistic stuff but these go at approx 2250 to 2300 fps i think...not that bothered as i know they work , compared to the rigby with 400 or 410 grn if loaded to correct original weight going at around 2400 fps or just under ...that is as long as no speed fetishists have ballsed it up......so quite a difference but have shot buff with both and for some reason they didnt notice the difference

 

[Velo Dog]

In my mind there would be nothing more wonderful and elegant than a O/U double, chambered in .303, made on the Boss platform. To my way of thinking the O/U goes better with small bores than a SxS. But, that's just me.

Of course, one main stumbling block with regard to doubles in small calibers is regulation. Not that they cannot be regulated (obviously) but that, generally speaking, a person is more apt to want to have a number of loads at their disposal. Whereas in a large bore (a stopper, if you will, the double's main reason for being) it's basically one load (solid or soft...same weight of bullet, same conformation, same velocity), in a small bore a shooter is in want of several loads. Further, small bore rifles tend to be shot at long range (or, longer ranges), which is again problematic for the double.

Were it me, I'd not be bothered by any of the above (one load, minute of grapefruit accuracy), but the market at large has come to expect something different (the whole matter of cost, aside). I am in agreement, though, @Velo Dog , were any of the major makers to adopt a small bore double, they'd be surprised by the demand. Truly, I think that if Bill Ruger were still alive he'd have one in the works, if not on the market, by now. Such was his way...make it, and they will come.

Hi CTDolan,

I agree with you that, at least in our often fickle USA hand loading culture, many would probably expect a small bore double to do almost all things in almost all situations, especially regarding very fine accuracy and probably compatibility with multiple bullet weights / shapes / velocities and with various powders as well, just like you had mentioned.
At first I was one of these myself, and that's why I started out with my first double rifle in caliber .375 H&H, presuming I could adapt to many hunting situations with it.
I even had it claw mounted with a scope in the folly of my youth (aged only about 50 back then).
However, older and wiser now (well ........ older anyway), I am with you in that; "one rifle one load" is what I am most comfortable with, especially for double rifles.
Fact is, that's how I generally do with my repeaters and single shots anyway - one rifle, one load.
The only .303 Double I have ever fired was from a pre-war English maker but, I do not recall exactly which specific one anymore.
At that time, I could not name more than 2 or 3 English makers to begin with.
However, I do remember that according to the markings, (as the owner had proudly pointed out to me), it was regulated for "215 gr Ball", among other descriptors.
Additional marks indicated weight of Cordite (or possibly Axite), etc. as well.

He had some hand loads with 215 gr Woodleigh round nose bullets that, shot extremely well from either barrel.
Plus, I had brought along a box of factory Remington 180 gr "Core-Lokt" round nose softs (I have a WW-I era SMLE and it likes Remington 180 grain factory ammunition).
Amazingly, these 180 grainers also regulated perfectly from the little double, we presumed due perhaps to near identical projectile shape / velocity (?).
In reading up on double rifle particulars in more recent years, it appears that many times a double that's regulated for a heavy blunt bullet, will also regulate acceptably with a measurably lighter bullet, as long as it is pretty much the same shape and leaving the muzzles at the same velocity, as the heavier regulated bullet is / does.
Certainly there are other factors, such as primer heat, the propellant or powder's burning rate, perhaps others (such as if the shooter is holding his mouth just right at the moment of kaboomski).

And as for you Mr. Spike.T,

Yes I do know that you prefer short barrels (as does Mr. Cal Pappas) but I would presume that 21 inches is too much of an abbreviation, even for you two wild and crazy guys.
Monty Python should have done a segment on "Proper Measurements For Rifles and Guns", not unlike "The Ministry of Silly Walks".
In which they could have had a field day with all preferences, as they pertain to double rifle barrel lengths, pistol grip vs straight grip and so forth.
Blah, blah whatever (my damn glass is empty again).

Death to Moby Dick !
(and cheers),
Velo Doggenstein

 

[CTDolan]

@Velo Dog , I am of the same persuasion in that each of my rifles are subject to one load (and each running toward the heavy end, with regard to bullet weight...old fashioned in my philosophy, that way, I am, no doubt).

 

[CTDolan]

By the way, I have a lot more to say regarding your post but it'll have to wait. Sorry.

 

[Velo Dog]

By the way, I have a lot more to say regarding your post but it'll have to wait. Sorry.

Ruttroe.

 

[stug]

A small calibre double would be great to hunt with. I've nearly bought a 30/06 baikal a couple of times (probably the only double I'll be able to afford) but held off.
I remember reading a Capstick story about a cursed .303 double.
I agree with @Velo Dog that a double .303 would be wonderful to hunt with. I shot my first deer with a .303.

 

[IdaRam]

There is this 1905 vintage MacNaughton that might turn your crank. It has a bit of a non-traditional look I guess, but certainly fits the bill in all the other respects.
SxS, .303 British, 26" tubes, European (Scottish), nice length of pull, 8 lbs
Hey, what more could you want?
http://www.gunsinternational.com/gu...e-elegant-rare-exc-piece.cfm?gun_id=100400613

 

[IdaRam]

Or maybe this
http://www.gunsinternational.com/gu...ce-double-very-nice-case.cfm?gun_id=100391836

Of course, both are about $30K. With the double market the way it is, I bet a deal could be struck...
@BRICKBURN we may need a "devil on my shoulder" emoji

 

[Velo Dog]

There is this 1905 vintage MacNaughton that might turn your crank. It has a bit of a non-traditional look I guess, but certainly fits the bill in all the other respects.
SxS, .303 British, 26" tubes, European (Scottish), nice length of pull, 8 lbs
Hey, what more could you want?
http://www.gunsinternational.com/gu...e-elegant-rare-exc-piece.cfm?gun_id=100400613

View attachment 191233

It's a dandy but, too bad for me it's priced at pretty much 3x what I can afford.

 

[PeteG]

Or maybe this
http://www.gunsinternational.com/gu...ce-double-very-nice-case.cfm?gun_id=100391836

Of course, both are about $30K. With the double market the way it is, I bet a deal could be struck...
@BRICKBURN we may need a "devil on my shoulder" emoji

View attachment 191235

Now that 333 would go nicely...

 

[IdaRam]

It's a dandy but, too bad for me it's priced at pretty much 3x what I can afford.

Yeah, me too. I need to find me a sugar mama