US Army's Mil-Spec 3443E test..wich models were tested?

dont put too much stock into that test - it was only firing 3000 rounds of buckshot.
id hand you any one of my pumps and bet that they would pass that easily.

Remington did not submit the 870 because the test required an ambidextrous safety and they did not want to redesign/retool for a run of <50k shotguns which represented a couple months of sales for them. they already owned the civilian and police markets and had a lot more to lose if they 'failed' the test due to some nonsense such as the ergonomics of the safety or an unlucky one in ten-thousand failure. Mossberg would have sevrely damaged their reputation by touting that the 870 had 'FAILED' the milspec test.

also, price is the bottom line for many decisions the military makes and the Mossberg with its extruded aluminum receiver and stamped/cast parts was a much cheaper shotgun to build - so even if Remington had submitted the 870 and also passed the test, it would most likely have lost the contract to the cheaper gun anyway. so they had very little to win, and a lot to lose.
 
manbearpig said:
dont put too much stock into that test - it was only firing 3000 rounds of buckshot.
id hand you any one of my pumps and bet that they would pass that easily.

Remington did not submit the 870 because the test required an ambidextrous safety and they did not want to redesign/retool for a run of <50k shotguns which represented a couple months of sales for them. they already owned the civilian and police markets and had a lot more to lose if they 'failed' the test due to some nonsense such as the ergonomics of the safety or an unlucky one in ten-thousand failure. Mossberg would have sevrely damaged their reputation by touting that the 870 had 'FAILED' the milspec test.

also, price is the bottom line for many decisions the military makes and the Mossberg with its extruded aluminum receiver and stamped/cast parts was a much cheaper shotgun to build - so even if Remington had submitted the 870 and also passed the test, it would most likely have lost the contract to the cheaper gun anyway. so they had very little to win, and a lot to lose.
Click to expand...
yep what he said
 
USMC is currently fielding the M4 Benelli and Mossberg 590A1. I was also under the impression that some USMC units (MOUT,FAST) were issued Rem 870 MCS kit as well? Don`t mean to hijack your thread......sorry.
 
600 Mohawk said:
Highly doubt it.
Click to expand...

For a universal platform issued to troops that will be either right or left handed IMO the Mossberg makes more sense. Ambi-safety and a superior slide release location sell it for me. I'm a lefty and grew up on 870's and Mossberg 500's. First time I held a Moss.500 it was a natural fit for my hands. In 5 minutes loading, shooting, unloading and operating the safety were memorized. I also like that the safety position is visable to the user. Thumb operated safeties make total sense in a stressful situation. Take dangerous game rifles for example.
 
i keep hearing the ambi safety argument.
i understand that lefties are handicapped, and i sympathise, but wtf? they cant reach the other side of the triggerguard with their thumb? how do you think righties actuate the safety? if you cant 'adapt' to do such a simple thing, then natural selection should have its way with you.

the only real world advantage i see in the Mossberg is the shell lifter that stays out of the way for easy loading. if im out shooting my 870s for several hours my thumb gets raw from the damned lifter.
but the 870 has its own advantages -- like easy addition of mag extensions, steel receiver for more robust sight/rail mounting and parkerizing (i believe the durability argument for steel/aluminum is moot), and a better aftermarket.

all in all i prefer the 870s, but if i woke up one morning and all my 870s were replaced with Mossberg 590s, i wouldnt cry about it.
 
manbearpig said:
i keep hearing the ambi safety argument.
i understand that lefties are handicapped, and i sympathise, but wtf? they cant reach the other side of the triggerguard with their thumb? how do you think righties actuate the safety? if you cant 'adapt' to do such a simple thing, then natural selection should have its way with you.

the only real world advantage i see in the Mossberg is the shell lifter that stays out of the way for easy loading. if im out shooting my 870s for several hours my thumb gets raw from the damned lifter.
but the 870 has its own advantages -- like easy addition of mag extensions, steel receiver for more robust sight/rail mounting and parkerizing (i believe the durability argument for steel/aluminum is moot), and a better aftermarket.

all in all i prefer the 870s, but if i woke up one morning and all my 870s were replaced with Mossberg 590s, i wouldnt cry about it.
Click to expand...

I think the soldier's need for an ambidextrous safety is not so much because he might be left or right handed, but because in CQB situations you might be called on to shoot from either side. If you are right handed, moving forward with the gun at low ready, anticipating a left hand shot, your index finger straight, it might be a problem to get the safety released in a timely manner, if you are fired on. The option of leaving the safety off while clearing a building might not sit well with team members, nor would going into action with the gun in condition 2.
 
Yep...ambidextrous has many different meanings......the tang safety is an all around better proposition....left or right handed.....strong/weak side grip/hold! All around, the 590 is an easier platform to manipulate than the 870 platform.......and I love my 870's, always have, but the truth is the 590 is easier for everyone to manipulate.....and it has some increased benefits as well......the loading of shells being one of them.
 
I'm not a soldier, but to slide the Ambidextrous safety of with my thumb as I shoulder the weapon is a natural move.
And doesn't req you the move your hand / trigger finger into any position other than ready.
Add in easy visual confirmation of safety position while carrying...
I'd want the ambidextrous safety, no doubt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom