Remington 1100 16 gauge

I have hunted the last 5 years with a Remington 1100 16 gauge. I have had great success with it. It is a 1960s era gun with a plain barrel, improved cylinder fixed choke. No issues with cycling or cold weather issues. Anyone with questions I will watch to reply.
 
bird shooter said:
I have hunted the last 5 years with a Remington 1100 16 gauge. I have had great success with it. It is a 1960s era gun with a plain barrel, improved cylinder fixed choke. No issues with cycling or cold weather issues. Anyone with questions I will watch to reply.
Click to expand...
Any idea of the weight of your gun?
 
I don't remember the exact weight. I am guessing it is just under 7 pounds. I can weigh it this weekend. I don't have it here right now.
 
I have one, an early-70's model. 26" plain barrel, IC choke. I bought an extra barrel off gunbroker, 28" mod choke.
It's not lightweight by any means, but not real heavy either. I've got a 12ga 1100 from the same era, and the 16 is noticeably lighter than the 12, even though they're built on the same frame. I haven't weighed them, but I would guess the 16 to be 7.25 lbs and the 12 to be close to 8 lbs.

My main pheasant gun is a new-style Sweet 16 that I've had for about 3 years, but the 16ga 1100 goes with me on most of my out-of-state phez trips as my backup.
 
The Classic Field, as I remember it, was introduced in the early 2000's along with a Remington 870 Classic 16gauge. Both were built on 12 gauge frames and that was the kiss of death for them because they were heavier than the earlier versions. I owned the 870 and it was a decent gun for skeet with the IC choke, but heavier than I liked for hiking after roosters or ducks. I traded it off after a year or so.
 
We'll need to wait for PTM's reply, but I was able to locate the 2005 Remington product catalog which does give stats on the 16 gauge model 1100 Classic Field. There are photos and a brief discussion of features on pages 18-19, and specific stats on page 83; the weight of the 28" 16 gauge 1100 is listed at 8 lbs. and the 26" model is listed at 7 7/8 lbs. The weight of the 870 Classic Field I owned is listed as 7 1/4 lbs.
 
Wolfchief said:
We'll need to wait for PTM's reply, but I was able to locate the 2005 Remington product catalog which does give stats on the 16 gauge model 1100 Classic Field. There are photos and a brief discussion of features on pages 18-19, and specific stats on page 83; the weight of the 28" 16 gauge 1100 is listed at 8 lbs. and the 26" model is listed at 7 7/8 lbs. The weight of the 870 Classic Field I owned is listed as 7 1/4 lbs.
Click to expand...
Thanks. That's heavy for a 16.
 
YEA, I’d rather tote around a nice, 6lb 9 oz Rizzini in 16. Feels more like a wand and less like a boat anchor.
 
Wolfchief said:
The Classic Field, as I remember it, was introduced in the early 2000's along with a Remington 870 Classic 16gauge. Both were built on 12 gauge frames and that was the kiss of death for them because they were heavier than the earlier versions. I owned the 870 and it was a decent gun for skeet with the IC choke, but heavier than I liked for hiking after roosters or ducks. I traded it off after a year or so.
Click to expand...

I don't know if the 1100s were built on 12 ga frames, I suspect you are correct, and would certainly defer to anyone else's superior knowledge. The 16 ga 870s, however, were built on 16 ga frames. It just happens to be that the 12 ga 870s are also built on 16 ga frames and always have been, so it would be correct to say they both have the same frame, but it isn't a 12 ga frame, it's a 16 ga frame. I think the added weight and poor handling of the Classic 16 ga 870s of the early 2000s was due to the fact that Remington inexplicably machined a smaller hole in 12 ga barrels to produce the 16 ga guns, with no reduction in outside diameter, resulting in thicker walls and barrels that were actually heavier in 16 ga than in 12.
 
I have read that when Remington first came out with the 1100 that the 12 ga. frame was scaled from the 16 ga. frame on the model 1148. Not sure if this is true but it's what I once read.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top