skybuster05

How much is the 3 1/2 in. worth? I am planing on buying a Browning Gold before next season and cant decide which to get. I will be doing some waterfowl hunting, but for the most part it will be dove hunts and skeet shoots. I have heard that 3in shells dont function very well in the 3 1/2 gun, if anyone had any tips or experiance with this problem I would like to hear what they had to say.

brother hal

If the gun you decide on is a reputable brand and you use reputable ammo, there should be no difference as to how the gun functions. I live on a rice/soybean farm and have ducks in all my flodded fields. I and all my friends hunt ducks. Some use 3", some 3 1/2, and a few 10 guages. All kill ducks just fine. One of my best friends hunts everything with an old 870, 2 3/4". He kills as many ducks as anyone I have ever heard of. As the saying goes, "It ain't the arrow, it's the Indian". If you are only going to hunt ducks a few times a year, I think you would be much happier with a 2 3/4 or a 3" chamber.

Worc

The Gold 3 1/2" will cycle even 2 3/4 shells. I agree with brother hal that a 3" gun is a better all around choice. Most 3" models are lighter and cycle lighter loads better than their bigger 3 1/2" brothers. The Gold Classic would be a great choice if you like the style of the receiver. The standard Gold is pretty much the same minus the magazine cut off and receiver. I would also recommend a 28" barrel for you intended uses. Try a few lengths to see wich you like the best.

bigcountry

sky, I look back and wish I got a 3.5" gold. I just got another 3" Gold Hunter. The 3.5" is so expensive however. If you are serious goose hunter, then go with a 10ga or 3.5". If you plan for this to be a all around gun, like dove, and skeet, upland, and duck, get the 3".

Californiadoctor

I use only 3 1/2 inch magnums but hunt with a Remington SP-10. I have heard, though I can not vouch for the veracity of it, that 3 1/2 inch loads pattern better with a 10 guage. I love my SP-10 but it was not cheap and at 11 pounds some people find it just too heavy to lug around all day. Surprisingly, the recoil is very manageble, far less punishing than some 12 guage shotguns I have fired.

Californiadoctor

fastbuckj

only had my benelli a few months, started shooting 3.5's went back to 3's did not seen a whole bunch of benefit. plenty of range with 3in. killed plenty of birds with 3in. less recoil with 3in.
shells a lot cheaper!!!

atrautweiler

I have a 3.5 835 uli-mag dedicated (almost) turkey gun that I have shot skeet with! It cycles the 2 & 3/4 fine. If you get the 3.5, your keeping your options open IMO.

Nomercy

For skeet, you are NOT going to want a 3.5" gun. Yes, they're SUPPOSED to function well with 3" and 2 3/4" shells, but I've heard stories and had experiences either way on that. For skeet, you're not going to want that much recoil. Not hardly. A lot of guys use a 3" shell with a typical 2 3/4" powder load so that they get more shot and less recoil...it doesn't take much power to kill a clay, but a couple rounds with a heavy recoiling gun works pretty hard on the shoulder. A couple rounds with a HEAVY 3.5" gun gets old too.

As far as hunting goes,I've hunted off and on with a 2 3/4" 12ga J.C. Higgins for my whole shooting life, the same gun that my dad used for 20yrs or so before I got it...I've never felt that I NEEDED a 3" gun, let alone a 3.5" gun.

I've never had a duck or goose that I "know" I've hit argue with me about the effectiveness of my choice.

For the general hunter, the 3.5" isn't worth it...for someone who spends 20hrs a day ALL waterfowl season in a blind, MAYBE you'd at least WANT the extra umph and shot count, but I don't believe anyone in the world NEEDS it for typical shotgun hunting.

If you're talking about using slugs for cape buffalo or Grizzly bear, I'd be more in favor of more power, debatably so since the recoil is so high, but at least more in favor.

Yes, you do get more shot with the 3.5", this means either a bigger spread or more dense pattern.

No, I don't honestly believe that the increased shot is worth the increased recoil, weight, and cost of the 3.5" ammo or guns. I've never felt like I "NEEDED" a 3" gun, let alone needing a 3.5" gun.

Yes, you get more power with the 3.5", theoretically that means you can reach out farther to kill the same bird.

No, you will never notice this range increase or power increase. If a 3.5" can kill it regularly (i.e. not just a few lucky bbs), a 3" will kill it just as dead. I'd venture that the killing power of the 3.5" is only about 5yrds AT MOST ahead of the 3".

Yes, the 3.5" costs a LOT more to shoot than the 3", and No, I don't believe it's worth it.

If you honestly need that much power, or just want it, it's much cheaper to simply get a 10ga gun.

Although they're not legal for waterfowl, I've never had any reason to NEED anything more than a 3" .410 for upland game, let alone little ol' doves...that's a FAR CRY from a 3.5" 12ga!!!

bigcountry

I don't know about you guys waterfowl in KS, but I need every advantage I can get with steel here in the Eastern Bay area. My success has doubled on goose using 3" T instead of 23/4" BB. Maybe I have gotten better. But I see the difference.

Nomercy have you ever compared a 3.5" over your 2.75", or just speaking opinion? And don't tell me you knock down every waterfowl you put a bead on either.

12 pointer

I have a 3.5" chambered Mossberg 835 that I do everything with, from skeet stooting to turkey hunting to just shooting for the heck of it. It shoots and cycles 2 3/4, 3, and 3 1/2 inch shells just fine. I havent had one problem with it yet.