Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact
NitroExpress.com: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing?

View recent messages : 24 hours | 48 hours | 7 days | 14 days | 30 days | 60 days | More Smilies


*** Enjoy NitroExpress.com? Participate and join in. ***
You are not logged in. [Login] Main Index · Search · Active Topics
New user · Who's Online · FAQ · Calendar

Double Rifles, Single Shots & Combinations >> Double Rifles
Previous topic Previous   View all topics Index   Next topic Next   Threaded Mode Threaded  

Pages: 1 | 2 | >> (show all)
NitroXAdministrator
.700 member


Reged: 25/12/02
Posts: 39321
Loc: Barossa Valley, South Australi...
Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing?
      #222124 - 22/12/12 01:33 AM

One of the absolutes we often hear stated on the internet, on a double rifle are the bullet paths from each barrel designed to cross or (in theory) run parallel?

What do you think, which is correct?

Please respond and join in.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DarylS
.700 member


Reged: 10/08/05
Posts: 26619
Loc: Beautiful British Columbia, Ca...
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: NitroX]
      #222141 - 22/12/12 03:34 AM

With parallel regulation the sights could be counted on at all ranges.

If the bullets shoot into a single group, ie: crossing to impact at a given range, at further ranges, the impacts will be diverging from the line of the sights, shooting further and further apart depending on the range.

In 1850, W. Greener wrote that wrote the bores should be made to converge (cross) at a given range, be it 50 yards or 100yards as the only other alternative was that they diverged and different sighting would have to be made for each barrel when shooting at any range. for all intents and purposes, over normal ranges to shoot together at 50 or 100yards would be perfect for most people as they'd be shooting bore axis apart at 100 or 200yards, THEN divergence would take place further out where few tread.

In 1860, Lt. J. Forsyth wrote that W. Greener's premise that the bores would shoot either crossing or diverging was incorrect.

Forsyth noted that perfect regulation was attained when the impacts of each barrel were perfectly parallel - equal distance apart at all ranges, so that the 'sights' would always give virtually the proper point of impact for each barrel. The centre of the individual barrel groups being only bore axis to bore axis apart, thus no holding off would be necessary no matter the range.

In reality, for the bores to shoot very close at 100 or 200yards would probably suffice today for most people.

--------------------
Daryl


"a gun without hammers is like a Spaniel without ears" King George V

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
AkMike
.416 member


Reged: 19/11/05
Posts: 2576
Loc: Anchorage, Alaska
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: DarylS]
      #222153 - 22/12/12 06:53 AM

Parallel!
Folks on the net don't understand what a distance regulated at means. They think it's where the bullets cross.

--------------------
"When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing; when you see that money is flowing to those who deal not in goods, but in favors; you may know that your society is doomed." Ayn Rand

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
doubleriflejack
.333 member


Reged: 11/11/07
Posts: 352
Loc: Oregon, U.S.A.
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: NitroX]
      #222154 - 22/12/12 07:00 AM

Anybody who has done shotgun to double rifle conversions successfully, including regulating the barrels, knows for certain, without doubt, that a properly regulated double rifle will NEVER HAVE BULLETS CROSSING AT ANY RANGE; BUT WILL HAVE bullets traveling parallel to reasonable range for caliber involved. In gunsmithing school, I took class from W. Ellis Brown, on converting shotguns to double rifles, and have successfully converted many. Brown has now written a book on this very subject, now in its second edition. All this is covered in his book. If you seriously want an answer to your question posed here, you need to read his book, if nothing more.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Idahoshooter
.275 member


Reged: 27/10/12
Posts: 64
Loc: Idaho, USA
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: doubleriflejack]
      #222155 - 22/12/12 07:28 AM

It is possible to keep the center of the groups parallel, but as the distance increases some shots will cross due to the accuracy of each barrel. Personally, if I can keep the center of the groups within 2” at 50 yds, without the centers crossing, then I can hunt with it.

Greg

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DarylS
.700 member


Reged: 10/08/05
Posts: 26619
Loc: Beautiful British Columbia, Ca...
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: doubleriflejack]
      #222162 - 22/12/12 08:58 AM

doubleriflejack - John knows which is correct. He was just wanting to find out what the general views were on this forum. There have been pictures posted, with both barrels shooting into a single group at 50 yards and exclamations of wonderful grouping from the membership.
Indeed, for a rifle that will only be shot to 150yards, crossing as in shooting together at 50yards, means they diverge to bore axis apart at 100 and only spread by about 1 1/2" to 2" between group centres at 150yards - still deadl and useable on most game. One can easily hold for that.

--------------------
Daryl


"a gun without hammers is like a Spaniel without ears" King George V

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
4seventy
Sponsor


Reged: 07/05/03
Posts: 2210
Loc: Queensland Australia
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: NitroX]
      #222163 - 22/12/12 09:08 AM

Quote:

One of the absolutes we often hear stated on the internet, on a double rifle are the bullet paths from each barrel designed to cross or (in theory) run parallel?

What do you think, which is correct?

Please respond and join in.




The correct "theory" is that the bullet paths should never cross.

The correct "theory" is that the bullet paths should remain parallel at any distance.

How many double rifles actually achieve this magic parallel bullet paths "theory" day in day out, year in year out?

I'd suggest very few, maybe none.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
tinker
.416 member


Reged: 12/03/05
Posts: 4835
Loc: Nevada
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: 4seventy]
      #222183 - 22/12/12 02:27 PM

It's not just the Internet, this has shown up in print and across the gunshop counter for generations.

Ask a gunmaker. Proper regulation has the center of aggregate groups from right and left barrels with the proper regulation ammunition flying in parallel arcs.

Will it work if they cross at some point..?
I guess that depends, but proper regulation involves parallel arcs.






Cheers
Tinker

--------------------
--Self-Appointed Colonel, DRSS--



"It IS a dangerous game, and so named for a reason, and you can't play from the keyboard. " --Some Old Texan...

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
NitroXAdministrator
.700 member


Reged: 25/12/02
Posts: 39321
Loc: Barossa Valley, South Australi...
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: doubleriflejack]
      #222191 - 22/12/12 04:05 PM

Quote:

Anybody who has done shotgun to double rifle conversions successfully, including regulating the barrels, knows for certain, without doubt, that a properly regulated double rifle will NEVER HAVE BULLETS CROSSING AT ANY RANGE; BUT WILL HAVE bullets traveling parallel to reasonable range for caliber involved. In gunsmithing school, I took class from W. Ellis Brown, on converting shotguns to double rifles, and have successfully converted many. Brown has now written a book on this very subject, now in its second edition. All this is covered in his book. If you seriously want an answer to your question posed here, you need to read his book, if nothing more.



Incorrect. On both points.

These are discussion forums, people come here to discuss things, perhaps even learn something new. Perhaps you can learn something new too.

And referring someone to a book of converting shotguns into double rifles? Please ... some actually make them completely from scratch, make the actions, and even make the barrels ... we've actually got a significant number of guys on here, that can pull apart a set of barrels and regulate them. Plus more than a few actual gunmakers as regular visitors and readers.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Edited by NitroX (22/12/12 04:58 PM)

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
NitroXAdministrator
.700 member


Reged: 25/12/02
Posts: 39321
Loc: Barossa Valley, South Australi...
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: NitroX]
      #222192 - 22/12/12 04:07 PM

The reason I posted this was to see what people believed.

I was of a particular viewpoint myself and found my belief was incorrect interesting.

Popular belief in general is double barrels are designed to cross. Perhaps this comes from double barrelled shotguns?

An internet "fact" is crossing barrels path is incorrect, and the bullet paths should fly in parallel. In theory at least.

In fact BOTH alternatives are CORRECT.

Per Heym, they make double rifle for the USA market to have the bullet paths parallel (in theory of course). They make double rifles for the continental market with bullet paths designed to cross at a certain distance.

So for at least the considerable number of double rifles made by Heym, the FACT is they make barrel designed to BOTH CROSS and shoot PARALLEL. Not theory, fact.

One of the advantages of having a bespoke rifle made by a maker such as Heym or L'Atelier Verney-Carron is one can presumably specify whether the regulation will have the bullet paths flying parallel or crossing.

My preference is to have the bullet paths being parallel. In any case bullet groups as the distance increases will in theory merge under a "parallel" system.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Edited by NitroX (22/12/12 05:02 PM)

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
NitroXAdministrator
.700 member


Reged: 25/12/02
Posts: 39321
Loc: Barossa Valley, South Australi...
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: NitroX]
      #222194 - 22/12/12 05:05 PM

It would be interesting to hear from other quality gunmakers, whether they make their barrels to shoot parallel, or to cross.

I am guessing US makers make them to shoot parallel.

What about the English gunmakers?

Other German and Austrian makers?

I need to ask the two French gunmakers what their practice is, as I never asked them, my visits to them being earlier in the trip.

It will be interesting to see and hear from some of the gunmakers on here, or reading on here (PM me if you wish). I will also make enquiries to some of the makers I know in the UK and elsewhere.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DarylS
.700 member


Reged: 10/08/05
Posts: 26619
Loc: Beautiful British Columbia, Ca...
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: NitroX]
      #222209 - 23/12/12 03:24 AM

In 1860, Forsyth noted his preference, or the correct way in his mind, was that they should shoot parallel - but - he noted in all of the many doubles he'd owned and tested, that only one shot perfectly parallel and such a treasure it was, with which he once shot a Sambar Stag at 250yards, the ball passing through both shoulders.

He had one he actually got quite vocal about that was regulated "so bad that it shot 6" apart at 100yards - he noted that if you ever got one that bad, to smash it or give it to a friend. (pick me)

Perhaps muzzleloading round ball DR's are more easily regulated than modern CTG. DR's.?

--------------------
Daryl


"a gun without hammers is like a Spaniel without ears" King George V

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Grenadier
.375 member


Reged: 20/02/08
Posts: 570
Loc: North of the Columbia, USA
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: DarylS]
      #222214 - 23/12/12 04:42 AM

I understand that perfectly parallel would be ideal. Nothing is perfect though and I would bet that all doubles either shoot apart or cross to some degree. Given that choice, I would prefer a little crossing. If the bullets cross at 50 yards then they will only be muzzle width apart at 100 yards and twice muzzle width apart at 150. Getting them to cross at 100 yards would be even better giving muzzle width apart at 200 yards and twice that not till 300 yards. I would rather have deliberately crossing at some reasonable distance than almost parallel but slightly diverging. Diverging paths will only get worse further down range.

--------------------
~

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Idahoshooter
.275 member


Reged: 27/10/12
Posts: 64
Loc: Idaho, USA
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: NitroX]
      #222218 - 23/12/12 05:33 AM

My idea of perfect regulation would be to have both barrels shooting to the same point, at the maximum yardage that the rifle will be used. Maybe one day I will be lucky enough to find a perfect double, and be able to afford it.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Grenadier
.375 member


Reged: 20/02/08
Posts: 570
Loc: North of the Columbia, USA
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: Idahoshooter]
      #222225 - 23/12/12 06:02 AM

Quote:

My idea of perfect regulation would be to have both barrels shooting to the same point, at the maximum yardage that the rifle will be used.

That would be crossing.

--------------------
~

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
CowboyCS
.333 member


Reged: 05/10/07
Posts: 386
Loc: Kansas u.S.A.
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: NitroX]
      #222228 - 23/12/12 06:59 AM

Quote:

It would be interesting to hear from other quality gunmakers, whether they make their barrels to shoot parallel, or to cross.

I am guessing US makers make them to shoot parallel.

What about the English gunmakers?

Other German and Austrian makers?

I need to ask the two French gunmakers what their practice is, as I never asked them, my visits to them being earlier in the trip.

It will be interesting to see and hear from some of the gunmakers on here, or reading on here (PM me if you wish). I will also make enquiries to some of the makers I know in the UK and elsewhere.


I can only speak for myself not other U.S. makers but I try to get as close to parallel as I can, but that rarely happens. There are to many factors involved to get absolute perfection, changing temps, changing conditions, weight variations between shooters, barrel expansion and contraction, harmonics and any number of other factors prevent achieving absolutely repeatable results. So I tend to try to get close to parallel and settle on slightly converging. As an example the...the 2 Bore Double is 2" center to center of bore line at the muzzles the final regulation is about 1.875" center to center at 50 yards(slightly crossing but more than acceptable for hunting accuracy).

Others mileage may vary but that is how try to do it.

Colin

--------------------
The Bill of Rights- Void were prohibited by law
Stolzer & Son's Gunsmithing

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
kuduae
.400 member


Reged: 13/01/10
Posts: 1779
Loc: middle of Germany
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: CowboyCS]
      #222237 - 23/12/12 09:33 AM

IMHO a moot, purely theoretical question,asked by people who have never regulated a dr! After reregulating about 20 double rifles, most of them side by sides, some dr drillings thrown in, about half of them by load development, the others by resoldering, and testing many more, I am quite content if I get a composite group, 3 right-left pairs, of 2 to 3" at 100 meters. This is practical hunting double rifle accuracy. The centers of most double rifle muzzles are about 1" apart, slightly more in real bigbores. Even if the individual barrels are capable of moa = 1" groups at that range and shoot true parallel this results in a 2" composite group, shaped like a liing 8. From then on the individual groups will overlap. At 200 you get at least a 3" group. If both lines of flight cross at 100 m you will get a 1" composite group at 100m and at least a 2" one at 200. Before both parallel and composite groups open up to 4" you will have exceeded the practical range of any double rifle, no matter if the barrels shoot parallel or cross at 100 m, despite of the optimistic express sights on most British rifles. Most older dr barrels will not shoot 1" individual groups at 100m at all, so the effect of shooting parallel or crossing is even less valid.
What may confuse the discussion: Even if a dr shoots perfectly parllel, the barrels have to converge slightly, more so in a side by side than in an o/u, more when shooting heavier bullet, less at high muzzle velocities. Reason: Newton's law of action and reaction. As soon as the bullet is accelerated through the barrel the gun starts to move also, unstoppable as this slight movement is taken up by the elasticity of the human skin. The gun rotates around it's center of gravity. As in a side by side the recoil force is applied to different sides of this center and on an o/u at different distances/levers from this centers, muzzles will not point at the same direction when the bullet leaves the muzzle than when the primer was ignited. For this reason all pistol barrels point downward from the line of sight (easy to check: Take any revolver and place it on a flat table upside down so that both front and rear sights touch the ssurface. Lokking from the side you will see that the barrel now points upward, away fom the table.) So the barrels have to be aligned to compensate for this invariable movement. If dr barrels were assembled perfectly parallel, perfectly possible today, it would shoot wide apart. So drs have to be regulated by cut-and try resoldering, load or screw adjustments to this day.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
NitroXAdministrator
.700 member


Reged: 25/12/02
Posts: 39321
Loc: Barossa Valley, South Australi...
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: kuduae]
      #222242 - 23/12/12 11:57 AM

Kudae,

True it is somewhat a theoretical discussion. As the variables often make it true in theory but only approximate in practice. Actually it is the reason I titled this thread "Internet absolute", because the theoretical ideal is usually stated as a fact or "absolute". Only on the internet ...

Of course you are correct with your description on how the barrels with increasing distance will form composite figure 8 like groups. One reason I think for longer range shooting, a DR could better be thought of as a single shot, with a second barrel attached to it. I think if one barrel, the first is more accurately aligned to the sights, with the second barrel regulated to be as close as reasonable, one has a rifle which can be used at longer ranges (ie medium ranges) where a second barrel is fine for closer shots, quick follow ups etc, running shots etc. Often where other variables all come into play as well.

Purists often disagree with that sort of thinking too.

My only personal "regulation" is with my Valmet/Tikka barrels. As you know, they have separated barrels, with adjustable wedges. Also under and over configuration. Interesting though my 9.3mm barrels will shoot from each barrel pretty much one hole, or clover leaf 1 inch or sub-MOA groups (2 or 3 shots from each barrel) at 100 metres. I try to get it shooting each small group about three-quarters of an inch apart at 100 metres. In theory the top barrel should be as accurate as any single shot or bolt action at longer ranges.

Though regarding accuracy, the very first double rifle I ever shot (1983) was a Frankonia U/O in .22 Magnum and 5.6x50mm Rimmed. The 5.6mm shot three shot one hole groups at 100 metres consistently. Even with the horrible stocking, very high mounted scope etc. I have no idea/recollection of that rifles regulation except we were happy where it shot at 100 metres.

Good you have brought up the human dynamics of regulation. That the barrels are not parallel, I don't think anyone has claimed them to be. And that the angle barrels face each other actually must compensate for the initial recoil of the rifle (especially for larger bores), the time the bullet is still in the barrel during recoil moving the point of impact apart. One reason human regulators are used, trial and error, not a computer programme. And a big reason for the higher cost of DRs actually delivered regulated.

I don't pretend to be a gunmaker in the slightest, nor even a very technical person with regard to these fine guns, always have said more of a user of them. But on these forums, I think a lot of guys LIKE to know at least the basics of the theory, out of interest. If not more. Otherwise we would not bother discussing them here on forums at all.

Good to see the responses and participation with comments.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
doubleriflejack
.333 member


Reged: 11/11/07
Posts: 352
Loc: Oregon, U.S.A.
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: kuduae]
      #222436 - 28/12/12 07:34 AM

kuduae Well said; I fully agree; that has pretty much been my experience too!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
NitroXAdministrator
.700 member


Reged: 25/12/02
Posts: 39321
Loc: Barossa Valley, South Australi...
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: doubleriflejack]
      #222501 - 29/12/12 03:18 PM

Quote:

doubleriflejack:
Anybody who has done shotgun to double rifle conversions successfully, including regulating the barrels, knows for certain, without doubt, that a properly regulated double rifle will NEVER HAVE BULLETS CROSSING AT ANY RANGE; BUT WILL HAVE bullets traveling parallel to reasonable range for caliber involved.



Quote:

Kudae:
IMHO a moot, purely theoretical question,asked by people who have never regulated a dr! ... I am quite content if I get a composite group, 3 right-left pairs, of 2 to 3" at 100 meters. This is practical hunting double rifle accuracy. The centers of most double rifle muzzles are about 1" apart, slightly more in real bigbores. Even if the individual barrels are capable of moa = 1" groups at that range and shoot true parallel this results in a 2" composite group, shaped like a liing 8. From then on the individual groups will overlap. At 200 you get at least a 3" group. If both lines of flight cross at 100 m you will get a 1" composite group at 100m and at least a 2" one at 200. Before both parallel and composite groups open up to 4" you will have exceeded the practical range of any double rifle, no matter if the barrels shoot parallel or cross at 100 m, despite of the optimistic express sights on most British rifles. Most older dr barrels will not shoot 1" individual groups at 100m at all, so the effect of shooting parallel or crossing is even less valid.




Quote:

doubleriflejack:
kuduae Well said; I fully agree; that has pretty much been my experience too!



--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Edited by NitroX (29/12/12 03:28 PM)

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
NitroXAdministrator
.700 member


Reged: 25/12/02
Posts: 39321
Loc: Barossa Valley, South Australi...
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: NitroX]
      #222502 - 29/12/12 03:36 PM

Good to read!

As said in one of the earlier posts, one of a very small number of very experienced gunmakers who performed the regulation task at Heym mentioned they make the barrels to shoot parallel for the US market and cross for the European market. Which was interesting considering the "internet absolute" often stated that "properly regulated double rifle will never have bullets crossing at any range".

Kudae's useful and informative post points out that while both systems might be employed, ie parallel regulation, which he says he does, and I prefer myself as obviously does DRJ, or crossing, the practicalities actually make the issue less important, at the usual reasonable hunting ranges.

Personally I'm always willing to learn new things, or even have old things, thought to be fact disproved or corrected.

--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
tinker
.416 member


Reged: 12/03/05
Posts: 4835
Loc: Nevada
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: NitroX]
      #222505 - 29/12/12 05:20 PM

Plus or minus a grain or so of powder and anyone can have it their own way...



:-)




Cheers
Tinker

--------------------
--Self-Appointed Colonel, DRSS--



"It IS a dangerous game, and so named for a reason, and you can't play from the keyboard. " --Some Old Texan...

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
NitroXAdministrator
.700 member


Reged: 25/12/02
Posts: 39321
Loc: Barossa Valley, South Australi...
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: tinker]
      #222507 - 29/12/12 06:24 PM

Or shoot two or three seconds quicker or slower than the regulated speed.

Oops, that another (non) controversial thread discussion.




--------------------
John aka NitroX

...
Govt get out of our lives NOW!
"I love the smell of cordite in the morning."
"A Sharp spear needs no polish"

Edited by NitroX (29/12/12 06:37 PM)

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DUGABOY1
.400 member


Reged: 02/02/03
Posts: 1340
Loc: TEXAS USA
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: NitroX]
      #223100 - 08/01/13 06:25 AM

Quote:

by Nitro express;

Popular belief in general is double barrels are designed to cross. Perhaps this comes from double barrelled shotguns?

An internet "fact" is crossing barrels path is incorrect, and the bullet paths should fly in parallel. In theory at least.

In fact BOTH alternatives are CORRECT.

Per Heym, they make double rifle for the USA market to have the bullet paths parallel (in theory of course). They make double rifles for the continental market with bullet paths designed to cross at a certain distance.

So for at least the considerable number of double rifles made by Heym, the FACT is they make barrel designed to BOTH CROSS and shoot PARALLEL. Not theory, fact.



Nitro you are absolutely correct and so is the fact that properly regulated double rifles do not cross the centers of each barrel’s individual group. This statement is what people are confusing as being bullet flight path!

This is the reason that most people have trouble trying to find a regulating load for a double rifle. They think no bullet should ever cross, and that is simply silly!

The factory regulator is not looking for all the bullet holes but is regulating the CENTERS of EACH barrel’s individual four shot group.

It stands to reason that if each barrel is shooting a 1 inch individual group and if the center of the bores are only 1 inch apart to form a composite group of both barrels, the right side of the left barrel’s group will spill over into the left side of the right barrel group and vise-versa.

When a double rifle is properly regulated the aiming point on the target should be half way between the CENTERS of BOTH barrels in the composite group.

If that regulation is at say 100 yds both those barrels that were shooting 1 inch groups at 100 yds will be shooting 2 inch groups at 200 yds, so now what you have is 4 or 5 inch 8 shot composite groups at 200 yds. But the centers of each barrel’s individual group will remain on it’s own side of the aiming point ( or parallel). Of course nobody can hold that well, but the rifle is capable of holding to it’s regulation indefinitely.

This why I’ve always said the test target that comes with a new double rifle tells you absolutely nothing and is nothing more than window dressing. This because a target that is worth anything should have four shots from each barrel all fired from cool barrels, with each shot marked as to the barrel it came from, and the centers of each barrel’s individual group marked for each barrel in relation to the aiming point.
The reason most think that a double rifle is regulated to cross at a given distance is the fault of the maker’s habit of labeling two different things as REGULATION. The regulation done by the regulator is the physical manipulation of the barrel conversion so that the rifle will shoot the centers of each barrels group on it’s own side of the aiming point. The have to converge so they will shoot parallel because of barrel flip and barrel time. Then the maker files the iron sight to a dead on hold point of aim at a given range, for elevation and windage and call that regulation as well. This makes the new owner want to make all bullets fired to hit the same hole on the target at that range which is wrong. If all bullets from both barrel were hitting the same ragged hole at any range the rifle would have the centers of both barrels individual groups CROSSING at that range.

In other words what is parallel is the CENTERS of each barrel’s individual groups that should remain parallel, not all the bullet holes!

--------------------
..........Mac >>>===(x)===>
DUGABOY1, and MacD37 founding member of DRSS www.doublerifleshooterssociety.com
"If I die today, I have had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Bill_Cooley
.300 member


Reged: 14/12/06
Posts: 197
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: DUGABOY1]
      #224157 - 23/01/13 08:20 AM

I think you are right that many are confused by the use of the term REGULATION meaning two different things. I also think it comes from the current use of scopes on extremely accurate single barreled rifles. We have become accustom to putting the crosshair on a target and that is where the bullet hits. Some are confused when they can’t do the same thing with a double rifle. As the sights are regulated to half way between the barrel groups. They tend to think the double must be made to converge so that all the bullets go into one hole where the sights are.
Bill

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DarylS
.700 member


Reged: 10/08/05
Posts: 26619
Loc: Beautiful British Columbia, Ca...
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: DarylS]
      #224159 - 23/01/13 09:13 AM

Quote:

With parallel regulation the sights could be counted on at all ranges.

In 1860, Lt. J. Forsyth wrote that W. Greener's premise that the bores would shoot either crossing or diverging was incorrect.

Forsyth noted
The centre of the individual barrel groups being only bore axis to bore axis apart, thus no holding off would be necessary no matter the range.

In reality, for the bores to shoot very close at 100 or 200yards would probably suffice today for most people.



Pretty much says the centre of the groups are bore axis apart.

--------------------
Daryl


"a gun without hammers is like a Spaniel without ears" King George V

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
brosteve
.224 member


Reged: 23/11/11
Posts: 39
Loc: TX USA
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: Bill_Cooley]
      #225699 - 21/02/13 03:05 PM

Good discussion. Truly parallel barrels by unwitting regulators may explain why some Browning and Winchester double rifles are known to be off (with some being perfectly accurate and no rhyme or reason as to why from the manufacturer. Caveat emptor). Could it be that they trusted physical alignment without testing at the range?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DarylS
.700 member


Reged: 10/08/05
Posts: 26619
Loc: Beautiful British Columbia, Ca...
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: brosteve]
      #225740 - 22/02/13 05:45 AM

Quote:

Could it be that they trusted physical alignment without testing at the range?



YES! Absolutely!

I have seen 'adverts' claiming perfect regulation due to the barrels being aligned with lasers. Now, that might have been Pedersoli & concerning muzzleloading doubles only. Seems with 4 out of 5 with that system didn't work well even though ML's are easier to regulate than are smokeless doubles, I believe. At least, one can go to the range and test 100 different loads combinations in a single 7 or 8 hour period - a nice day at the range.

--------------------
Daryl


"a gun without hammers is like a Spaniel without ears" King George V

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DUGABOY1
.400 member


Reged: 02/02/03
Posts: 1340
Loc: TEXAS USA
Re: Internet absolute: regulation parallel or crossing? [Re: DarylS]
      #227728 - 29/03/13 12:53 PM

Daryl I think you are correct. These regulation attempts were usually by companies that had been successful makers of shotguns. The use of lasers is common in the regulating of double barreled shotguns, and for that purpose it works well. This is because all that is needed is to make one barrel’s 30 inch pattern more or less superimpose over the other barrel’s 30 inch pattern at 30 yds. This was the problem with the Winchester Japanese made Over/Under double rifles, they assumed that a laser finding the center of a 30 inch target at 50 yds or 100 yds would make a double rifle shoot that way. So! They placed the barrel sets in a jig and aimed lasers on a target at those distances, and went ahead and hard brazed them in place finished them and put the in the box and shipped them. As we know that didn’t work well.

I don’t think anyone would want a double rifle that shot some place into a 30 inch target at 100 yds.

Almost all makers use the laser to get an educated guess as to a starting point, then turn the rifle over to a real regulator to do his magic. Nothing short of this will work. Sabatti tried that and when it didn’t work too well on most of their rifles they tried to adjust it with a moto-tool and we know how that turned out as well.

--------------------
..........Mac >>>===(x)===>
DUGABOY1, and MacD37 founding member of DRSS www.doublerifleshooterssociety.com
"If I die today, I have had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | >> (show all)


Previous topic Previous   View all topics Index   Next topic Next   Threaded Mode Threaded  

Extra information
1 registered and 117 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  CptCurl 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 13425

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us NitroExpress.com

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact


Copyright 2003 to 2011 - all rights reserved