If 16's are so good....Why did they drop from popularity??
12s are lighter than they once were, and 20s are more versatile than they once were.
In the 16's heyday, 2 1/2" shells were all there were. 2 3/4" was the newfangled magnum back in the 1920s. The old double guns were heavy as all get-out in 12 (except for the really high-end ones), and 20 packed less punch than a 28 does today. So, a 16 was powerful enough for ducks and pheasants. 12 was too heavy, 20 was too limited.
All that changed, many years ago. Lead is illegal on ducks, 20 Gauge shoots 1 oz. loads just fine, and 12s don't all top 8 lbs. any more.
Jim Watson is right:
Shoot an ounce of shot at standard velocity with black powder.
I just bought a 16. It's 82 years old. I like it. However, I don't see much sense in buying a
new 16, other than some European doubles maybe, if my budget someday allows.
Browning's guns offered in 16 tend to be overweight in 12. Both the BPS and the Citori weigh too much in 12. I'd rather not buy a Browning at all; Browning's obesity problem was solved by other companies decades ago. The old humpback Auto 5's were also beasts in 12; they were much nicer in 16. Again, it's been years since that mattered.
Remington briefly offered the 1100 in 16. Again, it's an overweight gun. Beretta's 12s usually weigh less than the Remington 20s.
In the modern world, there's little reason for a 16. And 3" 20s are irrelevant. 20 Gauge shoots 1 oz. loads quite well from 2 3/4" shells. Anything more than an ounce, shoots better in a 12 Gauge. There's no compelling reason not to get a modern, lightweight 12 Gauge instead of a 16.
When people talk about shot string, that's BS, too. If someone cared about shot string, they'd shoot 6/7 oz. in a 12, like International Trap shooters do. Take a look at the sizes of shot, bore sizes, and choke constrictions, and ask how much difference any of that makes -- especially considering that even the longest shot strings will pass over a bird in a couple milliseconds at worst.
But some of the old 16s are pretty neat.