Trapshooters Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm looking at a live bird gun that really needs to shed several ounces, and in the right places, too.

Currently, it's # 8¼ and on the iron-end has, side-ribs and a 'vent' rib that is more rib than vent. On the back-end it has a ginormous slab of Master Dockwiler's railroad ties.

I'd like to get it down to #7½(±), maybe 7¾ and I can get lots of weight-loss and fix/adjust balance & pointability with some amount of wood-loss.

Would losing the side ribs, and putting a light(er) weight top rib on it get me - 5 or 6 ounces? The barrels are 18.4 and I like the chokes, so I'd like to avoid Bro Eyster and their famed innards work if I could.

Dennis DeVault, of course, is suspectible ... anybody else?

Bob




 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
hmmmm, Titanium & Teflon ... I hadn't thought of that, I'll admit.

Then I could name her 'Mort d' Alpo', yes?

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I figured they were a couple of ounces, each. More?

I ran onto a 32" V. Bernadelli hammergun today, in RSA. The cost is not much, but the hassle of getting it here may be daunting.

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Thanks, Wayne, I surely think so, too.

The gun has been campaigned hard, but you'd never know it. We're still dickering, but it's getting closer.








 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,691 Posts
It's against the law to modify that gun in any way - at least is should be.
Couldn't you just lift weights and get stronger?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,852 Posts
You've got alot of solder removed in the process too.. I think it would put you really close.. My MX10 went from 1.59 to 1.36 31.5" barrels.. backbored from a 1.65 kg start..on 18.4mm bore.. It all adds up..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
<blockquote> dickgtax: <i>It's against the law to modify that gun in any way - at least is should be. Couldn't you just lift weights and get stronger?</i></blockquote>

Dick, in theory, I agree, but it gets worse than that, I'm afraid.

That Dockwiler log on the back is waaaay too high ... maybe you shouldn't be around when I get the wood rasp and files out?

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,712 Posts
You'll like that weight when shooting heavy pigeon loads. If the gun is properly balanced, the weight won't matter. Butt heavy is good, pigeons change directions!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,712 Posts
What is it exactly? Looks good, obviously cost more than you want to spend. By the time you get through cobbling it up, it will be worth half of what you paid fot it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
The price for any gun you <i>want</i> to have is always more than you'd like to spend, of course, but it's OK, and we're working out the details of a part trade.

I'll certainly shoot it before dropping another few thou on overhauling it - and reducing it's value, likewise. It is a dedicated bird-gun and is balanced appropriately - Dockwiler does know balancing as well as stocking. Currently I shoot a turn-of-the-century Boswell, and a V. Bernadelli, so an O/U is a different experience & feel.

You know the gun and the woman who shot it, originally Dallas and then the East Coast, PA & VA.

Incidentally, thanks for taking care of LC Smith-man last Wednesday - he is still giggling about that experience, and is ... looking for a better gun as we speak.

He's talked to Tom Baber about his original, hand-made Comp 1, but I don't know if they have got very far.

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
DB Bill, absolutely. Like EJ notes above, balance for a live-bird gun is both different and critical.

I agree, this is not a local gunsmith-cum-bicycle-repair-shop job.

Other than personally shaving the comb some to 'pretty-much' fit my face (which I've done several times), <i>IF</i> I decide I <i>need</i> to put it on a diet, it will go back to the maker.

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,663 Posts
I'd leave it along. You'll have little control where the weight came off. You might not like the balance afterward.

Find a suitable SCO sideplate or even an old SHO are not that difficult.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,478 Posts
Don't change the gun. You can change the balance and don't like it after.

Just go to the gym and lift some weights. You will be stronger and fell better at the same time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
kraiza, win, lose or draw, that the balance (as it is just now) WILL change is not optional.

Some-to-a-lot of that stump has to go - or I have to have a cheek transplant. Shaving the stock is cheaper and more effective than becoming a gym rat, too, just as a bonus.

The gun left the factory a couple of ounces shy of 8#, with a SC-type stock. (well, what's 'SC', now. the gun is a 1993, and stocked appropriately for then).

A lady was the 2nd owner of the gun and put the Dockwiler on it, so what it is now, is not what it was: certainly mass, but prolly it balances a lot further back than it's design conditions.

I don't have to overpower and 'whip' a gun, but I refuse to have to steer one, either.

The gun is not mine yet, so it may all be a moot point. Still dickering.

Bob
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top