Army infantry shotguns 2006 and up

[tpe187]

My Battalion (light infantry), has both the M26 and the M500. We use the M26 in the stand alone configuration, not mounted underneath the M4, as a breaching shotgun.

The M500 is one of the worst systems to be fielded, in my opinion. First, we don't need an offensive shotgun with 18.5" thin barrel with no stand off device and a full stock. When configured with the pistol grip stock, we have an overly long weapon for breaching. If we had purchased the 590s with thicker barrel, that would be one thing.

I saw several M500 with burst barrels because of poor technique and thin barrels. Soldiers would jam the muzzle into practice doors made of soft wood and plug the barrel. A standoff muzzle device would have minimized that possibility. The M26 isn't perfect, but its better than the M500.

[KalashniKEV]

Our issued shotguns were received during pre-deployment, along with the M14s.

They were M500s with steel trigger housings, and parked not blued.

I was issued the Winchester 1200 from TPE stocks, which I promptly removed the heat shield/ bayonet lug on.



This was home for a while:



Here's one that Joe got creative with:

[Flatlander35]

2/327 No Slack? We also got our bare bones walnut stocked iron sighted M14's a week before deployment in 2007. Upon redeployment we found all of them had excessive headspace issues and had to be turned in. We only shot them at an IA FOB down the road. Go figure.

[KalashniKEV]

2/327 No Slack? We also got our bare bones walnut stocked iron sighted M14's a week before deployment in 2007. Upon redeployment we found all of them had excessive headspace issues and had to be turned in. We only shot them at an IA FOB down the road. Go figure.

Yes.

We had poor results with the M14s also, though I never got any feedback on what was wrong with them. They were brand new refurbs from AAND in the thick blue plastic when we got them.

A bunch of guys were like, "OH, YES! YES!" and I was like "WTF is this whack-ass bullshit?"

The Sage International stocks were a joke too, and we PR&C'd a boatload of them for like $800 each.

[Flatlander35]

No Slack was certainly "phun"........

It's interesting to see that Winchester 1200 still being issued. What year was that around?

[DMR]

TPE187,

I could write a very long piece again explaining how you ended up with the shotgun you received and when you received it. We were some of the first units to receive them based off of a document I wrote in the spring of 2001. By August 2001 we had provided TACOM a list of configuration changes needed that were 70% COTS, and for the rest development was required.

MOD 1 entered service in 2010 in USASOC.

500/590 MOD 2 & MOD 3 of the solution to those issues are now in very limited distribution in the field. All parts are available COTS, several of the parts have NSNs assigned, and all have safety releases by more than one branch of service.

[Slater]

I'd always heard that the M590A1 (heavy-walled barrel) was peculiar to the US Navy. Did the Army ever purchase any?

[DMR]

The long history of the purchases of the Mossberg with very loose control of the configuration makes it hard to say no, but the majority of the Army Mossberg in service are 18" with thin barrel walls. Navy standard are 17" heavy barrels and USMC are 20" (5+1) heavy barrels. There were about 1000 of the 20" 590A1's "image" heat shield and bayonet lug procured prior to 91.

The MOD 0, MOD 2, & MOD 3 include heavy barrel walls and stand off devices. 0 & 3 are both compacts with 14" & 16" (stand off) barrels. MOD 2 uses a 18" barrel with stand off.

[KalashniKEV]

First, we don't need an offensive shotgun with 18.5" thin barrel with no stand off device and a full stock. When configured with the pistol grip stock, we have an overly long weapon for breaching. If we had purchased the 590s with thicker barrel, that would be one thing.

I'm with you on the need for ~10" for breaching and non-lethal munitions only, but the thick walled barrel is just extra weight.

You don't compensate for a training deficiency by putting more steel in the barrel- and anything you plug the barrel on and pull the trigger is going to banana... even the thick walled guns.

Also, if you think it's OK to plug the barrel and pull the trigger, because it worked on some particle board or a door that had already been breached 2-3x in training, then maybe it's time to select a new breacher with a little more brains. It's assumed that this person is also handling explosives and doing math...

[3ACR_Scout]

I can confirm that I was issued an M16A4 for my Iraq deployment in 2005. My Troop had 10 on the books that were basically brand new, received a few months before the deployment. I had to scrounge around to find a rail system for it though. I think they were procured separately, and of course, the number we got didn't match up with the number of rifles on hand. The bulk of the rifles in our Regiment were still M16A2s (it used to be organized so only tank crews had M4s), but there was a big push to fill an operational needs statement (ONS) for M4s just before we deployed.

Fast-forwarding to today, my Stryker battalion has what I believe are still old M590s with 18.5" barrels that are used for breaching.