Sheepdoggit
.22LR
Mossberg's literature says this about the "590A1":
"In the late 1970s, the U.S. Armed Forces developed MilSpec 3443 for the selection of new combat shotguns. After an unforgiving battery of endurance, accuracy and quality tests – Mossberg was the only manufacturer to meet and exceed the requirements. Today, every 590A1 conforms to the same set of strict MilSpec guidelines."
MIL-S-3443G says the following:
"4.6.7 Rough handling. After completion of the performance test, three weapons shall be chosen and subjected to the rough handling test. Each weapon will have the safety "on", a primed cartridge case in the chamber and a fully loaded magazine. One weapon shall be conditioned at -20°F, one at ambient and one at +120ºF for a minimum of four hours prior to the test. The weapons shall be dropped a minimum distance of four feet (lowest point on the weapon to the drop surface) in each of the following five modes: butt end down, right side down, left side down, top side down, and 45 degree angle with vertical Plane - butt end down. The drop surface shall be 85 + 5 Durometer (Shore A) rubber mat, one inch thick, backed by concrete. At the test’s conclusion, the weapon must be safe and serviceable and the primed shell shall not have fired."
If Mossberg is stating for a fact that it meets or exceeds all the requirements in MIL-S-3443G, then that means it meets the requirements and it is drop safe as long as the safety is actuated. If this were to go to court, I believe they would recognize that unless:
This portion of the testing in MIL-S-3443G is not the same as MIL-S-3443. In other words, they're claiming that this all started in the late 1970s with "3443," but 3443G and it's predecessor 3443F were not adopted until the 1990s. I do not know if the original requirement was 3443 or 3443A, but there was certainly a 3443A-3443G. I did locate a version as far back as 3443E and the rough handling test is identical. However, this document came out in 1989. 3443D is the specification I need to find because it was issued in 1968 and remained in effect until 1989 when it was superseded by 3443E. Given the fact that 3443D would have been the milspec from 1968 through 1989, then Mossberg must be referring to 3443 in a generic way (because they would have used 3443D and not "3443" in the late 1970s). As such, it really comes down to finding 3443D. If 3443D has the same rough handling requirements, then Mossberg is legally claiming that it meets what for all intents and purposes, is a drop safety test with the safety engaged.
Update: another page on Mossberg's website says the following about the 590A1 Tactical series in general:
FEATURES: MilSpec construction: the only pump action shotgun to pass MilSpec 3443E; Parkerized or Marinecote finishes on heavy-walled barrels; metal trigger guard and safety buttons. Select models feature tactical tri-rail forends, 6-position adjustable stocks, picatinny top rails, and specialty sight packages.
Now that we have that out of the way, what do you think? Is it drop safe with the safety on? When I contacted Mossberg before I looked at 3443G, they merely told me in an email "No," but that may be just to cover themselves about potential liabilities. For example, maybe there is something legal keeping them from saying "drop safe" because the safety has to be engaged unlike a Glock which doesn't have one, and since Glocks are considered drop safe, describing the 590A1 the same way may cause the liability.
This came up for me recently because I just purchased a 590A1 9 shot. I was going to go with a version with less capacity for the shorter barrel, but from everything I was reading, I was being told these are NOT "drop safe" (which may be technically true), so they should be either stored completely unloaded (like some manuals or the NRA might say), or it should be stored in "cruiser ready" or "cruiser safe" condition where the chamber is empty, the safety is typically off (though some versions claim it should be engaged), so that the slide merely needs to be racked before employing it (again, unless the safety must also be disengaged). In other words, I bought the 9 shot because it really would only be a 8 shot with an empty chamber, and thus the 7 shot would only be a 6 shot and the 6 shot would only be a 5 shot.
In conclusion, although I do not feel I can claim it is "drop safe" without the safety on, the Mossberg 590A1 does appear to have been successfully tested to be "drop safe with the safety engaged," so I am inclined to think it is safe to store it for home defense with a round loaded in the chamber (8+1)—with the safety engaged—so that it is ready with 9 rounds. I am not giving this as advice, legal or otherwise, to anyone. Obviously everyone has to assess their own situation to determine the safest method for storing their firearms, and in many cases that may mean storing the 590A1 unloaded in a safe, and storing the ammunition separately (also locked away). Everyone also has to keep in mind what the laws are in their state. But for people like me who have a safe way of instantly accessing a loaded firearm for home defense, I am inclined to think it is safe to store the 590A1 in "Condition 2: Magazine tube loaded, chamber loaded and the safety on" within the guidelines MIL-S-3443G (e.g. it won't be in a situation where it may be dropped from storage more than 4 feet off the ground). We must remember, however, that just because something proved safe in the military's testing does not mean that every or any sample is always going to be completely safe as all mechanical devices can fail.
Don't hold me to this, but I believe in an earlier video, James Yeager recommended keeping all firearms loaded with one in the chamber, (and that you didn't need to rack the slide because it wouldn't scare drug addicts anyway). Recently, however, he seems to have walked that statement back advocating the cruiser safe/ready condition. That may have resulted from virtually everything I have read on the internet stating that the Mossberg 590A1 series is not drop safe. While that may be technically true, that is not to say the firearm is unsafe stored in Condition 2. Again, that is my opinion only, and not advice in any way, shape, or form.
Sorry about the long post, but I wanted to be thorough.
"In the late 1970s, the U.S. Armed Forces developed MilSpec 3443 for the selection of new combat shotguns. After an unforgiving battery of endurance, accuracy and quality tests – Mossberg was the only manufacturer to meet and exceed the requirements. Today, every 590A1 conforms to the same set of strict MilSpec guidelines."
MIL-S-3443G says the following:
"4.6.7 Rough handling. After completion of the performance test, three weapons shall be chosen and subjected to the rough handling test. Each weapon will have the safety "on", a primed cartridge case in the chamber and a fully loaded magazine. One weapon shall be conditioned at -20°F, one at ambient and one at +120ºF for a minimum of four hours prior to the test. The weapons shall be dropped a minimum distance of four feet (lowest point on the weapon to the drop surface) in each of the following five modes: butt end down, right side down, left side down, top side down, and 45 degree angle with vertical Plane - butt end down. The drop surface shall be 85 + 5 Durometer (Shore A) rubber mat, one inch thick, backed by concrete. At the test’s conclusion, the weapon must be safe and serviceable and the primed shell shall not have fired."
If Mossberg is stating for a fact that it meets or exceeds all the requirements in MIL-S-3443G, then that means it meets the requirements and it is drop safe as long as the safety is actuated. If this were to go to court, I believe they would recognize that unless:
This portion of the testing in MIL-S-3443G is not the same as MIL-S-3443. In other words, they're claiming that this all started in the late 1970s with "3443," but 3443G and it's predecessor 3443F were not adopted until the 1990s. I do not know if the original requirement was 3443 or 3443A, but there was certainly a 3443A-3443G. I did locate a version as far back as 3443E and the rough handling test is identical. However, this document came out in 1989. 3443D is the specification I need to find because it was issued in 1968 and remained in effect until 1989 when it was superseded by 3443E. Given the fact that 3443D would have been the milspec from 1968 through 1989, then Mossberg must be referring to 3443 in a generic way (because they would have used 3443D and not "3443" in the late 1970s). As such, it really comes down to finding 3443D. If 3443D has the same rough handling requirements, then Mossberg is legally claiming that it meets what for all intents and purposes, is a drop safety test with the safety engaged.
Update: another page on Mossberg's website says the following about the 590A1 Tactical series in general:
FEATURES: MilSpec construction: the only pump action shotgun to pass MilSpec 3443E; Parkerized or Marinecote finishes on heavy-walled barrels; metal trigger guard and safety buttons. Select models feature tactical tri-rail forends, 6-position adjustable stocks, picatinny top rails, and specialty sight packages.
Now that we have that out of the way, what do you think? Is it drop safe with the safety on? When I contacted Mossberg before I looked at 3443G, they merely told me in an email "No," but that may be just to cover themselves about potential liabilities. For example, maybe there is something legal keeping them from saying "drop safe" because the safety has to be engaged unlike a Glock which doesn't have one, and since Glocks are considered drop safe, describing the 590A1 the same way may cause the liability.
This came up for me recently because I just purchased a 590A1 9 shot. I was going to go with a version with less capacity for the shorter barrel, but from everything I was reading, I was being told these are NOT "drop safe" (which may be technically true), so they should be either stored completely unloaded (like some manuals or the NRA might say), or it should be stored in "cruiser ready" or "cruiser safe" condition where the chamber is empty, the safety is typically off (though some versions claim it should be engaged), so that the slide merely needs to be racked before employing it (again, unless the safety must also be disengaged). In other words, I bought the 9 shot because it really would only be a 8 shot with an empty chamber, and thus the 7 shot would only be a 6 shot and the 6 shot would only be a 5 shot.
In conclusion, although I do not feel I can claim it is "drop safe" without the safety on, the Mossberg 590A1 does appear to have been successfully tested to be "drop safe with the safety engaged," so I am inclined to think it is safe to store it for home defense with a round loaded in the chamber (8+1)—with the safety engaged—so that it is ready with 9 rounds. I am not giving this as advice, legal or otherwise, to anyone. Obviously everyone has to assess their own situation to determine the safest method for storing their firearms, and in many cases that may mean storing the 590A1 unloaded in a safe, and storing the ammunition separately (also locked away). Everyone also has to keep in mind what the laws are in their state. But for people like me who have a safe way of instantly accessing a loaded firearm for home defense, I am inclined to think it is safe to store the 590A1 in "Condition 2: Magazine tube loaded, chamber loaded and the safety on" within the guidelines MIL-S-3443G (e.g. it won't be in a situation where it may be dropped from storage more than 4 feet off the ground). We must remember, however, that just because something proved safe in the military's testing does not mean that every or any sample is always going to be completely safe as all mechanical devices can fail.
Don't hold me to this, but I believe in an earlier video, James Yeager recommended keeping all firearms loaded with one in the chamber, (and that you didn't need to rack the slide because it wouldn't scare drug addicts anyway). Recently, however, he seems to have walked that statement back advocating the cruiser safe/ready condition. That may have resulted from virtually everything I have read on the internet stating that the Mossberg 590A1 series is not drop safe. While that may be technically true, that is not to say the firearm is unsafe stored in Condition 2. Again, that is my opinion only, and not advice in any way, shape, or form.
Sorry about the long post, but I wanted to be thorough.
Last edited:
