Made in America is hardly a ringing endorsement for a gun. (Granted, there are some fine guns made in the states.)
No, Stoeger has earned their bad reputation for what they are and what they are not - it has nothing to do with country of origin. Almost every maker is capable of producing quality pieces. It makes little or no difference in what country they are based (or where their production has been subcontracted to). Of much more concern is the quality of the materials and the workmanship. These two factors will invariably be tightly linked to the intended price point for the model. When an inexpensive gun is the objective, cheap materials and minimal finishing labour are inevitable.
Nobody is suggesting that Stoeger isn't worth the money, or that, no matter how well cared for, they won't last. There are still a few Belgian "hardware store" guns that have survived over 100 years. But that doesn't make them good guns. Just lucky.
When all that is expected of a gun is that it will go bang when the trigger is pulled, very few makes/models will disappoint. The differences between mass-produced shotguns and quality pieces is found in the handling, the reliability, the fit and finish, and the longevity.
If you allow yourself to be dazzled by magnum-chambering, camo finishes, fibre optic sights, etc., you're the kind of buyer that unscrupulous marketing is directed at.
Shot patterns, terminal energy, the balance and handling characteristics of a lively game gun, and uncompromising reliability are "features" that you don't see in advertisements for economy guns. That's because real performance improvements aren't important to buyers of these guns. They don't pattern their guns, so they wouldn't know if there's a huge hole in the middle of the pattern anyway. They don't understand that a pellet leaving the muzzle at 1475 fps has the same terminal energy as the same pellet fired from a magnum shell leaving the muzzle at 1475 fps. Camo finish is, of course, indispensable because ducks and geese can see right through your blind and will turn away at the first sight of a blued barrel.
And lets not forget the importance of multi-coloured fibre optic sights. After all, if you're looking at the sights of a shotgun, you're not hitting anything you're shooting at, so you might as well have bright colours to make it more enjoyable.
In the final analysis, there are a wide variety of factors that combine to determine the value of a gun. Some of them, such as the scarcity of the model or the notoriety of a previous owner, have nothing to do with the functioning of the gun. Others - such as the quality of the steel, the quality of the walnut, the weight distribution and balance, the fit and finish, and attention to detail (includes rounding of edges to reduce carry fatigue, checkering of the top lever to prevent slipping, checkering of the rib to eliminate glare, long tang trigger guard for extra strength, side clips and cross-bolt for centuries of durability, etc., etc.) - have everything to do with creating a better tool for the job (and increasing the cost of production).
Not everybody has a passion for firearms and for hunting. For some, it's all about hunting and they don't care what they carry into the bush, so long as it goes bang. For others, the gun doesn't even have to be in firing condition - it's a piece of living history and an example of fine craftsmanship. I have one leg in both camps. I can enjoy hunting with nothing more than a sling shot. However, I have a keen appreciation of the arms maker's art and I get the most enjoyment out of hunting and shooting with quality pieces.
Now you may better understand why respondents always want pictures when asked about a particular firearm and why some people come back with answers that don't seem relevant from your perspective. Budget, purpose(s), and your philosophy on guns is helpful for giving people a feel for what's important to you and will more often result in meaningful advice, rather than dissenting opinions.
