Stevens over and under 555

[-JR-]

Was at Cabela's Edmonton north on Saturday checking out the 555.
Great staff employee showing me a few riffles and the only riffle that I shouldered well was the Stevens 555.
All my Big game riffles are Mags so kick is normal for me but these 555 models are only around 6 pounds .
So the question is..who has one in 12 gauge.
Is the kick ok ? .....or do you wish you never bought it

[58thecat]

Don't have one but did some reading on it;

What really stood out when shooting the gun was the balance and handling. Shotguns with alloy receivers and standard steel barrels generally are nose-heavy. With a light gun, a bit of weight up front is a good thing as long as it isn’t too much. The 555’s balance was very nice. The balance point was about ½” in front of the hinge. The more important moment of inertia was delightfully moderate. The barrels were quick to move but had a certain steadiness. While I was able to shoot the gun only at clays, I believe it would be marvelous in the field. It certainly handled well for both near and far shots in sporting clays and FITASC. That said, with that aluminum receiver, it is not primarily a high-volume clay-target gun. It’s a hunter.

The light carry weight would be most welcome toward the end of a long day’s pheasant hunt. Recoil shouldn’t be an issue, if you are sensible in selecting the ammo. The gun will function with heavy 3″ loads, but you might not. A full-tilt 3″ shell will have about three times the recoil of a moderate target load in this gun. Not fun at all. But more realistic upland loads should be no problem. My usual pheasant 12-gauge weighs 7 pounds and is comfortable enough for a day’s hunt with 3¼-dram, 1¼-oz loads of No. 5s. The 555 is 10% lighter and should be just fine.

In all, I was very impressed with the performance of the Stevens 555 Enhanced. The balance was surprisingly good and made the gun easy to shoot well. The light weight was noticeable when carrying but not when shooting. The gun functioned properly in all respects. It’s not at all bad looking with the upgraded wood. And then there is that $863 retail price. Even though it is inexpensive, it is definitely not cheap.

[-JR-]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

Don't have one but did some reading on it;

What really stood out when shooting the gun was the balance and handling. Shotguns with alloy receivers and standard steel barrels generally are nose-heavy. With a light gun, a bit of weight up front is a good thing as long as it isn’t too much. The 555’s balance was very nice. The balance point was about ½” in front of the hinge. The more important moment of inertia was delightfully moderate. The barrels were quick to move but had a certain steadiness. While I was able to shoot the gun only at clays, I believe it would be marvelous in the field. It certainly handled well for both near and far shots in sporting clays and FITASC. That said, with that aluminum receiver, it is not primarily a high-volume clay-target gun. It’s a hunter.

The light carry weight would be most welcome toward the end of a long day’s pheasant hunt. Recoil shouldn’t be an issue, if you are sensible in selecting the ammo. The gun will function with heavy 3″ loads, but you might not. A full-tilt 3″ shell will have about three times the recoil of a moderate target load in this gun. Not fun at all. But more realistic upland loads should be no problem. My usual pheasant 12-gauge weighs 7 pounds and is comfortable enough for a day’s hunt with 3¼-dram, 1¼-oz loads of No. 5s. The 555 is 10% lighter and should be just fine.

In all, I was very impressed with the performance of the Stevens 555 Enhanced. The balance was surprisingly good and made the gun easy to shoot well. The light weight was noticeable when carrying but not when shooting. The gun functioned properly in all respects. It’s not at all bad looking with the upgraded wood. And then there is that $863 retail price. Even though it is inexpensive, it is definitely not cheap.

Thanks for your in put 58 cat. just might buy it next time I go in .

[32-40win]

Hard to say whether the doubling issue on them really was a big deal or just a small number of guns, perhaps something that was a mfgr's flaw that ended up being corrected, who knows? One theory was some springs may be weak, and allowing them to double as it is a recoil based switching system. Most of the complaints seem to be at least 2 yrs old.