Beretta 391 Gold Sporting vs. Remington 1100 Competition


PDA






dmarbell
November 14, 2006, 10:25 AM
As stated in my thread "Values of Clays Instruction," my instructor suggested that a Beretta 391 was a better gun for sporting clays than an 1100. I didn't get to ask him if he'd shot both. I did call the club and talked with someone else about the guns. They sell Berettas, admitted not being able to compete well on price, and don't sell Remingtons. This guy (not the instructor) said that one of the members has an 1100 Competition, shoots it a lot, and really likes it.

The 1100 price is slightly lower than the 391 price, based on reviews of gunbroker and gunsamerica. All things being equal, I would lean towards the Remington over the Italian-made Beretta (I am assuming the Remmy is US made, should have checked first!).

Let's hear from both sides, and especially from anyone who's shot both guns enough to tell any difference.

I like the looks of both guns, but that nickel receiver on the 1100 with the upgraded wood makes me drool.

Danny

If you enjoyed reading about "Beretta 391 Gold Sporting vs. Remington 1100 Competition" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
RNB65
November 14, 2006, 11:52 AM
I've owned both 391 and and 11-87 sporting clays models. Both are nice guns, but the 391 is better (for me).

391 advantages
- more reliable gas system, no rubber o-ring to break.
- slim forearm, feels more like an O/U. 11xx has a fat forearm.
- stock is easily adjustable for drop and cast using spacers. 11xx stock not easily adjustable.
- I think the 391 is a more robust design with fewer small parts that can break.

dmarbell
November 14, 2006, 01:31 PM
RNB65, and others:

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=60409145

Here's a nice looking 1187 SC edition. Is the 391 Gold Sporting worth 2X this gun?

Danny

RNB65
November 14, 2006, 01:51 PM
Nice looking shotgun, but FOR ME, I'd take a plain Jane 391 instead any day.

I prefer the thin forearm on the 391. Don't like fat forearms on guns.

Also, I prefer a 28" barrel on autoloaders. 30" is fine for O/U's, but it's too long on an autoloader. A 30" barrel on an autoloader is equiv to about 33" on an O/U due to the long length of the receiver.

Go to a gunstore and handle both and choose the one that feels better.

kudu
November 14, 2006, 07:34 PM
I have shot both, love the 391, but the 1100 feels better to me and if it feels better I generally shoot it better. I don't have the Competition model, but have 3 other 1100's. The 391 has a bit more diversity, as it will also shot 3" magnum shells, but in clay shooting that means nothing. If at all possible, shoot them both before you buy the one you like and feels best to you.

PJR
November 14, 2006, 08:02 PM
I've owned an 11-87 Sporting Clays which is an 1100 with a different name. I also currently have a Beretta 391 Sporting Optima. I think the Beretta 391 Sporting is worth the extra money but don't think the 391 Gold is. All you are getting with the Gold is a little more machine engraving and maybe a modest improvement in the wood.

I've shot just about every semi-auto out there and think the Beretta 391 is the best on the breed but I will not spend extra money just to have it tarted up.

But if I do decide to tart up my 391 I will go to Rich Coles and order an upgraded stock. He's got some beautiful wood for sale.

bwhited
November 14, 2006, 09:03 PM
Own both a Rem Comp and Beretta 391 Tenkys Gold Sporting.
They both shoot great!
The Beretta feels solid in that everything is where it should be and stays there.
The Remington is great and shoots great, but the forearm does wiggle and just does not feel like it will hold up as long and as well as the Beretta.
Of course, if you shooting less then 1,000 rounds a year you will probably never notice the difference.
For high volume shooting go with the Beretta.
For everything else it is your choice.

ArmedBear
November 15, 2006, 01:22 AM
The Remington is great and shoots great, but the forearm does wiggle and just does not feel like it will hold up as long and as well as the Beretta.

The jury's out since the 391 is a much newer gun, but 1100s last for a LONG time. The forearm rotates slightly around the mag tube, or something else?

Mine doesn't wiggle a bit, except for the slight rotation which is a "feature", and the gun's 35 years old.:)

pedaldude
November 15, 2006, 03:54 AM
my 391 is fine, can't say anything about the 1100, needed a gun and got the beretta since a friend of a friend had one at a good price, I rarely ever clean it and it runs great with cheap dirty federal ammo that I got cases and cases of in a group buy with a bunch of people.

overall though I'd just get what you want and what feels best since both should do the trick.

Kingcreek
November 15, 2006, 09:10 AM
The jury's out since the 391 is a much newer gun
Respectfully, there are some 390/391 out there with very high mileage, so I don't think durability is an issue with either gun. Both have proven value.
Speaking of value, purchase price differences of a couple hundred bucks are pretty insignificant if you consider in the many years of use and many thousands of rounds, and the money spent on club/range fees, travel, etc.

PJR
November 15, 2006, 10:30 AM
If the jury is still out on the Beretta 391 then it's never going to make a decision or can't accept than an Italian company is producing the world's best semi-automatic target shotgun.

The only advantage the 1100 has is price but with the 391 you get what you pay for in finish quality, manufacturing consistency, reliability, flexibililty and adaptability.

The only criticisms of the 391 versus the 1100 are that the Remington is easier to take apart for cleaning, there isn't a way to extend the magazine if you so desire on the 391 and the Beretta doesn't come in 28 gauge or .410.

But in all other categories the Beretta 391 is the gun to beat. The only one that comes close is the Browning Gold.

Striker
November 15, 2006, 11:06 AM
I own 3 11-87s, a 1100, and a 390 Golden Mallard.

I like them all, but would keep an 11-87 if limited to one because of repair parts availability and flexibility in changing the platform (stocks, barrels, extensions, etc) for a specific need.

bass806
November 15, 2006, 02:13 PM
I own both and have shot both for clays. I like the 391 better. It fits me better and has the user-capability to adjust the drop and cant with simple shims. I was able to fine tune the 391 for a perfect fit.

ArmedBear
November 15, 2006, 03:25 PM
The only advantage the 1100 has is price but with the 391 you get what you pay for in finish quality, manufacturing consistency, reliability, flexibililty and adaptability.

Not true re the 1100 Competition. It's easily as expensive as a 391, but it has excellent finish, nice wood, nickel-teflon-coated working parts, etc. It also has a different barrel and different choke tubes from a standard 1100.

http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/shotguns/model_1100/model_1100_competition.asp

By the "jury's still out" I didn't mean anything disparaging towards the 391. I just meant that no one can claim they've had a 391 for 40 years, as they can with an 1100. You're right that the 391 is a fine shotgun.

What I will say is that it's probably a matter of feel and fit, more than anything else. The 1100 feels more like a chunky O/U in the hand, while the 391 is skinnier, and balance is a bit different. Depends what you like.

Both are great guns, and the 1100 Competition shares only the design with past 1100s. Finish and manufacturing are upscale, as is the price.

dmarbell
November 28, 2006, 10:51 AM
...or 11-87 SC.

I rented a Beretta yesterday for 50 shots at 5-stand. Didn't hit too many, but at least 60% of the shots were into sun glare at 3:30. Lost birds in the sun as the stock hit my cheek on most shots, but that's life. (No sunglasses either, just clear safely glasses.)

The gun was Urika 12 gauge 30" barrel, plain AL391. It seemed light, and handled well for me. I did not seem to like the slim forearm, as compared to my Wingmasters.

I am leaning towards an 11-87 or 1100 after yesterday. The fatter forearms seem to fit my hand better. Also, I can get an 11-87 SC for less than half the comparable Beretta, which would be the sporting models, and the wood on the SC is probably comparable to the Beretta Gold models. Even the 1100 Comp can be had for something over half the Beretta.

Fifty shots might not be a fair test, I know, but that's all I have to go on right now.

Next, I want to rent an O/U from the club and see what I've been missing!!

Danny

If you enjoyed reading about "Beretta 391 Gold Sporting vs. Remington 1100 Competition" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!