Remington Gas Guns


You write,  “I owned six 1100s and shot four of them to bits. They were nice shooting guns, but didn’t hold up even remotely as well as the Berettas when shot a great deal. “

When you are doing your crapping on Remington thing, why do seem to always leave out the part, “maybe if I had replaced the recoil spring every 10,000 rounds they would have lasted longer.” That was your statement, correct????

How is it that most of you big time shotgun experts can remember exactly how many shells and in which gun they were shot over the last 30 years, but cleaning the tools of your trade is too much effort.


Dear D B,

I remember exactly how many shells I fire because I keep a log book and have done so since the early ’70s. I have a little stack of 30 notebooks now. Reading them by the fireside in the off-season keeps me out of the bars.

My gun cleaning habits aren’t perfect, I’m the first to admit that, but over time I’ve learned what keeps gas guns running. Part of that learning experience was figuring out that a new mainspring is good insurance. Fresh mainsprings every now and then might have kept my 1100s from beating themselves to death as quickly as they did. That said, everyone I knew who competed with 1100s in the ’70s and ’80s carried a little tool box full of spare parts. There’s no need for that with the Berettas.

I certainly don’t mean to pick on Remington, but the truth is the truth. They flat out don’t last as long as the Beretta autos do. At least that’s my experience and the experience of those shooters I’ve observed over the years. I don’t so much mine the little parts like rings, extractor claws, bolts, action bars and links breaking, but when the receivers crack or the magazine tubes shoot off, it’s over for that 1100. Perhaps your experience is different. If you’ve found a way to make the 1100s stand up as well as the Berettas, I’d love to hear about it and share your expertise with the other readers.

I do wish Remington would modernize their gun, but they don’t seem inclined. The 1100s came out in the early ’60s and hasn’t changed significantly since that time. It’s a nicely balanced, soft shooting gun, but it does eat parts. On the other hand, Beretta has gone to great lengths to keep their guns technologically current. Beretta now dominates the clay target market the way Remington did 35 years ago. There’s a reason for that.

Best regards,

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

About these ads
Posted in Shotguns | Tagged | 2 Comments

Reblog of “Momentum” by Holly Heyser

A nice piece from Holly Heyser, my favorite woman, shooter, hunter, and writer.

Scroll down and read her earlier pieces.

Posted in Reblog, Stuff | Tagged | Leave a comment

Beretta Shooting Grounds At Dover Furnace

Station 13

Posted in Course changes | Tagged , | Leave a comment

12 Ga 7/8 oz. vs. 20 ga 7/8 oz.

Dear bruce

My son and I shoot trap occasionally. We want to know if there is any difference between shooting our 20ga full choke with 7 1/2 shot, 7/8 oz. loads , verses our 12 ga with 7/8 oz loads same shot. When both guns have 30″ bbls. ? We are not competitive shooters. Just having fun .

Thanks Frank


The general rule of thumb is that, for a given load of shot, the larger the shotgun bore the better. This is because the larger bore results in the load having a shorter column height. In turn, that makes for less distorted shot due to setback on ignition. That’s where the shot at the front of the column squashes the shot at the rear of the column when the powder goes off. The longer the column, the more squashing. The bottom line is that the larger bore will produce more round pellets than the smaller bore. This means better and more consistent patterns.

Dem’s da facts. But, what I don’t know is just how much difference there really is. The 12 gauge 7/8 oz load will be better, but will it be better enough to matter in the slightest? Dunno. My guess is that it might actually matter for one or two birds out of 100, but that’s just a guess. I don’t think it’s a big deal. Certainly it shouldn’t matter for someone who is just shooting trap for fun.

Remember the old Technoid dictum: When you shoot to win, you often lose. When you shoot for fun, you always win.

Best regards,
Bruce Buck
Shotgun Report’s Technoid

Posted in Shotgun related | Tagged , | Leave a comment

O/U Shotguns (Cons)

Podcast Audio File

Click on Button in UL corner.

Posted in Podcasts, Shotguns | Tagged | Leave a comment

Gun Fit

I doubt you remember but I asked a question of you a while back when purchasing an O\U, you were very helpful and I settled on a Beretta Silver Pigeon II 12 ga which I love.

Anyhow I’m looking to get a SxS 20 ga next and I heard that the gun fitting for a SxS is not the same as an O/U. Apparently something to do with your hands being closer to the barrels. Is there any truth to this? I haven’t been professionally fitted for the O/U I have now, but all the do it yourself tests, and a laser boresighter seem to have it pretty close to an excellent fit. I’ll be attending the Orvis Sandanona 2 day shooting school in September and will have the opportunity for a free fitting with them. I’d like to know if there’s a difference before I get up there.


Dear Brian,

I think that there is a difference in the way a DT (double trigger) SxS fits vs a single trigger O/U. At least there is for me. I tend to stock my DT SxS guns longer and higher. I’m assuming here that the SxS is an English stocked gun that allows more freedom of hand placement.

On any DT gun I like to measure the stock length from the rear trigger, not the front as is the convention. I want to extend my finger forward to engage the front rigger, not cramp it back to pull the rear. Maybe that’s just personal preference. I’ve worked with a number of good British fitters and none have mentioned this approach, but the numbers always come out about 1/2″ or so more with the SxS than the O/U.

O/Us are tougher to measure length on because so much depends on the position and curvature of the pistol grip. Few fitter ever talk about this. An O/U with a tight competition grip, like many target model Beretta’s and Perazzis, will take less length than a gun with relaxed Prince of Wales grip. This is because your hand is forced forward with the Italian grip. True gun stock length is not determined from trigger to butt, but from somewhere on your right hand to the butt. I use the web of skin between my second and ring finger as the starting point.

As to height, I always seem to end up with my SxS guns stocked higher than my O/Us. I like my guns to shoot pretty flat, maybe just touch high, but not much. Definitely not low. The SxS, especially with larger loads, will have a tendency to shoot lower due to downward barrel flip. The O/U’s barrels don’t flex that way. The result is that to get both types of guns to shoot to the same point of impact, the SxS is usually stocked higher.

This is all painting with a broad brush as gun fit is all in the details. Even guns of the same type can often benefit from subtle changes in gun fit. It’s often best to have a particular gun fit, shoot it for a while and then go back for a re-fit if things aren’t perfect a year later. Also remember that changes in your body weight and shooting style can have significant effect on gun fit. Gun fit can change as you age and gain experience.

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

Calculated Skeet Leads

Dear Technoid:

I am trying to locate some data on skeet target speed. I have some information from an excerpt from the NSSA Gun Club Manual that was in the February 1996 Skeet Shooting Review. That article stated that the high house target measures 45 – 46 mph and the low house is 47 – 48 mph. These speeds were measured with a radar gun as close to the house as possible.

What I am trying to find is the target speed at other locations, such as the crossing point and at the 60 yard stake. Do you have any information on this?

As you can probably guess, I am trying to calculate skeet leads. I have good information on field layout and shot ballistics. I am trying to account for all of the factors, such as gun speed (match the target), where the target is broken, shell velocity, shot size, etc. This is fairly easy to do with a spreadsheet and if the calculations are made in small increments it will be accurate. I realize that these calculations are only applicable to the sustained lead method, but this is how I shoot skeet.

Do you have any idea how Ed Scherer determined his leads in his video? Regards,


Dear Jim:

I think that you are wasting your time. If you break all your targets at the center post on the skeet field, all your leads are exactly the same from every station. No kidding. They are. If you break at the center stick, the bird is always traveling at the same speed and the shot always has to go 21 yards regardless of which station the shot comes from (except 8). Mechanically, the lead has to be the same. Obviously, the lead that you SEE at each station is different, but not the actual lead. Think about it. It has to be so. No matter how you go about it, you are going to end up trying to calculate something very subjective- a tough job.

When Ed and I chatted about his specific lead charts (I would always kid him and ask whether he gave his students a yard stick), he just said that some beginning shooters needed the reassurance of a fixed number when discussing leads before they got the hang of things. I would be the last person to argue with Ed’s considerable training success, but he never did fully explain to me how he arrived at those numbers. I think that he made them up based on what he saw, not on any calculations.

In my coaching (two summers coaching International Skeet at the US Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs), I never knew of an elite shooting athlete who measured lead in terms of inches or feet. Everyone used space and light. I am not against aiming and measuring- Dryke, Carlisle and Clark certainly did enough of that- but they didn’t do it in feet and inches. They used their training to imprint the amount of space and light that they needed to see. This differs for each shooter- even when they are sustained lead shooters. People see lead differently. Four feet to lead to you may not be the same as a perceived four feet of lead to me. Many coaches like to use feet and inches because the new shooter can readily understand the concept, but that isn’t the way that you actually shoot. Or rather, actually shoot if you shoot well.

I never spent any time with American style skeet and perhaps the premounted gun and slower targets encourage a different kind of shooting, but I doubt it. Like American style skeet, IntSk is a sustained lead game (except second shot on doubles) and at Olympic and World Champion levels is shot with almost the same amount of precision. No one ever got a gold medal by running out there with a ruler.

Still and all, the Technoid loves you for wanting to get, well, so technical. You are clearly a born experimenter. Welcome to the club.

Best regards,
Bruce Buck
Shotgun Report’s Technoid

Posted in Shotgun related | Tagged | Leave a comment