Hello
I´m trying again. Was some problem with image size.
Anyway, for what it´s worth.
The below "snippet" is the end part of a 1922-article. The article mentions that guns are individuals. Also, that improvements and progress over time had given hollow slugs that were more suitable for tubes which were heavily choked. The article does not mention Drillings so much as shotguns part from that Mr. Uhlenflucht points out that his own Drilling gives a good result with slugs in the right tube. I suppose tubes are individuals as well. Apart from the three variants of slugs mentioned I can add the Witzleben´sche slug on which he, if I remember correctly, had a DRGM regarding an improvement. Witzleben´s slug is pre 1922. I suspect there were countless others as well, as is the case today. Conclusion would be that it depends on the weapon, what kind of slug and its weight, the powder charge behind it, the dimension of the tube, the sights, and that one would have to try out what´s best for each gun/Drilling. Probably also depends on who is behind the stock, come to think of it. So if German and Austrian gunmakers regulated Drillings for slugs there would have been a lot of considering for them to do.
0000.jpg
Also, I´m a bit confused as regards the term "Flintenlaufgeschoss" in the article. I would have thought that bleibolzengeschoss(e) is the more correct word. Probably my poor German giving rise to my confusion.
Also: I may remember correctly that Witzleben´s DRP on his slug is from around 1892-93. Although I would have to check before stating it as a fact.
Kind regards
Peter
EDIT: sorry, but can´t work out why the image becomes so small when putting it up in the thread. Worked fine a couple of days ago when I posted in another thread. Computers are beyond me.
I´m trying again. Was some problem with image size.
Anyway, for what it´s worth.
The below "snippet" is the end part of a 1922-article. The article mentions that guns are individuals. Also, that improvements and progress over time had given hollow slugs that were more suitable for tubes which were heavily choked. The article does not mention Drillings so much as shotguns part from that Mr. Uhlenflucht points out that his own Drilling gives a good result with slugs in the right tube. I suppose tubes are individuals as well. Apart from the three variants of slugs mentioned I can add the Witzleben´sche slug on which he, if I remember correctly, had a DRGM regarding an improvement. Witzleben´s slug is pre 1922. I suspect there were countless others as well, as is the case today. Conclusion would be that it depends on the weapon, what kind of slug and its weight, the powder charge behind it, the dimension of the tube, the sights, and that one would have to try out what´s best for each gun/Drilling. Probably also depends on who is behind the stock, come to think of it. So if German and Austrian gunmakers regulated Drillings for slugs there would have been a lot of considering for them to do.
0000.jpg
Also, I´m a bit confused as regards the term "Flintenlaufgeschoss" in the article. I would have thought that bleibolzengeschoss(e) is the more correct word. Probably my poor German giving rise to my confusion.
Also: I may remember correctly that Witzleben´s DRP on his slug is from around 1892-93. Although I would have to check before stating it as a fact.
Kind regards
Peter
EDIT: sorry, but can´t work out why the image becomes so small when putting it up in the thread. Worked fine a couple of days ago when I posted in another thread. Computers are beyond me.
Comment