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