bootster

I'm looking for a black "shot" barrel, like a 26" with a ventilated rib. You know, the kind that shoots bird shot.

I have a Nikon Monarch 1.5x-4.5x x 20mm that I bought 20 years ago. I also have a Burris Fullfield II 1.75x-5x x 20mm that's the same age that I can swap from an Encore muzzle loader. I'm planning on the Nikon as of now.

I don't know if any of you have tried, or succeeded in mounting a scope on your M1 Super 90. After purchasing the gun brand new for $550 ($876 in today's dollars) in 1991, I had purchased a fully rifled barrel the first year they were available, for $360 ($574 in today's dollars) sometime before 2000. 1998 I think. I was told that the barrel was a cantilever mount. It wasn't. It turned out that I wanted a scope mounted to the receiver. The dealer of the barrel had his gunsmith mount a weaver type one piece mount. The problem with that particular receiver is that there is nothing to tap in the front. You must rely on mounting the screws to the rear of the receiver only. I took the scope off and found out that the gunsmith had relied on two rear screws with a barely tapped front screw to hold the mount on. Years later, I had decided on a Warne Quick Release ring system. I purchased the mount that was for the Super Black Eagle, since the M1 90 wasn't listed in their catalog. Now I know why. There is absolutely no way to mount a two piece mount on this gun. The aluminum, or whatever the receiver is made from is way too thin to mount the front mount. Warne sent me a free one piece mount that lined up with the rear holes that I had drilled and tapped for the rear mount. They are 8-40 screws. What I did was to drill a hole forward of the two rear screws, the same spacing as the rear two. Now I have three rear screws in the mount that grab the receiver very securely. Since I had used the scope successfully with just the two in the rear for over 20 years, I am confident that I am good to go. I don't even want to attempt to try and mount a forward hole with no meat to tap into with that part of the receiver being so thin. The purpose of my post is to alert anyone who thinks they can easily mount a scope on these HK imported receivers, it's not terribly difficult, but you have to be creative. I like having the quick release rings to take the scope off for walking, and sitting in the stand I prefer a scope. 200 yards is highly doable on Whitetails with the fully rifled barrel and Lightfield 1 1/8 oz slugs. I've done it. I'm glad I took the effort to switch to the Warne mount, as it is a very low profile that allows me to easily use the open sights with the scope off. The rings are very reliable in their ability to maintain accuracy when taken off and put back on.Benelli mount hole.CR2

I found the ones I have here. The newer ones are here. Just for clarity.

I bought an "Ammo box" (80 rds) of the 7/8 oz, 2 3/4", 1300 FPS slugs a while back. I noticed that the current offerings are 1 oz, 2 3/4", 1150 FPS slugs. I have been in an area where I haven't got to a place to test them out. I was concerned with the fact that the lower recoil of the slugs I bought would fail to function in the M1 Super 90. Since the newer slugs are heavier, yet slower than the ones I have, would the recoil force be comparable? I'm hoping that I can fire them reliably with the 19" bbl and the 7 shot extension tube. I have a 24" fully rifled, Benelli brand bbl that fails to function reliably with full power slugs when the 7 shot extension tube is used when filled with the saboted 1 1/8" Lightfield slugs (and a Burris 1.75-5x scope). I have to convert it to a 2 shot extension tube in order for the forward weight to be reduced enough for the inertia bold system to function reliably when using the very heavy 24" fully rifled bbl. I am wanting to use the 19" bbl with the 7 shot ext tube (sans scope) for home defense. I know this is a shot in the dark (no pun intended) to ask here, but has anyone used these Fiocchi light recoil slugs in their M1? How is your gun configured, and do they function reliably? Does anyone know why they changed from the 7/8 oz to 1 oz, and lowered the speed from 1300 to 1150 FPS?

I couldn't find anywhere to edit the OP, but I wanted to add that the rear holes are 5/8" apart and the front holes are 7/8" apart. I think I saw some Remington 700 mounts that look similar, but without calling them to verify, it seems like I'm driving blind here. I also saw some Leopold two piece bases where they seemed to be of a different spacing. I cannot understand where the base is that came off of the gun. I believe that it was one piece, but I'm not sure of that.

Hello all. I had a scope mounted on my M1 Super 90 back in 1991. To make a long story short, I had purchased the first available rifled barrels that were manufactured by Benelli. The shop I had ordered through said it was a cantilever mount barrel, so all I needed to do was purchase the barrel, put some rings and scope on it, and I was good to go. The barrel was not cantilevered, so I needed to have the gun drilled and tapped. Then I needed a special forearm to accommodate the new barrel. Bottom line, the gun finished out way over the cost I was quoted. I am actually glad that I got the iron sights, as I can remove the Warne quick release rings to use the iron sights when needed. The problem I have now is the spacing of the holes that were drilled for the scope base. They are not the same spacing, and I cannot find a base that will line up with these holes. I looked through all of my bases, and cannot find anything that will line up. I know I didn't throw out the original bases that were placed on the gun by the gunsmith who drilled the holes, but I cannot find anything to line up with the holes. As can be seen in the attached picture, the forward two holes are farther apart than the rear two holes. All of the bases I have line up with the rear holes, but not the forward two holes. Am I missing something here? Why would the holes be of a different spacing, and is there a mount that I can get without having to drill a new hole?

Thanks. Numrich wants over twice what it costs at Brownells.

I have a Benelli M1 Super 90 that was made in 1991 with a roll pin that looks like it tried to move out of position. The picture shows what it looked like before I tried to push it back in. It broke as I tried to move it back into it's original position. Now it is in a place that has it shifted the distance shown in the photo. I'm afraid that it will try to shift even more now that it is broken off. It is in the trigger group, at the rear of the group. Does anyone with this model have any information that I can use for a reference as to what they see with their firearm? Do I just need to punch it through and replace it? It looks like it is a hollow pin that's made out of some kind of pot metal that's very brittle. Any help would be appreciated.

I have a M1 Super 90 from the HK days and can convert it from a full extension tube to a cutoff cap that only allows it to hold 4 shots total, compliments of wallhanger 54. I also have a Sure Cycle that I really want to sell, but I digress. I have an ammo can of Fiocchi low recoil 7/8 ounce slugs and want to know what the best setup would be to fire them reliably. I have a 24" fully rifled Benelli branded heavy bbl and the original 18 3/4" bbl. I can use a lighter spring in the buttstock, or the longer one, and I can take off the magazine extension to just cap the mag off without any extension. I am leaning towards the lighter spring in the buttstock and the 18 3/4" bbl, with no mag extension to allow just 3 shots in the mag and 1 in the chamber for a total of 4 to be the most reliable for these low recoil slugs. I don't have any place to shoot these ATM, so I am going to set it up the way I think it will be most reliable, like I had just described. Does anyone have any other thoughts as to how this gun can be configured to operate with these low recoil shells?

It is a standard stock. If you need to know it is black rynite. It has the sling slot that goes through it. To the best of my knowledge they didn't offer a lot of variety in stock selection on the M1 Super 90 other than standard/pistol grip. Like I've stated before,the box was labled,as well as the stickers (actually two of them)as being the same numbered variant. Model number 10401. It is possible that it was mislabled. I trust that if forum members have bought these in the past,then they should fit.

I wish! This pad is way too big in profile and the screw holes are a good 1/4 off in alignment. How old are your guns? Like I said,mine is a 1991 vintage. The pad has a sticker on it with the correct number for the M1-90.

I just bought a Limbsaver recoil pad #10401 and it doesn't fit my 1991 HK M1 Super 90. Does anyone know what one may fit? I really don't want a grind to fit pad.

I always search topics. This subject is all over the place with no definitive answers. I like your idea gunner76 but that can be alot of $$$/time. I just thought that the Benelli slug bbls had a common denominator that would eliminate some of the guesswork for me. It seems that no one gets good accuracy with the Hornady's and most people like the Winchesters. I really would like to use the Hornadys since I use them in my rifles and muzzleloaders. Fedremchesters aren't really "appealing" companies to sink my $$$ into. They have plenty of $$$ already. [ 09-01-2006, 04:19 AM: Message edited by: bootster ]

What kind of slugs would you guys/girls reccommend for hunting with a M1-90? I like Lightfields,but am out of ammo and need to "re-up". TIA