jantonio54

The M1/M2 are designed to cycle heavier loads. Some people report some success with lighter loads, but you can almost be guaranteed cycling problems with added weight AND lighter loads. With a mag extension and a fairly heavy light, I had regular cycling problems. The Wolff heavy spring seemed to fix the problem. I changed to a much lighter light and haven't had a problem since.

I guess it wouldn't matter if you had a hundred round magazine if you couldn't see anything. So go for the light, and take a hard look at Streamlight lights and mounts. They are so light in weight, you can add something else, like a mag extension or sling.

Go have fun, but be prepared for some good-natured ribbing. The M4 is NOT a skeet gun. Maybe you can out-shoot them and get the last laugh.

Sounds like you have it figured out for you. I couldn't agree with you more. I own both (M1 and M4), and the lightness of the M1 is incredible after handling the M4. The only downsides of the M1/M2 are questionable ability to cycle loads for which they are not designed and you do not have the option of hanging a lot of weight on the gun. The Wolff heavy recoil spring alleviates these downsides to some degree.

That's right, but it still will fail the magnet test.

So it's neither aluminum nor steel, but an alloy. You know, you could just touch a magnet to it.

I second the TLR-2. Very high quality and very bright, small, and light. And I think the laser could be very useful. You can set the TLR-2 so that the laser and light come on simultaneously with one switch. It throws a huge, bright wall of light with a very bright laser dot right in the middle. The laser module is well-integrated and adds little bulk or weight. So, why in the world would you not want the laser if you're going to add a light to a shotgun?

At this moment, I have two M4's, one with collapsible stock, one with PG stock, and one M1, and I'm not sure the M1 isn't the best of the bunch. I hunt with an 1100 and an A5, and they are fine as well. I've got $4000 in M4's. They're wonderful, but come on, folks, relax. The one under my bed is the M1, because it feels two pounds lighter than the M4's. It handles better and it points better. That said, the M4's are not for sale. If I could find a mag extension for my 1967 A5, it would be the one under my bed, because it's the shotgun I trust above all others.

That's interesting, understandable, and still a convincing argument for 000. But 25 to 30 yards seems like fairly long range for a HD shotgun, unless you're planning on nailing them at the mailbox on the assumption they're there to break in.

That's a pretty convincing argument for OOO. Do you happen to know the velocity of the OO which you used to compare the energy to OOO? Some of the OO is considerably hotter than normal full-charge loads, for instance Hornady TAP at 1600 FPS. That OO load would carry considerably more energy than the normal 1250 to 1350 FPS loads. It also makes me wonder what the rationale is behind the Army's and Marines' exclusive use of OO.

Maybe I'm an idiot, but I can not imagine at less than 10 yards there is much difference between full and cylinder. Heck, the shot hasn't even left the cup until near that distance.

Here are the Beretta date codes. I believe I read Benelli uses the same codes. I'm too lazy to go look at mine right now. I just bought an M4 for a friend who is also in the Far East. It's YO23XXX. http://www.sportingclays.net/forums/thread.cfm?threadid=3659&messages=3

Take it easy on your little buddy. You didn't even bother to compliment his getting his shift key repaired, as evidenced in the title of his post.

I think that's a great deal. I looked for a month and paid a hundred more. Without some sort of change in the market, these things are going to become very scarce and more expensive. If anybody wants one, I'd do it now. And it does change the character of the weapon in a great way.

Got that shift key fixed, I see.

That's correct. They're fairly difficult to see. Look through the chamber and shine a light through the muzzle.

http://www.benelliusa.com/downloads/manuals.php

The US Military grade buckshot is back on Gunbroker in 250-round cases for about a buck per round. I've shot about a hundred through an M4 with no problems. I have read it's 3.63 dram eq and I think 1425 fps. It feels full-power.

Or you can change the recoil spring to a Wolff Heavy, and hang a mag extension and a light, and it will still be as reliable as the rise and fall of the sun (with full-power loads).

then I guess that makes our reasons identical for asking a question. As I said, I'm "curious" why you'd be curious. I don't mean to be a jerk, or argumentative. I just wondered why it would make any difference.

I'm curious why you'd care. If they needed replacing, wouldn't you order them OEM from Benelli?

Have you seen these? Maybe not as "cost effective" as you'd like. http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=129378604

That's the way I see it, too. Have to wonder if at some point, some enterprising soul attempts to smuggle a container of them in. At a thousand a pop, it has to be tempting.

Duggan, what's your guess on the market for collapsibles in the future?

"I wouldnt think the stock would make any difference as the recoil is controlled through the gun" If you mean that the M4 internalizes the recoil, I respectfully disagree. My M4, shooting full-power loads, recoils as much at the shoulder as the inertia-driven guns I own (or at least very close to it). This means that the joints in the collapsible stock are taking at least somewhat of a beating. Whether or not that eventually manifests itself in the joints' loosening up, I don't know. I really know very little about the ARGO system, but it looks to me as if the two pistons whack the carrier with enough force to unlock the bolt, and from that point rearward, it's just another inertia-driven gun.