Nightcrawler
Member
I have a question. Today, for serious use, a detachable magazine fed, self loading rifle is considered ideal. It's what the military uses, and provides large capacity with a high rate of fire. Modern semiautomatic rifles provide a considerable advantage in these terms over, say, a lever action or bolt action rifle.
And yet, for shotguns, a tube-fed manually operated design is still prettymuch tops. There are semiautos out there, but many consider them to be too unreliable and too ammo sensative to be for "serious" use. First of all, is this true? If so, why? If they could make a reliable self loading rifle in 1918 (Browning M1918), why can't they make a reliable self loading shotgun now?
Manually operated, fixed magazine rifles used to be standard issue for military, but they evolved into self loading or select fire arms with detachable box magazines. Rimmed cartridges gave way to rimless ones to ease stacking in magazines and improve feeding in these weapons.
Yet the rimmed 12-gauge pump shotgun soldiers on, just like it did 100 years ago, a true testament to the effectiveness of the design.
But then, a .30-30 lever rifle is good enough for most police/civil "social" situations too.
One would assume that shotguns would evolve along with rifles and handguns. Yet this doesn't seem to be the case; people want large box magazines and semiautomatic (or higher) rates of fire from their rifles and handguns, yet are content with a fixed tube magazine and manual operation in a pump shotgun.
So how come we haven't developed more modern, rimless shotgun rounds, that feed from large box magazines in self-loading or select fire designs? Stupid laws notwithstanding, the military's been using a detachable box mag long arm since World War 1 (the BAR).
Now, of course, with a tube fed shotgun, you get the advantage of the "shoot one, reload one" method. You get the same advantage with a lever rifle, yet we don't see too many SWAT teams out there with Winchester 94s.
Obviously, if there was DEMAND for a new, rimless shotgun round, and a shotgun that fed from large box magazines, all of the companies would be making them. Even with our dumb gun laws, the law enforcement market would be buying them. Yet the one attempt to do this, the HK CAWS, was cancelled after a few prototypes. And standard, big rimmed shotgun shells don't lend themselves to box magazines.
So the BIG question is (and I'm sorry I was so wordy in explaining it), why does the market demand large capacity, box fed semiauto rifles and handguns, yet not demand the same from shotguns? Do people (including law enforcement and military) really use their shotguns so differently from their rifles that 20 or 30+1 is required/desired for a rifle but 4-8+1 is good enough for a shotgun?
(Don't get me wrong, I love pump shotguns. Just wondering here.)
And yet, for shotguns, a tube-fed manually operated design is still prettymuch tops. There are semiautos out there, but many consider them to be too unreliable and too ammo sensative to be for "serious" use. First of all, is this true? If so, why? If they could make a reliable self loading rifle in 1918 (Browning M1918), why can't they make a reliable self loading shotgun now?
Manually operated, fixed magazine rifles used to be standard issue for military, but they evolved into self loading or select fire arms with detachable box magazines. Rimmed cartridges gave way to rimless ones to ease stacking in magazines and improve feeding in these weapons.
Yet the rimmed 12-gauge pump shotgun soldiers on, just like it did 100 years ago, a true testament to the effectiveness of the design.
But then, a .30-30 lever rifle is good enough for most police/civil "social" situations too.
One would assume that shotguns would evolve along with rifles and handguns. Yet this doesn't seem to be the case; people want large box magazines and semiautomatic (or higher) rates of fire from their rifles and handguns, yet are content with a fixed tube magazine and manual operation in a pump shotgun.
So how come we haven't developed more modern, rimless shotgun rounds, that feed from large box magazines in self-loading or select fire designs? Stupid laws notwithstanding, the military's been using a detachable box mag long arm since World War 1 (the BAR).
Now, of course, with a tube fed shotgun, you get the advantage of the "shoot one, reload one" method. You get the same advantage with a lever rifle, yet we don't see too many SWAT teams out there with Winchester 94s.
Obviously, if there was DEMAND for a new, rimless shotgun round, and a shotgun that fed from large box magazines, all of the companies would be making them. Even with our dumb gun laws, the law enforcement market would be buying them. Yet the one attempt to do this, the HK CAWS, was cancelled after a few prototypes. And standard, big rimmed shotgun shells don't lend themselves to box magazines.
So the BIG question is (and I'm sorry I was so wordy in explaining it), why does the market demand large capacity, box fed semiauto rifles and handguns, yet not demand the same from shotguns? Do people (including law enforcement and military) really use their shotguns so differently from their rifles that 20 or 30+1 is required/desired for a rifle but 4-8+1 is good enough for a shotgun?
(Don't get me wrong, I love pump shotguns. Just wondering here.)
:banghead: 
