STA

Yeah you can put those parts back on. I'd be sure to put the retaining nut back before proceeding since I think this captures the retaining piece and tensioning spring which mount behind the swing swivel plate. These parts all stay assembled within the M4 stock and are not to be touched for taking the stock off. To remove the stock, you first ensure the weapon is unloaded and field strip the weapon. You then press in on the dimpled pin on the right side of the receiver which holds the trigger assembly in place (axle bush in Benelli talk). When the head pops out on the left side, you can easily grab it and pull it out about the 1" until it stops (it is captured from falling out). You then press and hold the carrier release button and wiggle the trigger group to the front and down to remove it from the receiver. From here, grasp the receiver in one hand, the buttstock in the other, and simply unscrew the two in a counterclockwise motion. Once free, the entire stock slides off the recoil spring tube. To replace, simply slide the stock on, screw back in place and replace the trigger group. This works the same for the collapsable, since you just screw the small pistol grip portion on in place of a full stock. The sliding buttstock then just slides in place with the rotating back and forth to clear the cuts.

Disk #2 is the limiter plug retainer ring. It is clearly shown in the M1 manual downloadable from Benelli's Italian site. In use, disk #2 is pushed in slightly and angled so that the 'wings' clear the lip of the tube allowing it to be slipped in and out the front of the tube. When sitting perpindicular to the tube, the wings hold the retainer in the tube against the magazine spring pressure. This retainer can thus be easily removed to allow quick insertion/removal of the limiter plug rod.

Like this ??

"1. ATF has ruled extended magazines are prohibited on imported semi-autos under 922®." Which completely explains why FN is able to import their 6+1 Self-loading Police and Winchester their Super X2 Pratical with 8 round mags. Yes these are non-US made and imported and freely available for sale. Yeah I love the (dis)information the net-net offers. And before someone says the ATF ruling also prohibits the mag 'extensions' ala the M4, then why not offer the full length military tube? It should be legally available (remember the FN and X2) and would certainly satisfy the M4 users more than being ripped off for the pricy add-on tubes. If this is still not feasible, then the problem lies with Benelli and their relationship with the ATF rather than the net-net interpretation of 922®.

Hopefully Benelli is now stocked a bit better than last year (they certainly have new M4 barrels at least!) The IT manual simply calls out the o-ring as part 270J, though I think this is simply to identify the schematics in the manual. I called last August looking for o-rings and Benelli Customer Service couldn't offer any guidance except to say all parts were handled by Brownells or Mann & Sons. Brownells didn't show any listing for the M4 model so they couldn't help. Mann at least had heard of the M4, but were a bit miffed that Benelli referred me to them since they had not received any parts or support for the M4. Just FYI, the gas plug assemblies for the four port low recoil barrel and my replacement two port barrel have different internal parts, though externally they were the same. I would bet the o-rings are the same, but the internal caps at least are different, with the manual diagram resembling the assemblies from the two port barrel.

Sheesh between Guns America and Gunbroker there are 8 M4/M1014s listed right now, 3 are at least M1014s. You need to do some legwork, find a friendlier FFL and hook them up with a seller. And yes M1014s can be had in CA. I just completed the DROS and took possesion of mine on Nov 7. A dealer in San Jose brought it in from Oklahoma. I found it the next day while heading to a trade show, bought it and then had the San Jose dealer ship it to my local FFL here in Orange Co. There were no issues with the transaction though it passed through several hands. So easy I almost want to get another.

Pure Absurdity. I have sold off a bunch of gear the past two months and have been running a 40% rate for deadbeats and scammers ... and this is even for some 'winners' who had positive feedback. Always a red light when a zero feedback bidders bids up multiple times with no other bidders. Good luck to the seller. As for extensions, if SRM, or even that other guy selling his homebuilt Aluminum or Steel extensions, are going to make something, I'd be more interested if they would make a full length tube, ala the military version. Then we could replace the short factory magazine with the full length tube and not worry about any extension coming loose. It would be more difficult for us to install (like a Sidewinder) but would be much easier for the manufacturer since there is no inside thread to deal with ... just a straight pipe threaded on both ends. Perhaps someone like Dave's Machine Works could tackle it.

Hi Austin, My swap was done simply to get the regular barrel and my lack of confidence in Benelli's customer service reps answers to my questions about the low recoil barrel. I was lucky to find a M4 here in Los Angeles, and while waiting on my 10 day DROS to clear called Benelli about the markings. The answers were as varied as the number of reps I talked to ... most knew nothing of a 'low recoil' barrel, yet they all said it should be safe to shoot anything 12 Ga loads in it, including 3" magnums. I pretty much gave up the idea of getting the military type two port barrel and assembled a big selection of the low recoil buck and slugs to try, hence my first outing. Then about two months later, another poster here said he'd gotten a replacement barrel. I called the next day, went through the CSR game again where they knew nothing about a swap, and then once proving I'd contacted them before, they immediately offered a new barrel. I sent it second day, hoping it would be returned quickly as was the first poster. Again some nonsense about it taking 6 to 8 weeks, and then I got ahold of the right lady and it was done in a day, back via UPS the next week. I've only had the one range session with the new two port barrel, putting all these LR rounds back through it. Slower cycling perhaps, but they worked great. I will try out some regular buckshot loadings in my next try, something I would have been wary of doing with those four large ports on the Low Recoil barrel. As luck would have it, about a month later while on a business trip in San Jose, I stopped by a gunshop on the way to my hotel. After wandering around I was about to leave when I spotted something that caught my eye ... it was the distinctive cheekrest of a M1014. I asked to see it and they said they had just put it out as a used gun. It was pristine, looked to have been fired maybe with one box of shells, and in the end, it turned out to be a Very expensive business trip for me! Considering some of the other M1014s I've seen on auctions sites, I overpaid, but this was the only M1014 I'd ever seen here in CA, was something I could see and examine firsthand, and was in virtually new condition. I am still debating whether to shoot it, or just hold onto it as a collector and shoot my M4 only. Either way, I have compared the gas ports in both barrels and they look the same, with the only difference being that the newer M4 barrel is threaded for the choke tubes. When I get some free time, I will measure them up side by side to dispell the idea that the early military barrels are heavier walled than the current commercial barrel. BTW that range pictured is the Iron Sights range in Oceanside, CA. It's about a 40 mile drive south, but it has a 25 yd rifle range that is one of the few ways to conveniently try your tactical/home defense type shotguns with slugs and buckshot. The range is well used, and this day there was an AR-15, M1A SOCOM, two other shotguns, Mini 14 and a pump rifle in what looked to be 30-06. The key word for this 25 yd indoor range was LOUD. Great fun though.

Yeah, don't look for trouble, it will find you. I too had the Low Recoil barrel and was one of the first to go through the swap to the two port barrel - and I am glad that I did. When I got a look at the new 2 port barrel, I was truly amazed at how much larger the total gas port area was on the older 4 port LR barrel. I have an earlier post with some factual information you can look at to decide for yourself. When I got the LR barreled M4, I was cautious and only shot low recoil loads on my one range session (about 200 rounds of shot, buck and slugs that day). Everything was flawless and ejection was vigorous. I then swapped out to the 2 port barrel and again went through about 150 LR rounds in my first session. I could immediately tell it was cycling slower, but all the normal low recoil or tactical loads worked flawlessly. These low recoil/tactical loads all worked 100% in the 2 port barrel: 8 pellet - Federal LE133 OO, Hornady TAP FPD. 9 pellet - Federal LE 132 OO, Remington RR12OOBK, WinchesterXB1200LR. Slugs - Remington RL12RS, Federal LE127RS. The Fiocchi 12LESLUG is a very 'mild' low recoil slug round and this was the first to show any cycling problems with the 2 port barrel. Out of the 20 rounds fired, one did not cycle far enough to eject and the bolt closed with the empty shell back in the chamber. Two other rounds fired and ejected, but the carrier didn't kick back far enough to lock open (I was shooting one round at a time). The other 17 rounds fired, ejected and locked the carrier back. Recoil was very mild and the cycling gave a unique slow motion feel due to its sluggishness. As a lark, I also tried about 15 rounds of Winchester's AA12FL8, which is a very light target load that is marked with "Low Noise, Low Recoil" and a Feather on the box. This has only 7/8oz #8 shot with 2½ dram loading, yet surprising it fully cycled the two port M4 about 60% of the time. I had a few failures to lock the carrier and two rounds which again left the empty shell in the chamber. I mention this extremely light target load since I would never have believed it would cycle even once in the two port barrel from what I had gathered from Benelli and this board. Again the two port barrel is intended for normal buckshot or magnum loads and yet worked fine with the reduced recoil rounds. It should thus cycle a little faster and eject with more vigor with it's normal diet as intended. Even if restricted to low recoil buck or slugs, I wouldn't see the need for the LR barrel given these initial results. I'd just pick a load with the patterning I liked and then shoot enough of it to ensure reliability. There would always remain the option to move up to normal power loads. Knowing how much more gas is being bled by the four port barrels, I can't even imagine the pounding they would produce with full 3" magnums. I certainly would not be comfortable blasting away with full power loads in a Low Recoil barrel, let alone those 3" magnums. I am glad I had the chance to experience both barrel types in starting out with my M4, but having done so, I would never go back to the four port low recoil barrel (unless I only intended on shooting those featherweight AA12FL8s !!) Mentioning the ammo options above, the Hornady TAP FPD load seems to be a middle ground offering at ca. 1370 fps, falling between the 1150 fps reduced recoil loads and the normal 1600 fps 00 buck. These were the most powerful of the 'tactical/defense' type loads I tried; they cycled very quickly and patterned well. The only downside was the brilliant 12" diameter fireball they produced. These may be marketed for police or defense use, but I'm not sure how much effort was put into them since they have significant muzzle flash. Comparing some literature, I think Hornady simply rebranded the older #86278 'Light Magnum' with the flashy TAP name to take advantage of the growing market for anything tactical. The flash was quite prominent indoors as shown - nothing else came close to it.

Cryo processing LoxEal 83-55 the official mag tube threadlocker of Benelli Roll stamping of the proof marks - before, during and after.

This weeks Sighting In with Shooting USA TV program features a segment called "Benelli in Urbino". There are some shots of the factory but the focus is on the testing the ComforTech stock. The show repeats at least one more time this week, on Outdoor Life Network on my cable system. Robots handling Aluminum receiver billets Factory and Lots of Shotguns

There's been so much discussion as to an imported gun with more than 5 rounds being prohibited by 922®. Benelli even said they cannot import the M2 practical due to ATF's crackdown on them. If this is so, then why can you still purchase a Winchester Super X2 Practical or FN self loading police? I posted this last week in the Armory section for shotguns on AR15.com. Plenty of 'experts' there yet no one has responded to this ... "Direct from the 'fine print' section in the back of the Winchester 2005 catalog, "Super X2 and Select shotguns are manufactured in Belgium and assembled in Portugal." I think the FNs are even marked made in Belgium. Since both the FN and X2 practical have one piece extended magazine tubes, it would seem to be pretty clear these are imported in this configuration, one which we think violates 922r and which we think is the reason Benelli was stopped. And yet FNs and X2 Practicals continue to be openly sold while Benelli cannot sell extensions or even import their pratical model. It seems strange to enforce this rule only against Benelli, unless there is some other issue between Benelli and the feds we don't know about (hmmm Uncle Sam isn't trying to negotiate a new contract on M1014s are they??). So has anyone heard of Winchester or FN shotguns coming under scrutiny as has Benelli?"

I called Long Island last week on another Benelli item from their site. The woman was a bit irritated, saying they do not handle Benelli accesories anymore. When I mentioned the website, she rudely blurted it was an old site that hadn't been updated and basically just wanted me to quit bothering her.

The current M1 tacticals have 18½" barrels and the 80155 extension sits flush. Older M1 tacticals had 19.75" barrels and the extension tubes were about 3/8" longer than the current 80155 tubes, as shown still wrapped. When installed, these older tubes sit about 7/8" behind the muzzle of the 19.75" barrels (or 3/8" in front of the new 18.5" barrels). Speaking of extensions, does anyone have any leads on the looong extensions or extension/speedloader kits that were offered for the M1 practical?

In first examining the new two port barrel (part #81245), it looks externally the same as the four port barrel (#81246) with the screw in chokes. The bbl serial number is in the TM122XX range whereas my older four port barrel was TM100XX. From the rear, you can see just the two ports and I immediately noticed they are also smaller than the ports as used in the four port barrel. New two port bbl Older four port bbl Comparing the sizes, I calculate the port diameters on the two port barrel are about 2.5mm (0.098"), while the four port barrels are about 3mm (0.118"). Adding up the total port area, I get a value of 9.8 sq. mm for the two port barrel, and 28.3 sq. mm for the four port barrel. This seems to be a significantly greater port area for the low recoil barrels that I would have expected. The gas plug assemblies are also different between the two barrels. The assemblies on my new two port barrel now match the diagram in the parts manual, with a stepped pin (272J) retaining in the plug spacer (275J). View of the two port gas plug assembly, looking down into the hole at the tip of the gas plug cap (273J), and from the front, looking at the pin holding in the spacer. Comparing the assemblies in these pictures below (four port on top, two port on bottom), we see the four port model uses a large pin while the two port has pins with smaller, stepped ends. The four port models also have much larger gas plug spacers and the pins pass through this spacer rather than simply retaining it, as is done on the two port models. So despite the apparently much larger port area for the four port barrels, there were some changes made to the gas plug assemblies on the low recoil barrels as well. With both styles, the spring holding the gas plug cap closed seems extremely stout, so perhaps whatever changes were made were still not enough to allow the ARGO system to fully compensate for full power loads on the four port systems. I can't wait to try this new two port barrel out with a full assortment of loads to see what it will tolerate. In closing, one other thing which has drawn my attention is the 'fouling' which surrounds the two ports in my new barrel. When recieved, there was some powder residue which I would have expected from a quick test firing upon reassembling with the new barrel. I noted what I thought was fouling or leading, particularly strong around the left port. I gave the barrel a quick cleaning last night and I definitely had traces of leading and plastic wad residue come out with a tight patch on a jag. The area around the ports was unaffected by this and I ended up giving it a more thorough cleaning with still no improvement. From the photos, there seems to be some shadowing which would indicate there is something on the barrel surface, though the more complete cleaning and brushing did not pull out any more residue to indicate it is leading or fouling. I'm getting a sinking feeling it is some pitting or surface defect around the ports. Perhaps the hardchrome did not take in that area or some parkerizing solution seeped in through the ports to etch the surface. Whatever it is, it was not affected by cleaning with Shooter's Choice, MPro7, Acetone or IPA. I vaguely recall another poster having some surface irregularity around the gas ports that looked like leading but would not come out (stevenb I think??). I don't recall hearing any resolution to that one ... I guess another call to Benelli may be in order

Long post warning .... After my ongoing discussion with Benelli customer service reps and following the efforts of another member here, Benelli has just replaced my "low recoil round" 4 gas port barrel with a two port barrel. Since June, I have been trying to get a straight answer from Benelli on the low recoil barrels. I finally resigned myself that I would not get an answer from Benelli since they said there were no more two port barrels available and that the low recoil barrel 'should' be OK for any 2-3/4" or 3" load. Hearing of some other problems recently and then the news that another member successfully lobbied them a few weeks ago for a two port barrel, I recontacted Benelli to see what had changed. In my call three weeks ago, the rep first said she knew nothing about it and that the other person must have had his own gunsmith work on his M4 since they had not done any barrel replacements. I relayed my previous efforts and showed that the other man's barrel had indeed been replaced by Benelli as he had posted on this forum. She seemed pleased with my level of detail and then did an about face and said she'd heard about the barrel changes and could now help with mine. She stated that they'd been given a 'heads up' from the product manager and offered to read it. After pausing a bit to find it she said the memo was dated August 6, 2005 and stated the "Low Recoil barrels will no longer be shipped ... there have been long term reliability issues with the 'low recoil barrels'... the new barrel style will be used on all M4 series ... all new guns will now ship with this barrel ... it is rated from heavy 3" Magnum to light 2-3/4" loads". It seemed like it was an email from the way she accessed and read it aloud. I told her this was definitely what I was calling about and she took my serial number to make sure I was affected. After 5 mins on hold she came back and said the replacement is only for the 11707 Law Enforcement guns, and not my 11703 model. She said the memo states it only affects the LE models since they are slightly different than the civilian guns, but she can still switch my barrel if I like. I said my understanding is the only difference is that the LE models have the notched/milled recoil tubes which allow the sliding stocks to retract while the civilian models have the solid tube which allow the stock to be placed at the full length only. She said that is correct. I said I didn't see how this would have any effect on the barrel issue as the LE and civilian should have the same problems with the 4 port barrels. She said yes she would think so too, but the memo only mentions that the LE are covered under the replacement. She then asked again if I wanted to switch barrels and said she 'had' to advise me that if I switch, I may experience reliability problems with cycling tactical or low power loads. She asked if I understood this and still wanted to switch. I said yes of course. I sent it back 2nd day, and waited a week to check on it. I then ran into their famous service when they looked up the RA and said nothing had been done ... "it will take several weeks ... our repair time is usually 6 to 9 weeks ... didn't anyone tell you?". She checked then said there was nothing she could do. I called back shortly asking to speak to the product manager as simply swapping barrels should not take two months. A short hold period and I'm right back in the customer service cue. This lady is very polite, checks and says she can't do anything about it, but she will pass me to a voicemail for her supervisor. I expected nothing to happen, but two hours later I got a call back. This lady said she was handling the M4 issues and said she thought the gunsmith was going to put a system in place to handle such quick turn issues. She said I'd hear back in a day or two with an update. One week later and still no response, so I call again. The lady checks my RA and says "oh it shipped 5 days ago ... I see we didn't call you like we should have". It was scheduled to arrive the next day, but UPS lost it in one of their hubs! After spending the next day tracking it down, they finally put it on a midday truck and it was finally back in my hands by the end of last week. In all, it was there and back in two and a half weeks. Had I not kept on top of it and gotten ahold of that one supervisor, I think it would still be sitting there in the 6 to 9 week repair line. And as with the whole incident since June, had I not kept pushing and seemingly proved I had been following the issue, they may not have admitted to the problem. It's ridiculous that the customer has to go through these motions when they are internally acknowledging the problems with the 4 port low recoil barrels. Now that I have examined it, I have seen a few things I will show below ...

Found these bits of info .... "AA60 3” 00 Buckshot - Procured to replace A011 2¾” Shotshell. The number of shot pellets increased from 9 to 13 improving lethality. The new cartridge was fielded to accommodate the M1014 but is compatible with all shotguns in the inventory." "The Cartridge, 12 Gauge #00 Buckshot 3" (DODIC AA60) is used for training, combat, and guard purposes with the Joint Service Shotgun (M1014). The AA60 consists of a brass cartridge case, plastic sleeve, and waterproofed paper plug." "The Cartridge, 12 Gauge #00 Buckshot M162 (DODIC A011) is used for training, combat, and guard purposes with the M500, M590, and M870 12-gauge Auto-loading and Pump action Shotguns. Three types of outer casings distinguish DODIC A011; the M19 Brass Cartridge Case, the M162 Plastic Cartridge Case, and the waterproofed paper cartridge case that does not have an assigned model number. Each cartridge case consists of a metal (brass or plated steel) head containing a propellant charge and smokeless powder."

Byron, Thanks for the update and good luck in getting your new barrel ! I for one appreciate your patience and thoughtfulness in explaining your situation. I likewise purchased a new M4 and only saw the low recoil markings once I had purchased it. Going back, I saw nothing online and nothing in the manual about it. I called customer service and they were unaware of the markings or the need for any special loads. They were unaware of some barrels having two gas ports while others had four. Three separate reps all said they were unaware of any limitations and thought I should be able to shoot ANY 12 ga. 2-3/4" or 3" all the way up through magnums. One rep did know about the 2 vs 4 port issue and some problems with certain models. He said when the M1014 was first released to the civilian market it would not work reliably with lower power loads (birdshot or target), so it was modified. Presumably this become the current civilian M4 version. If this is the case, then acknowledge the M4 is now set up for ONLY low power loads, and not all loads. We know 2 port barrels were used prior (and still are for the military guns I would guess). If these are what is required to handle full power loads, then say so. Forget the ARGO hype and make a clear distinction. This would protect Benelli and it would offer the consumer a choice of setting up their M4 for their desired use. I would certainly entertain the idea of buying an optional two port barrel and keeping the low recoil barrel handy for target loads or any other loads that aren't reliable in the military barrel. Please let us know how this is resolved and when you get your M4 back from Benelli. I am curious to see if you indeed get the two port barrel with fixed modified choke. I think this was part #81245, while the four port 'low recoil' barrel is #81246.

Byron, I was in the exact same situation as you back in July. Called customer service and the woman didn't even know anything about "low recoil" markings. Each time I call, I get someone else and it's usually 50/50 if they've heard of the low recoil marks or even know the 2 vs 4 gas port issue. When I do ask about what rounds I can use, they just read their cheat sheet which doesn't mention any limitations save the usual "2-3/4 or 3". As for me, I am sticking with low recoil, tactical type loads until this is (or never) resolved. I'm still waiting for a warranty parts issue from them going on two months now, so I guess you just take your chances with their lack of service.

I guess the only place the Surefire M80 has existed was on TV! Courtesy Mail Call.

Hi Steve, quick question about the gas plugs. Do you notice much gas residue at the front of the gas plugs which would indicate the gas plug caps are moving forward against the encased spring to relieve excess pressure out the front as intended ? I shot about 200 rounds of assorted shot, buck and slugs in my first outing with my 11703 and was shocked when I stripped it for cleaning and could see very little evidence of gas residue coming out the front end. There was ample fouling on the pistons and blown back at the receiver and handguards, yet the front end of each gas plug was quite clean with very little residue or soot inside the plugs near the holes or pins. Other than maybe unscrewing the plugs for cleaning, have you ever dissassembled the plugs themselves, removing the cap, spring and spacer? The spring on my plugs seem rather stout while the recoil spring seems quite light on my M4. Tapping the butt will unlock the bolt and throw the carrier back a good inch. It doesn't seem like it takes much force to cycle the action and I am curious how those strong gas plug springs can compress to relieve excess pressure when the bolt/carrier is so easy to cycle.

Yes slugs should be fine in your M4, though depending on your model, there is some contention on what power you level can use. If you've got the 4 port 'low recoil round' barrel on yours, you may want to stick with the "low recoil", "reduced recoil", "managed recoil", "LE", "tactical", etc. loadings that are widely available now. In my outing last week, I ran through quite a few slugs ranging from the Fiocchi Reduced Recoil Slug (12LESLUG), Remington Managed-Recoil Slugger (RL12RS), and the Federal Tactical Low Recoil Rifled Slug HP (LE127RS). These were generically rated by the mfgs as 1150, 1200 and 1300 fps respectively for their 1 oz slugs. All functioned flawlessly and were quite controllable. They fell in line with the mfg ratings as the Fiocchis were downright mild to shoot while the Federals had much more punch and were dead on at 60 yds with the factory sight settings. The Rem and Fed use a more conventional Foster type slug while the Fiocchis use a aero slug that has the wad attached to the slug.

Well I just shot my M4 for the first time last weekend. I shot about 150 rnds of various birdshot loads and then broke it in with a wide selection of low recoil slugs and 00 buck. Cleaning it that night, I was surprised at the amount of "leading", which I attributed to the fact I shot maybe 70+ rnds of the slugs and buckshot. I ended up giving the barrel and choke a few passes with a brush and yes I had quite a few slivers of shiny lead come out. I ended up also pulling the gas plugs and also found some slight lead shavings in both sides.

I sent you the operations and parts manual directly to the email as provided in your profile. If this isn't a valid address, please provide a working email and I can send again. Otherwise, the operations manual in .pdf is available here directly. http://www.benelli.it/Images/Image_Visualizza.asp?ID=1036

Miami, one further question .. After disassembling and finding the carrier cracked, did you happen to remove the gas plug assemblies from the barrel for inspection? I'm just curious if you made sure that each gas plug cap (# 273J in the parts manual) was free to push in against the spring. I would think that if either of these become stuck or even sluggish, it would prevent the excess gas from being relieved, causing much higher pressure to be exerted on the pistons and carrier. Just a thought ? SA