Less Epensive and More Expensive

[Tangram]

Quiet here in shotgun land. As in the topic description I am interested in the distinction between a serviceable shotgun, expensive.... Included below is an e-mail I sent to Bruce Buck after reading his latest article on www.shotgunreport.com (I am trying only to make this argument about shotguns.) You thoughts... reactions?

Bruce Buck,

This non expert wants to thank you for the following paragraph. It probably helps I agree wholeheartedly. After trying to make this argument to the heathen, it is refreshing to find someone that seems to agree with me. No matter how much I bait K and P shooters with the obvious success of the Beretta 391 in sporting they will not concede that a superior feeling trigger does not equal a superior performing shotgun. That said I might buy expensive or fancy and real expensive, but there is no pretense that it is superior to many of the less expensive and less fancy as far as my shooting performance goes.

Rick

Buck's quote:

"The type of gun you use really does not matter." There. I have said it and I feel much better. A shotgun is just a tube (or two). The most expensive shotguns really don't have any significant technical advantages over the cheapest. A Remington 870 will still hit a target just as well as a Purdey, and be a lot more durable too. No, I am not an unfeeling, insensitive Philistine. Those are just the facts, sir.

[AlamoShooter]

Thats the same Bruce Buck that was ..."The Tecknoid" on the shotgun forums 10 years ago.

I shot way too much shotgun.

you have to look at the Fun Factor. Is it the destination that is the best part or the Trip?

Some of the best looking guns are a pain in the butt to try and shoot. some of them that point fast and true , will let you down. both of them end up not being much fun.

I have a Browning IO that is over 12 year old and is a very dear friend. Thats fun to take out

Edited January 14, 2009 by AlamoShooter

[Chills1994]

Russian made Baikal IZH 27 (or something or another ) over under shotugn, could be had for right around the $400 price point.

I think Remington took that over and renamed it the Spartan (the wood was okay when it was the Baikal IZH 27, but somehow Remington has been able to find uglier wood. I didn't know that was possible).

As far as top end....

I live kinda close to where the American Trapshooting Association has their Grand every year in Sparta.

The first year it was here some vendor booth had a 4 barrel set for a paltry $420,000.

Yeah, you read that correctly... creeping up on a half a mill for a shotgun.

Anywhooo as often as this is repeated here on this forums... I guess I wll just have to say it one more time:

It's the Indian, not the arrow.

If one is serious about the shotgun sports, then just like pistols, like we talk about here on the forums, ya gotta go with what feels good...so the higher end shotties are gonna have all the adjustments: buttpad angle, comb height... yada yada.

[Hank Ellis]

I use a Beretta 391 Parallel Target for Trap. I'm not undergunned.

Went from having never shot a shotgun in my life to a C class ATA Trapshooter in 3 years. Did switch from a Rem 870 to the Beretta after the first year. The 870 was beating me up a bit. Shooting the auto fixed all that. Besides the pump was just too much of a PIA to use with doubles.

I see a whole bunch of high 4 figure and 5 figure guns at the Trap range. You know what? A good chunk of that cash is paying for pretty. Gorgeous wood and engraving adds a lot to the price. None of will help you break birds. I don't care how the gun looks. It's got to fit. There's an old biker one-liner that fits here. "Chrome don't get you home."

At the SW Zone Champs I was talking to a shooter who has been AA classed for over a decade. He was in the squad after me and watched me shoot the first half of Handicap. During a lull I asked him about whether switching to a OU would find me some benefit over my auto Beretta. His response said it all. "Why do you want to screw up a good thing. What you are shooting you are shooting well. Keep fine tuning what you've got."

Still boils down to the Indian and not the arrow yet again.

[zhunter]

I think Tightloop is the guy to ask about this subject, you might want to PM him as he has not been around a lot lately.

Tell him I sent ya

[Irishlad]

Bruce is a smart guy.

I think he used extreme examples to prove the point. Hunting lends itself well to that example.

But, let's say you are a medium to heavy clay target shooter...number of shells.

The well made Beretta 391 variations might cost you $1500, give or take. A well made O/U like Browning or Beretta 680 "type" can run you anywhere from $1600-$4,000, so lets say you'll spend at least another $1,000...maybe double of the 391. That's the additional cost, IMHO, of a plain grade, target version O/U...the "equal" of the quality of a 391 compared within the auto world.

The next "jump" of "competitive", plain grade O/U varies, but your probably into $6500, $8500 and $10,000 for the DT, Perazzi and Krieghoff respectively. Higher quality, service levels, more options, but 'tougher' argument VS the 391.

I prefer the O/U because I believe they are more reliable, simpler, nicer balance, etc. And I'm willing to pay more for that. But, there is no shooting advantage over an autoloader.

Every "real" shooter knows that!.

[XRe]

I can only think of one potential advantage to the O/U besides the reliability thing, and it only really applies to sporting clays. You can have more than one choke in the gun at a time, giving you potentially a little more flexibility beyond what you can via just changing shot size. Not yet being a sporting clays shooter, I'm not sure how much of a real advantage that is....

[zhunter]

OK, I have done a fair amount of clay bird shooting, a TON of wing shooting, and her is my take...

A Semi-Auto is going to be user-friendly as in recoil reduction

An O/U is more reliable, but a bit heavier.

To me, and I emphasis to ME, a plain jane is the way to go, I have a Ruger Red Label .20 that I bought for Argentina dove hunting and it is a dream. Extra weight to me = less recoil. I also HATE engraving, it is just something else to have to take care of in my opinion. My Red Label is smooth, meaning NO engraving. I personally look for function in a shotgun.

That said, there is NOTHING like a properly fitted shotgun!!!!

[tightloop]

It is a personal thing...buy and shoot what you like...like motorcycle riders always say..."chrome won't get you home"...same holds true with shotguns. You don't need a 10K shotgun to break birds and have a good time...most serious clays shooters will go thru several shotguns in their attempt to find "the one"...I shot Browning Citori, Ruger, Remington 1100 and then got a Beretta 682...it just seemed to fit me better and I broke more clays with it...stayed with it.

Pride of ownership is nice but shotguns are made to be used. I have shot doves, quail, pheasants, chukars, ducks and geese with my Beretta as well as clay birds and it has a few field bumps and bruises on it, but that goes with the territory as I see it. Wouldn't shoot a Boss, Purdey of H&H even if I had plenty of $$, but might try Kreighoff, and a few of the other midrange guns, just to see how they felt and fit me.

[HSMITH]

Bruce is a smart guy.

I think he used extreme examples to prove the point. Hunting lends itself well to that example.

But, let's say you are a medium to heavy clay target shooter...number of shells.

The well made Beretta 391 variations might cost you $1500, give or take. A well made O/U like Browning or Beretta 680 "type" can run you anywhere from $1600-$4,000, so lets say you'll spend at least another $1,000...maybe double of the 391. That's the additional cost, IMHO, of a plain grade, target version O/U...the "equal" of the quality of a 391 compared within the auto world.

The next "jump" of "competitive", plain grade O/U varies, but your probably into $6500, $8500 and $10,000 for the DT, Perazzi and Krieghoff respectively. Higher quality, service levels, more options, but 'tougher' argument VS the 391.

I prefer the O/U because I believe they are more reliable, simpler, nicer balance, etc. And I'm willing to pay more for that. But, there is no shooting advantage over an autoloader.

Every "real" shooter knows that!.

This ^^^ is good info. There IS a difference between a 'cheap' shotgun and a 'nice' shotgun, a drastic difference.

If you spend less than a grand it better have ONE tube on it, O/U shotguns with two tubes below a grand are regulated poorly and made poorly. The only good thing about a $500 two holer is you can do your own porting with a cordless drill at the range and not hurt the value.....

I was heavy into shotguns for a number of years and have owned literally several dozen shotguns but I never got into the really expensive guns, mine were $6000 or less per and usually less than $3000. A Beretta 682 Gold ended up being the one, but a guy wanted it a lot more than I did so I sold it and bought a Red Label Sporting to shoot while I found another. HUGE jump in price point and it beats me up but the Ruger shot just as many targets for me as the 682 did so I never replaced the 682. I picked up a SuperX2 3.5" to hunt with and it shot just as many targets as anything I had EVER shot and it didn't beat me up nearly as bad as the Ruger, so I started shooting it most of the time. I had no problem getting it to run 1 ounce reloads and it was twice as soft as the Ruger with 7/8 ounce loads. At some point in there I picked up a Browning Gold 20 for my kids to use when they were big enough and it was heaven, I shoot it for everything that doesn't need BIG firepower now and couldn't be happier. That little 20 reads my mind, with 3/4 ounce reloads it scores great, shoots soft as can be, runs absolutely perfect, and I love it. It is a pheasants worst nightmare with an ounce of 5's. If there is big wind I will jump up to a 12 in the SuperX2 and 1 1/8 ounce loads for targets, 1 1/4 mags for pheasants, 3.5" shells for waterfowl.

[Tangram]

At the present moment I have a two shotgun family, a 391 setup for sporting and a 682 Gold E sporting. Both the Berettas work well. Both guns are reliable. The semi auto 391, however, requires spring replacement 10 - 15,000 rounds to keep it that way for the high volume shooter. I bought the over/under 682 because I wanted to try a O/U. I also have developed some mobility problems so not having to pick up shells off the ground is a plus. I like the feel, movement of both guns and have discovered no overall performance difference. Even the alleged advantage of having two different chokes is marginal for me because I shoot light modified .015 in both barrels for almost every target. Close rabbits vaporize longer stuff breaks... Not saying this is the way to go just what I do most of the time.

With the list price of a new 682 GoldE Sporting at $4,000+ I wonder where servicable begins. Breaks clays or goes bang consistently and breaks clays may describe two different shotguns. Serviceable for me includes both breaks targets without undue adjustments, is reliable for the long term.

[ranger]

I am a competitive Sporting Clays shooter in GA. I started with a Remington 11-87 and then shot a Browning Gold Sporting Clays auto for several years. I bought a used Browning 325 European 32" OU because I WANTED one - I have shot it for over six years as my primary clays breaker. I have the old Browning GOLD SC, a new Beretta 391 SC, and the Browning 325 in the safe.

IMHO, the value of an OU is less cleaning than an auto (essentially none excepy a bore swab now and then and minor lubrication) and the ability to have two chokes. I have seen many precesentations in GA where I had cylinder in one barrel and improved mod in the other.

I tend to minimize choke changing now and try to just leave Light Mod in both barrels (another post itself).

My shooting parther has a Kreighoff K80 with multple barrels, custom wood, etc. - the package costs more than most used cars. I outshoot him as much as he outshoots me.

Many shotgun shooters buy the Perazzis, Kreighoffs, high end Berettas because they CAN rather than because they NEED.

I alwayss try to steer new shooters to the Beretta 391 or Remingon 1100 SC, or a clean used Browning 325/425/525 (with 30" or 32" barrels). I never saw a target that one of these shotguns would not break reliably.

[AlamoShooter]

other thing with the OU is that I loaded a 7/8 oz load with Clays powder that was less expensive to shoot and the load would not operate an Auto. And I could put my tube set in the OU and shoot 20, 28 0r even 410

Mostly I liked that the OU will run any shell I put in it