Those thinking about buying a first double rifle

[DUGABOY1]

From the poll

#1 Double rifles are not very accurate Ray Atkinson 1 9.09%

#2 Double rifles are too expensive BangFlop, billrquimby, browningbbr, Calhoun, enysse, Michael Snyder II, Ray Atkinson, safari hunter, Thunder head, TOM 10 90.91%

#3 Double rifles are made to shoot accurate at only one range, usually short browningbbr, derekwest, Ray Atkinson 3 27.27%

#4 Double rifles use only iron sights derekwest, Ray Atkinson 2 18.18%

#5 Double rifles only come in large chamberings Ray Atkinson 1 9.09%

#6 Double rifles are simply not suited to North American hunting billrquimby, browningbbr, Ray Atkinson 3 27.27%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 11.

From the vote given by the members who voted we will see two things!

A, One voter voted for every excuse for not haveing a double rifle, and that vote was by someone who has owned, and used double rifles, for years, and had had good success with them on dangerous game. This is not suprizing to me because I have known this man for some years, and he uses his doubles according to his beliefs about them. What I mean by this is because of the way he believes doubles work, that is the way he uses them.

B, Because #3, #4, #5, and #6 are the most common misconceptions by most who do not understand the true way a double rifle is supposed to work, these four votes are no surprise at all to me, Though none are true.

The only vote that has some substance is #2 That says double rifles are simply too expensive, got a vote from everyone who voted. This too is subjective, and personal, but also not based on the actual worth because of the difficulty in the building of a workable double rifle, but on an individual's personal resources.

#1 and #6 Is false. PERIOD!

#2 has some legitimacy , when you can buy a rifle like the CZ 550 in good chamberings for less than $1K , while the cheapest dependable dangerous game double rifle will cost no less than $7K used, with no features above both barrels firing when the triggers are pulled.

# 1,3,4,5,and 6 are the result of old wives tales that have been printed in every gun rag ever printed, and repeated ad nausium, for years, many times by people who should know better. However that is the nature of man!, and nothing will usually change pre-concieved notions, and that is OK as well, because there is absolutely no mandate that says anyone is requires to own, or even consider owning a double rifle.

More later after some more discussion among the voters!:thumb:

 

[mbogobutch]

Those Thinking About Buying A First Diuble Rifle

Douga Boy 1

How important are ejectors...Thanks for all the great info...I've always wanted to own a Double...and all the info is fantastic!! Butch

 

[DUGABOY1]

Douga Boy 1

How important are ejectors...Thanks for all the great info...I've always wanted to own a Double...and all the info is fantastic!! Butch

Butch, I have double rifles with both, and there is no doubt the ejectors get the cases out of the rifle a little quicker, but they have thier draw-backs as well. The extractor rifle is quieter, and closed easier because the closing doesn't have to cock the ejector hammers. I have ejectors on my Merkel 140E, 9.3X74R double, and they are quick,but I usually do not use that rifle for dangerous game. My 470NE Merkel has extractors, and I find it almost as quick as the little 140E 9.3, because of the fact that the rifle closes so effortlessly.

I think you will find that most double rifles in large chamberings,especially the vintage ones will be extractor rifles, and the 9.3, and smaller doubles, especially the NEW ones will have ejectors, or at least be available with ejectors!

I don't believe a double rifle of either type is a handicap to it's owner, as long as the owner does his practice, re-loading the rifle under hunting conditions! :thumb:

 

[Skyline]

I was not going to wade in on this............but I will simply because I am on the damn computer answering e-mail and waiting for the dew to dry before I can bale.

#1 This is completely subjective and not worth spending much time on.
Accuracy and its definition is in the eye of the beholder and varies
enormously.

#2 Yes this has merit. Simple fact is that most can't afford a double rifle,
even a used one for 7K. Most can't afford a 5K bolt-action either. Period.
Those who think they can obviously are very far removed from Joe
average out there and what their annual income is.

#3 OK, well I think this is true with some doubles but certainly not with all
of them.

#4 We all know this is not really the case if we have had any exposure
to European hunters.

#5 Same as #4 but has a lot to do with mindset of NA's and what they
think a double is used for.

#6 Yes and no......certainly a double could be used for all North American big
game hunting, but that does not mean it is the most suitable for all types of
NA big game hunting.

No I do not think going on a feral hog hunt on a private ranch in Texas somehow proves the premise that a double is the weapon of choice for all North American hunting.

Up until recently seeing a $50,000 4x4 in someones driveway meant nothing more than they could get a loan or a lease.......which just about anyone could do. Lots of toys mean lots of loans and debt in most cases, not actual wealth. Most people have more than one all consuming interest in life and do actually need to have some of the equipment in order to enjoy those other pass times. No maybe not the fastest/newest/shiniest.....but you still need a boat to go fishing.

If one has a strong enough obsession, one can convince themselves that the purchase of anything is the right thing to do........even if it is not.

Most of us have a family and each member of the family has interests and somehow the significant others and things they want to do seems to get in the way of the one individual getting to do or buy anything they want.

I like doubles, I have shot them quite a bit.............but I do not own one. $10,000 on a double means 10K I do not have to go on hunts with. Yes I actually do need an ATV and a dependable 4x4, a boat and several other items. If I had a big income and was Joe suburbia with a paved driveway, hated fishing, didn't need to haul livestock in a trailer or use an ATV for ranch work, had a wife with no interests of her own that only wanted to go on holidays that revolved around hunting, actually had a motorists association that would come out in the middle of nowhere to get you out of the snowbank at -40..........yep, I'd have a nice double to gaze at in the gun rack for most of the year, shooting it at the range to impress the locals and drive a used Toyota Corolla.

 

[DUGABOY1]

I was not going to wade in on this............but I will simply because I am on the damn computer answering e-mail and waiting for the dew to dry before I can bale.

#1 This is completely subjective and not worth spending much time on.
Accuracy and its definition is in the eye of the beholder and varies
enormously.

#2 Yes this has merit. Simple fact is that most can't afford a double rifle,
even a used one for 7K. Most can't afford a 5K bolt-action either. Period.
Those who think they can obviously are very far removed from Joe
average out there and what their annual income is.

#3 OK, well I think this is true with some doubles but certainly not with all
of them.

#4 We all know this is not really the case if we have had any exposure
to European hunters.

#5 Same as #4 but has a lot to do with mindset of NA's and what they
think a double is used for.

#6 Yes and no......certainly a double could be used for all North American big
game hunting, but that does not mean it is the most suitable for all types of
NA big game hunting.

No I do not think going on a feral hog hunt on a private ranch in Texas somehow proves the premise that a double is the weapon of choice for all North American hunting.

Up until recently seeing a $50,000 4x4 in someones driveway meant nothing more than they could get a loan or a lease.......which just about anyone could do. Lots of toys mean lots of loans and debt in most cases, not actual wealth. Most people have more than one all consuming interest in life and do actually need to have some of the equipment in order to enjoy those other pass times. No maybe not the fastest/newest/shiniest.....but you still need a boat to go fishing.

If one has a strong enough obsession, one can convince themselves that the purchase of anything is the right thing to do........even if it is not.

Most of us have a family and each member of the family has interests and somehow the significant others and things they want to do seems to get in the way of the one individual getting to do or buy anything they want.

I like doubles, I have shot them quite a bit.............but I do not own one. $10,000 on a double means 10K I do not have to go on hunts with. Yes I actually do need an ATV and a dependable 4x4, a boat and several other items. If I had a big income and was Joe suburbia with a paved driveway, hated fishing, didn't need to haul livestock in a trailer or use an ATV for ranch work, had a wife with no interests of her own that only wanted to go on holidays that revolved around hunting, actually had a motorists association that would come out in the middle of nowhere to get you out of the snowbank at -40..........yep, I'd have a nice double to gaze at in the gun rack for most of the year, shooting it at the range to impress the locals and drive a used Toyota Corolla.

NOW! Sky has added at least ten other supposed REASONS to not own, and hunt with a double rifle, none of which has anything to do with whether a double rifle is suitable for hunting game in North America! There will be more I'm sure, and some of the REASONS offered by Sky, are some of the SO-CALLED reasons some site when asked why they think they can't afford a double rifle.

In Sky’s case he is a Rancher, and Outfitter in Canada, so those are legitimate reasons in his case, but not for the guy who wants one but doesn't need the things he buys anymore than he does a double rifle. Like the guy in Tenn. who lives in a single wide, with an out house in back, but has a $25,000 bass boat, and a $45,000 Big ford diesel Power stroke dually to pull it down the pavement that is twenty feet from his door. What Sky and I are both saying, I think is, the only drawback for owning a double rifle, IF YOU WANT ONE, is YOUR priorities. None of this has anything to do with whether a double rifle is suited for hunting anyplace. The only type of hunting where a double rifle is not suited is something like Mountain Goat, or sheep hunting, but for that matter most regular hunting rifles are not the best suited for that hunting either.

The one thing I would like an answer to is the statement that:

By Skyline
No I do not think going on a feral hog hunt on a private ranch in Texas somehow proves the premise that a double is the weapon of choice for all North American hunting.

..........

First off, nobody has said that the double rifle is the WEAPON OF CHOICE!

That is the whole reason for this thread, to find out why it is not more used here. Other than price, and the fact that most people do not understand them, there is no legitimate reason, IMO.

Instead my premise is that it is just as good as any hunting rifle for general hunting in North America, and is the only rifle type that started out as a hunting rifle, and has never been used for anything else! All others were first war weapons, that were pressed into service for hunting as well.

My question of Sky is, what has the land being privately owned have to do with the difficulty of hunting Feral Hogs, or any other animal? The whole state of Texas is privately owned, but that has nothing to do with the quality of hunting, only the access to hunters . There are only a few High fence game ranches in Texas, I must say are mostly utilized by folks from other places, a great many from Canada, but very few Texans. The fact that the land is privately owned has nothing to do with the double rifle being suitable for hunting in North America! It only has to do with a Texan’s difficulty in hunting in his own state, nothing more!
.............................:thumb:

 

[Skyline]

That was way too easy.

 

[Skyline]

You Texas boys are way too sensitive

Hunted in Texas once for aoudad in the Ft. Davis area, not behind high fence. It was like going to Hawaii in January. -40 at home and 65 down there. Keep looking for fair-chase axis and blackbuck but I think I will have to go to Argentina when I can swing it.

You can hunt anything with a double as long as you know your limitations. You would never catch me with one in some of the areas I guide in though. Way too hard on rifles, never mind something that costs as much as a new compact car. Somehow the thoughts of pounding a nice double around in a boat on a lake in the sub-arctic during caribou season in sleet, rain and snow just does not appeal to me. They are not particularly handy for packing in a scabbard on horseback either and not really what I would want, as you mentioned, on a mountain hunt or for pronghorn either.

Would not hesitate to use one for bear hunting or moose, even elk where I live. I sort of think a 9.3x74R would be ideal. Oh well, it is not to be.

I have guided a number of European hunters over the years for moose and black bear that brought doubles in that cartridge, also a few with drillings. It is all a matter of what you are use to.

 

[DUGABOY1]

I know what you mean about the treatment of rifles up there, and in Alaska as well. I have used my 9.3X74R double on caribou in September rains in costal Alaska but I have a homemade rain jacket for my rifles no matter the type. I think you would enjoy haveing a little 140E Merkel 9.3X74R, with ejectors, and a QD scope attachment. I don't think there is a better Moose, or bear rifle made, especially in the dryer parts of Canada, and Alaska. We at DRSS have several members from Canada, and Guides from Alaska who guide for bear with double rifles. The only two rifles I take to Alaska, or Canada, are the 9.3 double, or a whitworth African express 375 H&H with a synthetic stock, and Warne QD rings, and bases and 1.5-5x30 Leupold VIII scope with a lighted reticle.

You are correct about on horses, not many rifles are safe on a jug-headed horse, and a double is at much greater risk. However, North America has a lot of land, and in all climates of the world, and for at least 70 % of this land the double rifle type is simply a hunting rifle that requires no more care than any other rifle, I agree that the 9.3X74R double is the very best choice for North America, and mine has become my all time favorite rifle for the USA,Mexico, and Canada.

.................Good Hunting :thumb:

 

[BryceM]

Well, I don't know a durn thing about doubles, other than that someday I want to wander around Africa with one, but I'll throw out my two bits about NA hunting.

If I look back at all the hunting I've done over the past 28 years, I'd say there are a few situations where a double would have been fantastic. There are many more where a double wouldn't have worked well at all. I live in the West and hunt primarily mule deer, pronghorn, and elk. For pronghorn, long-range shots are the norm and calm days are few and far between. Even if you can get up close, you'll be better off with a gun that can reach out there to 300+ yds in case everything doesn't go to plan.

For mule deer, I've taken one at 20 yards, several at around 100 yards, and many more between 250-450 yards. Last year I saw a goofy 5x2 that I decided was "the one". I couldn't get any closer than 400 yards, but it was early on a nice calm, crisp fall morning and I had an absolutely perfect rest. Boom, flop. With a double I'd have been out of luck.

For elk, a double might be reasonable. I haven't taken too many, but I usually run into them either in heavy timber or out in open meadows. For still-hunting in timber a double would be fantastic. Come to think of it, the idea would be downright fun.

Back east, where 50-100 yard shots are the norm, on pig hunts, or for certain other situations I think one would be great for NA. It seems somehow "wrong" to put a scope on a double - sort of like putting with a 3 wood. Sure you can do it, and you might even get good at it, but the things are really made for different duties.

All of that aside, I still want to own one someday. They're way up there on the "cool" scale, they're not likely to be a bad investment, and I think it might be fun to poke a hole or two into a big buff or elephant someday. For that particular duty, I think holding two guns at one time would be a fantastic idea.

 

[ch_FM77]

Instead my premise is that it is just as good as any hunting rifle for general hunting in North America, and is the only rifle type that started out as a hunting rifle, and has never been used for anything else! .............................:thumb:

Big bore doubles were actually used in World War I. I have heard of them being used as anti-tank weapons. I have also heard an account of a 600 NE. double being used to take out German sniping positions. The soldier brought it with him to war and used it to shoot through the steel plates that the snipers used over their positions for protection. After he died, a fellow soldier tried shooting it in a prone position and ended up breaking his collar bone. So, yes they weren't mass produced for war, but they were used in war.

I am interested in double rifles, and would like to own one some day, but thought I would share this info. I know it is kind of a technicality, but they were used in war. Thanks for all of your info by the way, I agree with you on a lot!

Charlie

 

[George Morris]

First off let me thank you guys for the flowers, I'm not sure a person who spells like a grade school kid, has any business writing at all!

I don't know if there is a poll feature on this website but if there isn't one now would be fine time to install one!

I have a few questions that will tell me loads on the thinking of the rank&file here on the subject of double rifle. Which of these answers most suits your reason, or reasons for not considering a double rifle as you hunting rifle for all so-called big game hunting for North America?

#1 Double rifles are not very accurate!

#2 Double rifles are too expensive!

#3 Double rifles are made to shoot accurate at only one range, usually
short!

#4 Double rifles use only iron sights!

#5 Double rifles only come in large chamberings!

#6 Double rifles are simply not suited to North American hunting!

You may use one or all the reasons in you answers, for your replies. :thumb:

Note from Jerome:
I have created this poll for DUGABOY1 on a new thread, you can get to it by clicking here.

Great article. I will say numbers 2, 3, and 6 are the reasons people do not use doubles in the US. I have always wanted one, probably in 375HH but can only see use on bears, moose and very close quarters elk. Price is the biggest problem for me.
Thanks again.

 

[rookhawk]

Gents and unwashed heathens, (I'm totally kidding, lighten up!),


The reason this thread drags on with some intense replies is the double rifle is not a solution, it's a condition. I can throw out many similar statements that have interesting amounts of correlation (not 100%, but correlation)

Refusing to own high power scopes or taking really long shots on African hunts.

Wearing American camo.

Hunting behind high fence.

Choosing to hunt more animals in lieu of more pristine locations that cost more.

Buying a double rifle in lieu of a bolt gun.


Double rifles are lovely and if I needed to save my own skin I'd much rather have a double than any other weapon personally. But good reliable ones cost money. Why do we love them? The same reason the same people correlate to some of the other statements I made: its anachronistic. If you want to invoke Selby and Pondoro and Bell, you want all of these things. To some, HOW we hunt is of critical importance. It's no different than when I brought my fly rod to the Zambezi for tiger fish. I caught 3. The PH could not understand why I wouldn't use his conventional tackle that worked so well. The how matters to some. It matters to some a lot. A bit of purity in the latter case and a bit of bragging rights as surely less than 2000 people in human history have done what I've done, maybe a lot less.

Back to double rifles. If one is instinctive and proficient, it is the technically finest weapon in the world for working the Jess for duiker and Grysbok. It's the weapon best suited for close range dangerous game of size (maybe not cats). It's all about its resiliency, the speed of acquisition, the silence that protects you after the first shot without giving away your position if amongst a herd of elephant or Buffalo. It's also an amazing tool on driven boar and roebuck.

Is it necessary? No. Can most afford one? Yes, but they choose to prioritize other things. It's all about how much you'll pay for anachronism.

I waited 25 years for Africa so I can do it yearly with all the trappings: fine rifles, untouched lands, no fences, no cabelas camo, homemade biltong daily, natural conditions, challenging fair chase hunts. (27km stalk for my dugga?)

It's all okay. Not everyone is caught up in the same things. As long as the habitat, guides and arms remain available for people to choose to hunt traditionally then everyone can make their choices.

 

[rookhawk]

Another thought on anachronism: I think the double rifle indicates a maximum shooting range of close distances (interpret that how you wish). It says the hunter is not going to take a 600 yard "shoot" at an animal but instead an 80 yard "hunt". There is merit in that, it's bragging you're in that club and that way is important to you.

Is it important to all? No. That's okay too. We do not respect the virtue of voluntary exclusion or discrimination by virtue anymore. Private clubs, small circles of personal ethics fraternities and minimum standards to be in groups are actually quite acceptable in hunting. I have my standards, you have yours, we're both legal. You think I'm a pompous ass, I think you're a cretin hillbilly, we're both loving what we do!

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Another thought on anachronism: I think the double rifle indicates a maximum shooting range of close distances (interpret that how you wish). It says the hunter is not going to take a 600 yard "shoot" at an animal but instead an 80 yard "hunt". There is merit in that, it's bragging you're in that club and that way is important to you.

Is it important to all? No. That's okay too. We do not respect the virtue of voluntary exclusion or discrimination by virtue anymore. Private clubs, small circles of personal ethics fraternities and minimum standards to be in groups are actually quite acceptable in hunting. I have my standards, you have yours, we're both legal. You think I'm a pompous ass, I think you're a cretin hillbilly, we're both loving what we do!

I dare say I will never pick up a rifle to hunt elk again. I've killed elk with a rifle and I've had my fill of that. Archery hunting for elk in the September rut is an experience I will never tire of. The challenge of getting close, the song of a love sick bull elk. It just can't be compared to a November rifle hunt.

I live in Arizona now, but I do hope post retirement I will be able to return to my love of fly-fishing for trout. If you were to ever catch me throwing a hook and worm, and worse yet if it included a bobber in the rig, please do me a favor and hit me real hard upside the head and pray that brings me back to sanity. Again the challenge of casting a fly tied by myself to a wary trout in slow clear water and managing to fool the fish into taking my offering.......there just isn't any other way that I would be happy catching a trout.

I choose to hunt elk and fish for trout in these manners because its what brings me great satisfaction. I couldn't care less that it puts me into some sort of club or brings me bragging rights. When I'm succesful in those endeavours it actually only wants me to share the experience so that other hunters/anglers who haven't chosen my way will give it a go and experience it for themselves.

With all due respect, I think there's more than enough elitism and private groups within the greater hunting fraternity. It is such elitism and the desire for bragging rights that has caused an awful lot of shit at SCI and been to the club's detriment and hunters as a whole. Furthermore this same perception of elitism amongst hunters of African game is what keeps many from joining our ranks. I believe again this is to the detriment of us all.

I don't mean to come across as having an issue with you, but if I was on the outside lookin in on this thread, I'm not sure I'd want to "join the club" as it were.

 

[rookhawk]

@PHOENIX PHIL I hear what you're saying but I think there is some political correctness that is killing sport, politics, every facet of life really.

Tolerance has now become equal to Acceptance.
Inclusion is required in every facet of life.
The mantra of all lobbies is that we must have a big tent so as to not tear down our cause.
Discrimination of ANY sort is unacceptable. (I prefer to say race, creed, color, orientation are unethical discrimination, but discrimination by virtue and interest should be the norm)

I miss the days of discriminating tastes. (remember that compliment?) The idea that I can go one path and another hunter can go a different path, both legal, but I don't have to like it? That I can find some sorts of hunting distasteful and some methods of harvest unsporting, yet leave others to their own designs? I can no longer "tolerate" a big tent of hunters advocacy but I must now "support/accept/embrace" such notions.

The dangerous slope of too much acceptance and too little peer pressure for higher standards. We end up with the lowest common denominator of behavior, values and virtues with this thinking. I appreciate the fact that there are clubs I cannot join and that there are clubs that will not have me. Association of like minded sportsman should be as free as association of like minded political thinkers.

Do I really have to like everybody and everything or else I'm an elitist? I'll stick with the double rifles and the anachronism as the HOW is really important to me.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

@PHOENIX PHIL
Do I really have to like everybody and everything or else I'm an elitist? I'll stick with the double rifles and the anachronism as the HOW is really important to me.

I truly hope to join you someday as a DR owner and hunter. But I'll do so as that is what I want to do and not for any other reason than that. No you don't have to like everybody or how they hunt and that certainly doesn't make you an elitist.

For the life of me I can't imagine again dunking a worm to catch a trout, but I really don't care if it's your thing. So while I wouldn't agree with you on how to properly enjoy catching a trout, I wouldn't look down my nose at you either. I just wouldn't fish with you.

I would say the threshold of elitism is crossed when you cause someone to think you're a pompous ass or think others are hillbilly cretins because they don't share the same views as you.

 

[Newboomer]

Very interesting thread. I can relate to both sides and let me throw out some "cliches" if I may: To each his own. Whatever works for you. If it feels good, do it. Do your own thing. Whatever floats your boat, ad nauseam.

Everyone has their likes, dislikes, and preferences. This would be a helluva boring world if everyone had the same. Variety makes the world go round as is witnessed by all the different brands, models, styles, etc. of everything you can name. If we all liked the same thing there would be no businesses to cater to our wants and needs, no variety to choose from, no differences of opinion, no discussions of pros and cons, no politics (which might be a good thing).

We are all individuals and we all have our opinions on everything. That's what makes life interesting and fosters progress--the ability to conceive an idea and bring it to fruition. This post may not be directly related to double rifles but it rather illuminates the differences we all share.

BTW, I have always had a fascination with doubles and drillings, even though I probably will never own one. Closest I came was a Savage O/U in .22/.410.

 

[Shootist43]

I love all kinds of firearms. I have bolt action repeating rifles, semi-automatics, single shots, a combination gun, a drilling, side by side and over & under shot guns. What I don't have is a Double Rifle. I almost bought one about 10 years ago in 375 H & H but couldn't get together on price. If I owned one I would probably take it hunting, but unless I was taking it to Africa for use on DG it would probably not be my favorite hunting rifle. At 73 a DG hunt is probably not in my "cards" but a nice double would be a welcome addition to my collection.

 

[Red Leg]

I love all kinds of firearms. I have bolt action repeating rifles, semi-automatics, single shots, a combination gun, a drilling, side by side and over & under shot guns. What I don't have is a Double Rifle. I almost bought one about 10 years ago in 375 H & H but couldn't get together on price. If I owned one I would probably take it hunting, but unless I was taking it to Africa for use on DG it would probably not be my favorite hunting rifle. At 73 a DG hunt is probably not in my "cards" but a nice double would be a welcome addition to my collection.

I'm right behind you partner. We are at an age where accumulation of anything, other than new experience, is something of a waste of resources. Go hunt that buffalo, and cherish every moment.

 

[edward]

as a handgun hunter i own only one rifle,a sabatti 9.3 x 74r double.at 73 when i bought it my open sight performance was nothing to brag about.so i put an srs1 trijicon red dot on it.1 3/4 moa dot.long story short at 264 yards i hit a sitting coyote size rock with both barrels less than 2 inches apart,about 3 inches low from a dead on hold on a patch of moss 4 inches big.would i use it on 200 yard shots on plains game,you bet.just my two cents.