First, I know I say "Perazzi" below, but in every relevant aspect, the Prostar actions are identical to Perazzi MX12 actions, such that barrels can be used interchangeably with typical fitting.

Where the monobloc mates to the receiver, the Perazzi's boss action has larger bearing surfaces than Beretta 680 series actions. The Perazzi receiver walls are thicker than the Berettas. The receiver knuckles on the Perazzis are wider and provide more bearing surface than on Berettas. In addition to the trapezoidal lumps in the receiver that mate into recesses in the monobloc, the forward bottom portion of the Perazzi monobloc also mates with a recess inside the bottom front of the receiver. While the Beretta's receiver has protrusions that mate with barrel in a similar manner, there's nothing else on the round bottom of the Beretta monobloc that mates with the bottom of the Beretta receiver. See the red circled areas on the pics below.

Then again, I'd hazard a guess that you don't have any independent studies on such either. If you do, I'd love to read them. Otherwise, based on the pics above or any other evidence you could provide, I'm curious to hear how you come to the conclusion that the Beretta's action is equal to (or better) than the Perazzi's boss action.

This is what the ProStar (std, non-engraved version) is DIRECTLY competing with:

https://www.joeletchenguns.com/etchen-s ... 32-barrels

There is nothing magical or mysterious about the "Boss action" design that makes it, by itself, a selling point or of inherent value.

Sorry, but anyone who buys a ProStar for $4k instead of an Etchen 687 for $3500 is NUTS.

This is what the Eurotech is DIRECTLY competing with:

https://grabagun.com/ber-j686sj2-686-sl ... -ochp.html

Sorry, but anyone who buys a Eurotech for $2700 instead of a 686 SP1 for $1800 is NUTS.

I agree that the lack of 32” barrels is a huge handicap. My first gun was a yildiz. My second gun was another yildiz. I know the guns were not built for longevity, but the entry level pricing is what got me into shooting.

As my shooting has progressed, I have moved up to Caesar Guerini and Fabarm guns, and i appreciate the quality and robust construction of these higher end guns. Still, the I see the value of the yildiz is there, but now my shooting preference demands 32” barrels, and nothing shorter. Value or not, one of the features that I require isn’t available.

I just bought a browning for my son as he has begun to become competitive in shooting as well. He has now surpassed my shooting abilities. A pro-star would have been an excellent choice for him - if they had offered 32” barrels.

You seem to be getting the two guns confused. The ProStar has 32” barrels available. The “cheaper” field grade EuroSport does not.

Based on historical results wrt the two guns, Perazzi and Beretta 68X or 69X, are there any differences in longevity and reliability of service to speak of? All that analysis of the action features is meaningless if it doesn't comport with experience in use. Sometimes bigger and heavier isn't better. It is just bigger and heavier. Oversizing a part is not better than right sizing it. Think the difference between clunkiness and elegance. I don't know one is better than the other. It is likely moot (not mute in case you were wondering).

203 posts since December 4, 2020?

Rpenmaker, Moishepipick, Auldthymer and Friend of Friend. You guys must be pretty close cousins. Funny how you all sound the same, have the same opinions and seem to disappear when a new one emerges on the forum.

First, I know I say "Perazzi" below, but in every relevant aspect, the Prostar actions are identical to Perazzi MX12 actions, such that barrels can be used interchangeably with typical fitting.

Where the monobloc mates to the receiver, the Perazzi's boss action has larger bearing surfaces than Beretta 680 series actions. The Perazzi receiver walls are thicker than the Berettas. The receiver knuckles on the Perazzis are wider and provide more bearing surface than on Berettas. In addition to the trapezoidal lumps in the receiver that mate into recesses in the monobloc, the forward bottom portion of the Perazzi monobloc also mates with a recess inside the bottom front of the receiver. While the Beretta's receiver has protrusions that mate with barrel in a similar manner, there's nothing else on the round bottom of the Beretta monobloc that mates with the bottom of the Beretta receiver. See the red circled areas on the pics below.






In addition, the Perazzi locking block is more robust. It might not be apparent when the pics aren't to scale, but the two prongs on the Perazzi's H-shaped locking block that mate with the barrel are shorter, wider, and taller, than the the prongs on the Beretta's U-shaped locking block.




As for independent studies with quantifiable numbers, no I don't, I'm just going by what I've observed by owning both and having them apart in my hands and coming to reasoned conclusions. Then again, I'd hazard a guess that you don't have any independent studies on such either. If you do, I'd love to read them. Otherwise, based on the pics above or any other evidence you could provide, I'm curious to hear how you come to the conclusion that the Beretta's action is equal to (or better) than the Perazzi's boss action.