|
DeporTiro Online Magazine The Guns Magazine on the Web |
IS THERE A BEST COMBAT SHOTGUN? - Part II- Chuck Taylor
Yet, "Shooter C" had a tough time in the 50, 75 and 100 meter stages of TEST 4 and all of TEST 5 because, although his bead-sighted Mossberg shot just slightly above point of aim with buckshot out to an amazing 40 meters, it shot several feet high and slightly to the right with slugs, negatively affecting all three categories of scoring. Conversely, "Shooter A" with the Benelli Super 90 auto-loader found that rifle sights did him little good -- his weapon shot 1 foot low with slugs at 50 meters, 1.5 feet low at 75 and 2 feet low at 100. To overcome this handicap, he held at the shoulders of the silhouettes, taking them down with no loss in time and producing good performances in Elapsed Time, Points Per Second and Points Per Round Expended in TEST 4. But when he got to TEST 5, he found that his Benelli Super 90 didn't pattern tightly enough to take down the silhouette at 50 meters, thus requiring a change from ammunition from buckshot to slugs to end the problem. Naturally, this took time and required extra shots be fired, which, in turn, negatively affected his scores in all three categories. This problem became recurrent with all shooters except "Shooter D," whose Mossberg M-590 placed enough pellets on the silhouette at 50 meters to knock it down, and give him high honors in Elapsed Time. Again, due to the fact that the weapon was cycled while in recoil, there proved to be no real difference between slide-action and auto-loader. Also, the problem of how close to point of aim the weapon shot with both buckshot and slugs affected performances more than whether or not it had bead or rifle sights. Not only did it pattern 1.5 feet high at 15 meters with buckshot, "Shooter E's" Remington M-870 shot four feet high and a full three feet to the right with slugs at 100 meters, meaning that he had to aim two feet low and two feet to the right to guarantee a hit. Naturally this didn't help his scores! On the other hand, "Shooter D's" Mossberg M-590 shot to point of aim with both kinds of ammo, making his job considerably easier. So, without danger of contradiction we can say that this is a highly variable -- and unpredictable -- problem that demands careful examination of the individual weapon involved before its used in the field. Although it didn't perform as well as "Shooter D's," Mossberg M-590, "Shooter B" with the SKB XL-100 auto-loader, also found that his weapon: (1) could place enough buckshot pellets on the 50 meter silhouette to knock it down on a fairly regular basis, and; (2) shot either to, or so close to, point of aim with both buckshot and slugs that it didn't matter. Naturally, this gave him less to think about under stress and made his job as a shooter much easier. When we got to TEST 6 (Partially Obscured Targets), TEST 7 (Small Targets) and TEST 8 (Hostage Situations), whether or not the gun had rifle or bead sights mattered little. What did matter is where it printed in relation to point of aim and how tightly it patterned. Especially during TEST 8 (Hostage Situations), where the target was only 6x4 inches and behind a hostage as well, this became patently obvious. Most shooters tried the long-espoused method of "holding off," that is, adjusting their aiming point laterally toward the outside edge of the hostage-holder's head to try and avoid hitting the hostage. Unfortunately, this caused quite a few complete misses but didn't prevent the hostage from being hit 12 times! In conclusion, is there a "best" combat shotgun? No. I don't think so. However, there are several things that make all the difference, regardless of the weapon or its inherent features: (1) The
shooter must possess skill with his weapon. If not, he's as good as dead,
regardless of what kind of piece he chooses or what characteristics it
possesses. So, get some professional tactical shotgun training, such as
we offer at American Small Arms Academy. (4) Avoid shotguns with poor human engineering, e.g. sharp edges or stocks that prevent comfortable grip and straight-rearward trigger pull. As an example, the Benelli Super 90 was the least popular among test personnel because its human engineering leaves much to be desired. Not only did it exhibit a plethora of sharp edges that quite literally left "Shooter A's" hands bleeding after he had used it for only a short time, but its pistol grip was also too large, thus quickly fatiguing the firing hand. To make matters worse, its buttstock demonstrated excessive drop, thus increasing recoil and preventing a straight-back trigger pull, making the achievement of maximum efficiency very difficult. This gun may indeed be popular, but it is by no means the most efficient. "Shooter A's" performance, though sufficiently good to take first-place in both Elapsed Time and Points Per Second and 2nd place in Points Per Round Expended, came from the fact that he's a 4-Weapon COMBAT MASTER, not from any superiority of his weapon. In fact, when questioned about why he selected it, he said that, although he preferred the Remington M-1100, he chose the Benelli because no one else wanted to use it and he felt that, since it was popular, it should be included in the test! He also said that he figured his score would have been approximately 20% better with any of the other shotguns. Please don't misunderstand. We played no favorites here. The purpose of the testing was to determine just how the various action types and features compared to each other in realistic simulations of typical real-world tactical scenarios. That by virtue of superior human engineering, some guns are easier to shoot than others is one of a number of issues deemed to be critically important by every single shooter in the test. As such, it cannot be ignored. Like it or not, when the chips are down, there is more to weapon efficiency than mechanical design. |
| Deportiro
Online Magazine! The Guns Magazine on the Web - www.deportiro.com You have the right to send via e-mail, print, reproduce and send to anyone these contents, provided that you donĀ“t modify or edit them or their original digital format and always indicate the source, the author and the translator. Copyrights are reserved to the author and Deportiro Online Magazine. 2004. Edited by Deportiro Online Magazine/Revista Deportiro Online©. All rights reserved. |