The enduring appeal of the side-by-side

Often considered a ‘traditional’ sporting weapon, a relic from a previous era, the side-by-side still has plenty to offer the modern gun – once you’ve busted the myths

- MICHAEL YARDLEY

There are many guns who, like me, still love side-by-sides; indeed, the sporting gun juxtaposée is enjoying something of a renaissance. I am biased, I have used one all my life, beginning both game and clay shooting with a side-by-side. These days, I use one pigeon shooting and enjoy breaking clays with old Lang and Holland hammer guns (I have to confess to going over to the ‘dark side’ – over-and-unders – for much, not all, of my game shooting).

A lot of misunderstanding and myth surrounds side-by-sides. So, let’s dispel some of it and note a little history. Side-by-sides may be the ‘traditional’ gun but they are a more recent invention than the over-and-under, which has been around for the best part of 500 years. Side-by-sides appeared circa 1725, made possible by flintlock ignition and practical by improvements in propellant and breeching. The first British gun was made about 1750 by Griffin of Bond Street. Towards the end of the 18th century, side-by-side design was much advanced by London makers such as Durs Egg and Henry Nock. Joe Manton (1766-1835) went on to refine mechanisms, stock work and dynamic handling qualities, establishing configuration and form that have been little improved since.

The side-by-side developed into a breech-loader mid 19th century, initially as a pin-fire gun, as exhibited by Casimir Lefaucheux at the Great Exhibition in 1851, then a centre-fire gun as offered by Charles Lancaster with his ‘base-fire’ (detonating compound was placed under a perforated copper disc to the rear of a rimless case rather than in a central cap). Schneider improved the cartridge and Eley, after much legal wrangling, perfected it. The hammerless double gun itself was perfected by Anson & Deeley in ‘boxlock’ (main components within the box of the action) guise