Mossy 590 Professional

[jeep45238]

Anybody catch any more wind off of this? There's enough going on here to interest me on the pump side of the house.


https://youtu.be/Zx304-FXL28?si=H8c1H8aFTx1HDOzn&t=86

[Paul Blackburn]

So on the 590 do you loose the rear sight completely when you add an optic? No co-witness?

[mmc45414]

So on the 590 do you loose the rear sight completely when you add an optic? No co-witness?What they are doing is offering a cover with a sight on it, so if you mount there you would. But seems you would still have the opportunity to screw a mount down in front of that, though the peep is nice and low so probably needs to be higher.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[gato naranja]

There seems to be an aversion to developing a barrel that has an optic sight mounting solution (as opposed to the receiver). The relatively few shotgun setups I have tried with a red dot on the barrel seemed like naturals for me, and only an intense natural indifference combined with a tight cash flow have kept me from running down a sound but used 870 barrel and doing a sort of "M'Bogo Plus" project on it that added a spot for an optics plate.

Am I just the lone kook and/or congenitally stupid for wondering why the PTB aren't developing barrel-centric optic solutions (other than the old Remmy cantilever one)?

[Le Français]

There seems to be an aversion to developing a barrel that has an optic sight mounting solution (as opposed to the receiver).

There’s the Aimpoint S1 for a vent rib.

[cosermann]

There’s a lot to like here. I’ve had a 590A1 since way back. I’d be all for another one with the new upgrades . . . but there’s no bayonet lug.

I want a bayo lug … just because. :)

[gato naranja]

There’s the Aimpoint S1 for a vent rib.

One of those setups is what ultimately convinced me that a barrel-mounted RDO is the way to go on a shotgun. I think three other people in the US might agree with me on a good day.

As for the Mossberg 590 Professional, the little extra touches will probably appeal to anyone who would contemplate a Mossy for SD/HD. And that's all I've got to say about that.

[Trooper224]

My last issued shotgun was a 590. It was such a raving piece of shite that it soured me on the brand forever.

[Bigghoss]

I just don't understand why most companies that make shotguns are so adverse to ghost rings that cowitness with irons.

[jeep45238]

My last issued....

That sort of sums up the experience with every issued small arm I got out of the armory.

Interestingly enough, every personally owned/maintained of the same equivalent have been stellar.

[Noah]

I just don't understand why most companies that make shotguns are so adverse to ghost rings that cowitness with irons.

You mean cowitness with a dot?

[Trooper224]

That sort of sums up the experience with every issued small arm I got out of the armory.

Interestingly enough, every personally owned/maintained of the same equivalent have been stellar.

This wasn't goombah military armory issue. This was issued permanently to me as my personal kit. Not to mention that fully half of the brand new 40 odd 590s issued to my division wound up being complete pieces of cocked up shit. We're not talking about dumb grunt operator error.

[Bigghoss]

You mean cowitness with a dot?

Yeah, one of those.

[Centerfire]

This wasn't goombah military armory issue. This was issued permanently to me as my personal kit. Not to mention that fully half of the brand new 40 odd 590s issued to my division wound up being complete pieces of cocked up shit. We're not talking about dumb grunt operator error.

Specifically, what were the problems?

[Velociginger]

That sort of sums up the experience with every issued small arm I got out of the armory.

Interestingly enough, every personally owned/maintained of the same equivalent have been stellar.

[willie]

This wasn't goombah military armory issue. This was issued permanently to me as my personal kit. Not to mention that fully half of the brand new 40 odd 590s issued to my division wound up being complete pieces of cocked up shit. We're not talking about dumb grunt operator error.

I just now saw your post. I'm curious about your agency's response when told they issued defective weapons. Did they contact Mossberg? Direct armorers to repair them? Ignore?

[HeavyDuty]

This wasn't goombah military armory issue. This was issued permanently to me as my personal kit. Not to mention that fully half of the brand new 40 odd 590s issued to my division wound up being complete pieces of cocked up shit. We're not talking about dumb grunt operator error.


Specifically, what were the problems?

I’m curious too - I have a couple of 590s and would like to know what to watch out for.

[willie]

I remember when Mossberg shipped a large number of 500 series shotguns with out spec shell stops. There are two. One is called an interruptor. On many 590's with sights, the front sight was installed off-center. Dan Lehr is a retired l.e. armorer who knows more about the product than Mossberg. I tinker with these shotguns and like them ok but understand why Trooper224 hates them. I'm really surprised that his outfit issued a piece of shit to one of their best men.

[Trooper224]

My issue shotgun was eventually sent back to Mossberg. The reliability issue was fixed,but the accuracy issue never was. Most of the issues regarded off center front sight bases. Faulty attachment of the front sight base, causing the front sight to fly off. These were all returned under warranty. I've been retired for nearly six years now, so I don't know what the status is.

As for why this shotgun? My division didn't obtain it's equipment from the normal government pipeline. There were no bid procedures, etc. Usually this was great, we wanted it, we got it. Unfortunately, our old Captain retired and his replacement wasn't a gun guy, or even what any of us would call a cop. When the time came for a new shotgun, he just chose the cheapest option available. The results of this philosophy were quite predictable.

[HCM]

I just don't understand why most companies that make shotguns are so adverse to ghost rings that cowitness with irons.


You mean cowitness with a dot?


Yeah, one of those.

IME Ghost rings on shotguns kind of suck and IMHO were an artifact of Jeff Cooper trying to turn shotguns into rifles.

Ghost Ring hate aside, co-witness ghost ring iron sights are huge. They obstruct a significant portion of most optic windows which impedes the effective use of the optic.

[Bigghoss]

IME Ghost rings on shotguns kind of suck and IMHO were an artifact of Jeff Cooper trying to turn shotguns into rifles.

Ghost Ring hate aside, co-witness ghost ring iron sights are huge. They obstruct a significant portion of most optic windows which impedes the effective use of the optic.

I'm not super concerned about what kind of sights they are, I just want irons that will cowitness with a dot.

[DDTSGM]

My issue shotgun was eventually sent back to Mossberg. The reliability issue was fixed,but the accuracy issue never was. Most of the issues regarded off center front sight bases. Faulty attachment of the front sight base, causing the front sight to fly off. These were all returned under warranty. I've been retired for nearly six years now, so I don't know what the status is.

As for why this shotgun? My division didn't obtain it's equipment from the normal government pipeline. There were no bid procedures, etc. Usually this was great, we wanted it, we got it. Unfortunately, our old Captain retired and his replacement wasn't a gun guy, or even what any of us would call a cop. When the time came for a new shotgun, he just chose the cheapest option available. The results of this philosophy were quite predictable.

Was that on the Turnpike? I remember when guys used to be jealous about the Turnpike Trooper's gear.

[Trooper224]

Was that on the Turnpike? I remember when guys used to be jealous about the Turnpike Trooper's gear.

Yep. They took away our Benelli semi-auto because it was an old model the company no longer supported. Parts were getting pretty hard to find, so that wasn't unwarranted. But, we went from an excellent shotgun to a boat anchor. Equipment's pretty well been standardized agency wide now. No more special Troop G. I don't know if they're still using the Mossbug. That Captain's now retired, so who knows.

[Dave Williams]

Jesus, Benelli to Mossberg? Ugh, what a kick in the nuts for a shotgun guy.

[HCM]

I'm not super concerned about what kind of sights they are, I just want irons that will cowitness with a dot.

It’s a shotgun, if the dot dies the body, the optic is perfectly usable for gross aiming .

A site that provides a true “co- witness” for the dot is taking up half the window and impeding the effective use of the optic regardless of what style of iron site.

Not to mention that whether or not something will Coe witness or provide a lower third or lower quarter coin witness is going to depend on which optic and how it’s mounted.

Particularly with small window optics, such as endpoint, micro pattern, RMR pattern or enclosed pistol sights like the ACRO or HS 509 there is not a lot of room to waste on the equivalent of a “doughnut spare tire.”

[Bigghoss]

It’s a shotgun, if the dot dies the body, the optic is perfectly usable for gross aiming .

A site that provides a true “co- witness” for the dot is taking up half the window and impeding the effective use of the optic regardless of what style of iron site.

Not to mention that whether or not something will Coe witness or provide a lower third or lower quarter coin witness is going to depend on which optic and how it’s mounted.

Particularly with small window optics, such as endpoint, micro pattern, RMR pattern or enclosed pistol sights like the ACRO or HS 509 there is not a lot of room to waste on the equivalent of a “doughnut spare tire.”

I currently own two shotguns with irons I can see through the red dot, and a few other firearms with co-witnessed irons and optics. I really don't find the irons being visible to be that much of a detriment. It is somewhat but not enough to turn me off of it.

Maybe instead of locking the user into irons they could mount the front bead on a pedestal (like Remington has done) that can be easily swapped. Then the dot mount can incorporate a rear sight of the user's choice, either in front of or behind the optic. ( maybe even flip-up?) The only thing that would need to be different on the base gun from any shotgun you can grab off the rack right now would be the front pedestal. The dot mount would attach to the holes that are already ubiqitous on shotguns and the user can select a setup that suits them.

However it's done, I have decided that I want irons and a dot and wish there were more shotguns with the option to set them up in such fashion. That's really all I'm saying.

[DDTSGM]

I currently own two shotguns with irons I can see through the red dot, and a few other firearms with co-witnessed irons and optics. I really don't find the irons being visible to be that much of a detriment. It is somewhat but not enough to turn me off of it.

Maybe instead of locking the user into irons they could mount the front bead on a pedestal (like Remington has done) that can be easily swapped. Then the dot mount can incorporate a rear sight of the user's choice, either in front of or behind the optic. ( maybe even flip-up?) The only thing that would need to be different on the base gun from any shotgun you can grab off the rack right now would be the front pedestal. The dot mount would attach to the holes that are already ubiqitous on shotguns and the user can select a setup that suits them.

However it's done, I have decided that I want irons and a dot and wish there were more shotguns with the option to set them up in such fashion. That's really all I'm saying.

Would this fit your needs?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss36hdkqwnA

[Bigghoss]

Would this fit your needs?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss36hdkqwnA


That still doesn't look ideal but I am intrigued. I just might give it a try.

[Hambo]

It’s a shotgun, if the dot dies the body, the optic is perfectly usable for gross aiming .


My plan for irons and optics:
Shotgun-no optics needed. Iron sights on the barrel are great for older eyes.
Carbine-no irons, just optics
Pistol-irons plus dot

[gato naranja]

My plan for irons and optics:
Shotgun-no optics needed. Iron sights on the barrel are great for older eyes.
Carbine-no irons, just optics
Pistol-irons plus dot

I am cautiously going to second your thoughts about shotgun sights. Even with my increasingly derp'd eyes, I have not found anything more than good irons are needed on a shotgun that is used as a shotgun. My mistake for some time was trying to make a shotgun also do duty as a carbine.

[HCM]

I currently own two shotguns with irons I can see through the red dot, and a few other firearms with co-witnessed irons and optics. I really don't find the irons being visible to be that much of a detriment. It is somewhat but not enough to turn me off of it.

Maybe instead of locking the user into irons they could mount the front bead on a pedestal (like Remington has done) that can be easily swapped. Then the dot mount can incorporate a rear sight of the user's choice, either in front of or behind the optic. ( maybe even flip-up?) The only thing that would need to be different on the base gun from any shotgun you can grab off the rack right now would be the front pedestal. The dot mount would attach to the holes that are already ubiqitous on shotguns and the user can select a setup that suits them.

However it's done, I have decided that I want irons and a dot and wish there were more shotguns with the option to set them up in such fashion. That's really all I'm saying.

Something like a low version of the ANR UKON seems like it would provide what you are describing.

https://www.anrkydexholsters.com/anvl-ukon-optic-mounts/

[Bigghoss]

Something like a low version of the ANR UKON seems like it would provide what you are describing.

https://www.anrkydexholsters.com/anvl-ukon-optic-mounts/

Well that's neat. One of my Mossys wears a Defender Tactical mount with a Holosun on it which is similar in concept. Not perfect but it's pretty much either that, have a gunsmith add sights, or sell the gun and buy a (much more expensive) model with sights from the factory. For $100 the Defender Tactical mount ain't a terrible compromise.

[03RN]

IME Ghost rings on shotguns kind of suck and IMHO were an artifact of Jeff Cooper trying to turn shotguns into rifles.

Ghost Ring hate aside, co-witness ghost ring iron sights are huge. They obstruct a significant portion of most optic windows which impedes the effective use of the optic.

Really? I think both the standard 590a1 GR and the ones on the 1014 are phenomenal

[03RN]

I've been pleasantly surprised with every issued mossberg. I was a 870 guy in high school. Now I use mossbergs.

I even taught a class in the Phillipines with clapped out 500s. I went through them all the night before and lock tighted the ejector screw and we never had an issue.

[HeavyDuty]

lock tighted the ejector screw

I take it this is a suggested preventative thing?

[03RN]

I take it this is a suggested preventative thing?

Yeah, the ejector getting loose or falling out is the biggest problem I've seen

[DDTSGM]

IME Ghost rings on shotguns kind of suck and IMHO were an artifact of Jeff Cooper trying to turn shotguns into rifles.

Ghost Ring hate aside, co-witness ghost ring iron sights are huge. They obstruct a significant portion of most optic windows which impedes the effective use of the optic.


Really? I think both the standard 590a1 GR and the ones on the 1014 are phenomenal

I think ghost rings are great if you are shooting slugs at fifty yards and beyond, but outside of turkey or slug hunting, that kinda reinforces what HCM pointed out about turning shotguns into rifles.

Quickly and accurately shooting with shotshells (versus slugs) from a ready position (versus shouldered/mounted) is primarily dependent on the persons ability to mount the shotgun correctly with consistency. You can get pretty quick, pretty fast.

In my experience 'bead shooters' are generally quicker to get good hits with buckshot inside 18 to 25 yards than ghost ring shooters.

So, if you aren't going to teach folks how to properly mount the shotgun and are instead giving someone who knows how to use iron sights a shotgun, then by all means, drive on with rifle sights and ghost rings.

JMO

[03RN]

I think ghost rings are great if you are shooting slugs at fifty yards and beyond, but outside of turkey or slug hunting, that kinda reinforces what HCM pointed out about turning shotguns into rifles.

Quickly and accurately shooting with shotshells (versus slugs) from a ready position (versus shouldered/mounted) is primarily dependent on the persons ability to mount the shotgun correctly with consistency. You can get pretty quick, pretty fast.

In my experience 'bead shooters' are generally quicker to get good hits with buckshot inside 18 to 25 yards than ghost ring shooters.

So, if you aren't going to teach folks how to properly mount the shotgun and are instead giving someone who knows how to use iron sights a shotgun, then by all means, drive on with rifle sights and ghost rings.

JMO


Glad we take off optics and irons on rifles for urban fighting too.

There is no difference in trying to get a load of buckshot into the upper torso at 15 yards with a shotgun then with a rifle.

[DDTSGM]

Glad we take off optics and irons on rifles for urban fighting too.

There is no difference in trying to get a load of buckshot into the upper torso at 15 yards with a shotgun then with a rifle.

You left off the sarcasm emoji on your first sentence, I hope.

Let me try to explain my thoughts/beliefs better.

Would you agree that in urban fighting the optic/dot on a rifle is quicker/better than open aperture sights? If so, why is that? (see bolded below)

When teaching folks to shoot shotgun at critters on the ground (versus wing shooting) you teach them to mount the shotgun into the shoulder so that the when they come from the high/international ready the bead and the rear sight plane (top of the receiver/rib) are aligned the moment the stock hits the cheek.

In more detail: from the high/international ready, the shooter places the bead of the shotgun on the target or area they want to cover. Keeping their head erect, the shooter keeps eye-bead-target alignment as they rotate the stock up into the shoulder, as the stock hits the cheek everything is aligned and the shot can break. Using this technique, the shotgun stock is mounted high in the shoulder and near the mid-line of the body, as opposed to buried in the shoulder and mounted outboard of the mid-line of the body.

From the low ready, stock mounted in shoulder muzzle depressed, the focus is on the target. Bring the muzzle/bead to the eye, everything is aligned and the shot can break.

In essence, being able to mount the shotgun correctly makes the bead the same thing as the dot/reticle in the optic.

This becomes even more apparent when engaging multiple targets and moving your eyes to the next target as you cycle the shotgun (or let it cycle if a semi) then moving the muzzle to where you are looking. Only one thing to line up - the bead.

Even though the human mind very quickly and naturally centers the front sight inside the aperture, I believe it takes longer to do so than seeing the bead.

All I know is that given a training dose of about 200 rounds of birdshot and 50 rounds of buck, along with 12 hours of training time, folks that really had never picked up shotguns are getting quick hits on multiple targets.

For the most part guys that won our multiple target drills - using buck at 15 yards on 3/4 IPSC metal - all pellets on metal used beads.

That's pretty much why I hold the opinion I hold.

Starting with shotgun mounted and on target, there is absolutely no difference as you are already aimed in.

[JRB]

You left off the sarcasm emoji on your first sentence, I hope.

Let me try to explain my thoughts/beliefs better.

Would you agree that in urban fighting the optic/dot on a rifle is quicker/better than open aperture sights? If so, why is that? (see bolded below)

When teaching folks to shoot shotgun at critters on the ground (versus wing shooting) you teach them to mount the shotgun into the shoulder so that the when they come from the high/international ready the bead and the rear sight plane (top of the receiver/rib) are aligned the moment the stock hits the cheek.

In more detail: from the high/international ready, the shooter places the bead of the shotgun on the target or area they want to cover. Keeping their head erect, the shooter keeps eye-bead-target alignment as they rotate the stock up into the shoulder, as the stock hits the cheek everything is aligned and the shot can break. Using this technique, the shotgun stock is mounted high in the shoulder and near the mid-line of the body, as opposed to buried in the shoulder and mounted outboard of the mid-line of the body.

From the low ready, stock mounted in shoulder muzzle depressed, the focus is on the target. Bring the muzzle/bead to the eye, everything is aligned and the shot can break.

In essence, being able to mount the shotgun correctly makes the bead the same thing as the dot/reticle in the optic.

This becomes even more apparent when engaging multiple targets and moving your eyes to the next target as you cycle the shotgun (or let it cycle if a semi) then moving the muzzle to where you are looking. Only one thing to line up - the bead.

Even though the human mind very quickly and naturally centers the front sight inside the aperture, I believe it takes longer to do so than seeing the bead.

All I know is that given a training dose of about 200 rounds of birdshot and 50 rounds of buck, along with 12 hours of training time, folks that really had never picked up shotguns are getting quick hits on multiple targets.

For the most part guys that won our multiple target drills - using buck at 15 yards on 3/4 IPSC metal - all pellets on metal used beads.

That's pretty much why I hold the opinion I hold.

Starting with shotgun mounted and on target, there is absolutely no difference as you are already aimed in.

I'm not sure if you know, but 03RN carried a 1014 through Fallujah. As Soldiers I know we're compelled to give Marines a hard time whenever possible, but when he starts talking about real world social work with a shotgun, I hush up and listen.

I don't mean to say that combat experience automatically equals unquestioned expertise. But I do mean to say that what you're saying is textbook old-guy stuff about bead sights. Bead sights require a consistent mount and posture that is simply not pragmatic to train for or expect in actual fighting. Sir Fuddbilly's speed at double trap is a specific problem set. LE use of shotguns on barricaded suspects or doing vehicle stops is another. Use in open combat is yet a distant third problem set.

I've always found it much easier to get fast and ethical hits with slugs etc at 25+ yards using rifle sights, ghost rings, or optics on shotguns. I never noticed any of those sights slow me down even when I tried my hand at clays and trap shooting using those same shotguns. (ETA - granted, I'm hardly an Olympic competitor when it comes to speed in those disciplines)
Maybe I'm just a knuckle dragging goombah that isn't evolved enough to figure out how to use a bead, and if so, that's fine by me.

[DDTSGM]

I'm not sure if you know, but 03RN carried a 1014 through Fallujah. As Soldiers I know we're compelled to give Marines a hard time whenever possible, but when he starts talking about real world social work with a shotgun, I hush up and listen.

I don't mean to say that combat experience automatically equals unquestioned expertise. But I do mean to say that what you're saying is textbook old-guy stuff about bead sights. Bead sights require a consistent mount and posture that is simply not pragmatic to train for or expect in actual fighting. Sir Fuddbilly's speed at double trap is a specific problem set. LE use of shotguns on barricaded suspects or doing vehicle stops is another. Use in open combat is yet a distant third problem set.

I've always found it much easier to get fast and ethical hits with slugs etc at 25+ yards using rifle sights, ghost rings, or optics on shotguns. I never noticed any of those sights slow me down even when I tried my hand at clays and trap shooting using those same shotguns.
Maybe I'm just a knuckle dragging goombah that isn't evolved enough to figure out how to use a bead, and if so, that's fine by me.

I was a Marine first, and it doesn't wear off.

I get and appreciate your reference to the various problem sets.

I've always felt that one of the best things one could instill in folks is the instinct to move while delivering, rather than standing and delivering, if you would. As a result very little of our shotgun training beyond fundamental manipulations was static.

In terms of consistent mounting, yes movement and unconventional positioning will require the bead shooter to slow down and make sure the bead is floating on the rib/rear sight plane, just at it requires the aperture sight user to pay more attention to centering things up. Consistency is one of the hallmarks of good marksmanship under any condition.

I'm trying real hard to not be dogmatic about this subject, but in using the shotgun within buckshot range, I'm still with the bead. I need to add, in case I didn't already, I've spent a good deal of time behind both sighting systems. I've owned ghost ring equipped shotguns, they are gone, though.

I mentioned in an earlier post that I did believe that if you aren't focusing/trained in shotgun specific techniques, that, yes, it would be more effective to give, as an example, Army 11B's, or Marine 03's, or really, anyone who is familiar with using aperture sights a ghost ring equipped shotgun.

And despite our disagreement I have great respect for 03RN for both his service and the outstanding job he is doing raising his family.

[JRB]

I was a Marine first, and it doesn't wear off.

Having worked with a few of you guys over the years... can confirm that ya'll ain't ever right in the head again after getting that doggone EGA. :) I say that with reverence and respect.

Better than one of these, though... Saw this real-world horror in the parking lot of the IHG I'm calling home for the next month or so. Redacted the plate because.. well... that might be a PL or Company Commander I have to deal with someday.

BSing and jokes aside - I think the key point we agree on is it's much easier to make effective shotgunners from riflemen if we use rifle sights. Shotgunning with a bead is an art unto itself that has no crossover or other application. So what wins Olympic golds with a Perazzi or works well enough for someone with bird gun & bead experience doing not-bird-gun-things isn't really the right solution if you're teaching shotgun stuff to riflemen.

[03RN]

And despite our disagreement I have great respect for 03RN for both his service and the outstanding job he is doing raising his family.

Thank you and I never thought there was any personal animosity. I can argue 30/30s vs .35 remington all day and not take it personally

My point with the shotguns is that if it's so close and fast up close then the sighting method is irrelevant. As soon as sights start to become relevant then pick the best ones.

You can rely on stock mounting and head position the exact same with grs or beads up close.

I did this challenge years ago. With a handgun but the principles are the same.

3 shots 3 yards. I think we were shooting 3" circles but not 100% sure. A guy told me to stop aiming so much. Just start shooting when the front sight is on the circles. My times for my first shot dropped a half second. At that distance I didn't need to aim as much as I was.

My point is beads aren't faster. People trying to aim grs can be slower.

If you are just indexing the gun then they're the same and it's the shooter who needs his brain rewired.