Semi-auto shotgun reliability?

[Preacherman]

Hi, scattergunning friends. I'd like to get your opinion on the reliability of semi-auto shotguns, in any field (hunting, clays, etc. included) but particularly in a self-defence scenario.

My take on them, based on many years in a civil war environment and considerable training here in the USA, is that I simply don't trust them to bet my life on. For example, here's a review I did of Massad Ayoob's LFI-2 and LFI-3 courses (see this thread on The Firing Line):

The shotgun work was also very interesting, particularly comparing pump-action to semi-auto for defensive use. I had always preferred pump-actions for reliability, although conceding that semi-auto's were faster in operation. This was amply borne out on both LFI-2 and LFI-3, especially the higher-speed runs in the latter course. Literally every semi-auto shotgun on the course (ranging from Benellis, Remingtons and Mossbergs to a magazine-fed Saiga AK clone) suffered one or more malfunctions, taking the weapon down during a course of fire. My reservations about their reliability were amply confirmed! (The sandy shooting range was a real problem in this regard, with dirt getting in the actions.) Pump guns were far more reliable, PROVIDED THAT the operators didn't short-stroke them under the stress of high-speed drills. This particular failure was very common. Mas observes that a competent shotgunner with a semi-auto weapon should be able to get five rounds of buckshot into a standard target at 7 yards in one second or less, and a competent pump-gunner should do the same in 2 seconds or less. On LFI-3, we were challenged to meet this standard. The fastest semi-auto shooter managed it in 1.67 seconds, and the fastest pump-gunner (yes, it was me!) managed 2.03 seconds with an 870. Fun stuff!

What say you, shooting buddies? Am I being too dogmatic in not trusting semi-auto's?

 

[Dave McCracken]

IMO, no. A "Serious" firearm HAS to be reliable, under any and all conditions. Top semis are not quite as reliable as good pumps.

As for short stroking,practice eliminates this.

Improve the software, not change the hardware.

For activities not affecting human life or death, the autos are OK.

BUT,using a pump for everything means practice with one is practice with all. The importance of this can hardly be overemphasized.

 

[Smoke]

Reliability may not be as good as a pump...but its close.

Ask yourself where will you be doing most of your defensive work. At home? Or out in the dirt?

I have put lots of rounds through auto shuckers out in the sand dunes of Monahans, the red clay near Graham, and other less nasty places with no problems. My only malfunction ever of any auto loaader is my old A5 sometims goes full auto for two rounds.

When I did my first ever shotgun course, one of the students brought a Benelli M1 Tactical. The first I had seen in the flesh. It was right out of the box. After the guy did a couple of days with it, the instructors took it one evening and really punished it (with owners permission of course) all the instructors came back grinning, it seems the Benelli had soaked up everything they could try to do to it.

Now I am a dedicated 870 man for home defense, but I think an auto loader has its place and with reasonable care can be a reliable HD gun also.

 

[harrydog]

My opinion, which admittedly means nothing to anyone here, is that the difference in reliability between a quality, well maintained semi-auto and a pump gun is so miniscule as to be almost meaningless. That coupled with the fact that some people will short stroke a pump when under real stress (and you can't be absolutely sure about that until it actually happens) and the practical difference between the two becomes totally insignificant.
Just buy what you want, and practice with it.

 

[Ron L]

The only semi-auto SG I've ever owned was a Winchester 140 (plain jane version of the 1400) that I bought 23 years ago. I've used it for hundreds of rounds of trap, pheasant, rabbit, partridge, dove, and deer (with side-saddle scope mounted on it). The only problem I've ever had wasn't even really a problem, it was an experiment in trying to see which rounds would cycle an 18" barrel (field and target loads wouldn't cycle the action but buck and slugs would). I break it down after every outing, clean it well, and I've never had a failure in the field. It's not a HD gun, so I can't comment on that, but I've had very good luck with this particular gun.

 

[El Tejon]

Preacherman, yes, you are being too dogmatic, but that it because you have real world experience, not gun rag experience.

As a practical matter, in training (never fought with a shotgun, well, once, almost), I have not observed more mals with self-loading weapons because of the weapon. What I have observed is that self-loading GSC shotguns with their goofy buttons and levers and neon/xeon laser/phasers mal because people cannot run the gun.

As the wise man in Tejas saith, "people don't get in trouble because they cannot shoot, they get in trouble because they cannot run their gear!"

Let your training choose your weapon. Pick one gun, buy multiple copies of it. The more I train, the more basic my weapons become. I should be down to a rock in a couple of years.

 

[Smoke]

Let your training choose your weapon. Pick one gun, buy multiple copies of it. The more I train, the more basic my weapons become.

El Tejon, you and I must go shoot sometime. That is probably the soundest wisdom I have read on THR/TFL to date.

You have my respect.

 

[sm]

El Tejon
VERY WISE

I guess that's why what little I have is described as redundent, and boring. Multiples of the same boring plain jane stuff.

repetiton becomes habit--habit becomes faith

I chose so many years ago a SX1 for a semi-auto shotgun, for one main reason--competition. I based this on Brister's testing..."SX1 proved to be the most reliable...in sand, neglect...adverse conditions"-Brister.Also because of gun fit. I used it for competition skeet/SC,and hunting. I have depended on it for HD/SD. And I based this on what others have experienced, before I bought also. Machined steel works. I think one year alone I ran 20k rds through it. Its still running -strong.

That said, for utter reliablity, in any enviroment, I want a pump, plain jane, no gizmos, extensions, bells or whisltles. I want it to fit, and a crisp trigger, and a wood stock. For me anyway.

But I'm an curmdgeon ...so I'm told.

 

[Nippy]

I agree with most of this thread because the difference in reliability seems pretty miniscule to me. In a beginner shotgun course I’ve seen the majority of pumps fail due to operator error and all the semi’s work flawlessly. Now before I receive flames…. I think that goes to show that training is important. However one might also consider the fact that your spouse or significant other may have to use the shotty as well.. So they need to be trained. All in all does every single person that owns a shotgun or will touch a shotgun have the time, disipline, and money to train to a point to be effective?? I don’t think so. In some cases it might be easier to train someone on loading/clearing jams/shooting on a semi than it would be on a pump. Or you can have a pump for the main gunner and a whatever for the rest of the people.

In fact (if anyone has bothered to read this far…and wouldn’t mind reading further) if you define reliability of a “shotgun systemâ€, the user would have to be part of that system since it needs to be there to shoot. Now since the system is a series system (exclude the M3 or any other system that can select semi-auto/pump that would make it parallel in some aspects) the failure will occur if one thing fails in the system. Now out of all the parts of the system what really has the most uncertainty? The most chances of failure? A forged or machined part? Or the human being… In the end I say take what you have most confidence, then take a friend with you and you'll be fine.

Sand getting in the gun… tsk tsk.. someone wasn’t cleaning their shotgun or tsk tsk.. some decided it would be a great thing to shoot in the middle of a sandstorm. LoL!

As for activities involving life or death. Well our marines in Iraq were using benellis, why? Well because the Iraqi’s weren’t a “serious†threat… So no need for that "serious" shotgun

On a side note it was really cool to see the point man in “tears of the su†use a shotty!! Hoorah for shottys!

 

[sm]

Sand getting in the gun… tsk tsk.. someone wasn’t cleaning their shotgun or tsk tsk.. some decided it would be a great thing to shoot in the middle of a sandstorm. LoL!

Nope. But I'm sure you know whom Brister is. Sure he shot live pigeons, various clay games, and hunted.

What the hell does this matter?

Probably the fact the various LEO, MIlitary...learned and utilized his testing in regard to shotshell performance on moving targets -but you knew that.

The gun reliability was a sidenote, per se'. As was his insights on gun fit.

What the hell do clay games matter?

Only the fact anti-aircraft gunners shot skeet to hit moving stuff like enemy planes. Then various LEO military said "you know, something about all this pattern board stuff". "You know reliable is a good thing, I mean with blowing sand, our boys just might find themselves in that situation. And Cold, wet, rain, ice...maybe that Brister feller got something there about Software, gun fit, practice[training], pattern boards...keeping the good guys alive--maybe this book written for the clay shooter or the fella hunting...but...".

I did the same thing when choosing a CCW platform too, I listened to experience, and tested in sand, wet , cold, mud, snow.

So I listen, read, ask questions of those whom have seen the elephant(s) like Dave Mc, Art Eatman, CRSAm, Preacherman...etc.

I keep hearing Software trumps hardware. I think in a few years a bunch of people are going to be loooking up archives to see the sage advice of these guys and El Tejon. Gonna cringe when <click> "damn these old farts were right".

Sand:
To quote CRSam: " one never knows the where or when of their next encounter..."

Make mine multiples of plain jane in flavors of pumps and 1911 style.

'73
"I respect my elders, no matter what, besides the dead brilliant young whippersnappers ain't here to ask..."

 

[Sir Galahad]

There's a LEO, goes by Phila PD, over at Ammolab.com forum thathas a Saiga-12 he put something close to 2,400 rounds through without cleaning before he had a jam. Not bad at all when you see the price of a Saiga-12. I just got a Saiga-20 and will see for myself how the Saiga/Kalashnikov action does for a shotgun. Thumbhole stocks are coming out for the Saigas and that will make for a great shotgun, really. Detachable box mag, AK action, and an ersatz pistol-style grip.

 

[Dave McCracken]

Awhile back I posted a reliability threshold (Started by Ayoob) that I considered minimal for a defensive firearm.

200 rounds of whatever ammo you use for "Serious" work, glitchless.

And, one should practice until he/she can fire off 200 rounds glitchless,under BAD conditions.

For instance...

One buddy has worn glasses since childhood, he had NEVER fired off a shot from his weapon of choice without his prescription glasses on.After one short but highly illuminative range session, his Model 19 sports colored sights and every practice has him shooting some sans prescription. At typical ranges, he's not hitting the X ring as often as with his glasses but he's performing adequately.

As for the pump/semi debate(and it's glad I am we've remained on The High Road), if your weapon passes the test AND so do you, use what you want to.

I'll stick to my 870s, I've never had a short stroke TTBOMK and they feel like body parts....

 

[mete]

When I got my Benelli years ago I asked their gunsmith a number of questions. He commented that of the guns returned because they wouldn't work at least 50% only needed a cleaning. KEEP YOUR GUNS CLEAN.

 

[zahc]

TTBOMK = what?

 

[Mannlicher]

For my shooting needs, my Browning A-5 is as reliable as my Remington and Mossberg pumps. If I were going into harm's way, I would'nt take a shottie anyway.

Establishing the criteria for your argument, and then finding examples, anectdotal and apocryphal, to back that up is not going to convince me otherwise.

 

[Nippy]

What would practice under "bad" conditions be?

 

[harrydog]

TTBOMK = To The Best Of My Knowledge?

 

[Al Thompson]

Harry - yep.

 

[El Tejon]

Old? Whose calling El Tejon old? Oh, yeah, the young & nubile as they run from me now!

I know I am in trouble when the hot chicks address me as "sir" or "Mr. Freeman." Darn it!

 

[sm]

What would practice under "bad" conditions be?

Lighting is the only thing we don't shoot in ...and then again I have.
If I've competed in heat and humidity with blowing sand and dirt, to freezing temps in rain, sleet, ice, snow, mud-then why would I NOT practice what I may be subject to in competition/real life.

I have hunted in some pretty bad weather, I will again. The reality is I have to know what I and my platforms will do anywhere/ anytime. Mud, sand. snow, portaging, my firearms are tools, platforms have to work. Model 12 , 870s will work when muddy and wet--so does my 1911, so will a model 70. Same with sand, snow...etc.

Besides as Preacher, and others whom have seen the elephant can share.In the real world its not always 65* with a slight breeze in good lighting when all hell breaks loose.

Practice in these conditions gives one a better understanding of themselves and gear.

--
EL Tejon, you had the "Mr." used and you as your thinking how 'cute" she is -realize that young an nubile...is ...is oh my I changed her diapers, and then your friends (usually her dad, your hunting buddy) ...yep daughter grew up and filled out...what were your thoughts '73 ?

 

[Dave McCracken]

Maybe I should float a glossary of Davespeak at the top of the forum. Sorry....

Bad conditions are anything that might hinder performance.Heat,cold,darkness,dust,mud,high winds and precipitation, for example.

Training should include a Pucker Factor also, but that's hard to supply on demand.