3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Share your questions on all makes and models of shotguns. Please post chokes questions in the SRBC forum

Moderators: Quack Wacker NC, MM

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby Tgunz_64 » Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:32 pm

I'd say 3" is all you need unless you want the option to shoot any size load for future reference then pick up a 3.5. I know I'm probably just repeating what some of the others have said. But all your really gaining is a few more BB's. For the first few years I hunted with a 20ga youth Winchester and that had no problem killing ducks or geese. In my opinion Beretta is an excellent choice. I own a 391 urika and love it! Also have a super Vinci for my 3.5 semi auto which is also a fantastic gun! Also have an 870 super magnum. Haven't heard anything bad about Stoegers. Or Winchester sx2 or 3. Personally I'd stick with a beretta if you want to spend a little extra and get a great gun.
Tgunz_64
hunter
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:17 pm


Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby Missouridukhunter » Fri Nov 08, 2013 9:22 am

clampdaddy wrote:
Missouridukhunter wrote: ......Just got back from Nodak a week ago...... Used it last year for fowl, shot in a trap league this summer and hunted this year with it. Havent even clean it once.. I know, I know shame on me. She's my baby but a work horse.


Yikes! You're brave. No matter how bad ass I think my gun is, if I'm going on an out of state hunt, I'm giving it a thorough cleaning and inspection before I go.



I know. Shouldn't have taken the chance but she is clean now ready for the missouri season.
Missouridukhunter
hunter
 
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:43 pm
Location: West Cental Missouri

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby BBK » Fri Nov 08, 2013 9:28 am

Shot 2.75" load out of my 3.5" gun for decoying ducks yesterday. Maybe tomorrow I'll hit a field and throw in the 3.5" BB's for geese. Can't do that with a 2.75" or 3" gun... 3.5's do it ALL.
Last edited by BBK on Fri Nov 08, 2013 2:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
BBK
hunter
 
Posts: 2927
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby Gabagool » Fri Nov 08, 2013 1:39 pm

Snoop around on Gunbroker. Sometimes you can find what youre looking for. Look for a used SBEII
Gabagool
hunter
 
Posts: 161
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:34 pm

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby mudpack » Fri Nov 08, 2013 4:44 pm

Missouridukhunter wrote: my Affinity it is a badass gun! Best gun i've ever owned.


Please list all the shotguns you've owned. This will give us some frame of reference for your statement.


I hunt with three guys who shoot SBE's. Every one of them has had at least one instance (some more than one) that I've witnessed in which his SBE failed to fire. In one case, it was minus 4 degrees F., and we had to swap an 11-87 and a Browning Gold between the three of us so the Benelli guy could shoot his limit (his SBE would not fire at all). In the other two cases, the SBE's being used would FTF about every third shot (temps in the 40's). They missed some spectacular opportunities because of the gun.

But, back to the subject: 3.5" guns can be nice to own, but 3" chambers are really more than enough.
Last edited by mudpack on Fri Nov 08, 2013 4:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
mudpack
hunter
 
Posts: 5374
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:40 am
Location: Central Kansas

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby LiquidA45 » Fri Nov 08, 2013 4:51 pm

greasy70 wrote:I currently use a pump Remington 870 to shot Dove now. I am going to go on my first goose hunt here in California and I am looking to make the jump to a Semi-auto shotgun. I have a lot of my friends telling me to get a 3.5 shotgun, while some of my older friends say it is not needed. My question is, what am I really gaining with going to a 3.5" shotgun? I also don't want to spend a lot of money, so for a 3.5" I was looking at the stoeger M3500. Can get for around $700 out here. If I don't need a 3.5" then I was looking at the Bereta A300 which I can get for around $750. Is is better to get a shotgun from a lesser known and used company just to be able to shoot 3.5" shells, or buy a better brand in a 3" that will be more reliable. Please note that used is not an option out here as there are far and few used hunting shotguns.I also will probably only be hunting around 4-5 days a year and the rest is just shooting skeet and junk in the desert.
Thanks



Keep the 870. Best gun I have ever owned. Here is a list of the guns I have owned:
Remington 870 12 ga


:grooving:
LiquidA45
hunter
 
Posts: 746
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:01 pm
Location: Broken Arrow, Oklahoma

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby mudpack » Sat Nov 09, 2013 8:24 am

LiquidA45 wrote:Keep the 870. Best gun I have ever owned. Here is a list of the guns I have owned:
Remington 870 12 ga


In other words, the 870 is also the worst gun you've ever owned? :yes:
mudpack
hunter
 
Posts: 5374
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:40 am
Location: Central Kansas

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby Get the green » Sat Nov 09, 2013 10:08 pm

greasy70 wrote:I currently use a pump Remington 870 to shot Dove now. I am going to go on my first goose hunt here in California and I am looking to make the jump to a Semi-auto shotgun. I have a lot of my friends telling me to get a 3.5 shotgun, while some of my older wiser friends say it is not needed. My question is, what am I really gaining with going to a 3.5" shotgun? I also don't want to spend a lot of money, so for a 3.5" I was looking at the stoeger M3500. Can get for around $700 out here. If I don't need a 3.5" then I was looking at the Bereta A300 which I can get for around $750. Is is better to get a shotgun from a lesser known and used company just to be able to shoot 3.5" shells, or buy a better brand in a 3" that will be more reliable. Please note that used is not an option out here as there are far and few used hunting shotguns.I also will probably only be hunting around 4-5 days a year and the rest is just shooting skeet and junk in the desert.
Thanks


Fify greasy. Sound like you have already received some good advice.. The only problems I have ever had with a shotgun are with 3.5" guns. I won't own another one.
Get the green
hunter
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:32 pm

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby LiquidA45 » Tue Nov 12, 2013 12:30 pm

mudpack wrote:
LiquidA45 wrote:Keep the 870. Best gun I have ever owned. Here is a list of the guns I have owned:
Remington 870 12 ga


In other words, the 870 is also the worst gun you've ever owned? :yes:


Haha yes it is. Had it for 12 years and the only problem I have ever had was this dove season when a spent shell was stuck in the barrel. It was the cheapest dove load available so I blame it on that. I wipe it down with rem oil pads after every hunt and take it apart at the end of the season and before the new one and that is it. Unless I hunt the river than I take it apart to clean out sand. I will say this gun rusts terribly. Had it resting over my knee in the layout blind this weekend and it rusted from touching my wet waders.

I also shot 9 ducks over the weekend...all with 2 3/4 loads of #4. I either missed 'em or dropped them dead in the water. The only cripple was a wing shot where we had a big group of scaup fly directly over us.
LiquidA45
hunter
 
Posts: 746
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:01 pm
Location: Broken Arrow, Oklahoma

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby Windrider » Tue Nov 12, 2013 6:15 pm

Shot ducks and geese for 2.5 season after neck surgery with 1 ounce 20ga loads.

Grab a reliable and fairly light 3" 12ga and don't look back.
Windrider
hunter
 
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:19 am

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby mudpack » Tue Nov 12, 2013 6:59 pm

Get the green wrote:The only problems I have ever had with a shotgun are with 3.5" guns. I won't own another one.

Good insight. I do know that the 3.5" Browning Golds and Remington 11-87's had far more reported problems than the 3" versions of the same guns. Maybe there's something to that.
mudpack
hunter
 
Posts: 5374
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:40 am
Location: Central Kansas

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby T Man » Tue Nov 12, 2013 7:18 pm

mudpack wrote:
Get the green wrote:The only problems I have ever had with a shotgun are with 3.5" guns. I won't own another one.

Good insight. I do know that the 3.5" Browning Golds and Remington 11-87's had far more reported problems than the 3" versions of the same guns. Maybe there's something to that.


To add on to that, the SBE seems to have more spring problems than the M series guns
Botiz630 wrote:How much does an apostrophe cost down south? Must be quite a bit, based on how sparingly you use them.
User avatar
T Man
Super Moderator
 
Posts: 5478
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 7:42 pm
Location: Everywhere the English language is being abused...

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby thomashamm2 » Wed Nov 13, 2013 8:38 am

3.5's are the way to go because you have the option to use whatever you want. Geese are tough so it would be a better idea to use a 3.5 on em
thomashamm2
hunter
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu May 02, 2013 7:03 am

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby mudpack » Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:12 am

T Man wrote:
mudpack wrote: I do know that the 3.5" Browning Golds and Remington 11-87's had far more reported problems than the 3" versions of the same guns. Maybe there's something to that.


To add on to that, the SBE seems to have more spring problems than the M series guns


Yes, indeed, T Man; I've hunted with three guys recently who shoot SBE's. All three had problems with their gun not going bang at least once, two of them it was about every third or fourth shot during a hunt..... Benelli's other autoloaders don't seem to have the same issues.
mudpack
hunter
 
Posts: 5374
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:40 am
Location: Central Kansas

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby terenceb » Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:55 am

I actually shoot a Stoeger M3500 for ducks and I really like it. However, I have never had to shoot 3.5" out of it, and 3" loads in BB have dropped large Canadas and large ducks cleanly for me as long as they are within a reasonable range (usually don't shoot outside of 40 yards). If you want the ability to go 3.5" if you ever choose to, M3500 wouldn't be a bad choice, but if you wanna shoot 3" only it wouldn't hurt your hunting at all.
terenceb
hunter
 
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:05 pm

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby Get the green » Wed Nov 13, 2013 10:22 am

thomashamm2 wrote:3.5's are the way to go because you have the option to use whatever you want. Geese are tough so it would be a better idea to use a 3.5 on em


Certainly, there is no way you are going to be able to bring down one of them big dudes with a little 3"! :nana:
Last edited by Get the green on Wed Nov 13, 2013 12:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Get the green
hunter
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:32 pm

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby Chris6418 » Wed Nov 13, 2013 12:27 pm

To be honest, it really all comes down to personal preference and shooting habits. I personally shoot a 3.5" for almost every type of waterfowl hunting I do. The only time I switch depends on the game that I'm hunting. I shoot BB on geese and #2 on ducks. Nonetheless, they'll be a 3.5" shell. A lot of people may say its not needed, but my bird count has proven to me that the 3.5s perform better for ME. Also, and I may catch a lot of grief for this, but I also shoot an extended "long range" (full) choke.

In regards to the "leads to flinching" comment that was mentioned before, I have never personally experienced this and I shoot the mentioned shells out of a Benelli Nova (not a SuperNova that has that oh so fancy Comfort Tech Stock)

The biggest thing to take into account when shopping for guns is personal fitment. Make sure the gun aims where you involuntarily want it to, and it fits "just right". Name brands and "Keeping up with the Jones'" can put the wrong gun in your hands. Shop around a little bit.
User avatar
Chris6418
hunter
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:47 pm

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby Get the green » Wed Nov 13, 2013 12:47 pm

Chris6418 wrote:To be honest, it really all comes down to personal preference and shooting habits. I personally shoot a 3.5" for almost every type of waterfowl hunting I do. The only time I switch depends on the game that I'm hunting. I shoot BB on geese and #2 on ducks. Nonetheless, they'll be a 3.5" shell. A lot of people may say its not needed, but my bird count has proven to me that the 3.5s perform better for ME. Also, and I may catch a lot of grief for this, but I also shoot an extended "long range" (full) choke.

In regards to the "leads to flinching" comment that was mentioned before, I have never personally experienced this and I shoot the mentioned shells out of a Benelli Nova (not a SuperNova that has that oh so fancy Comfort Tech Stock)

The biggest thing to take into account when shopping for guns is personal fitment. Make sure the gun aims where you involuntarily want it to, and it fits "just right". Name brands and "Keeping up with the Jones'" can put the wrong gun in your hands. Shop around a little bit.


This his turned into a Skybusters anonymous meeting. " Hi, my name is Chris and I shoot 3.5 " 2's and and ext range choke".! :yes: :wink:
Get the green
hunter
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:32 pm

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby Chris6418 » Thu Nov 14, 2013 9:32 am

Get the green wrote:
Chris6418 wrote:To be honest, it really all comes down to personal preference and shooting habits. I personally shoot a 3.5" for almost every type of waterfowl hunting I do. The only time I switch depends on the game that I'm hunting. I shoot BB on geese and #2 on ducks. Nonetheless, they'll be a 3.5" shell. A lot of people may say its not needed, but my bird count has proven to me that the 3.5s perform better for ME. Also, and I may catch a lot of grief for this, but I also shoot an extended "long range" (full) choke.

In regards to the "leads to flinching" comment that was mentioned before, I have never personally experienced this and I shoot the mentioned shells out of a Benelli Nova (not a SuperNova that has that oh so fancy Comfort Tech Stock)

The biggest thing to take into account when shopping for guns is personal fitment. Make sure the gun aims where you involuntarily want it to, and it fits "just right". Name brands and "Keeping up with the Jones'" can put the wrong gun in your hands. Shop around a little bit.


This his turned into a Skybusters anonymous meeting. " Hi, my name is Chris and I shoot 3.5 " 2's and and ext range choke".! :yes: :wink:


hahaha. To each their own I reckon :wink: The whole reason I even put that choke in my gun is because the conditions of last year. I hunt big open water and with the recent years droughts (as well as our HIGHLY intelligent DNR) lake levels were extremely low. This lead to me and my hunting buddies hunting on bare, mud soil on the water's edge in order to shoot and reach our deek spread. (we actually dug holes in the ground and drapped mud covered burlap over our bodies so we looked at flat as the bare ground around us). So by throwing in that choke, I was hoping to gain some extra distance one my shot. My game tote proved to me that it was a good idea
User avatar
Chris6418
hunter
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:47 pm

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby BBK » Thu Nov 14, 2013 1:07 pm

All about confidence. If you have confidence in 3.5's and then load up 2.75" load your killing percentage will go way down.

Personally all I am shooting right now is 2.75" 1 1/8 2's, the last week or so I've killed everything I've had an opportunity to take.. with no cripples. One was a big northern drake mallard (the thing was twice the size of the usual mallards we get) leaving the decoys at 40-45 yards at a completely awkward going-away angle. He landed in the decoys and then brought the flock back, we took the flock and nobody shot the drake that jumped out of the decoys. When it was all over I saw him scooting out about 2 foot off the ground and nailed him with the little 2.75 load. I counted at least 5 holes in the breast today as I was cleaning them up a bit. So you can't tell me they don't have enough pellets or penetration.. it had both, plus some. In the back and out the right breast (I was shooting down at him)

I'm done with the big boys on ducks, this sealed the coffin for me. I have 4 boxes of 3.5's that I will end up giving to my father. I'm shooting these 2.75's and then reloading the hulls. I was planning on shooting these little guys until the big mallards came, but I proved to myself yesterday that they will do JUST FINE. Can't beat them at $10 a box for a premium load with a great hull for reloading.

I'll probably still shoot 3.5" BB's for geese, I could use the increase in shot weight for those bigger pellets.

PS: it was also with a PM long range choke! Love that thing!
BBK
hunter
 
Posts: 2927
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby Chris6418 » Thu Nov 14, 2013 9:03 pm

BBK wrote:PS: it was also with a PM long range choke! Love that thing!


I currently have a Carlson's in my Nova. Its amazing how much their chokes increased my pattern. Unfortunately/fortunately, its not going to be getting as much use in the near future. Picking up a new shotgun this weekend
User avatar
Chris6418
hunter
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:47 pm

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby cuppedandkilled » Mon Nov 18, 2013 7:01 pm

If you're going to shoot a 3.5" 12 gauge, why not buy a 10 gauge?

3.5" shells are not needed IMO. Plenty of pellets hit geese with 3" shells; as long as they're in range.

I've argued this time after time. 3.5" semi-autos are less likley to function super light target loads, the weight us usually about 1/4-1/2 lb heavier on a 3.5" gun, and the extra payload equals more recoil.

Oh ya and ontop of spending more $ for the 3.5" model gun, the shells are about $3-$6 a box.



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SIII
cuppedandkilled
hunter
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 5:16 pm

Re: 3

Postby kbooger » Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:45 pm

cuppedandkilled wrote:If you're going to shoot a 3.5" 12 gauge, why not buy a 10 gauge?

3.5" shells are not needed IMO. Plenty of pellets hit geese with 3" shells; as long as they're in range.

I've argued this time after time. 3.5" semi-autos are less likley to function super light target loads, the weight us usually about 1/4-1/2 lb heavier on a 3.5" gun, and the extra payload equals more recoil.

Oh ya and ontop of spending more $ for the 3.5" model gun, the shells are about $3-$6 a box.



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SIII


Where to start... well the increase in $$ per box from a 3.5" to a 10 ga is $5-7.50/box (Rogers/Federal/Hevi Metal) And that is buying by the case so if you went to a retail store it is probably more like $10/box.

Next my maxus cycles target loads just fine. A heavier gun for waterfowl and clays is generally a good thing (tho my maxus isn't heavy IMO). Upland, not so much but that isn't what we are usually talking about on this forum.

More recoil isn't noticeable when hunting usually. And duck hunting generally you have a few layers on to help with recoil.

3.5" isn't needed sure, neither is 3" or a 12 ga. Or camo, or a semi-auto, or more than a few decoys, or an outboard...
User avatar
kbooger
hunter
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 5:54 pm
Location: metro MN

Re: 3" vs 3.5" shotgun

Postby cuppedandkilled » Tue Nov 19, 2013 1:55 am

kbooger wrote:
cuppedandkilled wrote:If you're going to shoot a 3.5" 12 gauge, why not buy a 10 gauge?

3.5" shells are not needed IMO. Plenty of pellets hit geese with 3" shells; as long as they're in range.

I've argued this time after time. 3.5" semi-autos are less likley to function super light target loads, the weight us usually about 1/4-1/2 lb heavier on a 3.5" gun, and the extra payload equals more recoil.

Oh ya and ontop of spending more $ for the 3.5" model gun, the shells are about $3-$6 a box.



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SIII


Where to start... well the increase in $$ per box from a 3.5" to a 10 ga is $5-7.50/box (Rogers/Federal/Hevi Metal) And that is buying by the case so if you went to a retail store it is probably more like $10/box.

Agreed.... they're spendier, which was kind of what I was getting at. If you're gunna spend the money; might as well do it on a 10'er.


Next my maxus cycles target loads just fine. A heavier gun for waterfowl and clays is generally a good thing (tho my maxus isn't heavy IMO). Upland, not so much but that isn't what we are usually talking about on this forum.

The Maxus is a great gun and very light weight. Although, I have seen one (yes - only 1) hang up with target loads first hand. Improperly broken in? I have no idea.


More recoil isn't noticeable when hunting usually. And duck hunting generally you have a few layers on to help with recoil.

Again, very true. Especially with a gas gun. I still rather get "pounded on" by a 3" mag than a 3.5" mag especially burning through 100's of shells during an awesome snow goose hunt!

3.5" isn't needed sure, neither is 3" or a 12 ga. Or camo, or a semi-auto, or more than a few decoys, or an outboard...


Thats why I like my cheap 3" shells/guns. So I can spend more on camo, other guns, a few more decoys, etc.


We can agree to disagree!


Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SIII
cuppedandkilled
hunter
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 5:16 pm

Re: 3

Postby Chris6418 » Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:09 pm

kbooger wrote:
cuppedandkilled wrote:If you're going to shoot a 3.5" 12 gauge, why not buy a 10 gauge?

3.5" shells are not needed IMO. Plenty of pellets hit geese with 3" shells; as long as they're in range.

I've argued this time after time. 3.5" semi-autos are less likley to function super light target loads, the weight us usually about 1/4-1/2 lb heavier on a 3.5" gun, and the extra payload equals more recoil.

Oh ya and ontop of spending more $ for the 3.5" model gun, the shells are about $3-$6 a box.



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SIII


Where to start... well the increase in $$ per box from a 3.5" to a 10 ga is $5-7.50/box (Rogers/Federal/Hevi Metal) And that is buying by the case so if you went to a retail store it is probably more like $10/box.

Next my maxus cycles target loads just fine. A heavier gun for waterfowl and clays is generally a good thing (tho my maxus isn't heavy IMO). Upland, not so much but that isn't what we are usually talking about on this forum.

More recoil isn't noticeable when hunting usually. And duck hunting generally you have a few layers on to help with recoil.

3.5" isn't needed sure, neither is 3" or a 12 ga. Or camo, or a semi-auto, or more than a few decoys, or an outboard...



hahaha. I literally laughed out loud on that one. Everyone has their opinion. And as I stated before, I knew I was going to catch some grief for my set up. But as it's proved (for ME), it's a better set up. In regards to your 3 1/2" guns not being able to cycle lighter loads, how light are we talking? I just bought myself an A400 this past Saturday and ran 4 boxes of 2 3/4" 1oz. 7.5shot through it and it never had a hiccup. Granted 1oz. may not be the lightest load out there, but I don't see myself running anything lighter than that through this gun (or any of my guns for that matter). In regards to weight difference for a 3" gun and 3.5", youre looking at MAX a rise in .2lbs of weight. Thats nothing. As Booger wrote, SOME additional weight leads for a better swing (for most people). Even though the A400 is almost a pound heavier than the SVinci, it swings better for me. It being too light (as well as some other details) is what steered me away from it. Nonetheless, it all comes down to personal preference and fitment. There is no "Best Gun Out There". There's only a "Best Gun For You"
User avatar
Chris6418
hunter
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:47 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Shotgun Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 10gaOkie and 14 guests