3 vs 3.5 shells - does it make any difference?

I won't buy a shotgun made for 3.5" shells. Heavier, less balanced, kicks more, more expensive, and very very specialized. I don't need one, don't want one. I shoot my geese and ducks with 2-3/4" shells mostly, and only seldom use 3".
 
The only reason I see a need for 3 1/2" is if that is the only chamber length offered in the shotgun you are after. IE: I was looking for a LH auto and the Benelli SBE2 was the only option readily available at the time, so viola 3 1/2" in my safe. I have shot 3 1/2 out of it but I find the experience nauseating and distracting, doesn't "hurt" but just not fun.

Much like Longwalker said I grew up shooting only 2 3/4 for both ducks and geese and have never felt "lacking" using them. That being said recently I've been shooting 3" for ducks and geese but the only reason is my brother in-law and I happened upon a close out on 6x flats at a local Co-op.
 
Ultraviolet said:
I would recommend the 3.5 chamber. Truly you may not always need the extra half inch, but it is always good to have the extra power. I found 3.5 more effective for Canada Geese hunting.
Click to expand...

What I like about some 3.5” guns over 3” guns is the added weight and in some cases, the change in dimensions because of the added receiver length. If a 3.5” gun fits me better and swings better then its 3” counterpart, then I would choose the 3.5” gun even if I had no intentions of using 3.5” shells. On the other hand, I chose a 3” gun when I bought my Browning Silver because I liked how it handled with the 30” barrels more than the 3.5” gun with the 28” barrels. If I were to buy another type of semi, I’d definitely handle both 3” and 3.5” guns to see the difference in feel
 
I believe that the 3.5 12 ga was the answer to steel shot being imposed on waterfowl hunters. Steel shot of the day was lacking compared to lead shot. One answer was to add more pellets and powder to make up for the reduced performance of steel. 10ga was expensive and not everyone needed or wanted it.
Nowadays the steel loads are better and the hevi-shot type metal premium loads have overcome any of the limitations of yesteryear.
Having said that, if you are stuck on a 3.5 combo, get the Ulti-mag one with the back-bored .775 in. barrel. which can actually take advantage of the longer shot column.
 
Wild_Thing said:
I believe that the 3.5 12 ga was the answer to steel shot being imposed on waterfowl hunters. Steel shot of the day was lacking compared to lead shot. One answer was to add more pellets and powder to make up for the reduced performance of steel. 10ga was expensive and not everyone needed or wanted it.
Nowadays the steel loads are better and the hevi-shot type metal premium loads have overcome any of the limitations of yesteryear.
Having said that, if you are stuck on a 3.5 combo, get the Ulti-mag one with the back-bored .775 in. barrel. which can actually take advantage of the longer shot column.
Click to expand...

This is correct....Mossberg worked with Federal and developed the first 3.5" gun, the 835. I think it was in 1988. The idea wasnt so much to get more pellets in general, rather, to get more pellets of larger shot size as it was being recommended to use larger shot sizes with steel. The larger shot was also likely the reason why Mossberg went with a .775" bore diameter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom