Home
I am going to pick one up tonite after work. It is the DU model with 3" chambers. I didn't even think it would have an issue firing 2 3/4" shells in a 3" chamber but after reading dozens of posts to the contrary apparently it does. I called Cole Gunsmithing this morning and they told me not to be concerned about it, I figured that they would certainly know . Does anyone here have one in 3" chambers and use 2 3/4" ammo in it ?

Thanks
Posted By: passport Re: Beretta 303 3"chambers - 03/01/18
I have a bud that hunts everything with a 303. Shoots all 2 3/4 and 3 inch with zero issue.
Originally Posted by passport
I have a bud that hunts everything with a 303. Shoots all 2 3/4 and 3 inch with zero issue.



Good to know , thank you
It depends on the shells used and the gun itself. Gas pressure and volume need to be high enough and long enough duration at the gas port for the action to work properly. That can be dependent on the individual gun as recoil spring tension can vary due to tolerances, use, and lube. Other factors can be slight differences in the gas port diameter (new vs old bit) amount/type of lube used and where applied, and amount/type of grit in the action whether from not cleaning or debris from shells or environmental factors. Assuming it is a 12 ga here is my limited experience with it.

Using 2 3/4" magnum and most high velocity 1 1/4 oz "hunting" loads should be no problem as the gas pressure and volume at the port should be adequate. Standard velocity (~1200 fps) have been nearly as reliable but I have seen some hiccups with some loads if the gun was not spotlessly clean, not correctly lubed, using newer recoil spring, and especially in temps under freezing. Loads using Blue Dot, HS-7, or other "dirty" burning powder were the least reliable, especially in cooler temps.

Handicap type target loads (1 1/8 oz , 1250+ fps) worked well as did most heavy trap (1200 fps) loads. Light trap (1145 fps or less) had some problems as gas pressure/volume was sometimes lower.

1 oz loads were mostly unreliable. The field loads of 1290 fps worked much of the time but it did vary. A weaker recoil spring, clean gun with proper lube, and a comparable powder and the gun worked well. If the powder was a bit dirty burning, the lube wore off or became gummy, or the recoil spring was new then these loads might act up by the end of a round. The field loads are manufactured with price in mind so they may work or not work depending on powder used in a particular lot. "Sporting clays" loads were not available back then but I would predict that if a particular brand/line of dedicated target ammo worked today the same one would work later as these are made to be consistent from lot to lot.

The 1 oz loads under 1200 fps were unreliable. They were great for trap as the need for a shell catcher was not necessary as the empties either did not eject or they barely made it out of the ejection port.

I saw these fairly regularly in the 80s and early 90s before the 390 came out. I've owned two 12 ga and one 20 ga mag model as the price was right but they did not stay long as other, newer models were more versatile.
My BIL has a 303. It will cycle 1 1/8 oz 1200 fps target loads fine. 1 oz 1180's it will not.
Originally Posted by woodmaster81
It depends on the shells used and the gun itself. Gas pressure and volume need to be high enough and long enough duration at the gas port for the action to work properly. That can be dependent on the individual gun as recoil spring tension can vary due to tolerances, use, and lube. Other factors can be slight differences in the gas port diameter (new vs old bit) amount/type of lube used and where applied, and amount/type of grit in the action whether from not cleaning or debris from shells or environmental factors. Assuming it is a 12 ga here is my limited experience with it.

Using 2 3/4" magnum and most high velocity 1 1/4 oz "hunting" loads should be no problem as the gas pressure and volume at the port should be adequate. Standard velocity (~1200 fps) have been nearly as reliable but I have seen some hiccups with some loads if the gun was not spotlessly clean, not correctly lubed, using newer recoil spring, and especially in temps under freezing. Loads using Blue Dot, HS-7, or other "dirty" burning powder were the least reliable, especially in cooler temps.

Handicap type target loads (1 1/8 oz , 1250+ fps) worked well as did most heavy trap (1200 fps) loads. Light trap (1145 fps or less) had some problems as gas pressure/volume was sometimes lower.

1 oz loads were mostly unreliable. The field loads of 1290 fps worked much of the time but it did vary. A weaker recoil spring, clean gun with proper lube, and a comparable powder and the gun worked well. If the powder was a bit dirty burning, the lube wore off or became gummy, or the recoil spring was new then these loads might act up by the end of a round. The field loads are manufactured with price in mind so they may work or not work depending on powder used in a particular lot. "Sporting clays" loads were not available back then but I would predict that if a particular brand/line of dedicated target ammo worked today the same one would work later as these are made to be consistent from lot to lot.

The 1 oz loads under 1200 fps were unreliable. They were great for trap as the need for a shell catcher was not necessary as the empties either did not eject or they barely made it out of the ejection port.

I saw these fairly regularly in the 80s and early 90s before the 390 came out. I've owned two 12 ga and one 20 ga mag model as the price was right but they did not stay long as other, newer models were more versatile.


It's a 20 gauge
Same goes for the 20 ga loads equivalent to the 12 ga except the 7/8 oz loads of all types back then were a little more problematic as were the 1150 fps 1 oz loads. The 1300 fps "sporting clays" loads now available might not have issues but they were not available when I had a 303.

Further thoughts, I cannot comment on the use of steel shot loads in these guns as I never tried tried it. They were designed in the days of lead shot and made in the early days of steel shot so performance with the latter could be variable. One would need to experiment a lttle to get a feel for what does or doesn't work well.
Ended up not getting it . I will look for a 20 gauge Montefeltro next
Posted By: weagle Re: Beretta 303 3"chambers - 03/04/18
As noted above, the problem with the 3" chambered barrels is they have smaller gas ports and most won't cycle cheap target loads. It's a quick fix to drill out the gas ports, or buy a spare 2 3/4" barrel.

The 303's are definitely worth buying as they are one of the smoothest and softest shooting semi auto shotguns ever built.
Originally Posted by weagle
As noted above, the problem with the 3" chambered barrels is they have smaller gas ports and most won't cycle cheap target loads. It's a quick fix to drill out the gas ports, or buy a spare 2 3/4" barrel.

The 303's are definitely worth buying as they are one of the smoothest and softest shooting semi auto shotguns ever built.


If I run into a 2 3/4 I will consider it .
I would look for a Beretta 390 or 391 as they will shoot all 2 3/4" as well as 3" shells interchangeably. If you are set on a 303 series, also look for a Browning B-80 as they are rebadged Berretas.
Posted By: SCgman1 Re: Beretta 303 3"chambers - 03/11/18
Biggest mistake I've ever made regarding firearms was selling a 12 GA 303. An absolutely amazing shotgun.
Posted By: wildfowl Re: Beretta 303 3"chambers - 03/21/18
This is the same gun as the Browning B80. Barrels will interchange. A friend swears by them and he has a couple of barrels for each one. Barrels are not expensive (relatively speaking)
© 24hourcampfire