870 TALO Edition, No J Lock [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : 870 TALO Edition, No J Lock


syr74
06-22-2010, 23:15
The title nails it. I picked up an 870 Express TALO edition today on a whim primarily because it didn't have a j-lock on it, the price wasn't bad, and I found myself in a situation where I needed a shotgun but going home to get a one wasn't practical. I thought all 870's but the 870 Police had the J-lock, is the TALO an exception to this rule?

No complaints by any means, I'll gladly live j-lock free and be grateful that I don't have to do anything to this particular gun get there.

B Coyote
06-22-2010, 23:18
Pics or it didn't happen.

bc

syr74
06-22-2010, 23:20
Pics or it didn't happen.

bc

ROFL. I'll get some pics for you asap.

aippi
06-22-2010, 23:36
The J lock was discontined a couple years ago. No 870's you buy today have it. If you have an older 870 with the J lock safety, it cost you $10 in parts to change it so anyone wanting an older 870 does not have to pass a good deal because of the safety.

syr74
06-22-2010, 23:39
Here are some, unfortunately, relatively crappy pics...one of the safety showing that the gun does not have a J-lock and two of the label showing the model number and that a j lock tool wasn't included with the gun. I may be making much ado about nothing and this could be the way TALO editions come for all I know, I was just surprised by the lack of a J Lock on a non police gun.

syr74
06-22-2010, 23:47
The J lock was discontined a couple years ago. No 870's you buy today have it. If you have an older 870 with the J lock safety, it cost you $10 in parts to change it so anyone wanting an older 870 does not have to pass a good deal because of the safety.

Ah, thanks...so the crappy pics are now just for comic relief. :supergrin:

That said, any reason why I shouldn't throw the proverbial book at this thing in terms of modifications. I'm not interested in going the tacti-cool route, in fact the appearance wont change much, but given the apparently limited nature of this gun I wanted to double check and see if I should potentially mess with something else. (it actually doesn't seem especially limited to me and, while my price was a decent one, decent priced don;t seem hard to find...but I wanted to ask anyway)

That said, I'm actually not crazy about the digital camo stocks, I would like to move to a machined ejector and extractor, a steel trigger housing wouldn't break my heart, and there are a few other, minor additions I might make.

I'm skipping anything too extraneous on this one like ghost rings (I actually really like the night-sight bead on this gun) or overly complicated stocks (I might even go old school and buy a nice set of wood stocks) I may throw a light on it because, on this gun, it would actually be a practical addition.

Hmm, maybe I'm getting conservative in my old age.

syr74
06-22-2010, 23:47
The J lock was discontined a couple years ago. No 870's you buy today have it. If you have an older 870 with the J lock safety, it cost you $10 in parts to change it so anyone wanting an older 870 does not have to pass a good deal because of the safety.

Ah, thanks...so the crappy pics are now just for comic relief. :supergrin:

That said, any reason who I shouldn't throw the proverbial book at this thing in terms of modifications. I'm not interested in going the tacti-cool route, in fact the appearance wont change much, but given the apparently limited nature of this gun I wanted to double check and see if I should potentially mess with something else. (it actually doesn't seem especially limited to me and, while my price was a decent one, decent prices don't seem hard to find...but I wanted to ask anyway)

That said, I'm actually not crazy about the digital camo stocks, I would like to move to a machined ejector and extractor, a steel trigger housing wouldn't break my heart, and there are a few other, minor additions I might make.

I'm skipping anything too extraneous on this one like ghost rings (I actually really like the night-sight bead on this gun) or overly complicated stocks (I might even go old school and buy a nice set of wood stocks) I may throw a light on it because, on this gun, it would actually be a practical addition.

Hmm, maybe I'm getting conservative in my old age.

B Coyote
06-23-2010, 03:26
Honestly, just go shoot the gun. I'll agree on the night sight bead, but other than that....spend that money on ammo.

bc

aippi
06-23-2010, 10:46
Remington only makes on ejector for all their shotguns. As for extractors, you can get the solid steel one but the MIM is as good. I have never seen a MIM extractor fail or even get dull.

The polymer trigger plate assembly is better then the cast metal. Go to www.aiptactical.com (http://www.aiptactical.com) and on the "Build your weapon" page, scroll down till you find the link to the Ruger drop test. Watch that. End of issue.

A new set of solid wood stocks from Remington will set you back over $225.00. Not worth it in my book.

The weapon you bought is simply an 870 Express Tactical model. Take it out, shoot it hard and after a few thousand rounds you may very well find you are please with it as is.

syr74
06-24-2010, 16:01
Remington only makes on ejector for all their shotguns.I did not not know that, thank you.

As for extractors, you can get the solid steel one but the MIM is as good. I have never seen a MIM extractor fail or even get dull.

I may well stick with the MIM part, or I may move to the steel piece still yet. I'm going to break the gun in first and then make a decision.

The weapon you bought is simply an 870 Express Tactical model.

Yeah, I know. When I bought it I actually thought it was simply a Tactical Express with a digital camo stock. Only later did the TALO edition info come to my attention, at which point I figured out that this 870 TALO is still basically just a 870 Tactical Express with a digital camo stock....so in the end I bought exactly what I thought I did anyway.

A new set of solid wood stocks from Remington will set you back over $225.00. Not worth it in my book.

If I buy wood it will be through a source besides Remington and I wouldn't be willing to pay anything like $250.00 bucks for a set. This is strictly a personal preference on my part, I have always preferred the way wood stocks felt in my hand and I have always preferred the way they look as well. Combine this with the fact that I really don't care for the digital camo and, well, you get the picture.


The polymer trigger plate assembly is better then the cast metal. Go to www.aiptactical.com (http://www.aiptactical.com/) and on the "Build your weapon" page, scroll down till you find the link to the Ruger drop test. Watch that. End of issue.

Thanks for the link. I actually figured this one out earlier as well though when I discovered that the 'metal' trigger guard was a cast part....I knew at that moment that I would be keeping the composite piece the shotgun came with. Although, to be blunt, I should have known that the metal trigger guard would have to be a cast piece since it obviously wasn't going to be a forged or billet piece on the other 870's. No way is Remington going to shell out that kind of money for this particular piece in any 870 in this day and age and I can't blame them.

Take it out, shoot it hard and after a few thousand rounds you may very well find you are please with it as is.

I'm sure I will have her broken in before I have anything done, that said if everything doesn't work as smoothly as I would like after breaking her in I will likely have a little internal work done.

aippi
06-24-2010, 16:48
Sounds like you have a good plan. Getting them broke in is first priority. I am not really even sure how many rounds it takes to break an 870 in, they just keep getting smoother and smoother. I give a 100 round break in plan to my clients for when they first get their weapons but that is simply discover any feed and function issue that could appear in the initial break in. I call it 100 for 100 which means 100 rounds for 100% confidence in the weapon before you rely on it. There will more rounds then that for a duty weapon as they also have to Qual with it before they use it on duty. so shoot the hell out of it, rack it like you got a pair and watch as it gets slicker then eel snot like and 870 should be.

syr74
06-24-2010, 23:36
Sounds like you have a good plan. Getting them broke in is first priority. I am not really even sure how many rounds it takes to break an 870 in, they just keep getting smoother and smoother. I give a 100 round break in plan to my clients for when they first get their weapons but that is simply discover any feed and function issue that could appear in the initial break in. I call it 100 for 100 which means 100 rounds for 100% confidence in the weapon before you rely on it. There will more rounds then that for a duty weapon as they also have to Qual with it before they use it on duty. so shoot the hell out of it, rack it like you got a pair and watch as it gets slicker then eel snot like and 870 should be.

Thank you sir. Right now the plan is to basically just fit the 870 with a light in case we get any night time visitors And, if I can find a set of wooden Police stocks for cheap I'll probably pick 'em up. Other than that I actually rather like the setup like it is, the minimalism thing really seems to work.

I do have one more question if you don't mind. If I'm not mistaken the Tactical is a matte blue finish with only police guns being parkerized, is this correct? My worry here is that matte blue guns I have had in the past suffered from some pretty serious finish wear when used and I can't find anything which specifically states whether the TALO is matte blued or parkerized, although I'm guessing it's blued like other Tactical Express models.

aippi
06-24-2010, 23:42
i am guessing it is a matte finish and the only thing that makes it a different model are the stocks. Stay on top of the finish, after you wipe it down, don't touch the metal as I had a matte finish and if I touched the receiver or barrel, I could see my finger prints in rust a week latter. That was in Miami and of course, humidity was 365 days a year.