First gun

Should I spend more for something nicer?

Get an older model 870. Or a new Mossberg 500. I've had the same 870 since 1977 and it still runs perfectly.

Old Wingmaster would be nice.
A regular 870 is p gud but they had some issues for a while starting in about 2008. Mostly rough chambers that needed to be polished and shitty finishes that needed to be refinished but nothing as bad as how ugly Mossmans are.

>>33451469
I checked out a 500 and it seemed cheaply made... Has the quality declined significantly in the 870s? It seems like buying used is kind of a bitch. Im in WA.

the reason why >>33451469 says an older 870 is because the current ones are shit thanks to Freedom Group's cost cutting measures after they purchased Remington. you're rolling the dice on a new one and you're going to come up losing way too much of the time.

>>33451515
Nah, Mossies are actually pretty well made. And like >>33451518 said about the 870. If you are getting one get an older model.

If you want a step up, look at a Mossberg 590 or a Benelli Supernova.

>>33451561
I got to fire of a super nova over the weekend. So smooth. Not a huge fan of the look though.

>>33451515
>Has the quality declined significantly
yes
mossberg and remington used to be evenly matched, mossberg continued on as normal while rem went and fucked everything up in 2007 to the point where the chink knockoff is built better than the modern legit gun.

>>33451469
>>33451518
>>33451502

So would I be good with anything pre 2008?

>>33451609
I wouldn't buy anything past 2005 famalam

Anything made by modern Remington is horrible unless you're willing to buy one of the marquee ones (ie the 700P, 870P, Wingmaster, etc). The problem with that is that the marquee ones are priced in a category that puts them in competition with other weapons of better quality, which defeats the purpose of getting them unless you just really want a Remington product for whatever reason.

I second the recommendation of the other anons to take a look at either a used older Wingmaster, a Mossberg 500/590, or the Benelli Nova/Supernova. All of them are much better than a shotgun by modern Remington.

Thanks for the suggestions everyone! I'll check out arms list for something older then.

>>33451790
If it's truly your first time buying a gun, you should just buy a new mossy 500. You probably have no idea what to look for in a used gun and might get ripped off

>>33451436

For the same price as a 870, you can get a Mossberg 500 with an 18 1/2" barrel and a 28" barrel, so you can defend the castle, and rustle up some food.

You didn't say what your primary purpose was for the firearm, but the Mossberg package is far more versatile, and it will hold it's value pretty well.

The only way I'd buy a new Remington is if I could shoot it first, and that just does not happen at gun shops.

>>33451515
Hello fellow WA fag! As you may believe the 500 is cheaply made I can assure you it's nothing less than a workhorse shotgun. And while your friend may suggest an 870, Remington's quality control has declined in the past decade to a noticeable degree.

File: 2017-03-19 00.04.48.jpg (704KB, 560x3260px) Image search: [Google]

704KB, 560x3260px

>>33451469
>>33451502
>>33451693

Early 80's wingmaster has been great to me, I shoot it over my more expensive Nova, Xplor and Citori most of the time unless I'm on hunts/sporting clays with clients. Something about a pump just feels right for shottys