294 



RECREA TION. 



There is but one drawback to this de- 

 partment and that is the want of thought 

 displayed by some of its contributors. 

 Jumping at conclusions has done an im- 

 mense amount of injustice to really good 

 arms and ammunition. To be more explicit, 

 some young sportsman spends an unsuc- 

 cessful day in the field; birds are feathered 

 or missed and the powder, shells and gun, 

 or one of them, is blamed. If the gun and 

 shells have been used before with good 

 results it is the powder that is immediately 

 denounced. Now if the matter were al- 

 lowed to rest there and a new powder se- 

 lected but little harm would be done. But 

 if, on the contrary, the shooter sees fit to 

 set forth his grievances in a letter to Rec- 

 reation thousands of readers accept the 

 alleged facts set forth as gospel. Then 

 when buying a stock of ammunition they 

 carefully avoid the brand that has been 

 blacklisted by a writer who a few days later 

 probably discovers that he has not been 

 loading properly and that in reality the pow- 

 der is all right. 



Aside from this feature, the discussion of 

 powder, shells and guns, or of rifles and 

 metallic ammunition, will always be a sub- 

 ject near to the heart of the sportsman and 

 one which never grows old. 



For many years I have experimented with 

 firearms, and as a result I can make the 

 statement that all guns turned out by repu- 

 table makers are good. The cheap gun on 

 which no maker's name appears is never 

 good, and will be dear at any price. The 

 only point for the sportsman to determine 

 is to see that he gets a gun that is adapted 

 to the work for which he intends it. It is 

 a great error to conclude that the best gun 

 is the one that shoots closest. Nine-tenths 

 of the shooters of to-day are out-gunned. 

 In other words, the shooting of the gun is 

 better than the marksmanship of the man 

 who has hold of it. These men would do 

 better work with guns of modified choke. 



I have used a light 16 gauge in wild fowl 

 shooting and the result was unsatisfactory. 

 Then with a heavy, full choke 12 gauge I 

 have blown quail to pieces in the woodland 

 or missed them outright. The guns could 

 not be blamed, for with conditions reversed 

 they would have worked to perfection. 

 Therefore the man who can afTord but one 

 gun should not seek an extreme in either 

 direction of open or close shooting, but 

 should secure one of average pattern, .and 

 by a careful selection of loads endeavor to 

 make it do the work required. This is not 

 by any means the impossible task it would 

 appear, for with the variety of powders, 

 wads and shells which is now at the com- 

 mand of the sportsman, almost any desired 

 result can be obtained. 



The question of smokeless powders is of 

 especial interest, and there is nothing per- 

 taining to gunning in which such marked 

 improvements have been made in the past 



few years as in nitros. The one object of 

 the different manufacturers has been to ob- 

 tain a powder which would not be affected 

 by climatic changes, and which hot or cold, 

 wet or dry, would always give the same 

 results, and this regardless of whether it 

 had been loaded a day or a year. The first 

 smokeless powders that were offered the 

 shooting public fell far short of embracing 

 these points, and what was worse they had 

 an unpleasant way of going through a 

 process of detonation which developed an 

 uncontrollable explosive power and fre- 

 quently resulted in the bursting of guns. 



One powder manufacturer at least has 

 succeeded in correcting all these faults, and 

 is now making a powder which seems be- 

 yond criticism in these points and to be 

 almost perfect in action. Unlike many other 

 nitros it is as hard of grain as black pow- 

 der, and is far more uniform than any other 

 smokeless powder I have ever tested. The 

 uniformity is explained by its process of 

 manufacture, for instead of being screened 

 to obtain the right size of grain, as is neces- 

 sary with the vast majority of powders, it 

 is made in the form of a long string and then 

 cut into exact sizes. Thus it is impossible 

 for one grain to contain a greater amount 

 of explosive than another. 



The makers assert that this powder was 

 waterproof, and after a thorough test I was 

 obliged to admit they were right. For 30 

 days I allowed a quantity of the powder to 

 soak in water, but it showed no sign of 

 softening. Then I poured the water off, 

 dried the powder by rubbing it a few min- 

 utes over a blotting pad, and loaded a dozen 

 shells. These were fired at targets in a 

 comparative test with shells I had just 

 loaded with fresh powder. If there was 

 any difference I was unable to detect it. 

 It was quick in ignition, gave a high veloc- 

 ity and an excellent pattern. In fact all 

 tests I was able to give it proved it superior 

 to any other smokeless powder I had ever 

 used, and I have during the past season 

 shot it exclusively in the field, with most 

 satisfactory results. 



Speaking generally of nitros, they are as 

 far ahead of black powder as a hammerless 

 ejector gun is of a muzzle loader. It is 

 advisable, however, that after the sports- 

 man has made a careful test and selected 

 what he regards as the best he should stick 

 to this one kind. There is not one of these 

 powders that will shoot exactly like another, 

 and frequent changes are sure to ruin the 

 shooting of the best marksman by destroy- 

 ing his judgment of time and distance. 



In the manufacture of shells a constant 

 improvement is also being made. The high 

 priced and high grade smokeless powder 

 shells, first introduced several years ago, are 

 still standard, but the demand for a cheaper 

 article in which smokeless powder could 

 be used with good results has led to the 

 turning out of a new brand every few 



