GUNS AND AMMUNITION. 



LIKES THE MOGG SIGHT. 



Mr. Wilson, of Syracuse, speaks of buy- 

 ing a telescope of L. N. Mogg, and says 

 he is doing good work with it. I, too, 

 have a Mogg, on a .30-30, and with this 

 combination I can get more woodchucks 

 than with anything I have ever seen. When 

 Mr. Mogg put on the sight, he said the 

 rifle was the best shooting .30-30 he had 

 then tried. With it I have, and think I can 

 again, put 10 shots on the size of a quarter 

 of a dollar at no paces. The first time I 

 ever used it I shot 12 shots at n wood- 

 chucks and a large hawk. The first was a 

 miss, but the rest were all kills, 10 chucks 

 and the hawk. I have used the Du Pont 

 .30 calibre powder, and the Du Pont No. 

 1, with different loads, and with bullets 

 from one to 10 to one to 20. I lubricate 

 every bullet, and have never had any 

 trouble with leading. In my opinion, if 

 the users of the .30-30 would tell just what 

 load they use when they are satisfied or 

 otherwise, the conflicting reports we have 

 would soon clear up. I know from actual 

 trials that a bullet driven by black powder 

 at, say, 1,300 feet a second, will not 

 mushroom like the same bullet driven by 

 the government smokeless with a velocity 

 of 2,000 feet a second. I have wind gauge 

 and Vernier screw mount on my mount- 

 ings. The glass is 10 power, and will show 

 a bullet hole in the white at 200 yards. I 

 have open sights on mountings, and like 

 them, too. I have shot many a chuck with 

 a Remington Creedmoor .44-105-550, and 

 with the full load it will tear a large hole 

 in a woodchuck. I don't mean to convey 

 the impression that a .30-30 will shoot as 

 close as a .32-40, but let Mr. Mogg put 

 on the glass and you will be well pleased 

 with the work. I have a Baker Paragon 

 shot gun, No. 360, and have yet to find 

 the man who has one of this grade and 

 >s willing to give it up. 



James H. Pixley, Schuyler Lake, N. Y. 



SHOT GUN SMOKELESS. 



I have always been interested in your 

 Guns and Ammunition department, and 

 have read with great pleasure the various 

 contributions relative to tests with smoke- 

 less powder. Recently I have carried out 

 some tests myself, and believe my experi- 

 ence will be of some interest to other 

 sportsmen. 



During the past 2 or 3 years I have 

 tried the various nitro powders on the 

 market, and have succeeded in getting 

 fairly good results with all. In this in- 



stance, however, I desired to make a prac- 

 tical test, and to that end took half a dozen 

 of the best known nitros with me, on my 

 vacation, from which I have just returned. 

 I tested these powders in bird shooting as 

 well as at targets, and kept tab on the 

 various loads, as far as was possible in the 

 field. My best results were obtained with 

 shells loaded with Laflin & Rand shot gun 

 smokeless. The charge I used was 42 

 grains, with 1% ounces of No. 7 l / 2 chilled 

 shot. I found that with this load I could 

 stop the birds at any reasonable distance. 

 When I missed it was my fault, and not 

 that of either the gun or the shells. 



I was pleased with the trial I made at 

 targets, the pattern and penetration both 

 being wonderful. The absence of smoke, 

 the slight recoil and the cleanliness of this 

 powder were just what I had always wished 

 for, but which I had despaired of finding. 

 The Laflin & Rand shot gun smokeless is 

 all right, and if I had 10 days more to 

 spend with the birds my shells would be 

 loaded with this powder alone. I am con- 

 fident a trial will convince anyone of the 

 merits of this powder, and that when he 

 has once used it he will discontinue all 

 further experiments with smokeless pow- 

 der. 



Robert Skinner, Lexington, Ky. 



46 



HAVE YOUR GUNS TREATED. 



Can the Gun Bore Treatment Co., of 

 New York, so treat a pair of gun barrels 

 that they will not rust, lead or pit? Will 

 some of the readers of Recreation kindly 

 tell their experience in the matter? 



Also, will some one tell me which is the 

 better gun cleaner, the Tomlinson or the 

 Budd-Petmecky ? 



A. D. Hammond, M. D., Brockton, Mass. 



ANSWER. 



I know the Gun Bore Treatment people 

 intimately, and they are thoroughly relia- 

 ble in every way. I have had them treat 

 several of my guns, one both inside and 

 outside, and if I had 50 guns I should 

 have every one of them treated. 



I have been familiar with the process 

 more than a year. I saw one gun that 

 was treated in Los Angeles, Cal., by the 

 inventor of the process, nearly 4 years ago. 

 It has been used and abused thoroughly 

 every shooting season since. It was used 

 for duck shooting on the coast, and 

 was frequently left out over night in fog, 

 spray, rain, or whatever came. It has 

 never been cleaned in these 4 years, ex- 



