A few years ago in a rather upscale gunshop I found a Thomas Bland 2.5" 20 ga SxS that tipped the scales at no more than 5 lbs, a well balanced "wand" with 28" or 30" barrels that moved and swung with the grace few modern, production-line guns could even come close to matching. One explanation, of course, was the pedigree. But as far as the weight per se was concerned, I couldn't help but notice how slender the receiver was when compared with "modern" 3" guns. In comparison with an SKB, Winchester Model 21 or even a Merkel 20 ga SxS, the Bland receiver was much trimmer, which translated into a much lighter, better proportioned gun.
Several years later, I bought a 2.5" 20 ga Cogswell & Harrison side lever single barrel "hammer gun" with an English stock that weighed all of 3.5 lbs--an Everyman's gun in every way but remarkably light and well-proportioned.
A few days ago I had the opportunity to purchase a 20 ga Model 23 Winchester that must weigh at least 6.5 lbs and has 3" chambers. Like the modern Merkel and the Win Model 21, this gun is nearly as wide across the bbl flats as are the OD of the barrels themselves, which naturally translates into a heavier gun.
Considering that, with a little assiduous searching, one can find a decent 2.75" 12 ga double weighing 6.5 lbs or thereabouts, it makes you wonder what the price of the 3" 20 ga has been. If we (meaning we Americans, I guess) weren't so wrapped up in having an all-around gun, capable of handling everything from woodcock to late-season wild pheasants to maybe ducks over decoys, maybe our treks afield would be a lot less "weighed down", a consideration that becomes more important by the year in my senior dotage!

Granby

Granby,
Currently being in the market for a very light gun, I would be remiss in calling the kettle black. ....but.... having humped up and down very steep hills all season, I will say; I wouldn't mind carrying a 7 or even 7 1/2 lb gun on the flats. It makes you shoot better anyway. But when the going gets hilly, lighter makes a big difference. It seems to be a balancing act of steady shooting ability vs. the fatigue of carrying a given weight.

Horses for courses,

you cannot expect an "all round" gun to do every job perfectly. I would rather have a battery of guns, each fit for their own individual purpose - and oh what fun amassing such a collection.

Lightweight doubles of 12 and 20 for walked up / rough / upland shooting, mid weight 7 lb O/U game guns for high driven pheasant, 6 1/2 lb sxs for normal driven days, heavy auto's for wilfowling / sporting clays, boys .410" for you guessed it... the list goes on. You wouldn't play a round of golf with one club ;-)

Jonty

Always wanted a 20 ga. 3" mag until I helped a buddy pattern one. Found the same things wrong with it that I found when I first got my Rem 870 3" for use on Canada geese and stuffed it with the most powerful ammo I could get - 3" mag 1 7/8 oz. loads. Tremendous recoil, noisy as hell, but the worst patterns I've ever seen (mine was choked IM). Big gaps in the patterns especially at medium to long ranges and lots of clumping of shot. The long narrow cartridge way overloaded with shot and combined with a powder necessary to get the whole mass moving makes for lousy patterns in either gauge. KBM

Instead of running around looking for a gun that will be one pound lighter, spend the money on a treadmill and lose 20 pounds.

While a lighter gun argument can be made for balance and shootability, the argument that a lighter gun will make a difference 'at the end of the day' vs. getting in shape is BS.

I owned a Ruger Red Label 3" 20 in the very early 1980s, and found the EXACT same thing with regard to patterns with 3" ammunition, along with a special added bonus of the gun not shooting to where I aimed it. Did I mention I got rid of it?

Hell, if you keep looking about, you can find 6lb 12s (my Darne R10 with sling is just a bit over 6lbs) and with light loads, these are especially sweet guns for extended carry. I also own an Italian "Companion" folding single shot hammerless 12 gauge that is about 5 lbs-it has a 3" chamber, but, coward that I am, I've never touched one off in it. I prefer my retinas attached. I use it as my snowshoe grouse hunting gun, with 30" tube it is a bit like a highwire artists balance pole, and the shots on grouse are out there a ways in winter.

Never underestimate how much of a friend a 7 1/2-8lb lb 12 is when you have 100 rounds of clay birds to shoot at trap league, however. The "one gun" religion often fails to mention the "one type" of shooting they participate, and, expect success in.
Best,
Ted

My experience with SKB model 500 20ga IC/M has been particularly rewarding with three-inch Kent 1 1/8 TM Impact on ducks over decoys.

I give all gauges and makers their turn during the season, sometimes choosing for choke alone, but more and more the 20 3" is the go-to gun.

I couldn't agree more with Halvey. I'm six-foot, 220 pounds, keep in good shape with forest and vineyard operations, and can't say gun weight is a burden.

It seems the little 20 fits right in any season; no complaint about patterns.

Halvey,
You're absolutely right about getting in shape. But, even those in shape will want for certain weight guns. I know some small framed hunters that when in good shape, they are 135 lbs. and can walk/run the feet off of anyone else. But they get arm fatigue carrying a 7.5 lb 12ga Citori all day. O.K., they can do it, they just prefer to find lighter guns. It's not about "need" but more about "want".

Sometimes I wonder if the 3" 20 bashers have ever hunted with one. The secret, folks, is to not overchoke. Interchangeable chokes are a big plus for figuring this out of course. Any gun with the necessary heft to shoot a 3" 20 is stout enough to have screw chokes anyway...

I use a Beretta 687L at 6.25lbs. With 3" XX or GP loads through the SK and IC tubes it ices pheasants. The patterns are plenty tight with buffered plated shot, and I'm not giving up a thing not lugging a 12.

Anything lighter requires finesse I personally don't have. A gun needs 'feel' which means it needs to have SOME mass. The lower limit for me is 6.25lbs.

My wife's little Beretta 686 3" 20 weighs 5 pounds 14 ounces. She shoots it with target loads without complaint. It beats me to death. I can't imagine shooting a WW 1 1/4 ounce lead load in it.

The light weight 3" 20 ga. is why God invented the 16 gauge.

I must admit, I am a bit of a recoil wimp. I have a nice Spanish 20 ga that weighs exactly 6 lbs. It is a nice field gun but a couple of rounds of clays can be a real pain. [:)]

I can not imagine shooting more then a few 3" rounds.

Tnx
RPr

Too many 3" rounds through a light 20 will most likely result in..."A bloody nose and the inability to read your watch".

My first double was an Ithaca/SKB Model 100 20 gauge 28" M/F($188). I shot a lot of ducks with that gun and Federal 3" #6 and #4 for the second shot while drifting down rivers and sneaking up on farm ponds. The advent of Non-Toxic steel put the gun to rest. It also performed quite well on pheseants and everything else that flew or ran and was legal. No problems with recoil, gun was just over 6#'s. I guess the birds and critters never looked at a pattern board or read any of the Sports writers!
Now have Win Model 21 3" 20 gauge! -Dick

Glad to see this number of posts because it reminded me of points I should have covered initially.

First, the main point I was making here (and, by all means, correct me if I'm wrong on this) is that SxS's made to accomodate the 3" shell by necessity have to be a good deal meatier than guns that were designed around the 2.5" or 2.75" shells--all other things being equal, of course. That greater "meatiness", also by necessity, translates into greater weight, all other things being equal. The result is typically, for production line guns, a gun that weighs in at, say, 1/2 lb more than necessary.

So, the question is WHY would anyone want to carry around a gun weighing as much as a decent 2.75" 12 ga that, payload for payload, can produce a better (more efficient) pattern than this overly robust twenty and is chambered for a shell can be had in factory loadings with greater diversity than any other shotshell on earth and shells that can be obtained anywhere where ammunition is sold. Not to mention the greater price that 3" 20 ga shells usually demand when compared with comparable 2.75" twelves. A direct and (I think) apt analogy would be the Remington 870; for what PRACTICAL reason would I ever want to carry a 16 ga Model 870 (which is built on a 12 ga frame and always weighs as much, and sometimes a bit more than, a comparable 12 ga gun) when I can tote the twelve with no more of a burden and all kinds of benefits?

And as far as aesthetics are concerned, many if not most of the regular members of this forum will certainly appreciate proportionality as applied to the construction of nice guns. When compared with a double like the Bland 20 ga I mentioned in the first post or any decent 12 or 16 ga double, most 3" 20 ga guns seem like they've been dipping a bit too often into the steroids stash. Overly thick/heavy on the frame and chamber walls. At least they do to me, anyway.

So, IMHO Jonty hit it on the mark re: a "battery". I'm hardly wealthy but my recreational priorities are such that I've managed over the years to acquire a few SxS's and O/U's that suit my needs for different types of hunting. A 6 pound, short barreled 12 ga (2.75" naturally) and light twenty for ruffed grouse and timberdoodles (both SxS); two 12 ga, 6.5-7 pound 28" guns (1 O/U and 1 SxS) for pheasants and other open country birds and several pump guns for waterfowl and rainy-day upland hunts. Also a pair of longer-barreled target (skt, sc, trap) guns that double for doves. The grouse/wc guns mentioned above are light enough and sufficiently well-balanced to allow me to go all day in the thick stuff (one-handed carrying while fending off brush) where weightier, front-weighted, longer barreled guns would have me arm weary at the end of the day.

As far as gun weight goes, I learned that leasson very early on when, as it so happened, I was in top physical shape. I went through undergraduate school on an athletic scholarship, the point being that at that time I wasn't exactly Jabba the Hut. At that time I was using my brother's Savage Fox BSE 12 ga w/28" bbls--an unwieldy clunker of the first order--and, midway through a long day's hunt, the arms/hands were always straight out and ill-prepared to react to a fast/difficult flush. Since that time I've spent a lot of hours seeking out lighter weight guns and there's no doubt in my mind that I do better with them. Frankly, and for whatever reason, I've never had much of a problem connecting with light, short-barreled guns. Now that I'm old and carrry a few extra pounds, a featherweight serves me all the better.

Finally, as far as having experience with the 3" 20 ga, my first repeating shotgun was a Mossberg 500 in this chambering and I've owned many others since, including several SKB SxS's and O/U's that never saw a 3 incher. My opinion: too much recoil and not enough pattern.

You ought to be a gun writer, Granby. There's enough double-talk in that last one there to satisfy any magazine editor... You say, in paragraph two, that a 3" 20 weighs the same as a proper 2 3/4" 12 which will do everything better, load for load... and in the last claim to have owned 3" 20s and never shot any 3" shells because of recoil! But... if they weigh the same... how can... the recoil be different load for load?

Also, when comparing shell costs consider that the 3" 20 is a plated/buffered/magnum load (premium shell). Compare with a 2 3/4" 12 of equal quality, and there's not much if any price difference. They are more expensive than cheapo 1 1/4oz twelves.

The gun of choice of many of the younger locals I have hunted with in IA & SD is the 20ga Rem 870 magnum. Premium 3" #4 or 5 when they are flush and Walmart special of the week when money is tight. No complaints about patterns of either.

Where does Joe Retail find a new entry-level 12 ga. double gun that's as light as a typical 3" 20 ga.? The guy looking for an under 7 lb. off-the-shelf double gun with new gun warranty doesn't find many 12 ga. options. That was me 25 years ago when I bought a 20 ga. Citori Sporter that weighed about 6-3/4 lbs. It was comfortable enough to shoot Federal Premium 3"ers for the number of shots a day wild pheasant hunting will offer. Patterns were just fine through those IC/M tubes too.

From what I see the options for that buyer haven't changed a whole lot.

I guess I forgot to mention the 20 gauge 870 LT WT Magnum that replaced the SKB for float trips with the infamous steel shot. 6#'s 2oz and NO problems with recoil with either lead or steel. My son at 14 even shot a few geese with that gun with 3" Federal steel #2's. For pheseant, I would load two 2&3/4" #6 with the third being a 3" #4. With the Full choke barrel never had any problems out to 40+yds.
Todays firearms are designed with liability in mind and most will not be as light as thier equivalent 40 years ago. But yesterday's 3" 20 gauge guns were light and certainly lighter than today's 12 gauge equivalents or thier contemoraries of the past. One writer, I think his last name was Sell wrote quite a bit about the 3" 20 and of course Jack O'Connor made it famous with his Win Model 21.
BTW you can get a Beretta o/u with 26" barrels that weighs about 6# 2oz that i have weighed. My brother-in-law owns it and shoots 3" shells when we hunt pheseants with it.
So I guess I don't really understand what you are saying or asking?-Dick

I once had an Italian 3" 20ga that weighed 6¼lbs with 28" bbls. For the hunting I was doing with it it got mostly the 2½de-1oz load, but I shot some 3" loads of 1¼oz #4's through it. It was quite trim & handled well & recoil was not excessive for hunting purposes. I guess the game I shot at had been reading Mr Sell's writing for they all seemed to fall dead at the shot, including some ducks & a goose. My take is if the majority of your shootin will be with an oz of shot & only occasionally an 1¼oz the 3" 20 is fine. For a gun to be used predominately with 1¼oz I would go with a twelve & preferably one of at least 7lbs for the 3¼de-1¼oz loads & heavier if using the high velocity 3 3/4de 1¼oz.

I have hunted with 12 gauge guns of all types and weights for almost 50 years now. Last year, due to an accident and remaining shoulder injury, I shot a Beretta A303 20 in SD and NM for pheasant, wild and pen raised. I enjoyed the light weight as well as the practically non-existent recoil with 2.75's and 3's. The pheasant didn't seem to notice the difference in loads, unless it was for the last micro second before their lights went out! I was using IC all the time. If I had a pattern problem, well, like I said, the birds didn't know it. I have, during my 57th year of hanging around, finally "discovered" the 20, and I think it is here to stay!!

I had a BSS 20g that had 3" chambers. The gun was near 7lbs. F/M chokes. I bought the gun as new from a friend at the range. I shot many straights in skeet with that gun with the F/M chokes. I won a buckle shoot with it in sporting also. Although I never shot a 3" shell thru it, I can see why a guy might want a 20g gun that's heavier than the featherweight 12g guns. First I paid $1100 for it. Second it fit. Just because a particular gun/gauge is heavier than someone's view of "ideal", doesn't mean it isn't a good gun or a good selection all things considered.

I don't think I've ever touched off a 3" 20g and no more than a few boxes of 12g 3" and those were given to me in the field when someone couldn't stand the recoil and I was much younger. But lately, I've shot a few boxes of 3" 410 to great success. I suppose that shell isn't perfect either. But my game bag got filled and I had a smile.

ShotgunJones, I really don't think it's a matter of double talk on my part but rather semi-literacy on yours.

Please read the last paragraph of my last post once again.

Now let's try to parse the comment in question which is the first sentence of that paragraph.

The first part says I've owned "many" 3" 20 gauge guns, the first one being the Mossberg 500, so I'm familiar with the cartridge and it's capabilities. Fact is that early on I touched off hundreds of 3" twenties before deciding they didn't perform as well as a comparable twelve.

And then the second part of that sentence says "including several SKB SxS's and O/U's that never saw a 3 incher." You see, my friend, it is the "several" SKB doubles that never saw a 3 incher. Had I wanted to indicate that all the guns mentioned in that sentence never saw a 3" shell, I would have placed a comma after the word "O/U's".

Most people evidently recognized my meaning there, but you obviously didn't. So, before you go around accusing people of double talk (and, for reasons of your own, impuning all gun writers in the process!!!), my suggestion is that you get hold of a book on basic English grammar and devote some time to reading it.

As for the price of 3" 20 ga shells vs COMPARABLE 2.75" 12 ga ones, the Winchester Ammunition website lists MSRPs for shotshells.
Win Supreme Shotshells:
3" twenty ga, 1.25 oz = $28.81/bx
2.75" twelve ga, 1,25 oz = $21.65/bx

Their SuperPheasant loads are actually the same price but the 12 ga shells have an extra 1/8 oz of shot so they're definitely NOT comparable.

Gunflint Charlie, you have a valid point there. There aren't many entry level 12 ga guns in the less than 7 lb range. But, as I said in the post, I'm not a kid and have bought and sold a quite a few guns over the years and managed to work my way up to some "mid-level" guns. And by all means, don't forget that I started out with a Mossberg 500 and a Savage Fox double--those were my entry level guns.

Also, if any of you 870 fans got the notion that I was demeaning pump guns and, in particular, the Rem 870, all I can say is that you're preaching to the choir. I am a very big fan of pumps in general and the 870 in particular. I own two 870's right now--a 12 ga SP and a 12 ga TC Trap, and have owned at least eight more over the years. They're one of the best guns ever produced in the US and I'll take one over any semi-auto anytime.

Granby

Bob Brister's book "Shotguns, the art and Science" pans the 20 Ga. 3" shell. His patterns that he shot on a moving billboard (a great technique in my opinion) show very bad stringing

So, has it been conclusively figured out whether or not stringing, in the lengths seen, is a highly detrimental thing?

Here is my take on 20g guns.

First, time has taken it's toll for sure. Even an Ithaca 37 20g is taller through the barrel/magazine than a Remington 17 by almost 3/16s. The lines of each gun next to each other are obviously different. As well compare a 2 1/2 1920 Fox to a BSS!

Second, different bores handle shot differently(Duh!) A Ruger Red Label with a 635 bore will pattern very nicely with most quality 3" shells and has enough heft to make a nice duck gun. Especially with modern non-tox.

Remingtons and others that hover around 620s shoot the baby mags quite well. I've taken 2 longbeards with the 1 1/8 oz 20g with hard 6s. These can be poison on late season pheasants as well.

Older guns like my Remington 17s and old SxSs really seem to prefer 7/8s. I load #7s specifically for these guns and they are the bomb for 90% of the shooting I do, to include a pile of pheasants.

I don't think it's fair to say a 20 is a 20 is a 20. They've changed allot over the years and I suppose if you want a truely trim gun then you need to look to the 1930s and back. I have to admit though that the Beretta O/Us I've handled are pretty nice!

Others better than me at math have posted calculations using velocity of shot, shot string length, and velocity of target. They convinced me that length of shot string isn't worth worrying about.

It's the birds that the shotgun pundits have to convince and I think the 20 gauge 3" or less have done that very well!-Dick

I'm not sure I see the point of comparing say a 1 1/8 oz load in a 20g vs a 1 1/8 oz load in a 12g. I think most will agree that the 12g has the advantage to achieve a better pattern, all other things being equal.

However, what I see as the reason to go to a heavier load in a small bore is to use that particular gun the shooter likes, and improve the chances of a kill over the lessor load. If a heavier load does that, what else is there to debate? There are undoubtedly countless reasons why a hunter might want to shoot the smaller bore gun that range from; it fits and he hits more reliably with it, to he can't afford another gun.

Like the saying goes for rifles, shotguns have to have their shot loads put on target first.

So my 5lb. 14oz. Bernardelli 20ga., chambered for 3" shells, is half a pound overweight? By the traditional formula (gun weight = 96 x shot weight), it's a couple of ounces light for the 1oz. loads I shoot for pheasant, and just a tad over for the 7/8oz. loads I use for grouse and woodcock. Hardly "meaty," granby.

That is hardly the normal Jack-I would be interested in seeing the level of proof on that gun. A few years past, a friend ordered a new Arrietta 20 and specified 20 magnum. Big mistake. The gun he got was not the trim little ballerina he had handled at the dealer, but, a hulking 12 gauge in a 20 suit. It was proofed for 20 magnum, and I would say the Arrietta people did their job well on the gun. It was exactly as it should have been.

I own a 5lb, 13oz 20 gauge. Even if it was so proofed, it would never see 3" ammunition.
Best,
Ted

Ted: Here's what the proof certificate for my Bernie says:
CERTIFICATO CUMULATIVO N. PRESSIONE DI COLLAUDO: Kg. cm3 1200. Camere 76
I think that's 1200 bars and 3" chambers - maybe you can do the math. Personally, I have no use for magnum loads, only shoot 2-3/4" shells and never push more than one ounce of shot at a time. But at 5lb. 14oz. this neat little 20ga. "production line" SxS, chambered and proofed for 3" magnum loads, could hardly be described as "meaty."

Jack, please read the last sentence of that quote of mine you chose. Did you notice the word "TYPICALLY" in there. As Ted tried to explain, your Bernadelli isn't meaty but it's hardly typical either.

Incidentally, this maker is known for some very nice lightweight doubles. The 12 ga grouse/wc gun I mentioned above is a Bernadelli and just a tad over 6 lbs; in the field I usually have 7/8 oz in the right bbl and 1.0 oz in the left.

Also, if you did decide to give that little twenty a steady and copious diet of 3" magnums, which do you think would give out first: your shoulder or the stock?

granby: It was the "by necessity" claim I wanted, by all means, to correct.

But we are certainly in agreement (on Winchester 21 and 23, et al.) that many 20ga. SxS guns built for 3" mags are a bit chunky and lacking in aesthetics. Vincenzo Bernardelli is one who did it well.

If I had to shoot a 'steady and copious' diet of 20ga. 3" mags, I wouldn't do it with a solid breech gun, period. My grandson's 20ga. Franchi semiauto does a far better job of sucking up magnum recoil, and, at a flat 6 lbs., is an easy carry in the field.

In the early 60's, I purchased a new 20Ga 6lb lightning grade Belgium Browning with 3" chambers. All of the scribes of the day praised the chamber length, gun configuration, and super quick handling. I purchased one box only of the 3" - 1 1/4oz Roman candles - this cured me. My shoulder eventually returned to the normal color.

I didn't even know if any of my current 20's had 3" chambers. Looks like the Beretta 391 Sporting Technys Gold has a 3" chamber as well as the Superposed 2bbl set. But I wouldn't shoot 3" mags in the Super and IF I wanted to shoot 3" mags, I'd take that 391 Sporting and put the factory 1/2 lb dynamic recoil reducer back in and put the 1/4lb gel recoil pad back on, bringing it back up to 6lbs 14oz. I doubt I'd have any trouble with the recoil once that was done on that gun. Standard Wallyworld 7/8oz loads feel like a 410 with all that stuff.

The important question is "Where is that gun today?" -Dick

Maybe it's the excitement and good fit of the gun. I don't remember any untoward recoil from 3" shells. I can't imagine firing enough shells---what, six or eight of a morning in the blind?---to cause any pain. A guess is my 26" SKB is 6 1/2 pounds. (Chuck reminded me a while back that o/u also makes a difference).

granby,

I'm compiling double dimensions for my web page. What is the width at the bosses of your Thomas Bland, firing pin spacing, height at the breach, overall height from the bottom of the reciever to the top of the breech? What is the length from the breach to the hing? I'm sorry I'm completely ignorant of the Bland, is it a side lock or box? What is the height of the action through the center of the breech?
thanks,
Mike

Mike's Model 21 Web Page

Mike, wish I could provide those dimensions on the Bland but I don't own it. As a matter of fact, I never did, which is why I wasn't able to recall the exact barrel length. I found the gun in a now defunct shop, New England Arms in Kittery Pt in southern Maine. I rangled with the manager of the shop for nearly three weeks and actually went back two more times. Unfortunately he wouldn't budge and wasn't interested in trading.

The gun in question was a boxlock ejector, st grip/splinter and, as I already mentioned, very light in both build and weight. Thomas Bland was a maker originally in Birmingham around 1840 but moved to London later on. They made both boxlocks and sidelocks and became famous for their "fowling" (as in waterfowling) pieces, so many of their guns were twelves. Or at least that's what I found most often in subsequent searches. I've been looking for another suitable twenty by this maker since then--and, naturally, at a bargain basement price. T. Bland is currently owned by Woodcock Hill, Inc located somewhere in Pennsylvania. Their website includes a history of the company; a google search of the maker name will bring you there and will also lead you to a number of guns currently/recently on the market.

Granby