miroku mk 38

[gold e]

Can any one help me please.I am thinking of changing my beretta 682 gold e,to a 32 inch miroku mk38 teague sporter.Does a miroku teague sporter grade 1,have longer forcing cones,and over bored barrels as standard,like the 682.Cheers Gaz.

[Hamster]

I'm a little curious as to why you need such specific info about the barrels? Both guns are built primarily to shoot 28g plastic wad shells and judging from the thousands of victories to each guns credit, either way they throw the right patterns. I do believe they both feature longer than standard forcing cones but can't be sure either has so called over bored barrels.

 

Also not convinced that over bored barrels in themselves contribute anything over and beyond a standard barrel to the quality of the end pattern. Longer forcing cones probably reduce pellet deformation or at least make a gun less shell fussy, many also believe they reduce recoil. The latter is easy to disprove if you accept basic laws of physics but difficult to accept if you like to compare gun ballistics to water hose pipe behaviour. Let us know your reasons anyway, also interested why you want to change from a 682e in any case.

[HDAV]

Can any one help me please.I am thinking of changing my beretta 682 gold e,to a 32 inch miroku mk38 teague sporter.Does a miroku teague sporter grade 1,have longer forcing cones,and over bored barrels as standard,like the 682.Cheers Gaz.

ERm isnt that just a MK38 Grade1 with some teague chokes in the box? BWM or your local Miroku dealer would surely be the best source of this information

[miroku_fan]

Can any one help me please.I am thinking of changing my beretta 682 gold e,to a 32 inch miroku mk38 teague sporter.Does a miroku teague sporter grade 1,have longer forcing cones,and over bored barrels as standard,like the 682.Cheers Gaz.

 

 

Both of these guns are excellent in their own right but they have little in common regarding the way in which they feel and handle. I would be more concerned with this rather than technical issues like forcing cones and over bored barrels.

[Windknot]

The MK38 is back bored to .740, and has regular forcing cones.

[gold e]

I'm a little curious as to why you need such specific info about the barrels? Both guns are built primarily to shoot 28g plastic wad shells and judging from the thousands of victories to each guns credit, either way they throw the right patterns. I do believe they both feature longer than standard forcing cones but can't be sure either has so called over bored barrels.

 

Also not convinced that over bored barrels in themselves contribute anything over and beyond a standard barrel to the quality of the end pattern. Longer forcing cones probably reduce pellet deformation or at least make a gun less shell fussy, many also believe they reduce recoil. The latter is easy to disprove if you accept basic laws of physics but difficult to accept if you like to compare gun ballistics to water hose pipe behaviour. Let us know your reasons anyway, also interested why you want to change from a 682e in any case.

 

Well that helped.

[Hamster]

Well that helped.

 

 

Sorry if it wasn't, just trying to say the gun's outside dynamics are what really make the difference. I've had both, you won't go wrong with a MK38 so long as it's handling characteristics are to your liking.

[miroku_fan]

The MK38 is back bored to .740, and has regular forcing cones.

 

 

 

 

 

If you purchase the MK38 Nigel Teague can lengthen and polish the forcing cones to possibly improve your shot pattern and reduce recoil. I had this done to an MK38 and was not convinced that it made a significant difference to the pattern or perceived recoil.

[Hamster]

 

 

If you purchase the MK38 Nigel Teague can lengthen and polish the forcing cones to possibly improve your shot pattern and reduce recoil. I had this done to an MK38 and was not convinced that it made a significant difference to the pattern or perceived recoil.

 

I had this done to an old spec 682 and couldn't tell a before and after effect on either recoil or patterns if my life depended on it.

[poorpeet]

I have to agree with Hamster. I really couldn't see any difference in recoil between my old school Miroku 7000, the Gold E or the my 725 with it's long forcing cones, back boring and extra long chokes. I'm not saying it's all just marketing hype, there may be subtle differences, but they pale into insignificance beside fit and balance.

[Alycidon]

Try both then but the one that you like the best and feels right. I have had three Mirokus in my life, all perfectly sound but none quite fitted perfectly. I have handled ( but not shot ) a couple of 682s including Richards Faulds Gold medal winning gun. I love Beretta's but the 682s to me feel like something like a railway sleeper. Each to his own.

 

A

[miroku_fan]

I had this done to an old spec 682 and couldn't tell a before and after effect on either recoil or patterns if my life depended on it.

 

 

 

That is the point that I was making. There was absolutely no difference to the gun after getting the forcing cones modified by Teague. I was new to shooting at the time and the modified gun was one of the original 32" MK38 sporters with fixed chokes( 1/4 and 3/4). In those days I was expecting the technical innovations( this included having the gun multi choked, work to the trigger and changing the butt pad) that were applied to the gun to take care of targets, leaving me to simply shoulder the gun and pull the trigger. You soon learn that it is not quite that simple.

[retromlc]

I had a Zoli Kronos that was too short in the stock for me, it kicked like a mule, poorpete shot it and no felt recoil for him, I fitted a 20 mm longer pad and no recoil, fit is more important than a thou wider bore