WC Scott hammer guns ?

[Milton C Starr]

Originally Posted by CraigThompson

I think if i booked a hunt and rolled in one of those joints with a short barrel 10 and my 1 1/8 ounce handloads they can suck the hind tit or give me a FULL refund .

Thats one way to put it lol but pretty much this , If thats what the client wanted than we would oblige them . Maybe if they used longer guns they would have better muzzle awareness . Ive seen one guest accidentally shoot someones house who bordered the plantation . Then again we did have 3,800 acres I have no idea why the game guide wanted to hunt on the perimeter of the land .

Are your handloads similair to the RST 1 1/8 oz ?
Thats all I ever shot in my short 10s . A very low kicking load and if I get another 10 ga will order some more in different shot sizes this time .

Some of these quail hunts especially in my area I think are around 2,000$+ a day with a 8 person party required .

[stumpstalker]

Milton:

It says, for the 10-gauge guns, (30 and 32-inch bbls): "....110.00."

The hammers are described as being "low"; not "short", although they may be that too.

The manipulable portion of the low hammers could be comparable with what you get with customary "high" hammers. Maybe someone with knowledge will comment.

The selling point is that when cocked, they are below the line of sight.

Even if functional, the low hammer concept apparently never took off; they probably didn't look right (maybe too evocative of a distressed Spaniel).

Lovell apparently offered some guns under its own brand, other "hardware store"-quality guns from sources domestic and foreign, as well guns of more recognizable and/or prestigious makers, such as W. W. Greener; Colt; Remington; Lefever; Ithaca and L. C. Smith and Parker.

[Milton C Starr]

Originally Posted by Russell E. Cleary

Milton:

It says, for the 10-gauge guns, (30 and 32-inch bbls): "....110.00."

The hammers are described as being "low"; not "short", although they may be that too.

The manipulable portion of the low hammers could be comparable with what you get with customary "high" hammers. Maybe someone with knowledge will comment.

The selling point is that when cocked, they are below the line of sight.

Even if functional, the low hammer concept apparently never took off; they probably didn't look right (maybe too evocative of a distressed Spaniel).

Lovell apparently offered some guns under its own brand, other "hardware store"-quality guns from sources domestic and foreign, as well guns of more recognizable and/or prestigious makers, such as W. W. Greener; Colt; Remington; Lefever; Ithaca and L. C. Smith and Parker.

I found a picture of a low hammer W.&C. Scott not sure if its the same as the model from that ad but they are low and noticeably shorter than the regular tall hammers . I guess you could have low tall hammers if they cocked back further . From my understanding W. Scotts son or sons can't remember if he had more than one ? Anyhow one of the sons was a inventor not a gunmaker so he came up with patents for the family business like the top lever . Low hammers sounds like one of those patent ideas that never caught on . There were alot of patents back then it seems for sxs shotguns .

[6pt-Sika]

Originally Posted by Milton C Starr

Are your handloads similair to the RST 1 1/8 oz ?
Thats all I ever shot in my short 10s . A very low kicking load and if I get another 10 ga will order some more in different shot sizes this time .

I'd say mine just might be lighter then RST . 18.6 grains of Red Dot pushing 1 1/8 ounces and a handful of spacers does not make a barn burner thumper load .

[Milton C Starr]

Originally Posted by CraigThompson

I'd say mine just might be lighter then RST . 18.6 grains of Red Dot pushing 1 1/8 ounces and a handful of spacers does not make a barn burner thumper load .

Are they sub sonic being such a lite load ? I think the RSTs are around 1150 fps ? Ive always wondered how or if transonic flight affects bb's and round balls like it does conical projectiles .

I never put any of the RSTs up against a patterning board to see how they actually perform . I know they worked very well on squirrels though .

[6pt-Sika]

Originally Posted by Milton C Starr

Are they sub sonic being such a lite load ? I think the RSTs are around 1150 fps ? Ive always wondered how or if transonic flight affects bb's and round balls like it does conical projectiles .

I never put any of the RSTs up against a patterning board to see how they actually perform . I know they worked very well on squirrels though .

I dunno if they're subsonic or not . I do however know they eat up clay targets on a skeet field , trap field and the limited sporting clays / five stand birds I've fired them at . They also do very nicely on dove and I would assume quail as well .

[6pt-Sika]

Morris the guy at RST makes some pretty decent shells as I've bought a few boxes mostly 2 1/2" for my W&C Scott 12 and 20 hammerless guns . I however do not wish to pay his price , not saying they're over priced or anything like that I'm just cheap when it comes to ammunition .

[Kensal Rise]

Originally Posted by Russell E. Cleary

Even if functional, the low hammer concept apparently never took off; they probably didn't look right .

To the contrary, if I may be allowed. Scott made thousands of "C-Hammer" guns. I've owned many myself. They function well and get the hammers down out of line of sight. But... good shots focus on the target, not the hammers.

Also... 40-inch barreled Scotts were said to be better for horseback hunting. They supposedly get the muzzle blast further away from the animal's ears. But I can't see how 10 extra inches of barrel would make much difference to a skittish mount.

[Milton C Starr]

Originally Posted by John Campbell

To the contrary, if I may be allowed. Scott made thousands of "C-Hammer" guns. I've owned many myself. They function well and get the hammers down out of line of sight. But... good shots focus on the target, not the hammers.

Also... 40-inch barreled Scotts were said to be better for horseback hunting. They supposedly get the muzzle blast further away from the animal's ears. But I can't see how 10 extra inches of barrel would make much difference to a skittish mount.

Horseback hunting with a shotgun sounds like a odd concept to me .
Now with a rifle I could see situations where you may want or need to fire from horseback . If you are in say bear country or horsebacking and need to fire your rifle from the mount .

If a horses hearing is as good as their eyesight I doubt the extra barrel length matters at all to them .

Ive been noticing it seems like everyone whos selling a hammer gun takes pictures of them with them on half cock so you cant truly see how short or tall the hammers are . However I have started to notice it seems like on shorter hammer guns the ears are at a angle on the hammer instead of just standing straight up .

[Milton C Starr]

Originally Posted by CraigThompson

Morris the guy at RST makes some pretty decent shells as I've bought a few boxes mostly 2 1/2" for my W&C Scott 12 and 20 hammerless guns . I however do not wish to pay his price , not saying they're over priced or anything like that I'm just cheap when it comes to ammunition .

Yeah they went up 3$ a box compared to last time I ordered any but a case usually lasts me a long time .
Im curious to see what they price their 8 gauge ammo at . Im guessing 30$ per 10 rounds .