LeoAtrox

IMHO, the second most important upgrade (after upgrading magazine capacity) should be to install the tactical bolt release from GG&G. Stock and bolt knob upgrades are nice, but the #1 thing is to be able to shoot the thing. Magazine capacity upgrade recudes the likelihood that you'd have to reload; but if you did run through the magazine and have to start dropping shells in through the ejection port, you don't want to be fumbling around trying to locate the bolt release.

They just have some consistancy problems since the Kimber guys took over. Some have plastic guide rods or plastic recoil springs, among other issues. If you really wanted a Sig, you'd just want to look it over to make sure that it's hasn't got cheap components and function check it. Mine is a new one (made earlier this year) and works like a champ. Can't go wrong with a J frame though. I'd never try to talk a guy out of a good revolver for an automatic. They both have their places for self defense.

Bummer. (I've got a P226, BTW. 20+1. But the same issue may apply in NY.)

Your 9mm only holds 18 rounds? I've got 20 in my magazine. That gives me 7.1". I do really like the .40S&W though. My problem with it is not recoil or stopping power, but simply that it's not a NATO round. NATO calibers get more readily available ammo, which is an advantage in that probably-never-gonna-happen SHTF scenario. (Probably-never-gonna-happen is still the same as could-someday-happen.)

I chose the .45. Really, it's a 12ga shotgun; but I've got a toddler in the house, and I can't keep a loaded shotgun next to my bed. Pistols are much easier to store safely, but in a way that allows very quick access in case of emergency. And also, it's much easier to do daily chores in your home with a holstered .45, than it is to do them with a slung shotgun. Whatever happened to the blunderbuss?

Outside of the shooting community, there wasn't any real attention to the brass issue. And the truth is, sale of brass that hasn't been destroyed is still up to the bases/armories that provide them. Many of the major bases are still destroying them. So, while the Obama administration reversed its decision on mandating the destruction of usable brass, there's still only about 50% that escapes to civilian reloaders.

I don't like the current handguard options. While I'd like to have a 6 o'clock rail (I toy around with the idea of using a Sig STOPLITE or something like that to make the shotgun easier to maneuver, since I can't adjust length-of-pull without paying $700+ for a skeleton stock) I find little fault, functionally, with the stock handguards. IMHO, the other options out there are too expensive for what little they offer in features and ergonomics. As far as rail systems, I think the best option out there right now is the Sidearmor rail system. The price is prohibitive for many, and it doesn't have full-cross-section rails; but it gives you rails at 12, 9*, and 3* o-clock positions and a shell-carrier* (*optional) as well as allows you to continue to use the stock handguards. Because I haven't got $400 to throw around on accessory mounts for my $1600 shotgun, the clamp mentioned above would give similar capability at a more affordable price. The promise of a mil-spec rail from CarrierComp is also very tempting. I just wish someone would bring out US-made replacement handguards for this shotgun at an affordable price. These things could be done so much better, and be offered so much cheaper. I think that manufacturers just don't see a market for the M4. At least, not one they want to take a chance on if they can't make more than $100 profit on each unit.

If you're going to do them, I'd recommend offset with consistant even-number markings. Kip: Did you say that you're putting mounting bosses in the rails (as needed) in order to allow us to use these as replacement rails on some other commercially available accessories? Or am I misunderstanding the intent of these bosses?

If you're using shot, you might not even have to worry about it. Slugs sure, but with sporting shot loads (and maybe even 00 if you've got a cylinder or IC choke) I think the spread will pretty much allow you to point instinctively.

Check your recoil tube to find out. Some with the PG stock do have the three-position recoil tubes; but some do not. And it's worth saying that the skeleton stock doesn't necessarily make it "function like factory" any more than the factory PG stock.

Top rail has that pesky channel cut down the length of the rail. Also, it's not US-made; so it won't work as a "compliance part" (if you're among those who care).

Outstanding work Devil Dog. I'm excited to see what's coming out. If you had them up on the site, I'd preorder a rail, bolt knob, pistons, a trigger, and a disconnector today. I know I'm going to end up checking your site weekly. I hope you don't sell out too quickly! Besides that, my tube order was mid-April, so I feel good about it being shipped out next week ... Except that I'll be out of town that week. Oh well. It'll be waiting when I get home.

The founder/president's name is actually Trulock? And I thought I was just a cool name some marketing guy thought up ...

I like the idea of the Vinci. It does truly seek to revolutionize how shotguns are engineered. My concern is that the stock gun is probably all you're ever going to get from it. If you wanted a different (more traditional or "tactical") stock, you're probably going to be out of luck. Likewise, if you wanted a different forearm, you are probably SOL. Same for a longer magazine. The potential for switching out the stock and magazine are there (and would be very easy giving the modular design of the gun); but given Benelli's, um... "casual" approach on catering to customer preference, its unlikely that we'll see alternate stocks or magazines in the United States for this first-generation Vinci. And I'm not certain where the Vinci is serialized; but my guess based on history is that it's serialized on the "forearm module". If that's the case, it completely rules out any changing of the forearm. That said, the reviews I've read about the ergonomics of the gun are all raves. Folks love it. They admit it's unsightly (if you like how it looks, more power to you) but once you get it in your hands, they say you'll love it. Kind of like how folks felt about the Springfield XD(m) pistols. It's comfortable and quick. And as long as it's reliable, I think they've got a winner. If they move on to a gen 2 Vinci, i'd recommend going one step further and modularizing the trigger group into an easily-removeable one-peice "trigger pack" and serializing there, as Sig has done with their P250. Then you could switch out the forearm module too (if alternatives became available). I'd buy that, if only for it's potential for adaptability to all types of shotgun use.

Not the case at all. If the aluminum is extruded in that shape already (with the cut) it saves money because you're using less material. In addition, you have less machining to do when tapping the rail for screws. It's cost-cutting at its best. They figure they'll save a few cents on each rail, and it'll still work in 90% of the situations. And then they fool themselves into believing it is mil-spec. I don't care how deep the rail cuts are, or whether they are spaced properly; if you have a channel "cut" down the middle of the rail, it is not M1913 mil-spec. The Picatinny spec sheets specifically shows a diagram illustrating the cross-section of the rail, and it doesn't have any channel running through the middle.

I got it. Weird.

Looking forward to the pictures. Want to see the results of your patterning.

Meh ... I figured there had to be some functional reason for this thing looking so gawdawful.

My 2 cents: When it comes to defense, pistols are good for one thing: Fighting your way to a shotgun. As for chokes: Take a look at your likely range in a defense situation. If you're fighting of home invaders, you're probably not going to be more than 10 yards away; and typically, it'll be even closer. I'd go with cylinder with 00 and/or slug rounds for up-close work. (Personally, I have boxes of slugs.) You can use stock IC choke too. It shouldn't make that much difference up close; you've got to aim center mass either way. The IC could give you an advantage if you're house (or property) is more wide open. My basement is more than 20 yards long. If I was using 00 and expected to be utilizing the full range that the room afforded me, I might want something more restrictive than a cylinder. I'm going to hit the guy either way, the IC just might put more of the shot into the intruder versus into my walls. Why a shotgun versus a rifle (or pistol) with higher capacity? The answer is simple: Stopping power. A 1oz slug or a cartridge of 00 is going to stop a guy dead in his tracks. Heck, it might take him right out of his tracks (and shoes). A pistol or rifle may punch right through a guy at close range, without causing all that much damage if you fail to hit vital organs. Depending on the caliber and ammunition used, it could take several hits to stop an intruder. For a shotgun, if you put a shot of 00 into a guy's forearm, he's still going down. If you put a slug into his leg, he's going down. If you just wing him, he's going down. Maybe not incapacitated, but definitely on the ground and in pain.

I've got one, but haven't fired with it. Patterning isn't typically allowed at the range I fire on. I got it only because it was the cheapest cylinder choke I could find at the time. I don't give a crap about looks or this "tacticool" mumbo-jumbo. Function first; what everybody thinks is the last thing I'm concerned with. I only care about having the most unrestrictive choke for home defense ... I will add this though: My wife does say that the choke feels very uncomfortable when its sticking into your side. So that's a bonus.

Maybe you're not explaining it right; or I'm just not getting it ... The carrier comes up when the bolt begins moving forward, not when it is in the rearward position. Are you saying that it doesn't come up when the bolt begins to move forward, and that you have to rack the bolt back a second time to get it to raise?

ihateitwhenthespacebarandpunctuationdontworkonmykeyboardtoobecauseitmakesithardforpeopletoreadwhatistyped

I bet they do. The military standards for "features" have dropped a bit since the beginning of the GWOT. The M1014 works well, and the Marine Corps didn't plan on mounting accessories to it anyway. Even if they had, they probably wouldn't have requested that the rail be changed. People are starting to get used to non-standard rails. Unfortunately, when enough people buy them, the industry learns that it doesn't matter if they meet the M1913 standard or not. We picky few raise a big stink and enlist the help of guys like Kip to fix Benelli's shortcomings; but the Marine Corps has bigger fish to fry.

It appears that the Zeiss Z-point's unique attachment system would work very well on the M4 rail. The photos of the underside that I could find aren't very large; but from what I could make out, it appears that the horizontal catch that fits into the rail's recoil groove (or "locking slot") runs from one side of the rail mount to the other. Because of this, it will engage the full surface of the M4 rail's exposed cross-section. Duggan's LaRue mount's catch does not extend from the one side of the rail mount to the other, but only exists in the center portion; so it only engages a small portion of the non-standard rail's cross section. Of course, ideally the rail would be mil-spec without the groove running down the middle of it; but we can't change that ... Yet.

If you were to post a picture of a photo of President Bush, or Wayne LaPierre, or some other less-anti-gun "celebrity" next to a pistol; would that seem like a threat, or an homage? Perceiving a negtive context about this photo is only due to the represented person's own political views with regards to firearms, and the views of the person looking at the photo. It has nothing to do with what items are in the photo, or how they are laid out. People can choose not to like the photo, but that doesn't make the photo a criminal offense.