Home Forums Birds & Dogs Shotguns Browning Cynergy

Anyone bought, or shot, a new Cynergy yet?

Bighorn, I have not shot a Cynergy, and certainly have not bought one but I have been offended by it's ugliness. Cheers, RS <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

I'm with Snort, they may be light (which is not all good BTW) but they are butt ugly to those of us who like the more classic lines. Frankly, I don't know why Browning was dumb enough to chose that radical a style of decoration and stock on what was probably a very good design. I think it will be a commercial failure.

It may shoot well, but if I were to try one I'd have to put a bag over my head to protect my identity, otherwise everybody at our club would laugh me out of there.....

Butt ugly is a vast understatement..

Well as a hunting gun I can see it being a flop - as a clays gun it could be ok. Most of the clay guys i know don't care too much bout looks - mostly it comes down to if they can shoot several 10's of thousands of rounds with little or no problem and whether or not the shot gun fits/shoots where pointed.

Teal:

You are somewhat correct in that many competitive shooters are not concerned with looks but with what works for them. However, and I want to make it clear that I have not handled one of these guns, in most competitive shotgun shooting, light weight in a gun is NOT your friend. It makes it easier to mispoint the gun, harder to maintain a smooth swing and follow through which is critical in all shotgun shooting but especially in competitition because the difference between winning and "glad you came, try harder next week" is often just one or two targets, and, perhaps as important a reason as any, the shooter has to absorb more recoil. Most competition guns TEND to be somewhat heavier with somewhat longer barrels than normal hunting guns to help with the above problems. Even many clays guns now have quite long barrels on them. Same thing happened to skeet shooting. Used to be the standard skeet barrel was about 26 inches, now it is probably more like 30 and some 32s. What this long lead in boils down to is that if the Cynergy doesn't sell to hunters where the carrying advantages of ltwt offset the shooting disadvantages, it is sunk.

Browning seems to have a history of listening to the designers or someone, and not the marketing people (or at least not the good ones <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />) and coming out with quite a few shotgun designs over the last 25 years that don't turn people on. It would have been relatively easy to make the Cynergy more attractive, instead, they chose to accentuate its differences. A poor decision IMO. Time will tell.

I prefere a bit of a heaver gun - across the board - rifle and shotgun.

Real weight - My father's K80 with 32s and the subgauge inserts -that thing has got to go close to 12-13 lbs (swag)

I absolutly can not shoot anything less than 30.

I tend to stop my barrels and "poke" the barrels at the target.

def: "CYNERGY" - old indian word for butt-a**- ugly.

Ditto on the butt ugly--why did they feel compelled to mess with one of the prettier O/U designs around. I always thought BARs were kind of homely, but they've given them a makeover too that resembles the Cynergy---all weird angles and ugliness---so they look even worse than they did.