Steel is not as bad as you think! Yes it is not as affectice as lead at long range, but if you are into testing your skills at decoying waterfowl rather than bragging on killing waterfowl by the numbers- you as a hunter/sportsmen are secure. I am just 54 years of age and have no fear of steel in my old guns. They may die with me along with true hunting. If I am very lucky I will have 20 years of real hunting remaining, maybe 30, but I doubt it. I'll buy a chrome lined double for my 13 year old nephew and pray he can use it till he is done. If the barrels of my Bakers, L.C.s and Merkels are shot out when I die they can throw them in the box with me. I'll go on up the trail with hope in my heart that coverts of grouse and wetlands with waterfowl are ahead. I am not going to worry about the resale value of anything I buy from this point on. As said, I hope the best for you young fellows. But, for the extra cost of steel, I would test my oldest gun to its limits just to let you know how it would stand up to it. If I get some notice that time is short I'll do it for sure. (won't have to pay the cable bill) I'll say it plain: I hate the man who thinks he's better cause he kills more for nothing more than killing. Game animals are more than targets, they are the members of the family that make hunting the greatest game. The cylinder choked flintlock smoothbore had less range than what we have become accustum to, but that is the standard we might want to test our skills against as hunters. And yes there are arguements for the 3&1/2" shell too?
