AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Black Powder Shooting => Topic started by: Edd on August 01, 2008, 04:32:09 PM
-
Bunch of questions here... Do we really need those 42" or longer barrels? Raise yo hand if the main reason you own such a lengthy barrel is 'cause it looks good. My arm is getting tired.
What's so wrong with a 36" barrel? Couldn't we do it all with a barrel that long?? How many of us studied the velocity figures when we elected to go with a barrel over 40 inches??
Do I hear some amens for the 36" - 38" barrels?? I can't hear you! Must I go out on the porch so I can hear better?? ;D
Edd
-
Edd,
My offhand AMS gun has a 1" X 36" GM .40 and it is the gun I shoot at most of the local matches I have an open sight gun full stock with a 7/8" .40 GM, also my x-stix guns have 42" barrels because I think a longer sight radius is more accurate especially when I move the sights up the barrel 13" to 14" so I can see them.
Steve C.
-
Other than sight radius, I doubt that long barrels have much intrinsic value. However, there's nothing wrong with haveing a long barrel just for it's visual appeal. IMO it's no different than figured wood, carving, patch boxes, inlays, engraveing, or even tight inletting. All of these things are added for visual appeal and add little or no intrinsic value.
-
What's so wrong with a 36" barrel? Couldn't we do it all with a barrel that long?? How many of us studied the velocity figures when we elected to go with a barrel over 40 inches??
Do I hear some amens for the 36" - 38" barrels?? I can't hear you! Must I go out on the porch so I can hear better??
OK I will sound off for the 38" barrels. I have a J. Dickert style rifle that I built with a Rice 38" .54 caliber barrel. I don't consider myself a good shot but it will cut clover leafs at 25 yards if I do my part. I shoot 3F Goex in it and to me it shoots as good as the 42 inch Getz that I had on another rifle (since sold).
Dennis
-
Why a long barrelled gun? The answer is in how you shoot.
Everyone these days seems to want a short barrel, lightweight gun. You point it at the target and then wave it around until you acquire a sight picture. These have become known as "fast handling guns" and are all the rage today in both cartridge and ML.
Old timers didn't need these. Gun weight was often given in sales ads. A long barrel, offhand gun should be slightly weight forward when shouldered. It is mounted and brought to bear slightly below the target. Your breath is taken, which raises the barrel to point of aim, and the shot is taken. Because of the weight, the point of aim is able to be held better without wavering. It holds on target. The longer sight radius is a bonus.
-
Edd- if the design supports a 32" barrel, go for it. My old English gun has not been beat for accuracy so far at any range and it only has a 32" barrel. Here's a picture of my friend Brad holding her, gently. I think a slim Penn. rifle of the 18th century might look a bit strange chopped off at 36", but there are some 38" guns as Dennis notes. Going to the largest bore size supported by the barrel's outside dimensions will lighten weight considerably. There is a big difference between the .45 and .40 bores on my 7/8" x 42" barrels. It's 7/8" straight octgonal shape supports a .50 as well as taht was the original barrel on the gun when I got it. I didn't like the offcentre hole, so I changed it to .45, then the current .40 to shoot the squirrel match at Hefley.
: The rifle pictured below weighs 9 pounds with it's 1 1/8" barrel in .69 cal. it holds easily and made 1.2" to 1.5" 5 shot groups at 100 yards in the 1980's and 1990's, still does as a matter of fact, even with my older eyes. I did this just last year when retesting for Rendezvous.
(https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv638%2FDarylS%2F2ec0cbe0.jpg&hash=a322aec345685955a225659f42ddeab836d60fe3)
-
My first real target rifle had a 1" X 32" GM .40, turned half round with redfield sights, half stock, it weighed in at 9.5 lbs I must have put 50,000 balls through that gun, I shot it for 10 years, and won truck loads of stuff with it, it hung pretty well with the under rib and steel thimbles and redfield sights. I always shot .395 swaged and pocket drill and the load started getting loose about 6 inches from the breech so I went to .400 cast and it was fine, I thinking about reviving it for old time sake.
Steve C.
-
I built a 50 cal. Track fullstock flint Hawken a couple years ago & left the barrel the full 42" as the GM blank came that long. I find it much too heavy for offhand shooting but like our friend Edd love the look on the wall! The fact that I can't shoot it offhand accurately is a small pain, but other than that I an extremely happy with it. My complaint with shorter barreled guns is noise! My buddy assembled a 50 cal. Lyman flint GPR last winter under my guidance & shooting the same 70 gr charge of 3f GOEX, mine has a nice mellow sound whilst his sounds like a bloody Howitzer going off! It reminds me very much of the sound of a 22" 458x2" Mauser I built years ago! The noise factor as well as good looks are all it takes to keep me in the ranks of longrifle shooters! If I ever get around to building myself another flint gun it will be a smoothbore like Leatherbelly wants me to so I can keep the long barrel while shedding a lot of barrel weight. Be kind to our ears out there folks! Leave the sawed-off guns at home! ;)
-
Harry & Edd - build a nice .69 with a 32" barrel. It has a nice mellow sound with 165 to 200gr. 2F. It's the 3F that's noisy! Oh, BYTY - it kicks like the .458 2".
-
Personally, I think the longer barrels make into better looking rifles that do not shoot any better if not worse than a shorter barrel. Like all things, as TOF mentioned some carry it too far for "handiness" . But a 32 - 36 inch barrel shoots fine for me. There has been some discussion on gain in velocity with longer barrels. Others claim they have gotten a gain cutting them off. I remember trying a 32" barreled CVA Mountain rifle a friend had. I was impressed.
DP
-
If your arm gets tired work out with the rifle more. Dry fire 20-50 rounds a night. Shooting is like any skill it needs practice.
I prefer heavier guns for offhand and a 42" barrel even if swamped and light will hold better than a 32" of the same weight. Plus the better sight radius.
Dan
-
I'm raising my hand. Got a couple of short fat barrels in the works now.
I'm also with Dphariss on the work out. Build a heavy gun and get strong enough to shoot it. And dry firing is good practice in and of itself, the work out is just a side benefit.
Kevin
-
I think that balance is at least, if not more, important than weight. Tom Caster built me a rifle recently, to my dimensions (LOP, drop) with a 42" 50cal "B" profile bbl. it balances 2-3" in front of my left hand, thus nose-heavy, and I'll say it is as perfect as can be had. Wish I could shoot as well as the rifle will.
-
I've thought that the true "long rifles" had the look of yesteryear with their 42" barrels. But not having any actual "long rifles, all of my barrels are 32" & 33"...however, I use 3/8" solid brass ramrods so I never have to worry about one breaking or ends pulling off while out on a hunt...and that adds another couple pounds out under the barrel.
They're all a tad muzzle heavv but I like it as it does indeed make that front sight hang on the target better and helps with accuracy...they all weigh in the 9.5-10.5 pound range.
-
I'm kinda split down the middle.
I certainly like and admire the longrifle style, but then the question of bulk and balance comes in. My prefered hunting grounds are tight quarters and close range, fast shooting. The right rifle for that balances more like a shotgun with the weight right between my hands regardless of barrel length. Shorter offers some advantage in dodging limbs, but it's not as important as balance. Last year's deer jumped at about 10 feet and I dropped it a split second later inside 20 yards. My ace gun for that has a 26" barrel tapered 1 1/8" to 15/16" and 58 cal. It balances about as well as a 20 gauge upland double, so you don't notice the 9.5 pound weight. You better have your act together for deliberate shooting on the range, though. On a good day it will put all shots touching offhand at 50 yards, but more typically a group of ten will have 7 touching and the others an inch or more away.
On the range for deliberate shooting I sure enjoy the advantage of longer sighting radius and more weight at the muzzle. If I'm hunting open country I like the same guns. My go-to gun for both is a GRRW 58 cal Hawken with a 36" 1 1/8" x 1" barrel, and comes in at 12.5 pounds. It's a death ray when there's time to aim it, but it's about as useful as scrap iron and wood chips for fast shooting at close quarters. Yet on the range it's a ragged hole grouper at 50 yards and beyond. It just doesn't swing fast enough to do the job for fast shooting at close quarters. Tried it, and got the sad tales to tell.
-
If your arm gets tired work out with the rifle more. Dry fire 20-50 rounds a night. Shooting is like any skill it needs practice.
Dan
Dan, I'm not sure if you were speaking to me. My arm was tired because I had my hand up a long time while in agreement with my comment about longer barrels being attractive. :)
Actually, my 42" barrel is only 3/4" across the flats and a puny little .36 caliber. I can hold it up for a full minute before taking the shot...
Edd
-
I don't have the experience of most but will comment anyway.
My 40 cal is 38 inches and the parts I just purchased for a 32 cal
have a 36 inch barrel. The small hole made for a lot of extra steel.
I think it depends on the caliber but find 38 inches works best for me.
40 inches is good but I find 42 inches to be a bit long for me.
Pat Cameron
-
Well lets see,,, I have rifles with barrels that are 28", 29", 30" 32", 36", 37", and 42"...
As far as the most used,,, I would say it's the 36" barreled ones. They range from .40 to .54 caliber, and are anywhere from 7/8" up to 1 1/8" across the flats. They all have a purpose and serve the purpose they were built for just as the 42" barreled rifles do.
My all time favorite is probably my 37" x 1" - .50 caliber Douglas barreled rifle with peep sights. This is my AMS x-stick rifle that in a pinch I can shoot offhand if I want to. It has brought home many a medals for me.
Unfortunately, they have only been 3rd place medals but I'll take 'em considering the competition I go up against at State Shoot. It has also bought home many a monthly shoot bragging rights and 1st place certificates...
I like the looks of the 42" barrel on a longrifle and fact is, it's about the max length I personally can handle when I'm loading. I like to see the ball over my patch before short starting it. Any longer barrel and I'd need a step stool or have to change my loading technique... The way I load now is to ingrained in me to change. ;)
-
I suspect I will invest in a 62 cal bore reamer sometime in the future & bore my 50 cal rifle out to a 20 ga smoothbore, that'll reduce the weight dramatically & allow me to stay with the long hex barrel I love so much. The supposed loss in accuracy won't be a problem because I can't see the sights well enough now!
-
I used to shot the shorter barreld production guns but went with the longer barrels on more PC replicas and have not found them to be any disadvantage in any way when hunting in heavy cover or plinking I now have a 42" and 44" swamped or oct /rd it is really a matter of choice unless you are into a PC/HC thing and a short barrel does not fit the mould.
-
Longer barrells burn powder more, not as much fowling. I found that a 44 inch 54 cal is more accurate than a 38 inch 54 cal. My opinion only. Tim
-
Harry- how long have you had a hex barrel on your longrifle. Which direction do the points go?
-
Harry- how long have you had a hex barrel on your longrifle. Which direction do the points go?
?!
-
I suspect I will invest in a 62 cal bore reamer sometime in the future & bore my 50 cal rifle out to a 20 ga smoothbore, that'll reduce the weight dramatically & allow me to stay with the long hex barrel I love so much. The supposed loss in accuracy won't be a problem because I can't see the sights well enough now!
Yeah- I know I'm being picky. I was surprised you make the typo, though.
-
:P Daryl! :P
Actually a hex barrel would be good with a taper. Wouldn't need sights if you aligned the top edge right! ;)
-
Spot-on, old duff! ;D ;D
-
Like a lot of folks, I started out with a short-barreled halfstock percussion gun in the '70s. I then moved on to a longer barrel (Dixie Tennessee) for the looks. Over the course of time I converted it to flint and finally built a rifle using a swamped barrel - and haven't looked back since! For me, a flintlock and a long swamped barrel holds better, looks better and shoots better, but that's just for me. I've never had any problem with a longer barrel in the field - if I were using it to clear a house, it would be a problem, but that's what modern guns are for. I've never lost a shot that I could have taken with a shorter barrel (or a modern gun for that matter), but again, that's in my experience. Under other conditions in other terrain there might be missed opportunities. Like tg said, unless your choice is being dictated by PC/HC considerations, it's a personal choice. Just my two cents!
Hey, I finally have a post on the new site!
Eric
-
The first 'custom' barrel I ever bought replaced the 28", .50 cal. Bauska barrel on my TC's modified stock (got rid ofsome of it's more nasty features). That barrel was 44" to start - looked it a bit strange for sure, but eventually got shortened to 32", the perfect length for a slim 1/2 stock,I think.
: My second 'custom' barrel was another Bauska, 7/8" X 42" and .45 cal. This was the one with .028" deep rifling in which I used .457" balls. It eventually was shortened to 34" and slimmer and the perfect length - was put on my first hand made ML 1/2 stock rifle - what a shooter it was.
-
Never could quite see a reason for barrel length other than some thought they "shot harder" or were more accurate (longer sighting plane) Horseback rifles like the plains rifles tended to be shorter more or less. Rifles like the Appalachian rifles and Pennsylvania rifles were used in more wooded areas, possibly carried more walking? Earlier trade muskets were longer. Germans and the English liked shorter barrels for hunting rifles. Don't know about the French. The longrifle is often credited with being an American thing. As far as being practical, I tend to lean toward the shorter barreled rifles, understanding that a 32-36 inch barrel is considered "short".
DP
-
Just a quick little note. I read (and I don't remember where) that one purpose of the longer barrel was the quality "burn" of the powder back in the day when black powder was as I understand it, not the quality it is today.
This doesn't explain the shorter Plains Rifle Barrel, or the Jaeger's shorter barrel length, but I do expect that European powder was probably a better quality then what was available here in the U.S. before - say - the 1830's?
Like everything, there are transitions in technology. We usually don't pay any attention to these transitions when we're living through these periods, but when we can look back in history and see the transitions, we then recognize them, and ask why?
-
I suspect the German builders learned that a long barrel was not absolutely needed, I believe that the early trend in long barrels in trade guns and rifleswas somewhat of a carry over from the mind set and developement of naval cannon and artiliary
of the time when the basic ballistic concept was that longer equalled greater range
-
There is the old statement about form following function, such that there may have been beliefs, whether correct or not, that made the long barrel popular. However, fashion or the style of the times is also a motivator. Look at pictures of some of the longrifles, you will see that some were made with barrels of 50" or more and many over 42". Somewhere, someone said longer is better and and others felt that longer yet is ideal. The "transitional" guns had shorter barrels. Whether it was to burn inferior powder as C. Jas mentioned, one I have also heard, or accuracy it was done that way. The British also thought the barrel weight was a little overdone also. The minivan was designed to be the perfect family vehicle. urban moms decided they did not want the "minivan" look and opted for SUV's which are inferior for that purpose. Style is a strong motivator.
DP
-
By 1850, the English noted (Forsyth) that the larger the bore, the shorter the barrels could be.
-
Never could quite see a reason for barrel length other than some thought they "shot harder" or were more accurate (longer sighting plane) Horseback rifles like the plains rifles tended to be shorter more or less. Rifles like the Appalachian rifles and Pennsylvania rifles were used in more wooded areas, possibly carried more walking? Earlier trade muskets were longer. Germans and the English liked shorter barrels for hunting rifles. Don't know about the French. The longrifle is often credited with being an American thing. As far as being practical, I tend to lean toward the shorter barreled rifles, understanding that a 32-36 inch barrel is considered "short".
DP
This another unanswerable question.
It was somewhat powder quality related. The export powder was not always as good as the higher priced powders and the stuff made in North America was pretty grim until after 1800.
Once the powder improved the barrels got somewhat heavier in cross section and they shortened up.
Just one possible factor but the barrels DO follow the powder quality.
But then there were shorter rifles made in Pre-Rev War America just not very common it would seem.
I really like my 16 bore with a 30" barrel but longer barrels are easier to shoot well off hand.
Dan
-
There are a lot of variables that all contribute to whether some one is able to shoot a given rifle accurately. Many of you have made note of particular rifles that you are able to shoot most accurately, but the major variable is the shooter. Those rifles are probably the ones that fit you best.
From my vantage point it is a trade-off between weight and accuracy. Being a COF, I get kind of tired carrying around a 10 or 12 pound rifle all day. If all you have to do is carry it from a loading bench to a firing line then a heavy rifle will be easier to shoot accurately. But if you have to carry that rifle over several miles of country before getting a shot then a lighter rifle will be desired.
But what really makes for a steady rifle is not weight, it is rotational inertia perpendicular to the axis of the bore. A rifle with high rotational inertia will be steady through the shooting process while one with lower inertia requires less force to accelerate away from the line of sight and hence be less steady and ultimately harder to shoot accurately. Rotational inertia is the product of weight multiplied by length. Thus a designer of a rifle can achieve the same rotational inertia by either increasing length or increasing weight. A long rifle does not have to be as heavy in order to achieve the same rotational inertial and hence holding accuracy as a shorter rifle. Consequently, if you have to carry that rifle in your hand over several mountians before you get a shot you will probably end up choosing a longer but lighter rifle.
My .54 has a 47 inch barrel and weighs 9 pounds. It does its job very well, indeed. Because I am getting old and tired of carrying a 9 pound rifle I am building is a new .54 that will weigh in at about 8 pounds despite its 47 inch barrel. I expect it will shoot as accurately as any 12 pound 32 inch rifle because it has the equivalent rotational inertia inspite of its much reduced weight.
I suspect the evolution of rifle design is the artifact of their use. Most jaegers were built for European-style hunting by nobles and target matches. The guns were short, heavy and of large bore. The cost of lead was a non-issue. When American gun makers began making rifles for American use, where they were taken afield by individual hunters usually hunting on foot, a rifle that was lighter was preferable. If it was to be lighter it had to be longer to be as accurate. Lead was also very expensive. Consequently smaller bores were more cost-effective. Once the primary use for hunting rifles extended to the west where foot travel was uncommon, rifles could be made shorter but heavier.
What works best for us depends on how we plan to use it. For me, long and light is right.
Those are my thoughts on the matter.
Best Regards,
John Cholin
-
John, I think I know what you were saying, maybe. When we were talking about off-hand rifles, most liked shorter barrels. The thing is that a long barrel can catch the wind and blow easier off target, trust me on that as I used to shoot a lighter Pennsylvania and had see the breeze blow it like a sail. That longer barrel works like a longer lever. The issue of sight radius is likely one of decreasing return. Mathematically it may work in theory, but the ability to align may stop at a certain distance. I know that I used to be able to shoot shorter barrels as well if not better than long ones. There were several very good shots I knew that liked the 1X36 inch configuration depending on caliber. As to light we can both agree on that one. Even when I was younger I noticed a fatigue factor in too heavy of barrels for bulleye shooting. While you can work out to a certain point, a heavy barrel is relative to the shooter. My wife could outshoot a lot of men with a 32 inch by 7/8 inch 45. For her it was a heavier barrel, held well and was plenty long. One could create a new theory of relativity for shooting.
DP
-
There are a LOT of variables. I shoot long barrels better and I live where the wind blows. Wind could care less if the barrel is a little longer.
Long barrels do have a disadvantage. Barrel time. Heavy recoiling guns with long barrel times can cause recoil induced problems since the gun moves more under recoil before the ball clears than if the barrel was shorter.
While it makes a lot more recoil than the typical RB gun my 15 pound 45-100 Sharps (530 gr PP at 1370 fps 32" barrel) is prone to this and MUST be held very consistently. Errors in holding , watching the wind to close and not putting adequate attention to hold will cause fliers of several feet at 400-1000 yards and with practice one can tell by the recoil and know its going to be off before the target is examined or the dust cloud of a miss appears. I can tell by the way the gun recoils. Not as much a factor in offhand but sitting x-sticks it gets really finicky.
So when people start to talk about very light RB guns with long barrels this comes to mind. But I can still shot a 38-42" barrel better than a 30" if the barrel is heavy enough.
Everything is a trade off...
When one thing is gained another is lost.
Long barrels can be more cumbersome, short barrels lose sight radius and tend to move off target easier. Light guns are fun to carry but not as efficient, for me at least, when actually shooting them.
Dan
-
The 'drive' towards short, light guns is detrimental to good shooting as you indicated, Dan. Too many times I've seen (or heard of) very light guns being needed for mountain use, but when the time came for the 'shot' the gun was so light, it was all over the place and couldn't be held accurately. Yes, it's a trade-off - light, slim and short, or accurate due to barrel weight and length. I've always been able to hold a heavy gun better when winded, than a light gun when winded.
-
While you can go pretty light in a ML most of the heavier calibers do not permit too light unless you get one of the 13/16 50s I read about and saw the barrel down to 24 inches or some other combination. Use of a 15/16 or 1 inch barrel in a 50 or 54 at normal lengths of about 32 -36 inches are really not all that light nor is 32 inches all that short. Even some of the swamped barrels have a breech heavier than 1" in larger bores. Again it is mostly relative to the individual. Bullseye shooting where one had 20 minutes to shoot 5 shots is different than the single shot "primitive" events and does have a fatigue factor. I would still prefer a slightly lighter rifle than something like the Tryon with a 1 3/16 inch by 35 inch barrel. That is my personal definition of a pig that would want a horse to carry it and sticks to shoot it off.
DP
-
The Tryon sounds heavy for sure, but then, the ones I've seen didn't appeal to me :Pso there's no chance of my buying one. There were Hawkens to 14 pounds, but again, I'd not own one (unless an original someone gave me). I did have one that seemed close to 12 pounds, with a 34" 1 1/8" barrel in .58. It wouldn't shoot less than 140gr. of 2f and the butt plate points hurt like H---- :'(so I sold it. :-[ Wish I hadn't now, for sure :(. Could have put a great big red rubber ventalated recoil pad ??? on it! ::) :-*
-
Longer burns powder better. Also the longer barrells...42 and up, look better than a 38 inch. Just my opinion. Tim