Why is a SxS hard to shoot?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wider Sight Plane???

What is this wider sight plane you speak of? When I shoulder any of the three we own, all I see is "Bead" :confused: They have not been tweaked or tuned in any way either.
 
Lots of shooters never look at the beed, they use the barrels.

I know I use my barrel as a tool to judge leading. a sxs is 2.5 times as wide as a single barreled shot gun.
 
If I'm looking at the barrels, I'm missing my target. Can't see where someone has time to use the barrel to judge the lead; there are surely much better ways to hit the target.

One way or t'other, I think that, if a SxS is hard to shoot, it either doesn't fit the shooter, or it's a poorly-balanced POS (same as any other shotgun that's hard to shoot). There's a reason people pay ungodly prices for the things, and it's not because they're hard to shoot.
 
Crossing targets when your using the "pull thru method" not really practical for games, but very pratical for hunting when you get cuaght off guard.
 
When I get caught off guard and do that, and one shot last fall sticks in my mind, I sure don't notice the barrel. Speed of swing vs. speed of target is all that works for me.
 
Well, all I see is the bead, and that only kinda subconsciously. But everyone who shoulders one of doubles makes some remark on how wide the barrel looks. I figure they weren't learned right.
I think most people shoot a single better than a double just because they learnt on a single.
 
Well, all I see is the bead, and that only kinda subconsciously. But everyone who shoulders one of doubles makes some remark on how wide the barrel looks. I figure they weren't learned right.

LOL

My thoughts, too.
 
I shoot better with a SxS, based on my experience with a Pedersoli 12 gauge double and a Stoeger Uplander 20 bore, vs. the pumps and single shots I've fired.

YMMV.
 
use the beads, if you must, for practice alignment to check gun fit...once there, forget about them and focus on the bird.....SXS's are more inclined to intuitive reactionary shooting..not "target" shooting, and therefore need to be properly fitted and balanced to really obtain the maximum benefit of their configuration....once that is obtained, they aren't harder to shoot, just harder to put down......;)
 
SxS is by far the best to me

I've done a lot of shotgun shooting with many different shotguns. As far as I am concerned the SxS is by far the best clay gun out there. :what:

Semi-autos are nice but they are a pain in the rear to take apart and clean properly. Too many moving parts that get fouled up over time. :scrutiny:

I for some reason can shoot skeet, trap and sporting clays with pretty dang good accuracy with most any SxS, semi-auto or pump gun. I'm not sure why but I can't hit the broad side of a barn with an O/U standing 20 feet from it. :rolleyes:

Shooting skeet I generally hit over 20 out of 25 clays every round. Most of the time I get close to the 25 mark. When I use an O/U (and I've tried several and practiced plenty with them) I am lucky if I hit 10 out of 25 and that is on a good day. :p

I have never in my life handled and shot a more awkward, front heavy, piece of junk (IMHO) than an O/U shotgun. I'd do better chasing the clays and trying to swat them out of the sky using the O/U as a bat. :cuss:

My 2 cents. I love them SxS shotguns. Y'all can keep the rest. :fire:

Molon Labe,
Joe
:cool:
 
My #1 shotgun is a Beretta GR4, a truly all-purpose and beautiful 12-gauge side-by-side.

It has 28" barrels choked full and modified ( NO TUBES), and they wear a nice ventilated rib. The gun weighs exactly seven pounds and balances precisely on the hinge pin. It has selective auto ejectors, and generally suits this shotgunner's dreams right down to the ground.
The gun was bought in 1970, and an inflation calculator says it cost me $4100 in today's funds. The action has 100% coverage of genuine engraving, and a silver bird is inlaid into the opening lever. It also has fine European walnut, well fitted, finished and checkered.

It handles like lightning. One day we were leaving our vehicle to roust some Ptarmigan, when one of the birds flushed from UNDER the car! Snap-shooting from the hip at about six feet, my Beretta completely removed its head without any calculations or aiming whatever.

It cost a bit of money, considering my income in those days of 38 years ago. However, I've never regretted the purchase for even one day. The gun has shared adventures with me in uplands, in duck blinds, in boats, and in walking-up ptarmigan in temps far below zero. It's a trusted companion and has fired thousands of rounds at game and targets.

The gun has served in swamps, in the High Arctic, in blinds, in ice-storms and dust and in
vehicles. It worked so well that we bought another one for my wife.

A good-quality shotgun WILL stand-up very nicely. with just the merest amount of care and consideration,

We have other shotguns, designed for more-utilitarian purposes, but our Berettas have the place of honor on our racks and in our hearts.

"Side-by-Sides are heavy, awkward and won't shoot." PHOOOOOEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
 
I've done a lot of shotgun shooting with many different shotguns. As far as I am concerned the SxS is by far the best clay gun out there.

Semi-autos are nice but they are a pain in the rear to take apart and clean properly. Too many moving parts that get fouled up over time.

I for some reason can shoot skeet, trap and sporting clays with pretty dang good accuracy with most any SxS, semi-auto or pump gun. I'm not sure why but I can't hit the broad side of a barn with an O/U standing 20 feet from it.

Shooting skeet I generally hit over 20 out of 25 clays every round. Most of the time I get close to the 25 mark. When I use an O/U (and I've tried several and practiced plenty with them) I am lucky if I hit 10 out of 25 and that is on a good day.

I have never in my life handled and shot a more awkward, front heavy, piece of junk (IMHO) than an O/U shotgun. I'd do better chasing the clays and trying to swat them out of the sky using the O/U as a bat.

My 2 cents. I love them SxS shotguns. Y'all can keep the rest.

Molon Labe,
Joe

Me too!!!!!!!!!!
Now some people might say I can't hit anything anyway, but I know better :scrutiny: I'm much better from low gun mount SxS than pre-mounting a O/U, which should be faster and better. (plus of course, you get extra manly points for working from low gun ;) )
 
I have never in my life handled and shot a more awkward, front heavy, piece of junk (IMHO) than an O/U shotgun. I'd do better chasing the clays and trying to swat them out of the sky using the O/U as a bat.

Sounds like you tried a Citori. It's not fair to condemn O/U's based on a specific design that feels like a 4 foot length of waterlogged 4x4.

Not all O/U's are [strike]Brownings[/strike] clunkers, just like not all guns with barrels next to each other are finely-balanced works of art.:)

The difference is, some popular O/U's that people think are great guns are god-awful clunkers, whereas there are really only two types of SxS guns on the market: guns people know are cheap, and damn-good-to-world-class ones.

For example, I've got a little SKB 20/26" O/U that evokes the reaction "feels like a side-by-side" whenever someone tries it. What they're really saying is, "Man, this thing feels well-balanced, naturally-pointing and quick, not like my Brownings."

The top-locking Greener crossbolt design minimizes the amount of metal in the receiver. The low profile points well, and puts the shooter's forward hand in a much better position than with tall and fat O/U's.
barrel-group-o_u.jpg


Beretta uses a different design with similar objectives; a steel frame 686/687 field gun weighs about a pound less in 12 Gauge than most of its competitors. My 12G/28" Beretta O/U works very well from low-gun in the field and at the range, and has also evoked the comment, "feels a lot like a SxS."

That doesn't keep me from looking at a SxS for my next purchase, of course...:)

And either way, I've had to save up and/or sell off other things to buy any of this stuff.
 
Last edited:
Ah, AB
There's a reason people pay ungodly prices for the things, and it's not because they're hard to shoot.
Hard to argue with that. They represent some of the most breathtakingly expensive firearms ever produced. Unlikely they'd command those kinds of tariffs if they were harder to use than a 200.00 alternative.

Interesting how personal assessments differ though. I never noticed the 525 being particularly heavy or large when I was picking out my first O/U. I didn't buy it and went with the 687 but this was a "fit" thing that I attributed more to cast-off vs no cast-off. I'm no expert on these matters but it seems I'd have noticed something other than the subtle differences I did notice. Maybe not. I still don't own one but the one I tried wasn't near being the railroad tie some make it out to be.

The D'Italia "felt" better to me than the Silver Hawk and I gather I'm near unique in that regard (maybe not - my transfer dealer says she's been seeing a lot of D'Italias recently).

The Cynergy 20/28 has so ingratiated itself I'm near forgiving the perforations. I'm wondering now how a 12/26 field model fits.

The Dallas Beretta Gallery is still calling your name...
 
Never had a problem with mine. Just focus on the front bead. But from the other end (not like the pics) otherwise it could get messy :what:

SXS5.JPG


SXS6.JPG
 
I've loved my SxSs but over the years I've noticed that whenever my skill got better - my SxSs were already at that level waiting on me.

So true. Validates the philosophy of BA/UU/R regardless of the platform used.
 
That we refer to it as "swinging" a shotgun is an unfortunate habit because it raises the image of swinging a ball bat, and that isn't the way to move a shotgun.... especially a typical length SxS that is (usually) "light" in the front compared to other types.

Many people begin their shotgunning career with pumps, autos, or maybe the 28" O/U. These guns are long and have some tangible weight forward.
It's very common with these guns for beginners to get in the habit of performing the "swing" mostly by horsing the gun around with their hands/arms/shoulders. You can watch this at any local Skeet shoot.

Then they pick up a SxS and have a difficult time with it - because with its' lighter-forward nature - it MUST be handled correctly - that is the "swing" needs to come mostly from the body's "core" muscles (lower back, abs, and pelvic )augmented by legs and footwork and, very importantly, it has to be controlled and balanced - not jerky and off-balance like some hacker golfer. The hands and arms (and cheek) are the "mounting/aiming apparatus", NOT the "swinging apparatus".

But when people start out and learn that "horse it around with your arms method" - it takes them a goodly while to UNlearn it - whenever they get around to realizing they need to unlearn it.

Anyone who has ever missed a clay while having someone helping them shoot Skeet has been told "Ya lifted your head off the stock".
Sometimes the person lifts their head, but really not too often.
If one watches closely, it is often NOT that they lifted their head from the stock but that the gun was pulled away (however slightly) from the cheek because the person shifted in mid-movement from using their core muscles to using their arms/shoulders to move the gun and that immediately makes the gun shoot NOT where the shooter is looking.
One thing an instructor can do to help the student with that is tell them (about 1000 times) to "Keep your head down".
But a better thing to tell them is that the pressure of their cheek on the comb of the stock must be the same all the way through the "swing". That makes them focus on using their hands and arms to control that cheek pressure rather than to flail the gun around - that's what their hands/arms are for, and they can't do both at the same time.

:cool:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top