Something I saw on TV recently made me think of the age old argument of which is better to use, a bolt or a double. It seems to me that the main argument of the bolt crowd is longer range accuracy and more rounds "on tap". Now back to what I saw. I saw Craig Boddington and Wayne Van Zwoll (both highly experienced hunters and editors for outdoor magazines)having a competition of who could shoot 3 targets(small pumpkins) at 50 yds. Wayne had a bolt gun and Craig had a T/C single shot. They only fired three rounds in which Craig was MUCH faster. he was reloading from his belt which probably help 20 rds. SO it seems to me that the double is not only faster but also eliminates the "holds more rounds" theory, as a belt holds much more ammo than any gun. As for longer range, I hardly think that applies to dangerous game. As Jeff Cooper said "it is simply irresponsable to open hostilities at distances that would require match winning efforts". Opinions??