[snooperman]

Why don't we have them? South Africa does. The bullpup design was made by High Standard and Mossberg years ago but proved unsuccessful. One would think that with all the new designs in assault rifles and pistols that some of this new technology could be applied to shotguns. Basically we have 100 year old designs that have changed very little but are workable and reliable as well. So, why change? Well , why not? I brought this to the attention of Mossberg and Remington and they could not give me a well thought out answer and seemed unprepared to do so.

[RSVP2RIP]

Costs money to revamp production lines for a untried design. When every American that buys and American made shotgun buys one of the existing designs, why change. They have a product that sells well, and there is no need for them to go to a design that is only produced by one company and not exported to the US as of now. You are talking about the MAG 7? Well in order to own one without a tax stamp, you need the MAG 7M1 which has everything an 870 has except the magazine in the pistol grip, long barrel and stock, pump action. Good luck getting a 3" shell in the magazine too.

[snooperman]

I agree with what you are saying too. However, the demands for new pistol and assault rifle designs did not come from the civilian market, they came from the demands of the military. It is for this reason that I believe that new designs in shotguns will come from the demands of the miliary. From there it will eventually go to law enforcemant and then to us. I may be wrong but it seems to be the logical progression in the past.

[AcceptableUserName]

I believe they're unchanged because thewy're reliable.
it's been proven to work.

[ArmedBear]

There are a few reasons.

1. Proven reliability. We have a number of VERY reliable, user-friendly semiauto shotguns available to us now. This was not always true. We also have a number of very reliable, very cheap pump guns.

2. Pointing. Shotguns benefit from their handling, no matter what the target is. Current designs (some anyway) are remarkable for their ease and speed of target acquisition.

3. Shells. Modern shells hold up quite well in tube magazines. They're not designed to withstand long-term lateral force without deforming, though.

[MCgunner]

I absolutely HATE bullpups. Most of 'em aren't ambidextrous, anyway. I shoot left handed. BUT, if I had a left handed one, I CAN shoot right handed if I take a round to the left shoulder. My right eye is bad, but not TOO bad to use if forced to. A bull pup on the Ithaca design would be the only way and it's still handle like a brick.

[ArmedBear]

it's still handle like a brick.

It's important to remember that the first shot is the one that counts most. The number of rounds fired per incident tapers off pretty rapidly, even with a small-caliber handgun.

A shotgun that will make a quick, accurate first shot is worth more than one that will make more slow, cumbersome, off-target shots. Doesn't matter if your target is a duck or a home invader.

[berettashotgun]

Because they work so darn well.
A crappy shotgun is 10X more desirable in a bad social situation than the latest -greatest pistol or rifle IMHO.
The only reason I use my pistol is to distract the opponent while I'm getting the shotgun.

[Fred Fuller]

The 'good enough' is the enemy of 'the best,' it seems. The current crop of shotguns is 'good enough' for most uses, is relatively inexpensive to produce, and consists for the most part of proven designs.

Plus, there is a strong "sporting purpose" barrier to the introduction of more capable fighting shotgun designs for broad public purchase in the US. We don't import the Neostead ( http://world.guns.ru/shotgun/sh08-e.htm ) beacause... no sporting purpose. So let's not overlook the heavy hand of BigBro here. Can't have the peasantry getting things like http://world.guns.ru/shotgun/sh16-e.htm after all...

Better just get your Saiga while you can, and be happy.

lpl

[ArmedBear]

Can't have the peasantry getting things like http://world.guns.ru/shotgun/sh16-e.htm after all...


You want a 13.6 lb. shotgun with lousy handling, be my guest.

I don't like Uncle Sam telling me I can't buy the thing, but I wouldn't buy it anyway.

[Fred Fuller]

Hey, look. I wanted one when I first saw pictures of Max Atchisson with his prototype in the 1970s, and I never got over it. I don't CARE how practical it was- I WANTED one. And during the 2 1/2 minutes that Daewoo imported them before Bubba the Cigar Twiddler came along with the AWB, I missed getting one- heck, I never even got to SEE one for real, just pictures.

No, it might not be practical. But practical ain't always everything. I wuz young once, too.

lpl

[huntsman]

Basically we have 100 year old designs that have changed very little but are workable and reliable as well.

And they are cheap.

IMHO the only thing that keeps the pump gun alive is the price and the fact Hollywood uses them in the movies.

[oneounceload]

cost, price points, ease of making it, consumer preference, marketing....ALL play a role in what to us from the makers....since more folks today would rather buy a Norinco or other cheap Chicom gun, why should US makers go to the effort and not be able to recoup their investment?

[snooperman]

That said, could it be like many have suggested, that like the old Mauser 98 action that is still used today for sniper rifles, that the pump shotgun functions so well that a replacement is not needed? Also, that many servicemen are familiar with this shotgun and it is easy to master and training time minimized.

[snooperman]

Was that a quote from Joseph Stalin ? Or, am I mistaken. I have read it somewhere before perhaps in one of my military books.

[Youngster]

There's been a few "modern" American designs proposed in recent years, the SRM 1216 and the Monolith/Magpul P12 come to mind here, but I have a feeling that at the end of the day the traditional type shotgun would still prove to be better for defensive use and be a lot more versatile besides.

[9mmepiphany]

I wanted one when I first saw pictures of Max Atchisson with his prototype in the 1970s, and I never got over it

that's how i felt when i first saw the Neostead pump action bullpup. it was short and light enough to move with in a house, 12+ round capacity and had twin slectable tubes which could feed different types of rounds.

i guess their negotiations with for domestic manufacture didn't work out...it would have been so cool to see it coming from Mossberg

[Blakenzy]

Most Americans are narrowminded :(

[oneounceload]

Most Americans are narrowminded

MOST Americans are budget-conscious. Most American POLITICIANS are narrow-minded.... ;)

[Pweller]

http://world.guns.ru/shotgun/hawk_semi_std.jpg

Did you see this one by Hawk/Norinco? It's on the same site that Lee linked to. I guess it is based on a Remington 1100 modified to take a magazine. Looks like fun!

I'd guess that it would be legal to import these in some format, as they don't look functionally different from a Saiga 12. I don't know all of the import laws on shotguns, but probably with a different stock it would be OK?

[oneounceload]

They are getting more and more restrictive on imports meeting a "useful sporting purpose"

[ArmedBear]

The problem with that gun is that is may not meet a useful purpose, sporting or not.:D

First, it's a hacked-up 1100. I wouldn't buy a real 1100 any more, to say nothing of a Chinese one. Note the lack of the extra slot in the receiver. Dollars to donuts, that thing will crack if you really use it.

Second, with no possibility for a cheek weld, that stock serves merely as a hammer that strikes your face. If you're lucky, you'll get hit by the smooth plastic, not the hinge.

Third, the box magazine doesn't work too well with current plastic shells, which deform easily in that plane.

Fourth, just from handling guns with stocks like that, it wouldn't point worth a hill of snow peas.

It does LOOK menacing, though.:)

[Howaido]

Basically we have 100 year old designs that have changed very little but are workable and reliable as well.

I like my SD designs to be decades old with a solid track record over that long haul.

[Pweller]

ArmedBear: All of your practical considerations are irrelevant. That gun is Tac-Tastic, and that's all that matters to me. :D

[RedLion]

Idk, probably the same reason why ARs and AKs are the most popular semi auto rifles out there. Its something people are familiar with, something they can afford to buy AND fix, and it works fine for what it was intended.

[MCgunner]

IMHO the only thing that keeps the pump gun alive is the price and the fact Hollywood uses them in the movies.

Did you forget the military? These guys ain't Hollywood actors.

http://tgscom.com/images/sharedimages/mossberg-shotguns/mil2.jpg

[Youngster]

IMO there's only so much you can do with the shotgun configuration without redesigning the cartridge, a metal cased, rimless, higher pressure round able to feed in a double stack magazine would open up a lot of possibilities, if it were ever to become commerically viable.

[The Deer Hunter]

Think about the primary components that a shotgun consists of; a handle of which to hold it by, an action/reciever, a trigger group, a mechanism to cycle the action, and a big long tube to fire it all out of, and of course a magazine if it's necessary.

That said, you can only do so much to re-configure those components.

The design of most shotguns is remotely similar and have remained basically the same for the past 100 years. This says a lot about the inherent design of shotguns, that they have been designed well and are reliable. This can be said about all action types, as most standard type actions have been around as long as the modern shotgun, and has only had room for improvement.

So, when you hear trouble a-brewing at night, and you need to grab your farm gun, what do you grab? Most people would take what they feel most comfortable using. This could be the new AA-12 automatic shotgun, but for most of us it's the old Remington, or Mossberg, or Ithica, or even Sears & Roebuck because it's what people have used, reliably, for decades.

Effectiveness is not the only thing that people consider when buying guns, or buying anything for that matter. I think this can be dissected into two categories; tradition and brand loyalty. I love Remington, they make great firearms, are historically relevant and are a brand I know I can trust buying products from. I also know that growing up, people have always shot double barrels, pumps, semis, and single barrels in traditional shotgun styles. Therefore, I am most comfortable around certain guns, made by certain companies, in certain configurations and that's that.

Modern technology is being used for shotguns, too. Look at Benelli, for example. They offer a very reliable pump action shotgun made with an all synthetic receiver. Most guys I shoot with don't trust plastic.

To be honest, I think most modern gun manufacturers have reached a plateau of shotgun design based on traditional designs. With the exception of new building materials, most "new" innovations are just recycled and changed around a bit to make it seems cooler, or possibly work better or more efficiently. It's at a point where they have to draw the line and stop trying to sell the same idea over and over again in a different wrapper. People realize this (whether or not they are aware of it) because poor shotgun designs fall out of production, while reliable shotguns designs, like the 870, have been around for 50 years.


One thing I should add, is that I would put more faith in a company I am familiar with to produce a "new age" shotgun, than a no-name company. Remington is a brand that has been around for over a century and have a reputation to stand up to. They are simply not going to produce a gun that is not well made and reliable. Sure, you can argue about certain aspects of certain guns, but if you go out and spend $500 on a rifle made by Remington, new in box, you can expect that firearm to perform as they advertise.


To really conclude the point I'm trying to make, Don't fix what ain't broken, and don't mess with my shotguns. I like them the way they are now.

[Dave Markowitz]

...the MAG 7M1 which has everything an 870 has except the magazine in the pistol grip, long barrel and stock, pump action.

I had the opportunity to shoot one back in the 90s. It handled poorly and of course requires special shells. The only advantage it has over traditional shotguns is that it's easier to load and reload, assuming you have spare loaded magazines. I'd much rather have either my Remington 870 or Mossberg Mariner.

The Saigas share the advantage of a detachable box mag, though without the handicap of having to fit into a pistol grip, like on the MAG7. I can't say how they handle, since I've never held one. But most reports of the Saigas are positive.

One problem with shotguns employing detachable box magazines is that plastic shotshells are prone to distortion if left in the magazines for an extended period. They get squished out of round. (An acquaintance of mine who owns a Saiga 12 had this happen in his, and I've read about it on either THR or Arfcom.) This probably wouldn't be an issue with metal shells.

[Girodin]

Better just get your Saiga while you can, and be happy.

I would much rather have the saiga than the USAS 12.

As to shell deformation in mags most of those who have commented seem to not understand what the issue is with the S-12 and shell deformation. The shells being in a mag or stored in a mag does not cause deformation. The shells being smashed up against the bottom of the bolt can cause it. One modification preformed on the saiga is to cut and reshape the bolt. This can alleviate the problem.

My point is that the magazines are not in and of themselves the problem. A gun built from the ground up would not have to have an issue with shell deformation.