Shotgun question? its about Rem'ington's vs Mossberg's [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Shotgun question? its about Rem'ington's vs Mossberg's


mixflip
02-03-2010, 02:46
Ok so Remington 870's are legendary with Police and Mossberg 590's and their bayonet capability are huge with the military.

Why didnt Remington try to sell a bayonet model to the military? Or did they and failed?

Alaskapopo
02-03-2010, 03:04
Ok so Remington 870's are legendary with Police and Mossberg 590's and their bayonet capability are huge with the military.

Why didnt Remington try to sell a bayonet model to the military? Or did they and failed?

Mossberg got the military contract on price.
Pat

Puppy
02-03-2010, 06:35
Mossberg got the military contract on price.
Pat

That statement ignores the fact that Mossberg's were the only pump shotguns to pass the Mil-S-3443 torture tests.

vafish
02-03-2010, 09:23
That statement ignores the fact that Mossberg's were the only pump shotguns to pass the Mil-S-3443 torture tests.

And that statement ignores that fact that Remington never submitted a shotgun for testing.

Mossberg is the only shotgun to be submitted to the Mil-S-3443 torture tests.

So the OP's question still stands, Why didn't Remington try to sell a bayonet model to the military?

Only the management at Remington at that time could answer why they chose not to go after a large military contract.

My guess is that Remington knew they would lose on price to Mossberg and didn't want to look bad by losing the competition so they decided to just stay out of it.

If you want to read the Milspec it is download-able here: http://www.everyspec.com/MIL-SPECS/MIL+SPECS+%28MIL-S%29/MIL-S-3443G_4585/

It really isn't that brutal of a test, the test calls for 3,000 rounds to be fired, but allows the guns to be cleaned every 100 rounds. No requirement for mud, dust, ect. There are temperature extremes in the drop tests.

I have both a Remington 870 and 3 Mossberg 500's. I have no doubt that they Remington could pass the tests as easily as the Mossberg.

Puppy
02-03-2010, 12:56
And that statement ignores that fact that Remington never submitted a shotgun for testing.

Student A takes & gets a 2400 on their SAT.

Student B refuses to take the SAT.

Which student gets to brag about their SAT score?

aippi
02-03-2010, 13:02
Vafish speaks the truth. This type thread is beat to death on line and that milspec mess always comes up like it is the " Holly Grail" of Mossberg owners and they attempt to use it to argue the Mossberg is superior to the Remington.

Mil Spec means nothing to me as I want better quality then a minimum standard for a low cost mass produced item.

Great answer Vafish.

Alaskapopo
02-03-2010, 13:09
Student A takes & gets a 2400 on their SAT.

Student B refuses to take the SAT.

Which student gets to brag about their SAT score?

I have owned 2 Mossberg shotguns and neither one worked. Both had issues with extraction. One was a 500 and the other a 590.
Pat

Puppy
02-03-2010, 13:14
I have owned 2 Mossberg shotguns and neither one worked. Both had issues with extraction. One was a 500 and the other a 590.
Pat

That's odd considering Mossberg uses dual extractors instead of a single one like on Remingtons.

David Armstrong
02-03-2010, 13:21
Mil-Spec besides the point, the fact that the Mossberg has a bayonet lug has nothing to do with anything. A bayonet lug can be added to any barrel. If Remington had wanted to do so they could easily have put a lug on an 870. And, FWIW, the military did buy several thousand 870s in the 1960s and 1970s, many of which were equipped with bayonet lugs.

Alaskapopo
02-03-2010, 13:22
That's odd considering Mossberg uses dual extractors instead of a single one like on Remingtons.

Yep both had the same issue with slugs and buck. The 500 came with a 18 inch and a 28 inch barrel. The 28 inch barrel worked but not the 18. The 590 did not work either. All my Remingtons have worked as has my Benelli M4. I won't buy another Mossberg.
Pat

byf43
02-03-2010, 13:50
I have owned 2 Mossberg shotguns and neither one worked. Both had issues with extraction. One was a 500 and the other a 590.
Pat


I had a Mossberg 500 that after only a few boxes of AA Trap loads, the disconnect developed a burr on it, and it wouldn't stay locked in battery.
Mossberg replaced the disconnect and it did the same thing after another few boxes of shells.

I honed the burr off. . . same result.
I honed the burr off again . . . same result.

Mossberg took a ride to a new home. Buyer was fully aware of the problem.
I sold that shotgun for $50.00 and that was with a 28" barrel and an 18" barrel.

I've now got two Mossbergs (that I won). They've NEVER been taken out of their box(es), and never will.

I've got several 870s, and they've all been flawless. Literally. . . . flawless.

Besides. . . gov't torture testing doesn't show me anything.

IBreakStuff
02-03-2010, 13:58
Have you ever noticed the "nipple" on the end of a Rem mag extension, its there for a reason. If you look hard enough you can find Rem factory heat shield/mag clamp with a bayo lug.

DaGroaner
02-03-2010, 14:48
I used to fire 600+ rounds a week on the trap range. Both of my 870s broke ejector springs. When I switched to a Mossberg 500 I never had a problem. When I bought a BT-99 my scores dropped so I sold it and went back to shooting the Mossberg. I don't shoot as much as used to but I still have that Mossberg and it still works perfectly. That is my personal experience.

TxGun
02-03-2010, 15:13
Both are solid, well-proven guns. Both are, or have been, used extensively by the military and PDs around the country. And 95% of owners will never wear either out. Anyone who says different just can't look past their own personal biases.

Oh yeah, and my Ford truck is better than your Chevy. :supergrin:

mixflip
02-03-2010, 15:30
I didnt mean for this thread to be a Remington vs Mossberg subject.

All I wanted to know is why Remington doesnt offer any competition to the 590/bayonet lug option?

Apparently, David's post mentions that Remington DID in fact offer bayonet lugged 870's decades ago but I havent seen any for sale presently anywhere in my area. I'd buy one in a heart beat if I did find one.

I have no brand loyalty to either. I own a Mossberg 930 SPX tactical and used to own a Remington 11-87 and I am shopping for a Remington pump as we speak.

I just thought it would be cool to have the 590/bayonet option for a zombie/SHTF/marshal law/hurricane Katrina/Rodney King riots... type situation thats all.

DaGroaner
02-03-2010, 17:14
I didnt mean for this thread to be a Remington vs Mossberg subject.

Really? Have you read the title you gave this thread? :wow:

vafish
02-03-2010, 18:06
Student A takes & gets a 2400 on their SAT.

Student B refuses to take the SAT.

Which student gets to brag about their SAT score?

Of course student A does.

But if student B takes the ACT and gets a 38, goes to MIT and graduates Suma Cum Lade and gets a PHD in physics and develops a warp drive engine for a space ship who is going to make fun of student B for not taking the SAT?

vafish
02-03-2010, 18:13
Vafish speaks the truth. This type thread is beat to death on line and that milspec mess always comes up like it is the " Holly Grail" of Mossberg owners and they attempt to use it to argue the Mossberg is superior to the Remington.

Mil Spec means nothing to me as I want better quality then a minimum standard for a low cost mass produced item.

Great answer Vafish.

And I like Mossberg 500's.

But you can't put the Mossberg 590 on a pedestal and bash the Remington 870 for not passing the Milspec tests when it was purely a business decision not to go for the contract.

As for reliability of the 2 brands, like I said I have 3 500's (two 12 ga and one 20 ga) and one 870 (12 ga). All four of them, as well as my Winchester 1200 have had a problem extracting at some point and it was always an ammunition issue, switching ammo solved the problem.

USMC03Grunt
02-03-2010, 18:30
The older 870s did have a bayonet lug on them when issued with the magazine extension. As for the 870 not being used by the military as an issue shotgun, the only thing I seen in the USAF has been the 870 both in the older riot gun version with and without the bayonet lug and the newer 870MCS (Modular Combat Shotgun) so the myth that the 870 is not issued to the military is just that, a myth. However, having to work on the 870, I can tell you that the Mossberg may be a better design in that if an ejector or shell stop goes bad, replacement can be done at the operator level. However, when an ejector or shell latch goes bad on our 870s, we have to restake them...and based on some of the older shotguns we've had, there is a finite number of times you can replace those parts before you run out of metal on the receiver and you wind up sending it back to depot with a red tag as unserviceable and unrepairable.

22highcaps
02-03-2010, 20:31
Yep both had the same issue with slugs and buck. The 500 came with a 18 inch and a 28 inch barrel. The 28 inch barrel worked but not the 18. The 590 did not work either. All my Remingtons have worked as has my Benelli M4. I won't buy another Mossberg.
Pat

I am going to guess that the chambers may have needed to be honed since it was a Mossberg with the previously mentioned dual extractors.

space_weazel
02-03-2010, 22:19
http://sjhardware.com/870Bayo.html

Alaskapopo
02-03-2010, 22:26
I am going to guess that the chambers may have needed to be honed since it was a Mossberg with the previously mentioned dual extractors.

Perhaps. But then again all my Remingtons have worked from day 1. I have seen Mossbergs fail at a rate greater than remington in training as well.
Pat

mixflip
02-04-2010, 02:26
Really? Have you read the title you gave this thread? :wow:

Lol, ok I guess I did title it wrong? I didnt mean it though. I wasnt looking to see if a Remington is better than a Mossberg per se'.

The real question was why no bayonet Remingtons? They would sell like hot cakes I am sure since there is a market for the Mossberg 590 that is selling unchallenged. I'd buy one today!

Alaskapopo
02-04-2010, 02:33
Lol, ok I guess I did title it wrong? I didnt mean it though. I wasnt looking to see if a Remington is better than a Mossberg per se'.

The real question was why no bayonet Remingtons? They would sell like hot cakes I am sure since there is a market for the Mossberg 590 that is selling unchallenged. I'd buy one today!

Other than for a collectors value why would you want a Bayonet on your shotgun?
Pat

vafish
02-04-2010, 07:09
Other than for a collectors value why would you want a Bayonet on your shotgun?
Pat

Well when you are out shooting and don't have a gun rack handy you can put the bayonet on then jam it into the ground so you don't have to lay your tacticool shotgun in the mud!

mixflip
02-04-2010, 12:20
Well when you are out shooting and don't have a gun rack handy you can put the bayonet on then jam it into the ground so you don't have to lay your tacticool shotgun in the mud!

That actually makes sense ^.

As for why? Because I can. (or in this case, I want to). I am American and I just like to do what I want, when I want, while I still have the freedoms to do so and if I want a bayonet mount on a Remington, smoke a cigar, wearing nothing but my boxer briefs on my own property...why not?

In reality, my dad has an old beat up 60's era bayonet he brought back from the Vietnam war that he gave me. I just thought it looks cool even though I have absolutely no practical use for it other than a SHTF/zombie invasion/hurricane Katrina/Rodney King, LA riots type situation. Which are all highly unlikely.

c5367
02-04-2010, 12:45
When I was in the Corps, we had M590s AND M870s.

Never fixed bayonets once in years of training and carrying them for Uncle Sam.

K.Kiser
02-04-2010, 13:21
Personally I've had better luck with the 870... Have six 870's between My Father, Brother and I over the past 40 years without a single issue other than the end "flare" of a 3" 20 gauge spent shell will very occasionally drag the front of the ejection port of the reciever when trying to empty the chamber somewhat gently.. I know it's not in the discussion, but My Family has had indisputable reliability from Browning pump's and Winchester 1300's...

fragout
02-04-2010, 16:38
I tested the 590 before it was issued. We used the 590's in Recondo school in the late 80's in Panama. It's true the 590 was the only one in the test. We used 870's,1300's,500's/590's in the jungle. At the time the 590 was only issued in 20''(to heavy and bulky), so we always used 18 or 14" 870's spray painted green. There were 870's with bayonet lugs(those adapters go for some nice $$$ to colletors) mosty to guard air fields. During the cold war the Army pretty much stopped training with bayonets because it was deemed a waste of training time anyways. And as someone else pointed out the 870 MCS is an issued weapon.I used an early model in Somalia. And the end of the day it's just a pipe throwing out buck shot really. The Army likes to go with the lowest bidder (hence the Beretta over the SIG). If my life depended on the 500/590 or the 870 I'd have no problem. But if I'm going to spend my money, an 870. Just a higher quality shotgun.

DaGroaner
02-04-2010, 21:13
I think a bayo would make some yutz think twice about making a grab for your barrel in certain situations. .

c5367
02-04-2010, 21:26
I think a bayo would make some yutz think twice about making a grab for your barrel in certain situations. .

as if the thought of 9 lead pellets headed at their face at supersonic velocity wouldn't do that? :rofl:

DaGroaner
02-04-2010, 21:38
as if the thought of 9 lead pellets headed at their face at supersonic velocity wouldn't do that? :rofl:

You've never heard of someone being held at gunpoint making a grab for the gun before? Amazing.

David Armstrong
02-06-2010, 15:48
You've never heard of someone being held at gunpoint making a grab for the gun before? Amazing.
A bayonet won't deter a gun grab, as that does not occur at the open end of the muzzle. Outside of the military, a bayonet mount serves no purpose other than to sucker in some foolish buyers who think it makes them look extra cool. In reality it makes them look extra foolish to folks in the know.:wow:

dorkweed
02-06-2010, 17:27
Ok so Remington 870's are legendary with Police and Mossberg 590's and their bayonet capability are huge with the military.

Why didnt Remington try to sell a bayonet model to the military? Or did they and failed?



Never bring a knife to a gun fight!!:cool:

DaGroaner
02-06-2010, 18:28
A bayonet won't deter a gun grab, as that does not occur at the open end of the muzzle. Outside of the military, a bayonet mount serves no purpose other than to sucker in some foolish buyers who think it makes them look extra cool. In reality it makes them look extra foolish to folks in the know.:wow:

Wow, I am dazzled by your brilliance. Where did you come by this divine knowledge O wise one? :rofl::rofl::rofl:

c5367
02-06-2010, 18:33
Bayonets are much more skeerier than buckshot.

DaGroaner
02-06-2010, 19:04
Bayonets are much more skeerier than buckshot.


Really? What makes you think so?

USMC03Grunt
02-06-2010, 21:31
Back in the first gulf war, you would have EPWs that grew up in a country where waving a gun in their face was common enough that they weren't too impressed with it. Things changed a LOT when you fixed bayonets. They were a lot more compliant when you waved that thing at them!

David Armstrong
02-07-2010, 15:12
Wow, I am dazzled by your brilliance. Where did you come by this divine knowledge O wise one? :rofl::rofl::rofl:
Mostly through teaching military, LE, and others how to fight with guns (including with bayonet attached) for the last 30+ years, as well as taking dozens of courses myself. Of course, I also listen to other wise ones, folks like Clint Smith, John Farnam, Jeff Cooper, Brian Felter, and so on. In fact, I can't thihnk of a single well-recognized trainer out there that recommends the use of the bayonet outside of the military. Of course, they could all be wrong and you could be right, I guess. I doubt it, but I guess it could happen.

DaGroaner
02-07-2010, 15:18
Mostly through teaching military, LE, and others how to fight with guns (including with bayonet attached) for the last 30+ years, as well as taking dozens of courses myself. Of course, I also listen to other wise ones, folks like Clint Smith, John Farnam, Jeff Cooper, Brian Felter, and so on.

Somehow I am more impressed with the guy who posted above you. You know, the guy who has actually been there as opposed to the guy teaching a theory.

USMC06
02-07-2010, 23:46
I have both 500s and 870s and also had 590s. I like all and have had no issues with any. Remingtons have been used extensively by the military. I carried one in Vietnam.

Puppy
02-08-2010, 04:58
A bayonet essentially turns a rifle or shotgun into a short spear & short spears have killed millions of people through the millenniums, so they are definitely not something to scoff at IMHO.

Alaskapopo
02-08-2010, 05:03
A bayonet essentially turns a rifle or shotgun into a short spear & short spears have killed millions of people through the millenniums, so they are definitely not something to scoff at IMHO.

They are pretty much useless in modern conflicts.
Pat

Puppy
02-08-2010, 05:09
They are pretty much useless in modern conflicts.
Pat

While bayonet charges are a thing of the past, I could definitely see a few instances especially in close quarters they'd be a desirable feature.

Which is probably why our military & just about every other military on the planet still manufactures their rifles with bayonet lugs & still issues bayonets to their troops.

In fact I probably wouldn't be surprised if 200 years from now "plasma rifles" are still equiped with bayonet lugs.

mixflip
02-08-2010, 12:14
I tried to buy a phased plasma rifle wit da 40 watt range and a "bayonet" but it was illegal in California.

Minnow
02-08-2010, 12:30
Have both, like both. I'm left handed and I do prefer Mossberg's tang safety. The Remington's action is a little more slick, but it seems the newer ones aren't butter like the older wingmasters.

David Armstrong
02-08-2010, 13:54
Somehow I am more impressed with the guy who posted above you. You know, the guy who has actually been there as opposed to the guy teaching a theory.

LOL!! I'm not here to impress, but I've got a pretty fair amount of that "actually been there" stuff myself. Want to have one of those neat contests where I show you mine and you show me yours? I bet I'd win!:rofl:

DaGroaner
02-08-2010, 14:32
LOL!! I'm not here to impress, but I've got a pretty fair amount of that "actually been there" stuff myself. Want to have one of those neat contests where I show you mine and you show me yours? I bet I'd win!:rofl:

Perhaps, but that is not the experience you cited as to why your opinion on the matter should be respected, now is it?

David Armstrong
02-08-2010, 17:59
Perhaps, but that is not the experience you cited as to why your opinion on the matter should be respected, now is it?

Strange. I don't see anywhere that I said anything about why my opinion should be respected. You asked where I came by my knowledge regarding the following: "A bayonet won't deter a gun grab, as that does not occur at the open end of the muzzle. Outside of the military, a bayonet mount serves no purpose other than to sucker in some foolish buyers who think it makes them look extra cool. In reality it makes them look extra foolish to folks in the know." I told you the source of much of that knowledge. I have yet to see anything that contradicts that statement.

DaGroaner
02-08-2010, 18:10
Strange. I don't see anywhere that I said anything about why my opinion should be respected. You asked where I came by my knowledge regarding the following: "A bayonet won't deter a gun grab, as that does not occur at the open end of the muzzle. Outside of the military, a bayonet mount serves no purpose other than to sucker in some foolish buyers who think it makes them look extra cool. In reality it makes them look extra foolish to folks in the know." I told you the source of much of that knowledge. I have yet to see anything that contradicts that statement.

I guess you didn't read the post above yours that I previously referenced. I'm also quite sure that people do stupid things like trying for a gun at the open end of the muzzle and that it has happened many times. I also know that many people are phobic of edged weapons. So your opinion has been noted and taken with a grain of salt like most opinions posted on the internet.

David Armstrong
02-09-2010, 10:28
I guess you didn't read the post above yours that I previously referenced.
Sure I did. Had nothing to do with the quesiton you posed to me, which was the source of my knowledge, not my experience.
I'm also quite sure that people do stupid things like trying for a gun at the open end of the muzzle and that it has happened many times.
And the proper response to that is to pull the trigger and shoot them. If you need a bayonet to handle an open end of muzzle gun grab you just need basic training in gunhandling and weapon retention, not a bayonet.
So your opinion has been noted and taken with a grain of salt like most opinions posted on the internet.
Yawn. Obviously you are looking for someone to validate this rather silly idea that you have, and rather than look at the facts are wanting to argue with anyone whose view does not agree with yours. By all means, get a bayonet on your shotgun if you want. Post the pics here with the rest of whatever mall ninja gear you think makes you look tacti-cool. It will be a good laugh for many of us. But while you do that, remember, not a single mainstream instructor recommends it for anything outside of the military. There is a reason for that. I would suggest you get some good instruction from a qualified trainer in this area and then you will (hopefully) realize for yourself the truth behind "Outside of the military, a bayonet mount serves no purpose other than to sucker in some foolish buyers who think it makes them look extra cool. In reality it makes them look extra foolish to folks in the know."

DaGroaner
02-09-2010, 10:56
Sure I did. Had nothing to do with the quesiton you posed to me, which was the source of my knowledge, not my experience.

And the proper response to that is to pull the trigger and shoot them. If you need a bayonet to handle an open end of muzzle gun grab you just need basic training in gunhandling and weapon retention, not a bayonet.

Yawn. Obviously you are looking for someone to validate this rather silly idea that you have, and rather than look at the facts are wanting to argue with anyone whose view does not agree with yours. By all means, get a bayonet on your shotgun if you want. Post the pics here with the rest of whatever mall ninja gear you think makes you look tacti-cool. It will be a good laugh for many of us. But while you do that, remember, not a single mainstream instructor recommends it for anything outside of the military. There is a reason for that. I would suggest you get some good instruction from a qualified trainer in this area and then you will (hopefully) realize for yourself the truth behind "Outside of the military, a bayonet mount serves no purpose other than to sucker in some foolish buyers who think it makes them look extra cool. In reality it make them look extra foolish to folks in the know."

Methinks you got a bad case of Freudian Projection son.

David Armstrong
02-09-2010, 11:29
Methinks you got a bad case of Freudian Projection son.
That might be our big difference. You seem to want to deal with "methinks", I prefer to deal with "I know". And I know that no mainstream instructor will recommend the use of a shotgun-mounted bayonet for purposes of self defense. Of course, I also know that nobody with any real experience or understanding of the concept would attempt to determine a case of Freudian Projection based on a few posts on an internet forum, so it appears we might have identified another issue here.

But it now appears that rather than discus the topic and the facts you want to discuss personalities and make up things, so I'll bow out, but leave you with the issue you have studiously avoided:
"Outside of the military, a bayonet mount serves no purpose other than to sucker in some foolish buyers who think it makes them look extra cool. In reality it makes them look extra foolish to folks in the know."

Should you wish to discuss the topic rather than argue personal issues, let us know. Until then, :wavey:

c5367
02-09-2010, 11:36
Sure I did. Had nothing to do with the quesiton you posed to me, which was the source of my knowledge, not my experience.

And the proper response to that is to pull the trigger and shoot them. If you need a bayonet to handle an open end of muzzle gun grab you just need basic training in gunhandling and weapon retention, not a bayonet.

Yawn. Obviously you are looking for someone to validate this rather silly idea that you have, and rather than look at the facts are wanting to argue with anyone whose view does not agree with yours. By all means, get a bayonet on your shotgun if you want. Post the pics here with the rest of whatever mall ninja gear you think makes you look tacti-cool. It will be a good laugh for many of us. But while you do that, remember, not a single mainstream instructor recommends it for anything outside of the military. There is a reason for that. I would suggest you get some good instruction from a qualified trainer in this area and then you will (hopefully) realize for yourself the truth behind "Outside of the military, a bayonet mount serves no purpose other than to sucker in some foolish buyers who think it makes them look extra cool. In reality it makes them look extra foolish to folks in the know."

Even the military doesn't really emphasize the bayonet in the applications that actually use the shotgun. In USMC 8152 school, which focuses almost entirely on shotgun and pistol, along with retention techniques for each, we never even touched a bayonet. Never.
When asked why we had these high-speed low-drag tacticool lugs but never used the bayonets that go with them, the instructors explained that the bayonet was pointless, because if you needed to use deadly force, do it right and shoot the grabber. If you didn't need to use deadly force, you put the buttstock across their jaw. A bayonet stab would be half-assed deadly force, but deadly force nonetheless. If there's one thing Marines hate, it's half-assed deadly force. :supergrin:

For our MOS, this made total sense. It was a garrison security thing, not intended for a full-out melee in the boonies. If you were responding to a near-ambush by a squad sized element, I could see the point of a bayonet as you're charging into the attack. But if that was your situation, you're probably wrong for carrying a pump action shotty in the first place. :dunno:

Just my experience. If someone wants to fix bayonets, more power to them.

mixflip
02-09-2010, 11:45
What ever happened to "I want it because I like it"? Who the F cares if "those in the know disapprove of a gun I own". I am an American gun owner for one, which in itself is a source of laughs by the so called in the know crowd. The gunsnobs within our gun culture are just irritating.

There are alot of guns I think are silly and useless to me personally but I dont knock them if you like them. I dont tout myself as an elitist who is part of a group that is "in the know" and if you dont conform to our mindset you are one to be snobbed and laughed at.

I swear, this gun culture infighting is pathetic and sad. We as gun owners have enough enemies outside of our world of guns. Us gun owners have alot of things that we dont NEED. We dont need multiple guns and multiple calibers yet everybody on Glock Talk probably has both? Who the F cares?

David Armstrong
02-09-2010, 12:01
What ever happened to "I want it because I like it"
Nothing. That is still there and is a quite valid reason for getting something. It is quite different from "I think a bayo would make some yutz think twice about making a grab for your barrel in certain situations" and similar claims of utility.

There are alot of guns I think are silly and useless to me personally but I dont knock them if you like them.
Don't knock the gun, but one should certainly knock the application. If someone were to post "I think an antique black powder ducks-foot pistol would be a good choice for self-defense" those in the know should step up and say "No, that is a rather silly idea." The ducks-foot is a fun gun and they are neat to play with, but I would certainly suggest that they are not a particularly good choice for self defense.

mixflip
02-09-2010, 14:26
I fully understand what you are saying. (the duckfoot analogy...very good point)

On the usefulness of a bayonet though? Its not a fair comparison. You cant quickly detach a duckfoot gun from being a duckfoot gun. But you can quickly attach or remove a bayonet from a 590. Thats pretty darn useful in my opinion. Useful when and where you might ask? Well, in a SHTF, LA riots, hurricane Katrina, NY black out, no power, no food, no water, shelter in place til the Army shows up to restore order type scenario.

Imagine, a group of looters are cruising the streets for a house or business to rob since the power is out. They take a turn down my street. 1st they see my neighbor out in front with nothing to protect him while he is boarding up his windows....then a few houses down they see with me with my Mossberg 590 with my bayonet fixed. They may or may not choose our street to loot? Who knows? I can only pray that they are thinking there are softer targets than me and my 590 with bayonet ready for a fight.

...and if a one of my "in the know" friends drives buy and I dont want to get laughed at...then I'll just quickly remove the tacticool bayonet to save face.

I dont see the big deal? Could it deter a gun grab? Yes of course it could. How could anyone say for certain it 100% wouldn't ? Does it make your shotgun any less devastating as a fighting gun? Who knows? Has anybody on GT ever fought for their lives with a bayonet mounted shotgun (chime in WWI and WWII guys if you are here)...I think not.

DaGroaner
02-09-2010, 14:45
I think some people just think it's uber-cool to be anti-tacticool.

txleapd
02-09-2010, 16:11
They are pretty much useless in modern conflicts.
Pat

Useless in modern conflicts? The Brits might think differently. This story is from 2004...

OUTNUMBERED British soldiers killed 35 Iraqi attackers in the Army’s first bayonet charge since the Falklands War 22 years ago.

The fearless Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders stormed rebel positions after being ambushed and pinned down.

Despite being outnumbered five to one, they suffered only three minor wounds in the hand-to-hand fighting near the city of Amara.

The battle erupted after Land Rovers carrying 20 Argylls came under attack on a highway.

After radioing for back-up, they fixed bayonets and charged at 100 rebels using tactics learned in drills.

When the fighting ended bodies lay all over the highway, and more were floating in a nearby river. Nine rebels were captured.

An Army spokesman said: “This was an intense engagement.”

The last bayonet charge was by the Scots Guards and the Paras against Argentinian positions.

Brits Kill 35 with Bayonets (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article88661.ece)


The bayonet, if it ever had to be used, would be one of my last choice of weapons. You would have to be in a really dire situation to have to resort to using a bayonet. It meant you were out of ammunition, didn't have a back up, and your rifle was nothing more than a useless stick of steel. But that doesn't make it useless, in my opinion.

If I had nothing else, I would gladly stick a bayonet on the end of my empty rifle, if for no other reason than to gain reach and leverage to thrust the blade deep into an enemy sternum (hopefully). It might be a little better than trying to do the same with a knife in my hand.

I would call that plan B and file it away under worse case scenarios, but that doesn't mean it might not be effective at some point. I don't think that at least having the option is necessarily a bad thing.

txleapd
02-09-2010, 16:21
I'm not sure if this is a different version of the same story, or a different one all together. Also from 2004....

British battalion 'attacked every day for six weeks'
By Sean Rayment, Defence Correspondent
(Filed: 13/06/2004)

An infantry battalion serving in Iraq has been awarded the dubious distinction of having been attacked more times than any British Army unit since the Korean War.

The officers and men of the 1st battalion of the Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment have been "in contact" with enemy forces on more than 250 separate occasions since they arrived in Iraq six weeks ago.

The regiment, which recruits troops from the southern Home Counties, the Isle of Wight and the Channel Islands, has sustained more than 40 casualties - 21 of whom have been evacuated back to Britain, where they are being treated for gunshot or shrapnel wounds in civilian hospitals.

Despite the number and ferocity of the attacks there have been no fatalities. The battalion of 700, which is based in a bombed-out former Iraqi army camp at Abu Naji, south of Al Amarah, in the Maysan province of southern Iraq, has been under daily mortar attack for the past six weeks.

The unit has also been ambushed, attacked with rockets and home-made bombs and has been repeatedly sniped at by Iraqi gunmen.

The area is a centre of anti-Coalition activity and is close to the town of Majar al-Kabir, where six members of the Royal Military Police were murdered by Iraqi gunmen last June.

The attacks are being carried out by "gangsters and terrorists" who are seeking to force Coalition troops to withdraw from the area. The Ministry of Defence has been unwilling to release details of the frequency and intensity of the attacks because of fears that the news could increase calls for troops to be withdrawn from Iraq.

Senior Army officers, however, by contrast believe that the fact that the unit can still function effectively is a reflection of the courage and professionalism of the troops in the battalion and that their actions should be commended publicly.

A senior military official said: "The battalion has had more than 250 contacts since they arrived in Iraq at the end of April. They have sustained casualties but they have shown tremendous grit and determination.

"They are being attacked virtually every day and sometimes several times a day, usually with rockets or from mortars. They are tired, primarily because the attacks mean sleep is constantly interrupted, but their morale is high."

Two weeks ago, 28 men from the battalion took part in a rout of Iraqi gunmen who had been terrorising the Route 6 motorway which links Al Amarah to Basra. The troops had been ordered to rescue two vehicles and their occupants from the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, which was ambushed by a group of 50 Iraqis.

The battle, one of three separate attacks against British troops in the area on the same day, ended when the soldiers fixed bayonets and stormed a series of enemy positions dug-in by the road-side. About 30 Iraqis were killed, 12 were captured and a further dozen are believed to have fled from the battlefield.

After the action, Capt Justin Barry, a military spokesman, said: "The fighters engaged were basically terrorists and gangsters - people who are out to destabilise the area, drive out the Coalition and suck as much out of Iraq as they can.

"But at the end of the day, we got the better of them. The Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment were engaged in very heavy hand-to-hand fighting and bayonets were fixed. There's a great sense of satisfaction among the men with the way this turned out."

The level of anti-terrorist activity directed against British forces in the area has led to an additional 370 members of the 1st battalion of the Black Watch and Royal Engineers being deployed to help secure Route 6. Announcements on further troop deployments are expected in the next few weeks.

The last time a British regiment sustained such a high level of attacks was, according to military officials, during the Korean War, between 1950 and 1953, when British Army units were under sustained attack from Chinese and North Korean forces for weeks on end.

In military campaigns since the Korean War, such as the Falklands War, battles may have been bloodier with higher casualty levels but most lasted less than 24 hours. No Army unit since the Korean War has been under continuous daily attack for six weeks. In Iraq, after hostilities were officially declared to be "over" last May, the number of attacks against British units fell sharply.

Most units were told to expect between five and 10 "contacts" in a five-month tour, although that could rise to several a week in periods of high terrorist activity.

A "contact" is defined by the military as an encounter with the enemy and can include anything from a single round fired to a unit coming under artillery fire.

The Queen's Lancashire Regiment experienced a two-week period at the end of August last year when its troops were under attack almost daily. Several soldiers were injured and Capt Dai Jones was killed when the vehicle he was travelling in was destroyed by a mine.

The Birts loves them some bayonets... (http://web.archive.org/web/20040812193042/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/06/13/wirq113.xml)

fragout
02-09-2010, 16:23
Actually worse case would probably be using your E-tool on someones face, but seriously 590's with bayonets were for Marines guarding ships or tactifools.

txleapd
02-09-2010, 16:34
Here's a more in depth account prepared by the U.S. Urban Warfare Analysis Center:


Executive Summary

In May 2004, approximately 20 British troops in Basra were ambushed and forced out of their vehicles by about 100 Shiite militia fighters. When ammunition ran low, the British troops fixed bayonets and charged the enemy. About 20 militiamen were killed in the assault without any British deaths.

The bayonet charge appeared to succeed for three main reasons. First, the attack was the first of its kind in that region and captured the element of surprise. Second, enemy fighters probably believed jihadist propaganda stating that coalition troops were cowards unwilling to fight in close combat, further enhancing the element of surprise. Third, the strict discipline of the British troops overwhelmed the ability of the militia fighters to organize a cohesive counteraction.

The effects of this tactical action in Basra are not immediately applicable elsewhere, but an important dominant theme emerges regarding the need to avoid predictable patterns of behavior within restrictive rules of engagement. Commanders should keep adversaries off balance with creative feints and occasional shows of force lest they surrender the initiative to the enemy.


I. Overview of Bayonet Charge

On 21 May 2004, Mahdi militiamen engaged a convoy consisting of approximately 20 British troops from the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders 55 miles north of Basra. A squad from the Princess of Wales regiment came to their assistance. What started as an attack on a passing convoy ended with at least 35 militiamen dead and just three British troops wounded. The militiamen engaged a force that had restrictive rules of engagement prior to the incident that prevented them from returning fire. What ensued was an example of irregular warfare by coalition troops that achieved a tactical victory over a numerically superior foe with considerable firepower.

The Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders are an infantry regiment of the British Army with a rich history. It is one of Scotland’s oldest fighting forces. It is best known for forming the legendry “thin red line” at the Battle of Balaklava in the Crimean War against Russia in 1854. It later fought with distinction in World War I and World War II, including intense jungle warfare in Malaya. After Iraq, it served in Afghanistan before returning home in 2008.


Country: United Kingdom
Branch: Army, 16th Air Assault Brigade
Type: One of six Scottish line infantry regiments
Role: Air assault-Light role
Motto: Nemo Me Impune Lacessit

No One Assails Me With Impunity


Atmosphere Preceding the Attack

After a period of relative calm, attacks escalated after coalition forces attempted to arrest Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. British soldiers in southern Iraq said they were “stunned” by the level of violence near Basra. In particular, Mahdi militiamen conducted regular ambushes on British convoys on the roads between Basra and Baghdad.Frequent, uncoordinated attacks inflicted little damage, although precise data is unavailable in open sources. Since the Scottish and Welsh troops arrived in Basra, Shiite militias averaged about five attacks per day in Basra.


The Bayonet Charge

The battle began when over 100 Mahdi army fighters ambushed two unarmored vehicles transporting around 20 Argylls on the isolated Route Six highway near the southern city of Amarah. Ensconced in trenches along the road, the militiamen fired mortars, rocket propelled grenades, and machine gun rounds. The vehicles stopped and British troops returned fire. The Mahdi barrage caused enough damage to force the troops to exit the vehicles.The soldiers quickly established a defensive perimeter and radioed for reinforcements from the main British base at Amarah – Camp Abu Naji. Reinforcements from the Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment assisted the Argyles in an offensive operation against the Mahdi militiamen. When ammunition ran low among the British troops, the decision was made to fix bayonets for a direct assault.

The British soldiers charged across 600 feet of open ground toward enemy trenches. They engaged in intense hand-to-hand fighting with the militiamen. Despite being outnumbered and lacking ammunition, the Argylls and Princess of Wales troops routed the enemy. The British troops killed about 20 militiamen in the bayonet charge and between 28 and 35 overall. Only three British soldiers were injured.This incident marked the first time in 22 years that the British Army used bayonets in action. The previous incident occurred during the Falklands War in 1982.


II. Why the Bayonet Charge Was a Tactical Success

The bayonet charge by British troops in Basra achieved tactical success primarily because of psychological and cultural factors. It also shows that superior firepower does not guarantee success by either side. In this case, the value of surprise, countering enemy expectations, and strict troop discipline were three deciding characteristics of the bayonet charge.


Surprise as a Weapon

The Mahdi fighters likely expected the British convoy to continue past the attack. Previous convoys of British vehicles had driven through ambush fire. British military sources believe the militiamen miscalculated the response of the convoy and expected the Scots to flee.

• Although the raid is a well-honed tactic practiced by jihadist and Arab irregulars, the surprise raid has been an effective tool against Arab armies, both regular and irregular.

Irregular fighters usually are not trained in the rigid discipline that professional counterparts possess, and the surprise attack exploits this weakness.


Enemy Expectation that Coalition Troops Would Avoid Combat

Propaganda by Sunni and Shiite jihadists regularly advertised the perception that American and British soldiers were cowards. Similar rhetoric increased after the battles of Fallujah in April 2004, perhaps to steady the resolve of militia fighters in the face of aggressive coalition attacks.

In addition, British convoys did not engage significantly during previous ambushes, which probably validated the narrative for many Mahdi militiamen. Because many of the Mahdi fighters were teenagers, it is also likely that the Mahdi army used these ambushes for training and recruiting. The attacks were an opportunity for young fighters to use weapons in combat with little risk of serious reprisal.

• In short, the bayonet charge not only surprised the Mahdi militiamen, it also debunked the perception that coalition troops were reluctant fighters seeking to avoid conflict.

"I wanted to put the fear of God into the enemy. I could see some dead bodies and eight blokes, some scrambling for their weapons. I’ve never seen such a look of fear in anyone’s eyes before. I’m over six feet; I was covered in sweat, angry, red in the face, charging in with a bayonet and screaming my head off. You would be scared, too."

Corporal Brian Wood
Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment

"There was a lot of aggression and a lot of hand-to-hand fighting. It wasn’t a pleasant scene. Some did get cut with the blades of the bayonet as we tumbled around, but in the end, they surrendered and were controlled. I do wonder how they regard life so cheaply. Some of these Iraqis in those trenches were 15 years old – against trained soldiers."

Colonel Mark Byers
Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment


Strict Discipline

A crucial distinction during the bayonet charge was the professional discipline of the British troops in contrast to the disunity and confusion of the militia fighters. Irregular militia often fight with passion and benefit from knowledge of the local terrain. Professional soldiers, however, formally trained in tactics and squad unity can often overcome these and other obstacles. During the bayonet charge, the soldiers rarely lost their nerve and not a single soldier lost his life.

Many of the militiamen fled.

txleapd
02-09-2010, 16:45
Actually worse case would probably be using your E-tool on someones face, but seriously 590's with bayonets were for Marines guarding ships or tactifools.

When I was in the Corps I knew an old civilian employee who worked on base that had a confirmed kill with a bayonet, and 2 with his E-tool during Vietnam. :wow:

He didn't have any problem talking about the night his position got overrun by NVA regulars. He shot his rifle until it ran out. Then used his .45 until it too went dry. Picked his rifle back up to stick a fool. Lost his grip (and the rifle) as the bad guy went down, and then grabbed his E-tool.

He hit the first guy in the helmet. It turned his E-tool, knocked of the bad guy's helmet, and stunned him. He had enough snap to aim for the next guy's throat. After dispatching him he turned back on the one that was stunned. His E-tool ended up buried in the last guy's skull, right before he hit the bottom of his fighting hole, and the arty shells finally arrived...

Just remembering the story as he told it gives me the chills, and is enough to conjure some nightmare images. I couldn't imagine actually having to live through that...

mixflip
02-10-2010, 03:18
but seriously 590's with bayonets were for Marines guarding ships or tactifools.

Again with the gun snobbery? Why is someone a "tactifool" just because he wants to own a 590A1 that has the option of a bayonet? Are you a bandwagon hater? Or do you have real world experience as to why you consider folks fools for owning a weapon that can fix a bayonet?

I own a Mosin Nagant bolt action carbine that has a spike bayonet built into the gun (fold out as needed). Am I a tactifool?

Seriously, whats up with all the snobs?

c5367
02-10-2010, 04:25
Again with the gun snobbery? Why is someone a "tactifool" just because he wants to own a 590A1 that has the option of a bayonet? Are you a bandwagon hater? Or do you have real world experience as to why you consider folks fools for owning a weapon that can fix a bayonet?

I own a Mosin Nagant bolt action carbine that has a spike bayonet built into the gun (fold out as needed). Am I a tactifool?

Seriously, whats up with all the snobs?

Depends.

If one owns it because it's a neat piece of history or just because they like it, that's cool. If one owns it because they think it'll make them a high speed low-drag mil-spec mall ninja operator type, they're a poser.

Collectors - cool
Mall ninja Posers/PX commandos - not cool

But that's just my opinion on things. I've some very good friends that are motorcycle posers, FWIW.

David Armstrong
02-10-2010, 13:36
On the usefulness of a bayonet though? Its not a fair comparison.
Sure it is. You assume the bayonet will give some kind of advantage. It does not, even in the SHTF scenarios you offer. IF it gave some kind of benefit you would see a lot more of them and a lot more talk about how good they are. Even in the military the use of the bayonet for self defense is quite restricted and not a common concept.
I can only pray that they are thinking there are softer targets than me and my 590 with bayonet ready for a fight.
So, as I understand your argument, the BGs would choose to attack you if you only had your shotgun but would choose not to if you had the same shotgun but put a bayonet on it? I'm sorry, but I fail to follow that at all.
I dont see the big deal?
The big deal is that there is enough nonsense floating around out there about how to defend yourself without adding to or being accepting of any more of it.
Could it deter a gun grab? Yes of course it could. How could anyone say for certain it 100% wouldn't ?
Using such reasoning I might suggest that wearing a pair of Mickey Mouse ears from Disneyland could deter a gun grab.
Does it make your shotgun any less devastating as a fighting gun? Who knows?
Depending on definitions, yes, I think a good case can be made for the idea that it does make the shotgun less devastating as a fighting gun. It makes it longer, heavier, more awkward to maneuver, etc.

David Armstrong
02-10-2010, 13:41
I own a Mosin Nagant bolt action carbine that has a spike bayonet built into the gun (fold out as needed). Am I a tactifool?
Depends. Did you buy the gun with the idea that this setup would be better than the other options for self defense based on the looks and the fact that it had a bayonet? Or did yo buy it because it was an inexpensive piece of history that is fun to play with?

mixflip
02-10-2010, 14:56
Wow, you really like to over analyze things dont you? I think its time to unplug from the Matrix from time to time and get some fresh air because you are arguing for the sake of arguing now.

You are even putting words in my mouth just to argue your point. I never said having a shotgun "without a bayonet" will make me less of a threat and that bad guys will want to pick me based on the fact that I have no bayonet on my shotgun vs having one and they scram? I never said that. You implied that.

If you dont like bayonets on shotguns then dont buy one. If somemone buys a shotgun and puts a bayonet on it what are you going to do? Call the un-cool police? Just let it go.

I just bought a 590 about an hour ago. It happened to have a bayonet lug but its not the 590A1. Will I have fun an slap on a bayonet someday? Sure. Am I claiming to be Joe tactical? No. I dont care if the "internet shotgun elitist in the know" laugh at me. They arent the one enjoying the gun...I am.

c5367
02-10-2010, 16:56
Wow, you really like to over analyze things dont you? I think its time to unplug from the Matrix from time to time and get some fresh air because you are arguing for the sake of arguing now.

You are even putting words in my mouth just to argue your point. I never said having a shotgun "without a bayonet" will make me less of a threat and that bad guys will want to pick me based on the fact that I have no bayonet on my shotgun vs having one and they scram? I never said that. You implied that.

If you dont like bayonets on shotguns then dont buy one. If somemone buys a shotgun and puts a bayonet on it what are you going to do? Call the un-cool police? Just let it go.

I just bought a 590 about an hour ago. It happened to have a bayonet lug but its not the 590A1. Will I have fun an slap on a bayonet someday? Sure. Am I claiming to be Joe tactical? No. I dont care if the "internet shotgun elitist in the know" laugh at me. They arent the one enjoying the gun...I am.


Not saying you personally, I (and David, if I read correctly) are talking generally about the Joe Tactical Mall Ninja posers out there. (if you've ever seen the original mall ninja thread about the mall rent-a-cop whe swore up and down that he needed double trauma plates and such for tactical reasons you'd understand where the anti-poser attitude comes from)
Clearly, you don't take yourself nearly as seriously as they do, and most of this "snobbery" doesn't apply. Don't take it personal, it wasn't meant to be.

Congrats on the new purchase. :thumbsup:


ETA: here's the original thread, archived elsewhere
http://lonelymachines.org/mall-ninjas/

Great for a few laughs

DaGroaner
02-10-2010, 17:30
Wow, you really like to over analyze things dont you? I think its time to unplug from the Matrix from time to time and get some fresh air because you are arguing for the sake of arguing now.

You are even putting words in my mouth just to argue your point. I never said having a shotgun "without a bayonet" will make me less of a threat and that bad guys will want to pick me based on the fact that I have no bayonet on my shotgun vs having one and they scram? I never said that. You implied that.

If you dont like bayonets on shotguns then dont buy one. If somemone buys a shotgun and puts a bayonet on it what are you going to do? Call the un-cool police? Just let it go.

I just bought a 590 about an hour ago. It happened to have a bayonet lug but its not the 590A1. Will I have fun an slap on a bayonet someday? Sure. Am I claiming to be Joe tactical? No. I dont care if the "internet shotgun elitist in the know" laugh at me. They arent the one enjoying the gun...I am.

Note: He(they) had nothing to say whatsoever regarding posts 38, 59, 60 and 62. Bombastic internet big mouths pumping their chests don't have a lot of credibility with me and here we see why.

David Armstrong
02-10-2010, 17:40
You are even putting words in my mouth just to argue your point. I never said having a shotgun "without a bayonet" will make me less of a threat and that bad guys will want to pick me based on the fact that I have no bayonet on my shotgun vs having one and they scram? I never said that. You implied that.
Here is what you wrote: "They may or may not choose our street to loot? Who knows? I can only pray that they are thinking there are softer targets than me and my 590 with bayonet ready for a fight." Again, if I have misunderstood your argument please explain it, as that is what I seem to get out of it.
If you dont like bayonets on shotguns then dont buy one. If somemone buys a shotgun and puts a bayonet on it what are you going to do? Call the un-cool police? Just let it go.
Ummm, perhaps YOU should let it go? Nobody here is arguing not to put a bayonet on a shotgun. The issue I have been discussing is (1) does it make the shotgun more effective as a weapon; and (2) is there a tactical advantage to be gained as opposed to disadvantage outside of the military environment. You seem to be arguing agaisnt something nobody has said.

David Armstrong
02-10-2010, 17:46
Note: He(they) had nothing to say whatsoever regarding posts 38, 59, 60 and 62.
Note: Posts 38, 59, 60 and 62 all deal with the use of the bayonet in the context of a military action, not for SD.
Bombastic internet big mouths pumping their chests don't have a lot of credibility with me and here we see why.
Perhaps you would care to indentify these bombastic internet big mouths pumping their chests specifically and identify any factual errors they may have posted? I mean, if yourconcern is their credibility you should be able to identify areas where what they have said was not correct or credible, right??

DaGroaner
02-10-2010, 18:03
Note: Posts 38, 59, 60 and 62 all deal with the use of the bayonet in the context of a military action, not for SD.

Perhaps you would care to indentify these bombastic internet big mouths pumping their chests specifically and identify any factual errors they may have posted? I mean, if yourconcern is their credibility you should be able to identify areas where what they have said was not correct or credible, right??

http://glocktalk.com/forums/search.php?searchid=5088522

One doesn't have to dig too deeply to see what I mean. You seem to have a penchant for this kind of thing. The chambered/unchambered round thread is particularly amusing. :wavey:

c5367
02-10-2010, 18:23
I do have some amazing pecs :rofl:

DaGroaner
02-10-2010, 18:33
I do have some amazing pecs :rofl:

Sounds like a GNG thread waiting to happen. :rofl:

OVERTHEHILLGUY
02-10-2010, 19:08
:dunno::dunno: bayonet on a shotgun??:dunno::dunno:

David Armstrong
02-11-2010, 11:49
http://glocktalk.com/forums/search.php?searchid=5088522

One doesn't have to dig too deeply to see what I mean. You seem to have a penchant for this kind of thing. The chambered/unchambered round thread is particularly amusing. :wavey:
So, in other words, when put on the spot you apparently cannot identify any factual errors that have been posted. Thank you.

David Armstrong
02-11-2010, 11:52
:dunno::dunno: bayonet on a shotgun??:dunno::dunno:

Yep. Sort of silly, isn't it. But hey, as long as it makes you look tacticool!:rofl:

DaGroaner
02-11-2010, 12:36
So, in other words, when put on the spot you apparently cannot identify any factual errors that have been posted. Thank you.

Facts? This is a conversation about opinions. We were merely spitballing about why a bayonet might be of use to someone on the end of a tactical shotgun. That's when you chose to step in and let us all know what a genius you are and why only tactifools would want a bayonet lug on their weapon.

My bottomline: I live in the forest. If faced with a hostile man, group of men, wild animals or whatever and I ran out of ammo or for some other reason my shotgun no longer functioned. I would rather have a spear than an unwieldy 12 GA club or a 6" bowie knife with which to defend myself. Obviously you feel differently, because God knows how heavy and clumsy bayonet lugs are, and have no problem saying so in the most condescending way possible.

Puppy
02-11-2010, 12:58
I don't think people realize just how much more energy is transferred to a target with a spear/bayonet than rather with a simple knife stab or a butt stroke.

Ancient man took down massive 8 ton woolly mammoths using wood shafted stone tipped spears, just a little something for you guys to think about while your mocking them.

I'm not saying that bayonets should be required on home defense weapons or anything, I just think it's silly to mock such an effective, time proven weapon.

David Armstrong
02-11-2010, 13:25
Facts? This is a conversation about opinions.
You have expressed some opinions. I have offered a set of facts that contradict your opinions. Perhaps there is the problem. You want to operate off of opinion and "I think" or "I believe." I prefer to operate from a position of "Here are some facts to consider."
Your opinion: "I think a bayo would make some yutz think twice about making a grab for your barrel in certain situations."
My facts: "A bayonet won't deter a gun grab, as that does not occur at the open end of the muzzle." Gun grabs, to be successful, have to bring the gun off the center line of the grabber, thus negating open end grabs, which are handled by pulling the trigger.
"Outside of the military, a bayonet mount serves no purpose other than to sucker in some foolish buyers who think it makes them look extra cool. In reality it makes them look extra foolish to folks in the know." While that might rate as opinion, I tend to classify it as a fact because, having been a shotgun tactics trainer and having attended a lot of shotgun training, I have never found anyone who suggests the bayonet mount serves any tactical function for SD. In fact, it has been roundly condemned as useless by all well recognized trainers I am aware of.
"If you need a bayonet to handle an open end of muzzle gun grab you just need basic training in gunhandling and weapon retention, not a bayonet."
"But while you do that, remember, not a single mainstream instructor recommends it for anything outside of the military. There is a reason for that."
"Of course, I also know that nobody with any real experience or understanding of the concept would attempt to determine a case of Freudian Projection based on a few posts on an internet forum,...."
"So, in other words, when put on the spot you apparently cannot identify any factual errors that have been posted."
"IF it gave some kind of benefit you would see a lot more of them and a lot more talk about how good they are. Even in the military the use of the bayonet for self defense is quite restricted and not a common concept."
"Depending on definitions, yes, I think a good case can be made for the idea that it does make the shotgun less devastating as a fighting gun. It makes it longer, heavier, more awkward to maneuver, etc."
Even the military, according to c5367, tends to agree that the bayonet is not a good tool for SD: "When asked why we had these high-speed low-drag tacticool lugs but never used the bayonets that go with them, the instructors explained that the bayonet was pointless...."
Anytime you wish to discuss those factual issues, I'm game.
My bottomline: I live in the forest.
Which does not change anything regarding the effectiveness of the bayonet.
If faced with a hostile man, group of men, wild animals or whatever and I ran out of ammo or for some other reason my shotgun no longer functioned. I would rather have a spear than an unwieldy 12 GA club or a 6" bowie knife with which to defend myself.
Which is a completely different rationale than your original ""I think a bayo would make some yutz think twice about making a grab for your barrel in certain situations" position. It also seems strange that you would think putting a bayhonet on "an unwieldy 12 GA club" would somehow make it less unwieldy.
Obviously you feel differently, because God knows how heavy and clumsy bayonet lugs are, and have no problem saying so in the most condescending way possible.
Again, you try to argue from opinion rather than facts. I have never said that bayonet lugs are heavy and clumsy.

DaGroaner
02-11-2010, 13:36
You have expressed some opinions. I have offered a set of facts that contradict your opinions. Perhaps there is the problem. You want to operate off of opinion and "I think" or "I believe." I prefer to operate from a position of "Here are some facts to consider."
Your opinion: "I think a bayo would make some yutz think twice about making a grab for your barrel in certain situations."
My facts: "A bayonet won't deter a gun grab, as that does not occur at the open end of the muzzle." Gun grabs, to be successful, have to bring the gun off the center line of the grabber, thus negating open end grabs, which are handled by pulling the trigger.
"Outside of the military, a bayonet mount serves no purpose other than to sucker in some foolish buyers who think it makes them look extra cool. In reality it makes them look extra foolish to folks in the know." While that might rate as opinion, I tend to classify it as a fact because, having been a shotgun tactics trainer and having attended a lot of shotgun training, I have never found anyone who suggests the bayonet mount serves any tactical function for SD. In fact, it has been roundly condemned as useless by all well recognized trainers I am aware of.
"If you need a bayonet to handle an open end of muzzle gun grab you just need basic training in gunhandling and weapon retention, not a bayonet."
"But while you do that, remember, not a single mainstream instructor recommends it for anything outside of the military. There is a reason for that."
"Of course, I also know that nobody with any real experience or understanding of the concept would attempt to determine a case of Freudian Projection based on a few posts on an internet forum,...."
"So, in other words, when put on the spot you apparently cannot identify any factual errors that have been posted."
"IF it gave some kind of benefit you would see a lot more of them and a lot more talk about how good they are. Even in the military the use of the bayonet for self defense is quite restricted and not a common concept."
"Depending on definitions, yes, I think a good case can be made for the idea that it does make the shotgun less devastating as a fighting gun. It makes it longer, heavier, more awkward to maneuver, etc."
Even the military, according to c5367, tends to agree that the bayonet is not a good tool for SD: "When asked why we had these high-speed low-drag tacticool lugs but never used the bayonets that go with them, the instructors explained that the bayonet was pointless...."
Anytime you wish to discuss those factual issues, I'm game.

Which does not change anything regarding the effectiveness of the bayonet.

Which is a completely different rationale than your original ""I think a bayo would make some yutz think twice about making a grab for your barrel in certain situations" position. It also seems strange that you would think putting a bayhonet on "an unwieldy 12 GA club" would somehow make it less unwieldy.

Again, you try to argue from opinion rather than facts. I have never said that bayonet lugs are heavy and clumsy.

My comment about some yutz "in certain situations" has already been confirmed by someone in the know. I think it is quite funny that you think a club and a spear are the same weapon and use the same techniques. Some genius you turned out to be. :rofl:

mixflip
02-11-2010, 15:12
This thread has strayed WAAAAAAAYYYYY of topic. All I asked was why doesnt Remington offer any competition to the Mossberg 590 bayonet market?

If Remington offered a factory version of what Mossberg has a monopoly on (the 590 with bayonet lug) I'd probably buy one just for snits and giggles over the Mossberg? I think there are lots of folks who actually enjoy a bayonet option regardless of the shotgun elitist in the know who hate them?

vafish
02-11-2010, 19:54
This thread has strayed WAAAAAAAYYYYY of topic. All I asked was why doesnt Remington offer any competition to the Mossberg 590 bayonet market?

If Remington offered a factory version of what Mossberg has a monopoly on (the 590 with bayonet lug) I'd probably buy one just for snits and giggles over the Mossberg? I think there are lots of folks who actually enjoy a bayonet option regardless of the shotgun elitist in the know who hate them?

You want a bayonet on your 870?

http://www.sjhardware.com/870Bayo.html

mixflip
02-11-2010, 20:08
No I dont own an 870...I was just wondering why Remington never offered competition to the Mossberg 590? Of course if it is just a marketing tool, then why not profit from that market share that Mossberg has a monopoly on?

I dont really care if its obsolete and useless and not cool to those in the know and to those who are shotgun trainers and Navy Seals and Delta Force and cops and whatever. I was just curious thats all.

aippi
02-11-2010, 21:25
Having built over 500 custom tactical shotguns for duty weapons, HD and other clients such as guides in AK who carry them for bear protection to brush pilots and even fly fishermen, park rangers and even a few competition shooters. I have never had anyone request a bayonet.

I bring this up to show how minute this topic even is. I also will point out that when reading anyones post I look at their qualifications to even address the topic. I would accept any comment on any type of Tactical Weapon from D Armstrong as I have taken the time to visit his site and learn some darn good stuff. Don't hate him just 'cause he knows what he is talking about.

B Coyote
02-11-2010, 22:20
Don't hate him just 'cause he knows what he is talking about.
Well stated, sir.

bc

David Armstrong
02-12-2010, 10:59
I think it is quite funny that you think a club and a spear are the same weapon and use the same techniques. Some genius you turned out to be.
Well, I'll point out that instead of calling people names you might want to try to read what is said and deal with that, instead of making things up. I do not think a club and a spear are the same weapon and use the same techniques, and I have never said anyting to support such an idea.

David Armstrong
02-12-2010, 11:02
I think there are lots of folks who actually enjoy a bayonet option regardless of the shotgun elitist in the know who hate them?
I don't think anyone, elitist or not, hates the bayonet option. Again, that seems to be something that some have made up rather than based on any real facts. What folks in the know have pointed out is that the bayonet doesn't help the shotgun as a SD weapon.

mixflip
02-12-2010, 11:27
I don't think anyone, elitist or not, hates the bayonet option. Again, that seems to be something that some have made up rather than based on any real facts. What folks in the know have pointed out is that the bayonet doesn't help the shotgun as a SD weapon.

Ok you convinced me that a bayonet doesnt help in a self in a self defense situation. I see your point. It makes it longer, heavier, does not deter a gun grab in close quarters and almost no one trains to use it even if they did have one. On top of that you have years of experience training other folks how to properly use a fighting shotgun and others here have verified that.

...I still dont mind the idea of slapping on an M7 (Vietnam era) bayonet if looters come my way when the power goes out.

MavsX
02-12-2010, 11:40
jesus, you guys are still going at this? I'm about to buy a shotgun pretty soon. I'm going to go with mossberg simply because i like the controls better than the remington. I have no doubt that both guns would be equal and could pass the mil. spec tests.

DaGroaner
02-12-2010, 13:30
I don't think anyone, elitist or not, hates the bayonet option. Again, that seems to be something that some have made up rather than based on any real facts. What folks in the know have pointed out is that the bayonet doesn't help the shotgun as a SD weapon.

Lot's of made up stuff in this thread. I don't hate you, as was suggested by one of your fans, for starters. I save my hate for only the most deserving and you are light years away from even coming close.

I do not think a club and a spear are the same weapon and use the same techniques, and I have never said anyting to support such an idea.

Well yes you did...

It also seems strange that you would think putting a bayhonet on "an unwieldy 12 GA club" would somehow make it less unwieldy.

Clearly with the addition of a bayonet, an empty 12 GA becomes something more than a club.

I personally would not want a bayonet on my shotgun as long as I had ammo or wasn't holding a group of bad guys at gun point or being stalked by a cougar, many people attacked by cougars/bears only have time to turn around before being mauled. All I ever said was that I can see it being useful in certain situations.

"If you need a bayonet to handle an open end of muzzle gun grab you just need basic training in gunhandling and weapon retention, not a bayonet."There's that "certain situation" I mentioned. Most of us are just homeowners, not cops or mil with countless hours spent training for self-defense. Hell some of us are older and not as able-bodied as we used to be either. A situation which lends itself to a bad guy attempting a grab. I think we all tend to have a hard time putting ourselves into the shoes of others and that you're looking at this from a POV that doesn't really apply to most people who live outside of your LEO/Mil world.

Finally, the exception clearly does not prove the rule but you just said yourself that you don't hate having the option. I think your last statement"What folks in the know have pointed out is that the bayonet doesn't help the shotgun as a SD weapon", would ring more true if you ended it with "99.9% of the time" or something like that. As it sits it doesn't take too much imagination to think of possible exceptions, however unlikely, to your rule. And that is all I was ever talking about in the first place.

Then there is always this situation in which a bayonet is invaluable. A situation a guy like me might have to face on any given day. :38

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOPuEuJx1MY

c5367
02-12-2010, 14:06
Then there is always this situation in which a bayonet is invaluable. A situation a guy like me might have to face on any given day. :38

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOPuEuJx1MY

Are the watermelons are pretty aggressive in your neck of the woods? :rofl:

DaGroaner
02-12-2010, 14:12
Are the watermelons are pretty aggressive in your neck of the woods? :rofl:

Not when compared to the cantaloupes. :supergrin:

David Armstrong
02-12-2010, 16:19
Yawn. Again we see this problem of wanting to make things up instead of dealing with what was said.
I say, "I do not think a club and a spear are the same weapon and use the same techniques, and I have never said anyting to support such an idea."
You say I did, and then quote where I said: "It also seems strange that you would think putting a bayonet on "an unwieldy 12 GA club" would somehow make it less unwieldy." The two statements are very different and do not even have the same subject matter.
Clearly with the addition of a bayonet, an empty 12 GA becomes something more than a club.
Yes, clearly it does. I did not say otherwise. I said it doesn't make it any less unwieldy. You can now have an unwieldy club with a pointy thing on one end.
There's that "certain situation" I mentioned.
No. That is a situation that you have imagined and have somehow convinced yourself, contrary to all available evidence, that a bayonet would help it come out better. Actually it makes it harder to defend against a gun grab, not easier.
I think we all tend to have a hard time putting ourselves into the shoes of others and that you're looking at this from a POV that doesn't really apply to most people who live outside of your LEO/Mil world.
Again you make assumptions that are not supported by facts. I am not looking at it from a LEO/Mil. world and my POV is outside of that. I teach civilians far more than LE or military these days. One of the hardest things to do, as amply evidenced by this thread, is to convince them that all those goofy tacticool things to put on the gun don't help.
I think your last statement"What folks in the know have pointed out is that the bayonet doesn't help the shotgun as a SD weapon", would ring more true if you ended it with "99.9% of the time" or something like that.
Here. Let me be real clear. THERE IS NO REASONABLY CONCEIVABLE CIVILIAN SELF-DEFENSE SITUATION WHERE ADDING A BAYONET TO THE SHOTGUN WILL MAKE IT A BETTER SELF DEFENSE WEAPON FOR THE UNTRAINED INDIVIDUAL. THERE ARE MANY CONCEIVABLE CIVILIAN SELF-DEFENSE SITUATIONS WHERE ADDING A BAYONET TO THE SHOTGUN WILL MAKE IT WORSE.

Yes, there are always possible exceptions to the rule. It is possible a large, man-eating tiger will jump out of your closet at midnite and eat you. Basing a plan of defense on "it's always possible" is a lousy way to plan.

fragout
02-12-2010, 16:23
[quote=mixflip;14735635]This thread has strayed WAAAAAAAYYYYY of topic. All I asked was why doesn't Remington offer any competition to the Mossberg 590 bayonet market?

Remington 870 MCS. It doesn't have a bayonet lug because the Army deemed it didn't warrant one, yet it is a issued weapon with a NSN #.
The bayonet market, lol. Wtf is the bayonet market?
And if you actually serve someday in the military and in a combat arms field, you might be surprized on the lack of 590A1's that you'll see.

DaGroaner
02-12-2010, 16:55
Yawn. Again we see this problem of wanting to make things up instead of dealing with what was said.
I say, "I do not think a club and a spear are the same weapon and use the same techniques, and I have never said anyting to support such an idea."
You say I did, and then quote where I said: "It also seems strange that you would think putting a bayonet on "an unwieldy 12 GA club" would somehow make it less unwieldy." The two statements are very different and do not even have the same subject matter.

Yes, clearly it does. I did not say otherwise. I said it doesn't make it any less unwieldy. You can now have an unwieldy club with a pointy thing on one end.

No. That is a situation that you have imagined and have somehow convinced yourself, contrary to all available evidence, that a bayonet would help it come out better. Actually it makes it harder to defend against a gun grab, not easier.

Again you make assumptions that are not supported by facts. I am not looking at it from a LEO/Mil. world and my POV is outside of that. I teach civilians far more than LE or military these days. One of the hardest things to do, as amply evidenced by this thread, is to convince them that all those goofy tacticool things to put on the gun don't help.

Here. Let me be real clear. THERE IS NO REASONABLY CONCEIVABLE CIVILIAN SELF-DEFENSE SITUATION WHERE ADDING A BAYONET TO THE SHOTGUN WILL MAKE IT A BETTER SELF DEFENSE WEAPON FOR THE UNTRAINED INDIVIDUAL. THERE ARE MANY CONCEIVABLE CIVILIAN SELF-DEFENSE SITUATIONS WHERE ADDING A BAYONET TO THE SHOTGUN WILL MAKE IT WORSE.

Yes, there are always possible exceptions to the rule. It is possible a large, man-eating tiger will jump out of your closet at midnite and eat you. Basing a plan of defense on "it's always possible" is a lousy way to plan.

Trying to use a 12 GA as a club OBVIOUSLY makes it vastly more unwieldy than using it as a spear because the of the differences in technique, your obfuscation of your previous statement notwithstanding.

Of course I NEVER said nor suggested anything about basing one's plan of defense on "it's always possible" now did I? In my case it is quite possible that I might encounter a cougar or a bear on my property. I know this because I have seen them on my land. So far they have always ran away but that certainly doesn't mean they will always run away. I also think it's funny that a guy whining about me supposedly making things up manages to pull a man-eating tiger in my closet out of his butt.

mixflip
02-12-2010, 19:45
[quote=mixflip;14735635]This thread has strayed WAAAAAAAYYYYY of topic. All I asked was why doesn't Remington offer any competition to the Mossberg 590 bayonet market?

Remington 870 MCS. It doesn't have a bayonet lug because the Army deemed it didn't warrant one, yet it is a issued weapon with a NSN #.
Thats all I asked and thank you for that answer.

The bayonet market, lol. Wtf is the bayonet market?
The bayonet market I was reffering to is all the folks who pick a Mossberg 590 or 590A1. That is a market and someone (Mossberg) is profiting off that market demand. If they found that they could not make a profit from selling 590's with a bayonet option then they would have stopped making them with that option right? So there is obviously a market for that oprion? Yet they still take the time to tool and machine those darn bayonet lugs. It takes material, machine tools and a skilled silver solder welder to ad a bayonet lug. Mossberg could save the end user about $40 or $50 bucks by not making that part anymore if there is really no market for a bayonet option?

And if you actually serve someday in the military and in a combat arms field, you might be surprized on the lack of 590A1's that you'll see.
I served 6 years in the Fleet Marine Force (1st Batt 12th Mar Div) MCB Kaneohe Hawaii, Camp Foster Okinawa and Camp Fuji japan with a CAX in 29 Palms. I have shot a few Mossbergs 590A1's. Ironically I never added a bayonet...lol.


Sue me because I wanted a 590 with a bayonet lug just for nolstagia and kicks. I am a huge fan of the Remington 870 and just wondered why I cant get a factory 870 with a bayonet lug? Mossberg has been offering 590's with the useless lug to civilians for years.

Would folks shopping for a 590 be upset if Mossberg stopped adding a bayonet lug on the iconic 590?

vafish
02-12-2010, 20:45
No I dont own an 870...I was just wondering why Remington never offered competition to the Mossberg 590? Of course if it is just a marketing tool, then why not profit from that market share that Mossberg has a monopoly on?

I dont really care if its obsolete and useless and not cool to those in the know and to those who are shotgun trainers and Navy Seals and Delta Force and cops and whatever. I was just curious thats all.


Well I hope Remington doesn't follow Mossberg with those huge goofy muzzle breaks in an attempt to make a profit.

mixflip
02-12-2010, 21:41
Yeah I agree, the Road blocker muzzle break is just goofy. The breecher attachments are being used more for a marketing tool rather than to folks who really need to breech a door.

I like to keep things simple and realistic. (except for maybe a bayonet just to piss people off)

David Armstrong
02-13-2010, 14:17
Trying to use a 12 GA as a club OBVIOUSLY makes it vastly more unwieldy than using it as a spear because the of the differences in technique, your obfuscation of your previous statement notwithstanding.
Umm, your lack of knowledge concerning how to use the shotgun as an impact weapon and how to use the bayonet are both becoming glaringly obvious. Having said that, it still has nothing to do with the fact that adding a bayonet does not make the gun less unwieldy.
Of course I NEVER said nor suggested anything about basing one's plan of defense on "it's always possible" now did I?
From Post #92: "I think your last statement"What folks in the know have pointed out is that the bayonet doesn't help the shotgun as a SD weapon", would ring more true if you ended it with "99.9% of the time" or something like that. As it sits it doesn't take too much imagination to think of possible exceptions, however unlikely, to your rule."
In my case it is quite possible that I might encounter a cougar or a bear on my property.
And your solution is to engage them with a bayonet charge?:rofl:
I also think it's funny that a guy whining about me supposedly making things up manages to pull a man-eating tiger in my closet out of his butt.
Not "supposedly." I think we've shown pretty cearly your attempts to invent statements and positions that have nothign to do with what was actually said. As for the tiger, YOU are the one who is basing his argument on "possible exceptions, however unlikely". I just point out that is a pretty silly way to decide things.

David Armstrong
02-13-2010, 14:25
Would folks shopping for a 590 be upset if Mossberg stopped adding a bayonet lug on the iconic 590?
Probably not. It hasn't seemed to bother folks with all the other manufacturers.
The breecher attachments are being used more for a marketing tool rather than to folks who really need to breech a door.
Which is the same reasoning behind the bayonet lug.

mixflip
02-13-2010, 18:30
Where is that guy with a breecher barrel AND a bayonet when you need him? That would just be too funny!

As for a 590 without a bayonet lug? Dont they already sell a model like that called the persuader? It just has a full length mag tube (vs a tube extension) and no bayonet lug. If they sell both 590 with and without, why is the bayonet model still selling like hot cakes?

.....wait for it..................















because there is a "market for it" and Mossberg is in the business to make money not cure cancer.

Bullman
02-14-2010, 05:04
Well when you are out shooting and don't have a gun rack handy you can put the bayonet on then jam it into the ground so you don't have to lay your tacticool shotgun in the mud!


I always loved that folding bayonet on my SKS paratrooper, you could jam it in the ground, and fold it and then use it as a monopod ( one legged bipod).

David Armstrong
02-15-2010, 12:42
If they sell both 590 with and without, why is the bayonet model still selling like hot cakes?
Apropos this discussion, the better question to ask is why does the "without" model sell like hotcakes if the bayonet is so important and useful?

You are right, of course. The bayonet is a marketing ploy rather than a useful item, as I have been saying, and one should never underestimate the gullibility of the typical consumer to fall for those marketing ploys.

mixflip
02-15-2010, 17:24
I do agree with you Dave, the bayonet lug is nothing more than a "cool nod to military" and really nothing else more than a marketing tool.

I didnt mean to sound as if the other models dont sell like hot cakes though. Mossberg in general is on fire with its award winning 930SPX and the legendary 500 should ship with syrup because it sells like hot cakes!!! lol.

I just got back from a whole dayof shooting my shotguns (about 20 minutes ago actually) and I think I would buy a 18.5" barreled 500 vs the 590 if I could go shopping all over again...but I am happy with my 590 for now.