Thoughts on the Mossberg 500

[Big D]

Hey yall. Last year I came into possession of a Mossberg 500A Mariner, through a trade. I have always been a Remington man, the first shottie I bought with my own money was an 870 20ga. Then I had the opportunity to acquire my brother's used 870 12ga, so I did. So most of my shotgun experience is on the 870. But in the small amount of time I have owned my 500A, I have begun to like the ergonomics of the Mossberg, and how handy it is. I haven't used mine much, other than running mostly birdshot through it, along with some buckshot. Most of the time my go to shotgun is my Remington. And then the ejector spring mounted to the receiver broke, which made my 870 unreliable unless I made sure to actuate the pump slower.

So then I brought out my Mossberg as my main HD shotgun. I have never had a malfunction, at all with my 500. I have grown to like it more, and would eventually like to get a plain jane 500 (probably hit a few pawn shops for that). Anyways, what is the general consensus on the standard 500? Most of the time I see everyone goin' on and on about the 870 (which is a damn good shotgun) and the Mossberg 590. Is the 500 just the runt of the litter?

 

[dak0ta]

Nope. Just has a plastic trigger guard and safety. Barrel attachment is not as versatile as an 870 or 590 because it has no mag cap, but Mossberg makes MANY different types of barrels for its locking system. It doesn't have a heavy walled barrel but not like it really matters.

Built to loose tolerances, will operate more reliable in harsh conditions.

 

[hub]

I really like my 3 500's. I have some 870's also but to me the 500's are just as reliable and I think they are better looking the the 870 express models.

I have two 12ga with three different barrels a 26" vent rib with imp cyl, mod, full, and two turkey choke tubes, a 24in fully rifled slug barrel, and a 24in smooth bore slugger barrel I cut down to 18.5 with rifle sights. I also have one in .410 thats nice too.

The 590 are nice but my 500's work just fine and I got them all for less than $200 a piece.

 

[Fred Fuller]

Nope, it isn't the runt of the litter at all. I have several 500s, and would not feel too underarmed if one of them was the only shotgun handy.

My main objection to the 500 is its magazine design. It lacks an easy pull-through cleanout magazine tube, you have to remove the magazine tube from the receiver to get into it for any cleaning, maintenance etc. Not my idea of the way to go for a "serious" shotgun, and a shortcoming that Mossberg found necessary to change in order to get considered for a certain oft-touted military contract a few years back.

I seem not to be the only one who's 'picky' in that regard... 8^).

lpl

 

[MCgunner]

But in the small amount of time I have owned my 500A, I have begun to like the ergonomics of the Mossberg, and how handy it is

Bingo and times 10 if you're a lefty shooter like me. 870 ergos suck. That's why I sold my Wingmaster years ago for and eventually picked up a Mossberg 500 camo for waterfowl hunting. Nothing wrong with the Wingmaster mechanically, just didn't like the ergos when the Mossberg has much, much better and is just as good as the 870 as a waterfowl gun or maybe better with the camo finish which is rather rust resistant.

 

[RandKL]

Actually, Lee, the mag attach system was designed for the 835 Ultimag guns to keep folks from using 3.5 inch barrels on their 500's and injuring themselves. That system was just chosen for the mil gun because it allowed a bayonet lug to be simply one slightly modified piece.

I've never heard a Mossy 500 referred to as "not a serious shotgun" before. Don't know how to reply to that one.

As to cleaning mag tubes, that's kind of an unusual topic for most folks. I raised it a couple of months back and I believe there was *one* person out of about a dozen who had ever done it or suggested it be done. Most folks, other than me, don't tend to clean mag tubes on their shotguns, it seems. I know from all the rust I've cleaned out of them over the years, not many folks do.

rich

 

[RandKL]

Is the 500 just the runt of the litter?

The 500 series is an entire weapons system, not just one gun. It's the starting point for making any number of different configurations. You can go from a three shot 30" ribbed barrel duck gun with nice walnut all the way to a nine shot military style with a bayonet lug simply by switching parts. Heck, there's even a blackpowder muzzleloader barrel if you want. Several different mag tube setups to fit any barrel type you want. Walnut stocks to synthetics to camo to pistol grip to tactical multi position etc. Stock adjust shims for getting it *just right*. All kinds of different sights. Safety on top or on the trigger guard. Three different scope attach systems so you can scope your gun no matter what it happens to be. No "gunsmith only" parts. No rivets etc.

rich

 

[Ky Larry]

My 500 was a Jam-O-Matic P.O.S. Couldn't fire 4 shells thru it without a stuck shell between the mag and chamber. It made one trip back to the factory and wasn't fixed. It got gone in exchange for a Win 1300 Home Defender.Mossberg has a pretty good rep so I probably just got a lemon.If a deal comes along, I would probably buy another one. YMMV.

 

[oletymer]

If you like cheap they are the holy grail. If you want quality they are not.

 

[hub]

Hey oletymer I agree that if you like cheap then they are the holy grail, but I've felt that way because I think they are nice quality American made shotgun for the money. It seems to me they have taken the market at the lower price without sacrificing too much, mine seem to have nice bluing, OK but not fancy walnut wood, and are very reliable. I'm not doubting your claim I'm just wondering where you think they are lacking quality wise. Is it reliability, workmanship, quality of parts or lack thereof?

 

[Fred Fuller]

RandKL,

Military Specification (MilSpec) 3443 (as amended, but no longer active) defined the characteristics necessary for pump shotguns which were submitted for adoption when the Mossberg was selected howevermany years ago it was. The specification called for, in part (on Page 11):

MIL-S-3443G (AR)

3.10.1 Tubular magazine. The tubular magazine shall be of such design and construction as to provide easy access to the interior for cleaning, inspection~ and preventative maintenance. If the tube is of a closed end design, a positive mechanical locking device, i.e., a screw, pin, spring, loaded detent, etc., shall be used to secure the magazine to the receiver. If the tube is of open end design, the magazine tube shall be positively secured to the barrel and a magazine tube removable [e.g., threaded) cap shall be provided to allow easy access for cleaning. The magazine spring shall be retained inside the magazine tube (e.g., by a removable magazine spring retaining ring) when the cap is removed.
-- http://www.assistdocs.com/search/do...1&PaginatorPageNumber=119&search_method=BASIC

The 590 style magazine design was submitted for testing and adopted at that time simply because the specification (as cited above) demanded an easily accessible magazine tube for cleaning and maintenance.

FWIW for those who weren't around at the time, Remington didn't submit samples for this particular contract RFP. Therefore there wasn't any "competition" between Mossberg and Remington in this instance. I don't know what if any other companies did submit samples for this RFP, but I know Remington didn't.

FWIW,

lpl

 

[61chalk]

Grew up with Mossbergs, Dad had the .20 ga. I've had the .12 ga. many years
now, never owned any other pump. Loved it when I got the rifled slug barrel with
scope mount. Can trade out barrels, an its always sighted in. The only complaint
I have is for deer hunting you have to be careful because the foregrip an slide can
slop around way to much an makes too much noise.

 

[RandKL]

The 590 style magazine design was submitted for testing and adopted at that time simply because the specification (as cited above) demanded an easily accessible magazine tube for cleaning and maintenance.

You're reading one paragraph but you're not seeing the rest of it. The entire doc is a "shotgun" of certain specs, not a "magazine tube" of those specs. If it came down to *just* the magazine tube, Mossberg could have easily taken a stock 500 and simply threaded the far end of the mag tube such that it could be unscrewed and cleaned after the stock barrel was removed. The criteria only called for a four shot mag tube, after all and making the welded/staked tube end into a threaded one is easy. But that only fixes the mag tube, as I said.

The rest of the article that pertains to the selection and use of the 835 mag attach over the 500 was based on the bayonet mount. The criteria stated a barrel must be between 19 and 21 inches in length....and that no part of the barrel/gun could extend past the bayonet guard by, I think it was, a half inch. *THAT* criteria, if used with the standard 500 mag tube, would have put the M-7 bayonet fixed or welded directly to the side of the barrel with a length of unsupported barrel between it and the mag tube. Mossberg would have had to design a new barrel system, mount a bayonet lug onto it, and somehow have it strengthened enough to pass the thrust test which was I believe 300 unsupported pounds of stress.

In a nutshell, for the 500 tube attach system to be feasibly used, Mossberg would have had to lengthen a mag tube so it reached within a certain distance of a 20" barrel bore and fit a new manufactured barrel so that it worked on that new manufactured length mag tube....refit the lengthened mag tube with a threaded end plug and manufacture the new threaded plug....design and manufacture a new mag spring retainer system....design and fit a bayonet lug system so that it worked with the new parts and was strong enough etc.

The 835, on the other hand, had a stock barrel that was long enough and thick enough and that had an attach system that allowed the mag tube to be extended so that it was long enough (if necessary to fit later criteria as well) to reach the front bayonet attach and be strong enough to pass the tests. To fit it for the mil tests, it simply needed a bayonet lug and a new mag cap.

This isn't a new discussion. This same topic has come up on different forums for at least a decade.

Peace.

richard

 

[Fred Fuller]

Interesting.

The only edition of Small Arms Of The World I have handy is the 12th edition, copyrighted in 1983. It has the Mossberg MILSGUN illustrated, designated the 500-ATP-8SP, complete with bayonet lug on the secondary barrel ring, and a magazine cap. The example pictured at http://www.milesfortis.com/b&jguns/shotguns/long_and_short_of_it.htm is alleged to have been acquired in 1979.

I don't recall seeing the 835s until the early 1990s. But I'm no Mossberg historian, just an interested bystander where fighting shotguns are concerned.

lpl

 

[inSight-NEO]

The 500 is a good shotgun...congrats. But, I prefer the 590A1.

My 500 was a Jam-O-Matic P.O.S.

Hmm... Ive heard many similar complaints regarding the Remington 870 line as of late.

If you like cheap they are the holy grail. If you want quality they are not.

Whats this "cheap" business about? Ive shot the Mossberg (590A1) and plenty of 870s....I went with the Mossberg. Ever handle a Mossberg 590A1? It feels like a tank and has the durability to match, IMHO.

Now, if you want the highest in initial quality for the money (concerning pumps), go with the Benelli SuperNova (tactical). All else is featureset vs. featureset and nothing more as far as Im concerned.

 

[chevyforlife21]

best shotgun ever. it may feel cheap compared to all others but most reliable ever ive shot rem 870, benelli nova,nef parnder pump,ithaca, the mossy wins hands down.

 

[jaholder1971]

If you like cheap they are the holy grail. If you want quality they are not.

NOT.

I've owned 870's, 500's, 590's, and a couple High Standards. All work as intended with zero issues. Some poo-pooh the plastic trigger guard on the 500 but all that part does if to keep stuff from discharging the gun, it's a nonissue.

 

[CornCod]

I have had an 18.5 inch barrel Model 500A for well over 20 years. There may be shotguns with better features, but I have never had one jam on me. It can just go CLACK,CLACK, BOOM all day long. The corrections agency I work for lets me choose between qualifying with an 870 or a 500. I choose the 500, although I have nothing against the 870.

 

[cook45]

i own both the 870 and 500A. use the 870 for hunting (and showing off but my favorite is the 500A. I have done countless mods to it and it has never let me down. I would buy another in a heartbeat..

 

[RandKL]

I don't recall seeing the 835s until the early 1990s.

The 500ATP-SP you linked to was identical to the eight shot Persuader today 'cept the addition of a brazed on mag tube ring for the bayonet lug. It used a standard 500 screw attach that had a raised center that fit the barrel ring of the M-7. It's not an 835 attach. That's a great example of early Mossy mil gun tech, but it's simply reinforcing what I've said. Again, to get it to fit the mil requirements, it would have had to have a new mag tube designed with an inside threaded end and a new end plug/screw and spring retainer system manufactured to fit.

The 835 system, on the other hand, used slightly modified stock barrels, stock mag tubes etc. It only required a brazed on mag tube ring (stock part) for the bayonet lug and a new mag tube cap.

It all comes down to cost and ease of tooling/manufacturing and the 835 system was far cheaper to produce for the 590a1.

The 535 and the 590 six shot are, again, extensions of already existing parts/systems. The 590 six shot uses the same stock barrel as the standard 500 with the 835 mag attach brazed on instead of the 500 attach. The mag tube is the only original part and even it is a modified stock part. The 535 is basically an 835 with a 500 mag attach brazed on. Both are great examples of using stock or modified stock parts instead of designing and manufacturing new ones to make new guns. By mixing and matching already existing parts, you can make a *lot* of different 500 series guns!

Incidentally, the Remington 870 couldn't meet the field servicability and loading/unloading criteria and wasn't submitted for review on those grounds. It wasn't submitted because it had no chance of being approved.

Great chatting with you, sir!

Be well!

Richard

 

[RandKL]

My 500 was a Jam-O-Matic P.O.S. Couldn't fire 4 shells thru it without a stuck shell between the mag and chamber.

That's pretty strange, Larry. Are you sure you're not thinking of an 870? The 870 can get a shell stuck between the lifter and the bolt carrier and create a jam. The Mossy 500 can't, though.

I *have* seen Mossies that had been "amateur gunsmithed" to the point that parts needed to be replaced, but never a jammed factory original gun. Is it even possible to jam a Mossberg 500???

What part seemed to be giving you problems?

rich

 

[MCgunner]

That's pretty strange, Larry. Are you sure you're not thinking of an 870? The 870 can get a shell stuck between the lifter and the bolt carrier and create a jam. The Mossy 500 can't, though.

I used to have that problem on cold mornings in the marsh when the shell elevator would pinch my cold numbed thumb and I'd yank it out prematurely from the pain. It was a royal PITA to clear, required a pocket knife and a few choice cuss words. One can avoid this (if one THINKS before reloading) by holding the elevator up with the off hand. I do this now days with my Winchester. But, on a fighting shotgun, that is the slow way and this is one thing that could really bite ya in a fight if you were reloading in a hurry and didn't get the "click" when you stick the shell in. In my mind, feeble as it might be, this is a major advantage in the Mossberg design.

I had some problems with shell extraction last year on my 500. I've been shooting this shotgun for 20 years in the salt marsh. I wound up using 4/0 steel wool and buffing out the chamber on the barrel which seems to have cured the problem. Apparently, there was a little rust forming, though I couldn't really see any on inspection. This happens to 870s, too, as I've learned from reading duck hunting sites.

 

[MAX100]

The 835, 590A1 5+1 and the 500 Tactical Breacher all have the same mag tube setup and all barrels & tube extensions interchange between the three.

GC

 

[RandKL]

The 835, 590A1 5+1 and the 500 Tactical Breacher all have the same mag tube setup and all barrels & tube extensions interchange between the three.

Thank you for that info, Max. Not quite sure what your point was but thanks anyway.

richard

 

[Dave McCracken]

The 500 and it's Maverick kin are the red headed step children of the shotgun world.

It shouldn't be that way.

They are a lot of gun for the money, though I still prefer the 870 platform for ease of dissassembly, cleaning and pointability.

The 870's ergonomics work for me.

Get the one that feels best....