All around shotgun***updated with pics***

[newyork]

They are sweet. Mine was a light model with kickoff. They are above my current budget.

[NCGREENSWAMP13]

I would consider the benelli m2 with a 24" barrel. It's the same gun as the sbe2 but it doesn't shoot 3.5" and it's cheaper.

[newyork]

24" should still be ok for clays?

[HKGuns]

I'm a Beretta shotgun guy too. A400 for the win. I'd go at least 26" better to have 28" for clays. The longer barrels swing more smoothly and point more naturally. I've shot the snot out of my 391 and Xtrema2 and they just keep on trucking. I use mine for hunting as well as trap, skeet, 5-Stand and SC's.

[newyork]

I thought 26 and 28 would be the way to go. I'm leaning Winchester for its price paired with its stellar reputation for soft recoil and reliability. It also pointed well for me. The sole reason I'm not leaning Beretta A400 is price. $1400 and up street price. Otherwise I'd grab one of those .
The Browning A5 pointed and balanced best but I've heard of it having stout recoil (although very reliable, similar to Benelli characteristics)

[pinzgauer]

Don't know much about the modern winchesters, but did quite a bit of research on the 3901 vs A300 vs A400.

Net net: my heart wanted the A400... It's prettier, more nicely finished, has a couple of extra features, etc.

But from multiple groups and individuals who shoot all three quite a bit, it became clear the A300 combined the best aspects of the A390/3901 and the A400. At almost half the price. With maybe some subjective handling advantages. (But subjective for sure) multiple instances of individuals with all three who say their preference is the A300.

I have mixed feelings, I don't marvel at its polished metal, blueing, etc. I don't consider it an heirloom class piece. I don't smile and imagine swinging on quail when I heft it.

But for me, it was exactly what I needed. Functional, reliable, affordable, and most importantly, I can hit ducks to dove, plus skeet and clays, and *never* have to dink or fiddle with it. Or worry it won't work. Its like a hammer, it's not sexy, it just works.

And I don't worry about that drop of sweat falling on it in a dove field, etc.

[newyork]

Excellent points. I really don't NEED to pay for fancy Wood and finish if the performance and reliability are the same.

I'd love if someone had an outlander and an sx3. I've read countless sx3 positive feedbacks.

[dbain99]

Well, if you have had a Beretta with a KickOff you know the answer!

Humble brag - When I bought my 26" Beretta 391 they offered a free KickOff by rebate, absolutely incredible deal.


Sent via telegraph with the same fingers I use to sip whiskey.

[newyork]

Honestly, I can't afford one with kickoff.

[pinzgauer]

From memory the A400 differences are:

- cutoff button
- rotating bolt (a300 is a hybrid of the 391 and 400 design)
- two rod action rather than one

The engineer in me wants these. But I've never heard or read of anyone who had a problem due to lack of the above. Zillions of 390/3901/A300s get by well without them.

The other issue was most of the 400s I found were optioned up, where I was able to find the basic syn A300 on sale just the way I wanted it.

Same for the kickoff, I think I would love to have it. But if I can comfortable shoot 5 boxes without it, I'm not sure it's worth 40% of the cost of an A300 to me.

I started out wanting an M2, but the cost has doubled since I first shot one. And by all accounts it's harder on the shoulder. As a young man I shot even clays with a Citori and recoil did not bother me. But as I've aged it became not fun. So I wanted a reliable gas gun.

Rather than analysis paralysis, I decided to try the basic A300. If I did not like it, I'd pony up and get an M2 or nicer Beretta. I'm still banging with the ugly, non sexy stick! You won't win any admiration chats about pretty wood from the geezers while waiting. But you won't be at a disadvantage shooting, either. (My experience, anyway)