Evolution

I get it. If you can make your plan work and if you're happy then, go for it. If you choose to go new, you could cut your above estimated costs quite a bit by going with an IWC mount and a SF M600 or M300 light, and you would not have to modify, or buy anything else to make it work. The scout light bodies attach directly to the IWC mount without any mods so you don't need a Thorntail body or a modified tailcap. However, if you must have an intellibeam head on your light then, I defer to StrangerDanger, and the cost does go up. I'm not trying to tell you what to do, just giving you some info you might find helpful.

UGH.... that sounds horrible....keep the light to use a regular flashlight and start from scratch with a new setup.

If you end up changing to a SF Scout light, you need one of these aftermarket Scout bodies to be able to use it in the AVA mount. That, or milling material off of the lugs on a Scout body http://www.impactweaponscomponents.com/product/thorntail-backbone-600-light-body/ You also have to replace the Scout tail cap with an aftermarket non-shrouded one or have the shrouded one lathed down to remove the shroud. I had that set up on for a few months now I have gone back to my first setup.

SD, Because I don't have one in my hands and therefore can't make any definitive assessment of how the thing fits, I'll ask this question; Could they not have made the thing so that it would be securely attached to the gun, captured exactly the same way as the OEM hand guards are captured, and by that, eliminate the need to rely on little screws to keep it secure??

Is the rail system captured front and back like the OEM guards? If not it seems like it will shoot loose.

I have both mounts and I think both have their strong points. One reason I prefer the AVA is because I think as it attaches to more surface area on the main part of the hanger, it's the stronger of the two. Plus, you can use the OEM front sling plate. Iv'e mentioned before that I just would not trust the IWC mount to hold up under heavy sling strain pulling on it. And attaching your sling to it is the only option you have. I use the OEM sling plate on the front in the down facing position. This allows me to tightly sling up the gun without the front of the sling "biting" against my hand /wrist. You only have one option with the IWC as far as sling attachment, it's going to pull off of the side of the mount whether the swivel is facing down or to the side. Since I only use the sling for shooting, and not running around with it hanging off my body, having the front of the sling pull straight down is a must for comfort when "slung up" in a standing shooting position. I suppose it's possible that a non IWC backbone light body could slip during recoil in the AVA mount but, it's virtually impossible to happen if you're using a IWC backbone body. The recess on the AVA mount completely captures the rear lug of the light body and there is zero movement or play in there. Then the lug and body is tightly clamped down. It's like a mortise and tenon joint. This has been explained ad-nauseam in a lot of threads already. Not having to modify or change the tail cap goes to the IWC. IMO, the IWC mounting casts less barrel shadow due I think because it stands off the light from the barrel. The AVA is way tight in there. As for people complaining that their optics slip in their rings when firing a heavy magnum rifle, I submit that these people are probably using non-premium rifle scope rings to start with, and/or probably are improperly tightening them to boot. That shouldn't happen- .375 magnum or not.

Nice work on the IB bezel. Nice that you found that you can remove the bezel without having to remove the whole body from the gun to change batteries. That, I would not like. I have both the M300 and M600 lights and also both the IWC and AVA mounts having tried out both combinations on my 18.5 barrel. Holding both lights in your hands and shining them down a hallway there's not a huge difference in how much light that they cast between the two. Yeah, 100 lumens. However, once you mount the lights in the AVA mount, there is a big difference in how bright they are because of the barrel shadow amplified by the M300's bezel being further back on the gun and the lower position of the light in the AVA mount versus the IWC. Aesthetically, I like the shorter look of the M300 in the AVA mount but, it really compromises the effectiveness of the light so, I prefer to use the M600 in it. With the IWC mount, the M300 brightness is not so muted because of the higher position and farther distance away from alongside the barrel that the mount locates the light. But I don't like the front sling mounting point on the side that the IWC forces you to use. It makes the sling bite my hand and I don't trust it's strength and longevity when using the gun in a tight slung up standing position when firing. I use the OEM front sling swivel on mine which the AVA mount does not require you to remove. The sling's rear POA is a Noveske QD swivel plate. Just my observations/experience having tried both lights in both mounts.

Whatever it is....it's never gonna be worth ten euros to me for that tiny little bottle, unless maybe if it disassembles the gun, cleans it, and reassembles it all with the application of a single spray.

That should be a 3-notch which is a modified choke, if I have my facts straight. Why does Benelli advise against shooting slugs with anything more constricting than an IC choke?

Thanks M2. Just did mine but drilled it out to 1/4" cuz I will use a segment of a military .30 cal. steel cleaning rod for the handle instead of an old screwing driver.

So...can I assume that for those of us who have the minor, albeit recurring issue of the loosening choke syndrome with our M4, this is an alternative solution to buying one of those $25 dollar super choke tools?

You have to buy the Milspec model of the shotgun which is the M1014, to get the barrel without the removable choke or buy one of those barrels separately.

If you start having feeding problems- especially when it gets down to the last couple of shells in the mag tube. Otherwise, there's no immediate need to "upgrade" the spring.

I saw that video in an email they sent to me. The only AM part that I have in my A&S trigger housing is a Geissele hammer, and when doing the function check as they show, mine does not have this issue. The hammer is firmly captured by the sear every time.

The FS can be adjusted for windage (see the indices on the sight tower) mine is canted slightly also. I was going to try and make it straight but I could not find a wrench to fit the nut on the bottom. It seems to be like 4.5 MM. I got a 5 MM box wrench and it was to big. Let us know if you find a wrench to fit it.

Like the crumbs that collect in the tray at the bottom of a toaster?

Rats! You mean I missed some internet entertainment??

Ok, no doubt in my mind that you have a poorly finish machined receiver. Given that fact, the rest of the geometry of the inside of the receiver may be suspect as well... and resulting in the FTE's you have experienced. No telling what the junk on the link is.....I would not be happy with that gun either. I hope CS takes care of you satisfactorily. Good luck.

Uh huh, yeah.....but you seem to hate everybody. LOL

Uhhh,,,somebody dumped sawdust inside his recoil spring tube? Or is that first pic on the left showing metal abrasion on the bolt carrier link? Love it when people don't tell you specifically what they think you're supposed to see in their damn pictures, and specifically where it's supposed to be located.

Thanks for posting. My experience with that standard vel. "law enforcement" Remington buckshot is the same, like standing back 25 yds. and throwing a handful of marbles at a target. Ok for plinking and messing around but, not for any serious SG work.

...bacon grease is the ticket.

.....and if it was, there would be people clamoring over each other to buy an aftermarket aluminum alloy receiver because the OEM is too heavy, WAH! Oh wait...there's that little matter of the serial# LOL!

Yeah, I bet the jolly green giant could get his thumb in there LOL.

I think that is a very well done job with nice symmetry to it but, wow, it looks like they took an awful lot of material off of the receiver at the front- too much for me.