M2 vs. 391 urika

[memphis]

For waterfowl only. For a 60 year old guy... would the recoil difference in these 2 three inch guns be significant? I have a sbe II and prefer it to xtrema, but recoil is not my major concern. I plan to purchase one of these two guns for my father. I have never seen a M2 in the field. Have hunted with the Berretta.

[cherok9878]

This 60 year old guy purchased a M2, Feb 05. Have put several thousand rounds thru it. It is, with out a doubt, the best shotgun I have ever owned. The fit and feel of the gun is awsome and the felt recoil is less than my Browning A-5.

[dagrizz]

Originally posted by memphis:

For waterfowl only. For a 60 year old guy... would the recoil difference in these 2 three inch guns be significant? I have a sbe II and prefer it to xtrema, but recoil is not my major concern. I plan to purchase one of these two guns for my father. I have never seen a M2 in the field. Have hunted with the Berretta.

I own, hunt and shoot 5-stand and sporting clays with my M2. I have shot with several others that use the a variant of the 391 for sporting clays. When I compared the two guns, the 391 had slightly less perceived recoil than my M2. This was using the same loads in both guns and quantified on a 5 shot round. But I still prefer my M2 over the Beretta for reliability. I have been averaging about 3 flats of shells per month since August 2004 and have only had 1 failure to fire. It was the shell not the gun. Another friend tried the same shell in their gun and had similar results.

 

So I would take the M2 any day.

 

Mike

[Coloradoryan]

Memphis, either gun is an excellent choice.

 

If it were me purchasing one of these two offerings for an elderly guy for waterfowl I would choose the M2 with comfortech. The comfortech stock does offer slightly less recoil than wood stocked versions with magnum loads and of course stands up better than wood in waterfowl conditions.

 

The simplicity in cleaning, and maintaining the Benelli is far easier as well.