[duckslayer#1]

Me and my friend have been arguing over which is an overall better gun to purchase assuming both are 3.5" camo for waterfowl. One of us feels the Browing is superior and is worth the extra money. The other feels it is not worth the extra money.

 

[jlptexashunter]

I vote Browning, but for only subjective reasons. Both really are great guns, proven actions, proven reliability, proven marketability.

I can think of no feature found on one gun that would be a show stopper if I were out buying one.

 

[quackster]

Well, stop arguing, and start finding other pals who have these guns, and shoot them.

The guns, not the pals. :roll:

After a few boxes of shells, at skeet or trap or birds, you will have a much better basis for your opinion. And the two of you might disagree, and you will be both right.

There is nothing wrong with either gun. One of them will be better for you, in terms of fit, and comfort, and your ability to connect with the target. You will be able to tell after shooting. You won't be able to tell if you DONT!!!!

-- Quackster

 

[Dr Strangelove]

As above, shoot both with a spectrum of 2.75 low brass to 3.5 mags and see which one is most reliable, shoulders best for more kills, and is most aesthetically pleasing to you.

My vote is the Remington. I have heard bad juju about the Browning's reliability from folks who work at Bi-Mart, having had many unhappy customers trying to return the Gold guns for defective function only to be directed to Browning customer service.

As long as you're considering big heavy 3.5" autoguns, don't forget the Winchester SX.

My personal choice would be between the Benelli SBE, Franchi 912, and the Beretta Xtrema. I own the SBE with a recoil reducer and have never looked back.

 

[Jag]

Both are fine guns! I myself prefer the Remington's they just fit me better, (I've shot both) All things being equal, Go for the 11-87. It all comes down too gun fit .If you don't like it, I'll buy it from you cheap!!! ha! ha!