28 Gauge Perazzi


I remember reading that you bought a set of 28 ga. 32″ barrels for your(a) Perazzi. Was it a 12 ga. frame? What were the barrels bored? Comments/observations. Several years ago I bought a 20 ga. UK Game gun built on the MX20 frame. It is a superb gun. I dearly love the 28 since I no longer am thrilled about being beaten to death by recoil and wanted your thoughts on these long Perazzi 28 barels.

Thanks. Shep

Dear Shep,

The Perazzi that I got from the now defunct Mr. Litt is an MX8/20 fitted with 31.5″ 28 gauge barrels. If you wish to duplicate it, you need only add similar barrels to your 20 gauge.

My barrels have fixed chokes of .016″ in each barrel. Perazzi bores chokes in .004″ increments. I’d felt that .016″ would be a good modified in the 28, but was wrong. They may measure modified, but they pattern full. If I were to do it again, I’d probably get a pair of .012″s for a little more mercy on the closer shots. Still, at 35 yards, (incoming dove distance) those chokes are miracles.

My trigger is removable with leaf springs, but is non selective. As I built the gun for dove, there really isn’t time to so all that selecting stuff. You just sort of jam the bullets in and let her rip. In driven situations I prefer paired chokes, rather than staggered ones. In sporting clays, paired fixed chokes take all the anguish out of shooting. There are no choices, so you don’t worry about it.

Every now and then I think about sending the barrels to Briley for flush screw chokes, but the gun shoots so well with what it has that I’m reluctant to tempt fate. By the way, barrel convergence is perfect- not always the case with double barrel guns no matter who the maker.

The fixed choke patterns are remarkably consistent and are among the best patterns I’ve ever gotten from a 28. It may have something to do with the fact that the chokes have almost half a foot of taper.

The rib I chose is a flat, tapered one with a single brass bead in front. I’ve never seen any reason to regret this choice and would do it again. You’d probably want your 28 bbls to have the same rib as your 20 bbls.

My 31.5″ 28 ga bbls are stamped with a weight of 1.490 kg. I think that this is about right for the gun, but if the barrels had been an ounce heavier, I wouldn’t have minded. The gun is definitely not whippy, but is very responsive. With those lazer chokes, it’s a real aimer, not a snap shooter. In return, it is an awesome gun at distance.

Perazzi makes screw choke barrels for the 28. I passed those by because Perazzi screw chokes do not have as good a reputation as their marvelous fixed chokes. On the plus side, their screw chokes do add a bit of tip weight to the barrels which will make the gun feel even more steady.

My total gun weighs 7.5# on the button, but it’s centrally balanced so it has a good bit of speed. I wouldn’t get the barrels any lighter, but not too much heavier either.

Now here’s the odd thing about the gun. I had the stock made exactly to my dimensions. That included a slight relaxing of the pistol grip, a length of 15-3/8 with 3″ pitch and zero cast, plus relatively high dimension because I felt a long barreled sub-gauge gun would be a very flat shooting gun. That turned out to be true.

These stock dimensions certainly shouldn’t suit everyone but everyone, and I mean everyone, who has shot that gun shoots it well. Some shoot it marvelously well. I could have sold it a number of times. In fact, most people shoot it better than I do because I tend to aim with it and that’s never a good thing. It’s easy to aim a gun like this because the barrels are so long and thin.

The only mechanical problems I’ve had with the gun have been in broken leaf spring and a broken ejector. The latter was expensive and inconvenient. Other than that, I’ve shot the gun about 14,000 rounds with no problems.

I have an acquaintance, who liked my gun so much that he had Litt get him a three gauge set on the MX8/20 frame with the same 31.5″ length barrels. He likes his gun as much as I like mine. His 28s are just an ounce heavier than mine.

Bottom line: definitely get a set of 28 bbls for your MX8/20 frame. You are going to love it. There is something magical about the 28 and Perazzi certainly does it right.

Best regards,

Bruce Buck
The Technoid for Shotgun Report, LLC

About these ads
Posted in Shotguns | Tagged | Leave a comment


Podcast Audio File

Click on Button in UL corner.

Posted in Podcasts | Tagged | Leave a comment

Long Distance Gun Fitting

Hi Professor,

I am trying hard to make my 391 shoot straight. Out of box p.o.a was 3 inches left of center @ 16 yds. After increasing cast off with Beretta shims provided, p.o.a is not any better. I then added a additional shim that I shaved down to the form of a wedge increasing cast off. No luck, I,m still 2 inches left. I fear that adding more shims could weaken stock head @ receiver and cause problems. Any suggestions?

Knowing that you can’t actually fit anyone via internet here is my physical description hoping it might help in your suggestions. I am 6′ 1″, 255lbs., thick chest and wide shoulders. I’ve noticed that I tend to mount my gun further out almost on the shoulder and arm joint. I also have a full face (what the hell I got fat cheeks). I wear 32″ shirt sleave.

I’ve even ordered a Wenig stock for the 391. Their American Style model. comes with parallel comb, 1/4″ offset comb and a 3/8″ toe out (no off set at heel). Stock feels great. I,ve lowered comb to my height but with this stock you cannot use beretta’s shims. Point of aim with this stock is also 3 inches to left. My question here is can you make the stock butt end slope one way or the other to create cast the same way pitch is altered? I feel like my chest and shoulder mass forces the gun left when I flush the butt to my shoulder. Looking for help.



Dear Kevin,

Professor? Geez, I love that. It sounds so learned, so erudite. Oops! Come to think of it, most of the professors I know are Commie dweebs who salute with their left hands. Who you calling a Commie dweeb? See what kind of advice you’re going to get.

Here’s the deal on gunfitting- it’s a combination of shooter style and shooter physical makeup. You can’t separate one from the other. That’s why a fitter/coach has to see someone shoot before he can hope to come up with the right dimensions. The amount that your turn your head into the stock when you shoot and how upright you hold your head have a lot to do with determining cast, just as does shoulder and face structure. Stock fit also has a great deal to do with how square you stand to the bird vs turning to your side a bit like a rifle shooter. It’s all a matter of degree. You say that you shoot “almost on the shoulder and arm joint”. I’m not really clear exactly where that is. I’d have to see that and I’d also want to see how far to the side you turn your body.

I’m going to assume that your shooting style has gelled and that you are pretty much fixed in the way you mount a gun so that the point of impact feedback you are getting is consistent.

The next thing I’m going to assume is that you already do have some guns that fit you and that you shoot well. Have you compared the stock dimensions on those guns to your 391? What are the differences? Do they all have a lot more cast than the 391 or are they similar? Do you get the same sight picture when you mount? If you get the same sight picture, but not the same point of impact, then look to something mechanical in the barrel alignment. If you can’t get the same sight picture, then look to the stock.

First thing is to eliminate any mechanical deviation in the gun. 391s are mass produced and it’s possible that the gun simply shoots to the left. Test by doing what you have to do to sight directly down the rib with beads lined up. Does the gun still shoot to the left or is it now correct? If it still shoots to the left, it’s a gun problem either with a crooked rib or an incorrect mating of barrel into receiver or incorrect bead alignment.

If the gun shoots straight when you get the beads lined up, then its a fitting issue. We’ve eliminated shooter technique and mechanical problems as the cause. So now it’s just a case of getting the stock cast off far enough.

Go easy on the shims. As you surmise, too much shimming will bend the magazine spring tube too much. I used to screw around with this on my Remington 1100s all the time and managed to bend the tube enough to bind the link. The Beretta tube is much stronger and really, really doesn’t like to be bent too much. I’ve seen a number of people get away with double shims, but I wouldn’t go further than that.

If shims won’t get you over far enough, then you have to remove wood from the stock. Pure and simple. Just get out the rasp and sandpaper and have at it until you get the sight picture you want. Brutal, but effective. Just remember, when removing wood, cut a little and shoot a lot. Then do it again. And again. And again. Once you get it right, refinish and you are done.

Stocks with adjustable combs are only partial solutions to cast as only the comb moves. You say you mount out on your shoulder, so you really want to move the whole thing out. If wood removal alone won’t do it, then it’s back to Wenig for a stock with considerably more cast-off.

Sooner or later this is going to cost you some real money. I’d really advise spending it on a decent gunfitter first. As you can see by all the questions I’ve asked, it really is just about impossible to analyze gunfit over the ether. A good gunfitter who can actually see you mount the gun will be able to spot the problem in less time that it took me to write this and make all my guesses.

After the above professorial ramble, now to your other question: yes, there are a number of ways to “fake” cast by angling the recoil pad. None of them really alter cast of course, but they do alter the way the gun sets up on the shoulder. I’ve got a box of hacked up recoil pads with toes ground off, toes ground at an angle and inside rear edges beveled. All of this affects where the gun seats on the shoulder, not how the cheek fits the gun. I use recoil pad mutilation more to affect barrel cant than cast.

Since you have a heavy chest, you might try rounding the toe of the pad considerably. Kickeez has a “rocker” design pad that is worth a look. http://www.kickeezproducts.com/rocker.php  Just a glance at it will show you what they are trying to do. I like to work with Kick-Eez pads because they are solid and can be cut any way you wish without penetrating the egg crate voids of other pads. This pad essentially increases pitch in only the lower half of the pad. Worth a try if you feel that the toe is digging in enough to move the barrel to the left. Of course, if your shooting left were caused by mismounting due to the recoil pad, you should be able to see that in your rib alignment and you didn’t mention it.

That’s why these things have to be done in person or we just keep doing around in circles. It’s like writing out an instruction manual on tying a shoe lace. It’s so much easier just to show the person. Gun fitting is the same.

Best regards,

Bruce Buck
The Technoid writing for Shotgun Report, LLC
(Often in error. Never in doubt.)

Posted in Shotgun related | Tagged | Leave a comment

BC And POI Explained, Sort Of

Dear Bruce,

If it was as easy as making up the answers, I would also be a Technoid. The problem is with the Aussie culture. Grab a gun, some No. 7 shells, pay for your nominations, and bob’s your uncle (Aussie lingo). You would be surprised how well this works. Though, this does not apply to the top shooters. These guys have travelled into Europe and the USA and have gathered information from the worlds best. The biggest problem is that these guys, don’t divulge information, unless you hold then down and give then a wedgy. (That normally does not go down well on the sporting clays coarse).

So what does the average fellow do, well that is easy……..get on the net and check out what the Technoid has to say!!!!!!!!

So lets begin. Point Of Impact. What is it? Who Cares? Why is it important? What does it mean in the real world?

As you guessed I am a mechanical engineer, who sometimes finds it hard to come to terms with some of the rubbish that our so called gun distributors feed us. They seem to apply a “smoke and mirrors” approach to the entire Point of Impact question.


A friend of mine recently bought himself a brand spanking new Browning UXS. His first attempts at putting this gun to the test was on the skeet range. Needless to say he could not hit a target. It appeared to me that he was shooting over the top of everything. He did all the obvious things like lowered the stock, stuffed around with this and that, but still had the same problem. He eventually realised that this was not a problem, as long as he ran about a foot under every target. At this point I borrowed this gun for some pattern testing. The gun confirmed my suspicions. It was shooting high. Both barrels 75/25% over rib. I told him the results and he was surprised that shotguns were this scientific. He then went back to his dealer, and the dealer told him that it couldn’t possibly be the gun. He went further to say that the person performing the pattern testing was not holding the gun right and that neither of us were qualified to perform such tests, let alone derive to any conclusions. As for me, I have been called an idiot many times before. Not the first and not the last time, I suspect. As for my friend, being the nice fellow he is, did not argue the point, traded in the gun, wore the $1500 loss (in six weeks) and wrote it off to the fact that Browningâs were crap. (Not necessarily so)

This is where the plot thickens. Another fellow I know is currently having an argument with Beretta, as his sporter is shooting 60% below rib. Though this guy (another under paid engineer) is not your average shot gunner. He is well informed on shotgun performance and often publishes articles on the subject for our local rag. (“Feathers and Fur”) Initially Beretta told him to go and jump, but after a little complaining they agreed to change his barrels. I guess they figured that the bad press was not worth it. Can you image what would happen if only 10% of Australian shooters went out and patterned their shotguns. I make this statement, as I personally only know of one fellow you has patterned his shotguns with any diligence, as for the others “ignorance is bliss”.

This is not just confined to the sporting guns. I was talking to a competitive trap shooter who had to have Briley machine an eccentric choke, to correct his first barrel from shooting low left. Aussie’s are to relaxed, if that was me, I would have screamed blue murder.

Correct me if I am wrong, but in sporting, as we see a good percentage of dropping targets, a 50% P.O.I. would suit 95% of the market. So why do the major manufactures insist on producing sporters that shoot otherwise. For example the Beretta agent recently told me that the DT10 sporter is 60/40%. By the way, I nearly had to beat that out of him.

I am very interested to know more about how manufactures determine & achieve POI and what tolerance they consider to be acceptable? Also, what are the current trends on the international scene? New shotguns are not like cars. You cannot drive before you buy. You can shoot a test gun (if one is available) but once you have paid your dollars, you are well and truly committed.



Dear Panos,

I’m always amazed how much more expert I become the further away the supplicant is! Since you are about as far away from me as can be, I can wax very authoritative indeed (without the danger of you showing up on my doorstep to shake a fist at me).

First of all a definition of terms. “Barrel Convergence” (BC) must be discussed first. BC is the difference in impact points between the two barrels of a double barrel gun. Ideally, BC = 0″. In the real world, BC can be a factor, sometimes a considerable one. In any two barrel shotgun, the barrels must be angled towards each other to get proper BC, much like the machine guns on the wings of the WWII fighters were set to converge at a certain distance. You can’t just set both barrels up parallel as the geometry of an O/Us recoil “wants” to shoot the top barrel high.

The problem with BC is that it is somewhat recoil, shell and shooting technique dependent. It’s also VERY hard to regulate perfectly without testing each and every gun. You’d think that with CNC and EDM machining perfect BC would be a given, but it’s not. Many manufacturers consider up to 8″ mis-convergence at 40 yards to be acceptable and much less than that to be simply good fortune. If at 40 yards your killing pattern is only 24″, you don’t want to give up 1/3 of that to barrels that shoot to different places. Welcome to the world of shotgunning! It’s not precision riflery.

The reason I mention BC before Point of Impact (POI), is that it’s quite possible for a shooter to test his POI with one barrel only to find a completely different POI with the other. It’s quite common for O/Us to shoot their top barrel higher than their bottom barrel. So which one do you test for POI? Aarrgghh! And don’t think BC is just a problem with cheap guns. I’ve seen whopping BC errors (“whopping” like meaning a 24″ mis-convergence at 40 yards) in some very, very expensive guns.

So, let’s assume that your BC is acceptable, or even, miracle of miracles, perfect. To measure POI, I rifle sight flat down the rib. This superimposes the mid and front bead. This may or may not be the way you actually shoot the gun, but we are testing the gun here, not your shooting style. If when you sight flat down the rib, your pattern is 50/50, then you have a 50/50 POI to my way of thinking. That’s a “built-in” 50/50 POI and it’s not shooter dependent.

Of course, when you actually shoot the gun, you may have raised your stock so that you see a little bit of rib when it is cheeked the way you like it. This would make a gun that shoots 50/50 shoot 60/40 or somesuch. Technically, you now have a 60/40 POI, but I think that it’s fairer to still say that the gun is a 50/50 POI and that you, the shooter, have caused the gun to shoot higher by stock adjustment or shooting technique. Same result, but very different cause.

There are all sorts of reasons why people like guns that have different POIs. In trap shooting, some people like a gun with a high POI because they are used to looking flat down the rib and they want the gun to shoot high. Others, like myself, want a gun that shoots 50/50 and if I want to shoot higher, I simply use a higher stock and see more rib. Same result, but a very different sight picture. It just depends on what you want.

One of the reasons that some guns come with stepped ribs that are higher at the rear than at the muzzle is because sighting flat down one of those ribs gives you a raised POI without the manufacturer going to the trouble of building the POI into the barrels. He can take the same gun with a flat rib and make its POI flat. Saves money on the production line.

I’ve always hated sighting flat down a rib, especially at sporting, because the slightest extra cheek pressure such as you use on a dropper puts my eye below the rib and I go “blind”. That’s why I like to see a bit of rib when I use standard cheek pressure. If I get a low bird and tuck in just a bit extra, my eye goes flat down the rib, but never below. Yes, I know you should always use the same cheek pressure for each and every shot, but in sporting if the angles are very low or high you don’t. Skeet and trap are very much easier to control in this respect. I like my guns to be about 50/50 POI when looking dead down the rib so that when I cheek normally and see just a touch of rib they shoot a little bit high, but not too much. I’m not saying that this setup is right for everyone, but it’s what I’ve gotten used to over the years and it’s right for me.

Why do the major manufacturers “insist” on producing sporters that are other than 50/50 when they know that’s what most people want? Three reasons: 1) they are unable to control POI as much as you think, 2) some people like guns that shoot high because they prefer to float their birds, and 3) some manufacturers don’t have a clue. Quick, when was the last time you met a gunsmith who was a really good competitive shooter? Well, in some cases it’s the same with gun makers. Sometimes they just make the guns, they don’t shoot them competitively.

You sell what the customer buys. Note that all the Krieghoff K-80s I’ve seen in the USA have had stepped ribs which are noticeably higher in the rear than at the front. This includes their sporter line. Sure it saves them the expense of fitting different ribs to their guns and the customers don’t seem to mind or notice or care. In theory, that K-80 stepped rib should make the gun shoot high and force the shooter to look flat down the rib rather than see a bit of rib. Perazzi goes to great lengths to sell you any style rib you want. It’s interesting to note that the early Beretta 390 semi-auto sporters had stepped ribs. The shooting public in the US hated them and an entire cottage industry arose to fit the flat ribbed 303 barrel to the 390 before Beretta relented and started to produce the 390 sporter with a flat rib. When the 391 sporter came out, Beretta was smart enough to make it available in a flat rib gun.

I’ve always felt that one shouldn’t attribute to malice that which and be adequately explained by sheer stupidity. That certainly applies to some peoples’ driving habits, but it also may apply to shotgun barrel convergence and point of impact. Sometimes the makers do what they do because they simply can’t control the process any better at the price at which they are selling the gun. Where it becomes inexcusable is when there’s a problem with an expensive gun. I can understand the manufacturers stonewalling when a POI or BC problem arises because there really isn’t much they can do about it without drastically altering the way they make guns. About half the time, they are right to stonewall because the owner is improperly testing the gun. The other half of the time, there is really something wrong with the gun.

One of the main reasons I always prefer to buy a used gun, rather than a new one, is that I can test the used gun for BC and POI and return it if it doesn’t suit me. Those are the first tests I make when vetting a gun.

Bottom line: There is always a potential problem with BC and POI, but fortunately most people don’t bother to test their guns and never notice it. Ignorance is bliss or, more accurately, bliss is ignorance. One thing’s for sure- If you have a gun that you shoot really well don’t, don’t, don’t test if for BC or POI. It’s like going to the doctor’s office when you are feeling fine. All you can do is break even or lose. You can never win.

Best regards,

Bruce Buck
The Technoid writing for Shotgun Report, LLC
(Often in error. Never in doubt.)

Posted in Shotgun related | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Shotgun League Format

Dear Technoid:

I have been shooting trap for about a year and a half with very good results. I have recently taken over a dying trap range at our local club, trying to revive it.

What i need to know is where can i get some information or better yet some software to run a summer trap league at our local club. I’ve never shot in any leagues, but i have been getting a lot of input from fellow shooters. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanx Bob

Dear Bob:

I have been running shotgun leagues since the late ’70s. It is really only a matter of minutes to write a little spreadsheet that will do it. You don’t really need a commercial program. What you have to think about is what type of league you want to run.

Winchester used to sponsor shotgun leagues made up of teams. The problem with any team situation is that team members are always dropping in and out of the league. That makes holding a team together very difficult. My experience with team leagues has not been good.

Most of the leagues that I ran were for International Skeet and seldom had more than 40 participants. I found a latter-type league to be the best. I think that the concept was originally used by a bowler or tennis player and I adapted the details to suit shotgun.

All shooters are ranked high to low based on their averages. On any give week, who ever is in position one competes against whoever is in position two, three against four and so on. Our weekly league was two rounds of 25. You shot for points. As between the two opponents, the person who had the highest score for the first round got one point, same for the second round and also one point for the highest total of the 50. Ties split, loser gets 0. Thus the most you could win was three points per week. You might prefer other numbers, but this worked for us.

After each week’s shooting, the averages were retabulated and all the shooters moved up or down the list to reflect their new average and select their new individual opponent for the next week. At the end of the league, the guy with the most points wins.

This ladder system has several advantages: An individual is always competing against the person closest to him in average and thus in ability. There are no handicaps. The beginner has just as good a chance (perhaps better) of winning as the pro does. All you have to do is to keep beating your equal (but often changing) opponent. The good guys tend to be pretty equal and split a lot of points. As you get better and start to beat people, your average gets better too and you start to shoot against better competition. It is self leveling.

Another advantage of this league is that people can drop in and out without affecting the others. He someone drops out, his name just disappears from the next week’s list and every one moves up one place. Nothing really changes. If a late comer is added, a new shooter just appears somewhere on the list and he starts with zero points. It is his choice. Drop outs and add ons are a big league problem and this solves it neatly.

The devil is always in the details and here are a few that I have worked out. Since no one can attend each and every league meeting, I worked out a score bank account system called “Escrow”. On league day, before the shooter shoots his round, he must declare to the scorer whether he is shooting score, escrow or practice. Our rule was that the first two rounds you shot HAD to be score and if you showed up at the club on league day, you HAD to shoot. After your score rounds, if you wished you could shoot either Escrow or Practice.

Escrow scores were recorded just like score rounds, but they were sort of a bank account. If you failed to come one league day, your bank account Escrow scores were put in place of the scores you would have shot. The order of Escrow usage was first in, first out. This meant that we virtually eliminated the problem of “no shows” and people who could not come to the league for a few weeks in a row did not get discouraged and drop out.

If you anticipate a problem, you can always put in a limit on how many places down the ladder you can drop based on any one poor performance. In order to drop down in average to pair up with soft opponents, the sandbagger has to earn zero points for several league meetings. This will probably put him out of the running.

While we encourage the pairs to shoot together, we never did require it. What we did do, though, was never to post the results of the night’s shooting until the league was over for the day. That way no one could arrive a little late, check out his opponent’s score for that evening and shave points. If you don’t know what your opponent has shot, you have to do your best every time to have a chance of beating him.

Starting averages, at the beginning of the league, were initially hard to come by. We would use “known ability” for the first ladder ranking. This worked pretty well, but later I shifted a bit. I had two or three sessions of league warmup before the league actually started. During this league warmup period you were required to shoot two rounds of Escrow each session. This did several things for us. First, it gave the shooter a starting average that we could use when setting up the first ladder. No shooter would willingly do poorly in his initial Escrow rounds because he could be relatively certain that some of them would be used later in the league when he missed a night. Bad early Escrow comes back to haunt you. Secondly, it put some Escrow in the bank for each shooter so that he could still be competing if he missed a few nights and could not come.

I used spreadsheets made on VisiCalc, Lotus 123 and now Excel. Anything that can sort numerically will do fine. It is not very hard to set up. If you need some help, have further questions or want me to send you some of the old spreadsheets, let me know. Good luck with the league. Nothing can transform a stagnant club the way a league can. The bowling people know this better than anyone.

Best regards,
Bruce Buck
Shotgun Report’s Technoid


Posted in Shotgun related | Tagged | Leave a comment

California Waterfowl Association

Posted in Shotgun related | Tagged | Leave a comment

Barrel Length

Dear Sir,

I am in a position of buying a new semi-auto gas operated gun. [Probably an Extrema 2]. I will use this gun for rough shooting, I would like to know what are the advantages and disadvantages of a long barrel compared to a short barrel. Another thing is, this gun is a 3.5 inch chamber, if I use a 3 inch or shorter shell, does it effect the shot pattern?

Best regards,


Dear Kevin,

The Beretta Xtrema 2 comes only in 26″ and 28″ shotshell barrels, so that’s what your choices will be. Other autos usually come with 26″, 28″ and 30″ barrels.

A long barrel has only the very smallest ballistic effect with modern shotshells. In the old days of black powder, longer barrels allowed the powder to burn more completely and produced higher velocity. Modern powders burn much more quickly and barrel length has minimal effect on velocity. Choke has more effect on velocity than barrel length does. Did you know that a 12 gauge using Full choke will have about 50 feet per second more velocity than the same gun/shell using a Cylinder Bore choke? I was surprised when I found that through testing.

Barrel length does have some slight effect on pointing the gun. When the gun is fully raised to the face, it is impossible to discern differences in barrel length because you are looking right down the rib. But when the shooter is in the act of raising the gun to the face, he will be aware of barrel length. In that situation, longer barrels require less visual (but the same actual) lead. This is not a good or a bad thing. It is just something to get used to.

The biggest difference between long and short barrels is balance. That is what I would concentrate on. If you can try both the 26″ and the 28″ barrels and compare them, pick the one that balances best for your taste. The longer, heavier barrel will be slower swinging, but more steady. The shorter barrel will move faster and correct more quickly, but will be a little less stable. The Xtrema is quite a heavy gun as it is, so you might not need any more weight. That is really personal taste.

When considering barrel length, remember also that the receiver of the Xtrema is quite long. It is about 3-1/2″ longer than the receiver on an Over/Under. Thus an Xtrema with a 26″ barrel would have the same sighting plane length as a 29.5″ O/U.

Using a short shell in a long chamber will not affect the pattern. The Xtrema 1 that I tested shot 32 gram 2-3/4″ shells very reliably.

Best regards,
Bruce Buck
Shotgun Report’s Technoid

Posted in Shotgun related | Tagged | Leave a comment