Maverick 88 with Slugs and Magnum Cartidges

[Flyingswords]

the stock vent ribbed 28" barrel has a modified choke I think.

 

[jrbfishn]

That is what it comes with. But can be changed, it's screw-in.

from an idgit coffeeholic

 

[phatcyclist]

I bought a used Maverick 88 12ga back in 2004. Great shotgun, only had one little repair to make after 5000+ rounds. You shouldn't have any issue with buckshot or slugs, assuming you're not running a full choke.

Fun fact, because the feeding system employs a block for the ejection port during cycling, the Maverick 88 and Mossberg 500 will cycle mini-shells, the little 1-7/8" to 2" length ones.

 

[epwrangler]

I never have tried them. Where do you buy them.

Sent from my SM-G925T using Tapatalk

 

[TheDan]

I have an 88 and the manual doesn't say anything about not shooting magnum slugs. I've shot Brenneke dangerous game slugs out of it before, but I don't shoot them often. Hurts my shoulder more than the gun

 

[phatcyclist]

I have an 88 and the manual doesn't say anything about not shooting magnum slugs. I've shot Brenneke dangerous game slugs out of it before, but I don't shoot them often. Hurts my shoulder more than the gun

Those 12 ga. 3" mag Brenneke slugs hurt on both ends. I only put one through to function test, because not too many animals around here need 3,000 lb-ft of muzzle energy. I run the green slugs in my 20 ga frequently for feral hogs, they work very well.

 

[TheDan]

I only got those slugs because I was going camping in Alaska. Wanted a "bear round." I'm not a recoil shy person by any means, but out of that lightweight 88 they really kick. Anyone want to shoot two at a time on my dual trigger SxS?

 

[epwrangler]

I have tried the 3 inch slugs and they are reserved for last ditch defense only.

Sent from my SM-G925T using Tapatalk

 

[hacker]

I've not shot any 12 gauge 3 inch shells as my shoulder has threatened to file on me.

 

[FrankT]

I have a Mav 88 and a 500A, the 500A is the better made gun and I do wonder if the 88 barrel is less than as good as the 500, barrels are interchangeable . I have a 20" changeable choke Mossberg barrel w vent rib and a collapsible stock on the 88. The 500 runs a rifled barrel and the original bird barrel the 88 had on it. I see no difference in performance. I use the 88 for everything including home defense to turkey and have run all but mags and slugs made for rifled barrels out of it and all shoot well w the modified choke in. You will be OK w slugs and Buck in the 88, mags maybe not so much.

 

[phatcyclist]

I have a Mav 88 and a 500A, the 500A is the better made gun and I do wonder if the 88 barrel is less than as good as the 500, barrels are interchangeable . I have a 20" changeable choke Mossberg barrel w vent rib and a collapsible stock on the 88. The 500 runs a rifled barrel and the original bird barrel the 88 had on it. I see no difference in performance. I use the 88 for everything including home defense to turkey and have run all but mags and slugs made for rifled barrels out of it and all shoot well w the modified choke in. You will be OK w slugs and Buck in the 88, mags maybe not so much.

Aside from the safety location, there's not much difference in design between the 88 and a 500. The lockup system is exactly the same. Now, the quality of the stock is different between the two, and every Maverick 88 I've seen has a cheap-looking injection-molded stock, but that can always be changed. Either one will fire 3" mag buckshot or slugs all day long without a hitch. The only possible failure point on the 88 is the forend being directly pinned to the slides, which will loosen up over time. I did the conversion to the 500-style forend a while back, but mostly because I wanted the short LOP Hogue overmold stock set as it's my home defense gun.

 

[FrankT]

I don't have a tool to measure but the receiver on the 88 seems to be thinner/lighter, mine certainly is a funky color and they are cheaper so something is different. My personal opinion is not to shoot mags from the 88 and until I hear from an engineer at Mossberg would be comfortable w that and not a gun forum...but that is just me..

 

[epwrangler]

Well Frank why not buy a 500 and quit worrying about it. My 88 has done just fine for years but then that's just me and untold thousands.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

 

[FrankT]

Because I already have a 500 also, 3 barrels. The 88 is a cheap home defense and truck gun and quite frankly mags not needed, buck is just fine...I have probably had both the 500 and 88 before some of you were born, just got to know risks and use common sense.

 

[ROGER4314]

Well Frank, I have owned a small pile of Mossberg 88 and Mossberg 500 shotguns and have fired both models with many combinations of barrels and loads over the years. Further, I've disassembled both the 88's and 500 models side-by-side and found not a dime's worth of difference except for the safety location (trigger group on the 88 and tang location on the 500). I found nothing to justify a $100 price difference, any difference in quality or workmanship.

Barrels advertised for the 500 shotguns fit and function perfectly on the 88 guns.

I just got off the phone with OF Mossberg Corporate and quizzed their people at length about the strength and serviceability of the Mossberg 88 shotguns. It was a long conversation, but I'll paraphrase their responses:

The model 88 shotguns are designed and recommended for any load, velocity and variety of ammunition that they are correctly chambered for! Of course, shooting solid lead slugs through a full choke barrel is never a good idea, but any commercially available round that will correctly chamber in the Model 88 shotgun can be fired safely. Mossberg had no reservations, cautions or conditions about this matter.

That's how it is in the real world, Frank. Your statements about safety of the Mossberg 88 shotgun were made without a shred of evidence and they are wrong.

I'd be willing to bet that you haven't owned Mossberg shotguns longer than I have nor in the quantities that I've owned them. But hey, this is the Internet and it's a perfect place to spread misinformation.

Flash

 

[FrankT]

I did not post as fact but my opinion and it still is, but you can do whatever you want...I generally use common sense to dictate action, of course mossberg will tell you whatever is in their marketing material. Thank for your effort...lol

 

[Shady]

So common sense tells you you should not shoot a round out of a gun that is made to use it ? To each there own. I would suggest looking at your Mav88 manual there is no warning in there about using magnum or slugs. If there was even the slightest chance in hell of a problem you can bet the legal department would have warnings all over the box and manual and may even engrave it in the gun so bone heads that do stupid things cant sue them

I did not post as fact but my opinion and it still is, but you can do whatever you want...I generally use common sense to dictate action, of course mossberg will tell you whatever is in their marketing material. Thank for your effort...lol

 

[FrankT]

I know there is no warning but as cheaply (sorta like a hipoint) I have no desire to push it. Safety First you know. Since when is someone bashed on this forum for their personal thoughts, Is this obama owned??? LOL

 

[Shady]

No bashing intended.

But I dont see how you get that there is a safety issue using a gun and ammo as intended. You seem to think that a Mav88 is not up to snuff with a Mossburg when the difference in them Is not in the parts in the receiver but in the finish/safety/slide and possibly the barrel.

I guess you also don't own anything from harbor Freight

 

[Younggun]

I know there is no warning but as cheaply (sorta like a hipoint) I have no desire to push it. Safety First you know. Since when is someone bashed on this forum for their personal thoughts, Is this obama owned??? LOL

Your opinion can't be backed up and your advice on the maverick is bad. For that reason it is being bashed as bad advice or false information should be.

Bad mouthing the forum will not be tolerated.