Versamax or Maxus

[buckshotbarlow]

i picked up an a400, sweet shooter. don't forget about the sx3 also. I like the versamax, but when you compare all the guns, the a400 knocks em all out with less weight.

[oak86]

I haven't looked at a400 yet. I"ve heard the a400 had some reliability issues with light loads but that might be just hear say....

[nontactical]

I just picked up an a400 "action." I took it to the range without stripping it down first, and fired 100 handloaded 7/8oz rounds through it without a single hiccup. It handles like a dream, and swings way better than it should considering it weighs about as much as a wooden dowel of the same length. I got a smokin' deal on it, so it came with some rather humiliating options that I am going to take a lot of crap for: the "gunpod" which records the shots fired, has a thermometer, and compares the relative power of the loads you are shooting (it might do my taxes too, I'm not sure) and the kickoff 3 recoil reduction gimmick. I would never have gotten these silly things on purpose, but I couldn't turn down the deal. I shoot A LOT of different guns, and you really can't go wrong with a Beretta 391 or a400.

Of the other two guns that you mentioned, my personal opinion is that Remington still hasn't caught up to Browning (or Beretta). I don't think the Versamax is as well finished as the Browning, and I don't think the longevity is known yet. That being said, the Versamax is probably Remington's best effort to date.

The Maxus is a great gun, and as someone else pointed out it is mechanically the same as the SX3. The Maxus is nicer looking IMO, and I think the level of finish is superior to the SX3. You do pay a bit more as a result. If it were me, I would strongly consider either a Browning Gold or a Beretta 391. While they are not the "latest and greatest," you can get a real bargain as a result. I paid $500 for the last Browning Gold I bought, and I have seen 391s for as little as $600. To be honest, I wouldn't give a nickel for the difference between a Maxus and a Gold, nor for an a400 vs. a 391. The Gold and the 391 were almost too good to improve on IMO. The 391 has a stellar reputation (more so than the gold) but my Browning is the only gun that I have ever owned that I would almost call "abused." It rarely gets cleaned, gets loaned out to friends, and fires everything from 3.5" goose loads to the same 7/8oz target loads (when my daughter wants to shoot).

Honestly though, all of the modern autoloaders are great guns, and Remington is no exception. If you can locate all four of these guns side by side, I would shoulder them all and choose from there (even this is nearly moot since most of them come with shims and allow you to adjust just about everything.

One last thing to consider, the 391 series is BY FAR the dominant auto among clays competitors. They embraced it to the point that there was a noticeable shift from over-unders to 391s. Before the 391 came out, 95% of the guns in the racks at a sporting clays tournament were twin tubers, now about 80% are over-unders and the other 20% are nearly all 391s. These are guys that fire their guns thousands of times per year, so this is a pretty good indicator of the gun's quality. They really haven't embraced the a400 to that extent, and the target model 391s haven't dropped in value at all. This could be because the target model a400s have a smurf-blue receiver.

You live in Greeley; I'm in Fort Lupton and have a Gold, a 391 and an a400 you can look at if you feel like dropping by.