Good $ value sxs shotgun brands?

SuperCub said:
I've owned 6 different SKBs over the years (3 M100s, 1 M200, 2 M500s). All performed perfectly as a high quality, no nonsense working gun. The M100s are my favourite as they come with extractors and a splinter forend. The only thing I dislike about the is the single trigger. Once one gets used to a double trigger, they find that it is a far better system for quick bbl selection.

My current M100 20ga has 28" bbls which have been opened up to IC/M. Handles very well. Perfect for grouse and woodcock with out spending and arm and a leg.

013_zps91ad5d19.jpg
Click to expand...

I am not aware of another system for quick barrel selection. Are you saying some people will attempt to switch a barrel selector on the flush ?
 
Westward1 said:
I am not aware of another system for quick barrel selection. Are you saying some people will attempt to switch a barrel selector on the flush ?
Click to expand...


Double trigger means you just choose the barrel you want to shoot on the flush by which trigger you pull. Quick and easy.
 
In Canada the best value is probably the euro sxs that are quite common here due to some large imports. We can find very high quality side by sides in the 300-400$ range. I'm thinking of the AYA, V.Sarasqueta, Sauer, Thalmann, Brno, Baikal etc.
 
Philthy1 said:
In Canada the best value is probably the euro sxs that are quite common here due to some large imports. We can find very high quality side by sides in the 300-400$ range. I'm thinking of the AYA, V.Sarasqueta, Sauer, Thalmann, Brno, Baikal etc.
Click to expand...

You may be the world's first person to call baikal high quality.
 
Philthy1 said:
In Canada the best value is probably the euro sxs that are quite common here due to some large imports. We can find very high quality side by sides in the 300-400$ range. I'm thinking of the AYA, V.Sarasqueta, Sauer, Thalmann, Brno, Baikal etc.
Click to expand...

Where are you finding Aya's & V. Sarasqueta priced at $300 to $400?
 
I don't want to stir up trouble but Heronfish's response to Philthy1's post made me think.

None of the guns philthy1 noted are, by any objective measure "High Quality". Neither are most of the others that have been mentioned on this thread, including the ones by AYA and Sauer that trade for $400-$500. Most started life as value propositions, not "high quality". That doesn't mean some of them aren't well made or that most of them don't now represent good or very good value for money. And while some may think I'm being overly picky, when we spend this much time, on line, talking about guns, the descriptors we use are important.

Some of these guns will feel better in the hand to some, than other guns. Some will represent better dollar value than others. There is no doubt that a Ithaca/SKB is a better designed and made gun than the Baikals and they all have their place in our market. But when someone (the OP) asks a question.....what is a good value shotgun brand?, we should try to remember the question we are answering and not confuse readers that this is a discussion about "high quality" SxS.

There are, for all intents and purposes, no post WWII SxS shotguns that trade for under $1000 Cdn that are high quality. (A few mistakes slip through now and again.) There are a ton that represent great value.
 
canvasback said:
I don't want to stir up trouble but Heronfish's response to Philthy1's post made me think.

None of the guns philthy1 noted are, by any objective measure "High Quality". Neither are most of the others that have been mentioned on this thread, including the ones by AYA and Sauer that trade for $400-$500. Most started life as value propositions, not "high quality". That doesn't mean some of them aren't well made or that most of them don't now represent good or very good value for money. And while some may think I'm being overly picky, when we spend this much time, on line, talking about guns, the descriptors we use are important.

Some of these guns will feel better in the hand to some, than other guns. Some will represent better dollar value than others. There is no doubt that a Ithaca/SKB is a better designed and made gun than the Baikals and they all have their place in our market. But when someone (the OP) asks a question.....what is a good value shotgun brand?, we should try to remember the question we are answering and not confuse readers that this is a discussion about "high quality" SxS.

There are, for all intents and purposes, no post WWII SxS shotguns that trade for under $1000 Cdn that are high quality. (A few mistakes slip through now and again.) There are a ton that represent great value.
Click to expand...

Wasnt the OP talking value? I'm not talking about best guns. As for high quality..... Well there is a subjective element there.
 
Philthy1 said:
Wasnt the OP talking value? I'm not talking about best guns. As for high quality..... Well there is a subjective element there.
Click to expand...

You are right, the OP asked about good value. And the guns you mentioned are often mentioned in discussions about what guns are good value.

But they aren't high quality no matter how subjective one may be. I wasn't necessarily referring to London Bests either, but it's not hard to divide post war SxS into three simple groups: Lower quality field grade guns built to hit a opening or lower price point in the NA market. Mid range guns, of higher quality of both design and production. And high end guns, well made, well embellished and with striking wood....few and far between from the post war era.

Philthy, if you feel I was picking on you specifically, I'm sorry. Didn't mean to. It's just your post and Heronfish's reply allowed a thought to crystallize that had been bothering me in this thread and others about the way we talk about guns. We have often used "high quality" or something similar when we really mean great value.
 
canvasback said:
You are right, the OP asked about good value. And the guns you mentioned are often mentioned in discussions about what guns are good value.

But they aren't high quality no matter how subjective one may be. I wasn't necessarily referring to London Bests either, but it's not hard to divide post war SxS into three simple groups: Lower quality field grade guns built to hit a opening or lower price point in the NA market. Mid range guns, of higher quality of both design and production. And high end guns, well made, well embellished and with striking wood....few and far between from the post war era.

Philthy, if you feel I was picking on you specifically, I'm sorry. Didn't mean to. It's just your post and Heronfish's reply allowed a thought to crystallize that had been bothering me in this thread and others about the way we talk about guns. We have often used "high quality" or something similar when we really mean great value.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you...... in the gun world, shotguns are overlooked for rifles as rifles need more precise tolerances in the barrel, rifling and action........ that being said, the shotgun world is also rife with snobs that enjoy looking down their noses at sub $2k guns.....

As a young lad, I cut my teeth taking lots of game with a cooey 84........ and yes, it did the trick....... if we were not well off and it's all dad could afford me...

I think "quality" is in the eye of the beholder for shotguns.....

If you are simply looking for a shotgun for a 4-5 time a year grouse hunt, then likely anything would do and the baikal and Stevens mentioned earlier would be considered "high quality" vs the alternatives......

Then there is mid level........ guns you can shoot skeet regularly with and take afield that have good fit and finish ..... mid level like what I mentioned above......

Then there is the stuff of dreams....... hollands, parkers, etc......

The most important thing is to realize that we are all shooters and inclusion is best for our sport....

Have seen the debate swing equally...... baikal and Stevens guys labelling Perazzi guys as snobs..... as well as perazzi and Parker guys in their tweed labelling the lower grades as amateurs......

Me, I just shoot......
 
Superbrad said:
I think "quality" is in the eye of the beholder for shotguns.....

Me, I just shoot......
Click to expand...

Me too, but it has to be a high end gun. In fact, I just bought another---$275.00, lol! But, as in the topic of this thread, I thought it was great value for the condition of the gun and it shows that anyone looking to get in the doublegun arena can find nice condition guns at a very low cost that will likely last the typical hunter for years. I would take this $275.00 gun over most of the Turkish $1000.00 guns today.
 
We are deviating a bit off course, but to many people (including myself) a browning citori is a high quality shotgun, as it is clearly better than lesser, budget doubles. I can appreciate their is better out there, but they're so far out of my price range they aren't worth considering.

One must also be so well versed in older shotguns to appreciate them and seperate the wheat from the chafe. And in going to gun shows frequently, there is a lot of chafe sold as wheat.
There isn't an easy way to learn these guns, as you cannot just Google them or read the gun digest value book. Because of this I, and I'm guessing many, many others, don't even bother to look at these old shotguns.
 
The point I'm trying to make has nothing to do with being a snob, or a pot hunter. It is really about objectively (not subjectively) describing a gun (or a group of guns) somewhat accurately. The fact that a gun was the first gun you had or you shot a lot of game with it is meaningless when it comes to an accurate description of that gun and an accurate assessment of where the gun fits in the larger world of gun quality.

It strikes me many, including recent posts, continue to confuse quality with value. Just because it takes some knowledge to truly understand what makes the difference between the wheat and the chaff, doesn't mean we can't tell the difference when we are talking about a Lada, a Toyota, a BMW, a Porsche or a Bugatti. Even women who have little interest in cars can rank those brands in order of quality. Certainly we should be able to do the same for guns. It has nothing to do with how you hunt, what you can afford or even what you choose to put in your safe.

When we talk about a gun being NIB, we all know what that means. Exactly. When Yildiz and Baikals are grouped under the heading "high quality guns" what does that mean?
 
I guess maybe I was a bit simple minded when I thought of this thread. Trying to apply the wrong logic to the subject. I have loved shotguns more than rifles since the day I first followed along behind my father and neighbour down an abandoned logging road in fall foliage in search of grouse. When I finally came of age I got myself a used 20ga wingmaster that was a good price and Ive used the heck out of it. I have a couple more 870's a franchi O/U a 16 ga SxS from elgiobar, a versamax. All have served me well. I used to shoot more clays than I do now that I've got 3 little kids and for that matter I used to hunt birds more too. But all of these guns to me have been good value guns. They've fit my blue collar budget and except for one very cold, icy, sandy duck hunt I've not had an issue with any of em.

So now that my tastes are changing a bit and I'm reading more classic sporting books on upland and waterfowling my interest in SxS's, and frankly other action types from bygone eras, is increasing. Browsing ee ads and various websites I kept coming across SxS's for what seem like decent prices. However the realist, school of hard knocks side of me didn't trust the low prices. SxS's are supposed to be expensive, they cost $ to make and it's hard to turn a profit hence the plethora of o/u's and very few modern SxS's.

This is where maybe I'm a bit simple ( I am a welder after all :) ) I thought maybe in the same sense that some "brands" of tools or cars or TVs are considered good value for the dollar ie you buy a Honda civic and you drive it knowing its gonna start everytime get you where you want and when you're done you sell it for a decent price. Maybe some of these SxS' are good value as well. Maybe they're not overly popular because of the lack of choke tubes and steel shot capability, and there's nowhere to mount a flashlight or cartidge saddle etc and this the price is depressed. Maybe the finish is worn and the wood is dinged a bit here and there but if taken care of they'll hunt another lifetime of upland gunning.

I thought for my benefit and others that some brands could be found that, if xyz conditions are met then that model of that brand should be good to go. I guess I'd rather spend the $ on a classic with lots of life left in it than a cheaply made version of it that'll never make it in the same way. I guess by good value I meant a SxS that maybe cost the same as a current Turkish SxS +\- some $ but if it were to be made today would be much more expensive. Because like everything else we just can't make things as nice for as cheap as we used to. A good value to me is something that functions trouble free from purchase till death or damn near as long. Wether that means a AH Fox , LC Smith, SKB, or a British or continental gun I haven't figured out.

I've found and am finding out more each day that it's a wide wide world of lots of makers and lots of guns and variations. Lots of research and reading which may be just as fun as shooting these old guns. I guess partly I'm sad I missed out on the "golden era" where working men went afield with SxS's of whicher level of craftsmanship they could afford and hunted birds.
 
Last edited:
canvasback said:
The point I'm trying to make has nothing to do with being a snob, or a pot hunter. It is really about objectively (not subjectively) describing a gun (or a group of guns) somewhat accurately. The fact that a gun was the first gun you had or you shot a lot of game with it is meaningless when it comes to an accurate description of that gun and an accurate assessment of where the gun fits in the larger world of gun quality.

It strikes me many, including recent posts, continue to confuse quality with value. Just because it takes some knowledge to truly understand what makes the difference between the wheat and the chaff, doesn't mean we can't tell the difference when we are talking about a Lada, a Toyota, a BMW, a Porsche or a Bugatti. Even women who have little interest in cars can rank those brands in order of quality. Certainly we should be able to do the same for guns. It has nothing to do with how you hunt, what you can afford or even what you choose to put in your safe.

When we talk about a gun being NIB, we all know what that means. Exactly. When Yildiz and Baikals are grouped under the heading "high quality guns" what does that mean?
Click to expand...

It means that english teachers have failed Canadian students. They clearly do not understand the meaning of that phrase.

The problem arises when others use their money and it's created superiority in an attempt to diminish others. In all honesty, it's what keeps me away from groups of other shooters.

Value is a midnight JBC. Definitely not high quality.
 
It's interesting how the good value and high quality does not apply to semi auto shotguns. In the case of these, in order to be good value, the gun has to be good quality. There is no aristocratic ties to the past with semis, even though the auto 5 has been around for 100 years plus and counting.

I'm not sure you missed any golden age. Working men are still able to hit the field, affording whatever shotgun they can afford. Let's remember that most doubles back then where plain hardware store guns that the blue collar could afford.
 
heronfish said:
It's interesting how the good value and high quality does not apply to semi auto shotguns. In the case of these, in order to be good value, the gun has to be good quality. There is no aristocratic ties to the past with semis, even though the auto 5 has been around for 100 years plus and counting.

I'm not sure you missed any golden age. Working men are still able to hit the field, affording whatever shotgun they can afford. Let's remember that most doubles back then where plain hardware store guns that the blue collar could afford.
Click to expand...

I think the reason these terms don't apply to semi autos as much is that semi autos are generally better and more reliable that auto loaders of the past and everybody makes them because demand is high. Where as SxS's are only made by a few manufactures and the widely affordable ones aren't nearly the quality of the ones from days past.

This is where to me a "hardware store" AH or LC is a better value than many newer guns. Similairly the "golden age" is somewhat gone as working men no longer go afield with plain Jane handcrafted and machined doubles, they now go out with mass produced stamped steel, aluminum and pressed checkering or Cnc cut parts. Both work obviously and something's are even better with computer machining, but they're not the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom