Lever action .41 barrel length

[courtgreene]

Greetings,

I’m saving for a lever action .41 mag because I love the Blackhawk I have and want a rifle that shoots the same thing.

My question is about barrel length. This is going to be a deer/bear rifle. When I say bear I mean behind dogs in thick mountain terrain. That makes me think carbine (which, on the Henry, is 16.5”). Would I be losing much? The other option would be 20”. Would I gain that much velocity or sight radius to make the longer option worth it?

 

[horsemen61]

Your talking 3.5 inches in this case I’d get the 20 inch barrel you get the additional velocity and the .41 mag could use that

 

[BigBore44]

I agree with the 20” barrel. Only saving a few ounces. But realistically only gaining a few fps. One thing to think about is if you’re going to be wearing thick gloves, get a big hoop lever on that rifle.

 

[courtgreene]

I generally wear gloves after deer, but not bears. Running after dogs gets hot.

What kind of gains does 3.5” get you, realistically?

 

[gotboostvr]

Magnum pistol cartridges are very "efficient" in shorter barreled rifles than bottlenecked cartridges. You won't gain much velocity with a couple extra inches. Not enough to make a significant difference in performance on game. You'll need a tough bullet to run at carbine velocities, that'll be a bigger difference than a few extra inches.

I'd rather have a handier carbine. The thick brush I hunt is a pain even with a 16" M92, heavy slug guns were even worse.

 

[TN Outlaw]

BBTI doesn't show much gain from 16"-18" so I wouldn't figure 20" would offer much more. No doubt there would be a velocity gain but just not enough to justify losing the "handiness" of a 16" carbine for me personally. Bullet selection and being quick pointing and handy would win out vs a very minor gain in velocity.

Good luck in your decision.

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

My preference would be for the shorter barrel.

 

[Walkalong]

I don't consider 20" barrel long by any means, nor do I find it a problem going through brush with. You never saw 16" barrels until the popularity of the 16" AR blossomed. A 20" hunting rifle is short.

You will gain a little velocity, and lose a lot of muzzle blast.

 

[Jim Watson]

Open sight, peep, scope, red dot?

I'd want the 20" for a little more sight radius with iron sights. I suspect I might like its balance better, too.

 

[TN Outlaw]

I don't consider 20" barrel long by any means, nor do I find it a problem going through brush with. You never saw 16" barrels until the popularity of the 16" AR blossomed. A 20" hunting rifle is short.

You will gain a little velocity, and lose a lot of muzzle blast.

I'm speaking from my personal view point, 16" would be alot more handy and faster pointing. It would also be all you would need with a pistol cartridge to get up to it's potential.

Some may prefer a 20" BBL and that's great. It's not long by no means and would work out just fine. I can just tell a pretty big difference in an 18" and a 21" bbl for usability in the same platform and I also have a CZ 513 that I cut a little over an inch off of and could tell alot bigger difference than I ever thought possible. Saying all of that to say 16" to 20" in a thicket is a big difference in feel. BIG. If it's a rifle cartridge that really benefits from those extra inches than fine, but the .41Mag just don't need em so why unless a person just prefers that length? The muzzle blast, I agree with you but I'm not sure the .41Mag will dish out very much in a rifle length. I'm not sure?

Also the "AR" platform never entered my mind with this conversation. 16" bbl's have been around for well over 100yrs. The trapper carbine (which happens to be an excellent bush wacker) is what I was thinking of when I commented above.

It's all up to priority and preference.

 

[Walkalong]

Also the "AR" platform never entered my mind with this conversation. 16" bbl's have been around for well over 100yrs

But not hugely popular, and you didn't used to see many hunting rifles in 16". Seems to coincide. Maybe not. Anyway, my preference is 20" over 16" for anything not AR.

 

[BigBlue 94]

All carbine 1873s had 16" barrels. Ruger 96 series has a 16" barrel as does the Deerfield carbine. I have both rugers in 44mag. My NEF handi rifle has a 16" barrel too, in 22 hornet.

For a pistol round, the difference in a 20 or 16" barrel is moot to me. The difference in velocity is less than the average variance in factory ammo velocity. I would rather have the lighter, shorter gun.

 

[courtgreene]

Thanks. To answer the question about sights... iron sights. I’ll try the factory but know I’ll eventually end up putting a peep sight on it (big improvement on the marlin I have).

I appreciate all the comments thus far.

 

[If1HitU]

I like 18" barrel

 

[Charlie98]

I have a Marlin 1894 .41 with a 20" barrel, I have considered whacking the barrel to 16". I bought my brother a Winchester Trapper 16" barreled carbine in .45 Colt many years ago, I liked it so much I 'borrowed' it from him for some years... it was my go-to camp and hiking long arm. When I got my .41 (and thoughtfully returned my brother's Trapper...) I thought pretty much the same thing... but haven't really put any effort into having the barrel cut since I've been shooting it at longer distances (600yds) lately, and the 20" barrel makes a difference there... not only in added velocity, but sight radius.

I would say if you are shooting (for whatever purpose) at less than 100yds, 16" vs 20" is less of a question... get what you want. At distances over that, I would probably get a 20".

I also have a 16" barreled .308 autoloader (an M1a) and a 22" barreled .308 bolt gun. At rifle velocities there is a significant difference between the two, but, again, it depends on what distances you are shooting at, and what you expect the bullet to do.

 

[CraigC]

IMHO, short barrels on leverguns are overrated. Hunting with +30" muzzleloaders taught me that. I prefer a 20" or longer for a levergun. The Henry .357 I just got is a 16" for weight concerns with the smaller bore. Otherwise, I would've gotten a 20" 1892 carbine.

 

[Catpop]

I vote 16!. I’m short and I like my guns and women short!

 

[Ks5shooter]

I just bought the Henry 16.5 45 Colt large loop steel version. I will tell you this,it is a handy ,pointable rifle. You will not be disappointed. I bought the Henry to match my Ruger Vaquero 45 Colt just as you want to do.

 

[Ohen Cepel]

For a pistol caliber gun I would go with 16in.

 

[cdb1]

I don't consider 20" barrel long by any means, nor do I find it a problem going through brush with. You never saw 16" barrels until the popularity of the 16" AR blossomed. A 20" hunting rifle is short.

You will gain a little velocity, and lose a lot of muzzle blast.

I agree, have never found 20” to be a hindrance over 16”. Reduced muzzle blast is big to me.

 

[200Apples]

I own three Marlin 1894s; an 18.5" .357, a 20" .41 and just recently a 16.5" .44... and while all are handy and light weight, I'll be dadgummed if that 20" FG isn't my absolute favorite. It is supremely well balanced. The 16" SBL is little more than a long-barreled .44 Magnum handgun with a shoulder stock. Oh, it's neat alright but if push came to shove I'd much rather have my 20" .41....

If you're a-huntin' with a .41 Mag, why not go with the 20", adjust your propellent choice (if you handload), and see an near-400 fps increase in velocity (over a revolver barrel)? The 20" lever carbines, whether a Henry, Marlin or Winchester, are still shorter overall than an 18" pump shotgun.