• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

Origin of the 590A1 designation, from the 1897 "Trench Gun"

Rossignol

The Original Sheriff
Global Moderator
Sponsor
Moderator
Mossberg 590A1
Written by Michael O. Humphries

U.S. Military-endorsed 12 gauge powerhouse—
a 21st century “Trench Gun!”


"The “trench gun” had its beginnings most famously with a modified variant of the Winchester 1897 pump shotgun, designed to sport a short barrel, heat shield and bayonet lug. This design set the standard for military-pattern shotguns, providing a compact and fearsome close-range weapon designed perfectly for the arm’s-length combat of the trenches. Nonetheless, the configuration developed for World War I is now more than 90 years old. So what is the state of today’s combat pump-action shotgun?

In the case of the 590A1 model from Mossberg, it is a cutting-edge combat shotgun designed with input directly from the US military and based upon a platform that has passed the US Government’s stringent Mil-Std-3443 shotgun performance requirements, allowing Mossberg 500-based shotguns to be adopted for use by the US military.

The 500, the platform upon which the 590A1 is based, has a long and storied history as both a sporting and tactical shotgun. Hardy and reliable, the Mossberg 500 has earned a reputation as a reliable and affordable shotgun, as equally well suited to LE/military applications as it is to the sporting fields.

Unlike the relatively low-key appearance of the basic 500, the new 590 featured a very aggressive visage and several combat-oriented enhancements. Sporting a 20-inch barrel similar to eight-shot variants of the 500, the new 3-inch chambered 590 featured a 9-round capacity, with eight 2¾-inch shells fitting in its tubular magazine.

The feat of upping the total capacity of the 590 over the standard 20-inch barreled 500 by one shell was accomplished by redesigning the barrel retention system from the standard 500, which employs a retaining screw that attaches to a threaded portion on the forward end of the magazine tube.

On the 590, a magazine cap screws onto the end of the magazine tube that features threading on its exterior diameter at its end. The magazine cap is designed to tighten down against a barrel retaining ring attached to the barrel that encircles the magazine tube, with a spring-loaded plunger in the ring’s forward face interacting with “teeth” machined into the rear face of the magazine cap.

Located roughly 3 inches behind the forward barrel-retaining ring is a secondary ring that is also home to the other significant enhancement of the 590 — a bayonet lug. To give the shotgun a uniquely military-oriented capability, this lug works in concert with a reduced diameter ring on the front face of the magazine cap (the same diameter as an M16-pattern flash suppressor) to accept a bayonet.

For obvious reasons, the 590 was an immediate hit. It offered a robust, capable scattergun that captured the spirit of the original 1897 trench gun, but in a synthetic-stocked and modernized form. However, for some members of the US military whose needs for this type of shotgun would push any gun to its limits, there was still a little room for enhancement. With direct input from the US military, Mossberg took another look at the 590 model.

First and foremost, the thickness of the 590’s barrel was examined. Due to extensive deployment on ships where the risk of denting standard-thickness barrels on bulkheads or steel decking was a real concern, the barrel wall thickness was beefed up to address this potential problem. In addition to a thicker barrel, the synthetic receiver-mounted safety and trigger housing were redesigned to be manufactured from aluminum alloy, resulting in much tougher parts with little to no additional weight.

The result was the Mossberg 590A1, a specialized variant of the 590 series designed specifically for heavy-duty LE/military applications and the US military’s specific needs."
 
Re: Origin of the 590A1 designation, from the 1897 "Trench G

Great read! I never knew the full story behind how the mossberg 590 started but now I do.

Thanks
 
Re: Origin of the 590A1 designation, from the 1897 "Trench G

The 590 and 590A1 even moreso are actually fairly uncommon in the .mil. Compared to the 500 and some special runs of the 500 that were almost 590s and 590A1s, very few of the 590/590A1 were bought by the .mil for use.
The 590 was built for the LE and later .mil market, but the 500 far outnumbers the 590 in .mil service. The 500 was first purchased between 1979 and 1987, with the 590 first being purchased in 1987. There was a relatively small number 590/590A1s produced. The 500 continues to be purchased to this day.
The M1014 despite HK marketing is in rather limited use, and pretty much is seen only in the Marines regardless of the "Joint" part of the JCS designation. The Remington MCS is another .mil contract shotgun, but both of them combined aren't produced on the level that the 500/590 series are for military use.
In addition, the other models of trench and riot shotguns have been withdrawn from general service.
 
Re: Origin of the 590A1 designation, from the 1897 "Trench G

Good piece of insight to the article! Thank you!
 
Re: Origin of the 590A1 designation, from the 1897 "Trench G

good article,
I disagree with a few points.

The 590 tube was not designed for the military it already was around, it was called an 835 (My understanding is that the 835 was designed first and the mag was due to needing to stuff 3.5 in rounds in there, but introduced after).

Secondly the article implies that the Milspec was overly hard to achieve and required redesign again untrue, plenty of standard 500's and cruisers were .mil
Remington for example did not try to compete during the trials knowing they could not meet the cost of the 590.

I DO LIKE THAT THE AUTHOR POINTS OUT THAT THE HEATSHIELD IS FOR BAYO FIGHTING.
NOT MANY FOLKS KNOW THAT
 
Re: Origin of the 590A1 designation, from the 1897 "Trench G

hunter72 said:
The 590 tube was not designed for the military it already was around, it was called an 835 3.5 in mag though.
The 590 first appeared in 1987. The 835 was introduced in 1988.
 
Re: Origin of the 590A1 designation, from the 1897 "Trench G

Edited my above.
It is true the 590 came out in 87 and the 835 in 88 however, designed and came out are to different things.

It is my understanding that the 835 ws designed first, but introduced after due to difficulties in the reciever length.
It was in fact introduced a less than a year after the 590.

THe 590 as I understand it was a result of design work on the 835 and was never intended to replace the 500 but in addition to the 500 combining the 500 and the 835 with out hte more expensive at the time 835 reciever.

Although I have to admit I do not understand why it did not become the standard model, as I am pretty sure the 870 would have been killed by a 500 that had a magtube clean out and was extendable.
 
Re: Origin of the 590A1 designation, from the 1897 "Trench G

Very interesting points not noted by the author!
 
Re: Origin of the 590A1 designation, from the 1897 "Trench G

hunter72 said:
Edited my above.
It is true the 590 came out in 87 and the 835 in 88 however, designed and came out are to different things.
I had always heard that the clean out was at the .mil's request so that it would be more like the 870 and capable of taking an extension. Never heard that it was first implemented on the 835.
It is my understanding that the 835 ws designed first, but introduced after due to difficulties in the reciever length.
I could see where there could be a problem with a longer aluminum receiver that was still capable of taking a beating.
It was in fact introduced a less than a year after the 590.

THe 590 as I understand it was a result of design work on the 835 and was never intended to replace the 500 but in addition to the 500 combining the 500 and the 835 with out hte more expensive at the time 835 reciever.
I think that's where a lot of people get hung up and believe that the 590A1 and to a lesser extent the 590 is THE military shotgun, whereas the 500 far outnumbers both. I don't have the numbers right in front of me but I think there were less than like 2000 of them in total made as 590A1 configuration.
Although I have to admit I do not understand why it did not become the standard model, as I am pretty sure the 870 would have been killed by a 500 that had a magtube clean out and was extendable.
I don't know why Mossberg has stayed married to the barrel take down nut arrangement. I think the mag tube clean out and cap arrangement would make the shotguns better across the board. JMO though.
 
Re: Origin of the 590A1 designation, from the 1897 "Trench G

On the clean out, think about it this way, the 590 had a 20" bbl and full tube already, why would you need to extend it?
Remington did not enter the contest and the clean out may have indeed become a mossberg thing stemming from the military request (I do not know when the request for evaluation was made) . R&D can be years before introduction though. It is my understanding that Mossberg didnt intend to reinvent the 500 that the military had thousands of already. I think for whatever reason they felt that they could come closer to the new REQUESTS by combining two things they already had. the 500 and the concept/design/idea of the 835.
 
Re: Origin of the 590A1 designation, from the 1897 "Trench G

hunter72 said:
On the clean out, think about it this way, the 590 had a 20" bbl and full tube already, why would you need to extend it?
Agreed if you're just talking about the 20" model. The possible use of extensions is one of the reasons Canfield identifies for the mag tube cleanout. Now, I don't know if that was because they were considering the 6 and 9 shot and finally decided on the 9 shot or what. It doesn't make sense to consider extensions for the 9 shot. Part of the initial 590 orders were also the Navy requests for the shorter than 20" (17" IIRC) barrels that specified the mag tube clean out arrangement and the 6 round capacity, so I would assume that it may have been a consideration for those..
 
Re: Origin of the 590A1 designation, from the 1897 "Trench G

definately possible, My above statements were posted as opinion and were my understanding, from reasearch and talking with procurment officers as well.
I did talk wiht mossberg years ago about it as well.
My opinion is the "using what they had already" after all, I cannot see them designing three different magtube/bbl nut configurations anyway.

Perhaps I and my information is all wrong or a combination of both,
I understood that the 590 features(not all the features just the clean out) came from the 835 and the magtube being different from a 500 was to allow more 3.5 in shells in a standard tube (not for extensions), and since they had to redesign why not make it like the 870 (but better) then came the 870 supermag to compete... that would explain why the 500 remained the same, no need to retool everything,
the 500 was a base entry level product the 835 was a specialized duck/goose/turkey gun. Im sure they thought at the time the 835 would out sell the 500.
or at least replace it. when it did not, I beleave they came up with the mav 88 to be the entry and the 500 to remain the staple.
 
Back
Top