Ultimate rook rifle

What is a "rook" rifle?

Jim Watson said:

Greener showed the top of the line rabbit and rook rifle as a Hollands top break, top lever single shot. Hammer guns were a step down and the Martini was the low end of the market. However a friend's Martini is a nicer looking little rifle than many of the side lever hammer break actions. His was Parkerrifled (relined) to .22 from some larger rook calibre.

Greener said the .22 was not well suited for rook and rabbit, that it paradoxically had too light a bullet and too long a danger space. He said that ideally a rook rifle should shoot accurately for 100 yards and the bullet then drop straight to the ground. Not physically possible, but something to think about when shooting at a rook on a limb or a rabbit in a flat field where a miss could go a long way.
Typical rook rifle calibers ran from .25 to .30. Greener said his .310 Cadet round was probably more than necessary and would probably rate the .300 Sherwood the same.
There was the .360 Rook and some rifles for the .360 No 5 revolver cartridge. Again bigger than necessary but people would shoot deer with them and the Cadet.
Modern rook rifle collectors and shooters are always on the lookout for a .360; it is so close to .38 Long Colt as to make no difference. I think C.E. Harris shoots his with .38 Special wadcutters.

As said, a new gun in .32 S&W long or maybe low end loads in a .32 H&R would do.

The teeny little doubles are cute; but I doubt a crow or rabbit will sit around long enough for the second barrel.

Click to expand...

I can appreciate the limited range but lethal aspect of a small caliber antique revolver round(as in 32S&W). But wouldn't a single shot 410 be more useful given your criteria?

.410 will drop off long before 100 yards though.

P.B.Walsh said:

What is a "rook" rifle?

Click to expand...

Rook is a British name for a crow. So the literal translation would be "rifle for killing crows". However, like many literal translations a lot is lost. A rook rifle is designed for killing crows and other small pests in a relatively crowded environment. Rook rifles were designed to be quiet, pleasant to shoot and short ranged. They were usually single shots using low power cartridges in the 32 S&W Long class, such as 310 Cadet, 300 Sherwood, etc.

So while high speed spitzer bullet cartridges such as 22 Hornet and 223 are perfectly capable of killing crows, they don't quite meet the criteria of a rook rifle.

Remo223 said:

I can appreciate the limited range but lethal aspect of a small caliber antique revolver round(as in 32S&W). But wouldn't a single shot 410 be more useful given your criteria?

Click to expand...

A 410 would be a bit too short range. It would also remove the marksmanship element out of shooting stationary crows.

Rook is a British name for a crow. So the literal translation would be "rifle for killing crows". However, like many literal translations a lot is lost. A rook rifle is designed for killing crows and other small pests in a relatively crowded environment. Rook rifles were designed to be quiet, pleasant to shoot and short ranged. They were usually single shots using low power cartridges in the 32 S&W Long class, such as 310 Cadet, 300 Sherwood, etc.

So while high speed spitzer bullet cartridges such as 22 Hornet and 223 are perfectly capable of killing crows, they don't quite meet the criteria of a rook rifle.

Click to expand...

Well, yes and no.

Rooks were shot out of trees, which means the rifle was elevated and a miss -- or even a hit -- would let the bullet continue on for some distance. Now in small arms, momemtum (related to mass) is more critical than velocity in determining maximum range -- mass increases with the cube, while drag (which slows the bullet down) increases with the square (for bullets of equal shape.) So a .36 caliber rook rifle will shoot a lot farther than a .22 LR.

On the other hand, if we shoot rooks on the ground, the danger is not in the maximum range of the rifle, but in the ricochet potential. A modern bullet from a .22 Hornet has a low ricochet potential (and a very low potential of continuing on after hitting the rook) -- it will normally self-destruct on impact. A lead bullet has a high ricochet potential and a high potential of continuing on after hitting the rook.

The next question is, what is the danger from a bullet that continues on in the air, through or past the target? Regardless of the construction, size or velocity, it is going to hit in one place, only. So when you shoot into the air the danger there is a function of whatever lies along the trajectory, plus the fact that the shooter can't see what his bullet is likely to hit. It's difficult to say that a bullet shot into the air is more dangerous because of its range.

All in all, then, if you shoot at rooks or crows on the ground, a modern .22 Hornet is less dangerous than a .360 rook rifle.

A missed shot at a high trajectory is more dangerous with a heavier projectile than a light one. So I think a moderately high powered air rifle would be the best solution for missed shots in populated areas if you intend to retain a marksmanship aspect.

AirForce Talon PCP (silenced) in .22 with a dive compressor in the shop and an extra tank or two. Short range, very quiet, accurate and plenty powerful enough. Can be shot in most locations w/o getting Johnny Law all riled up. What else do you need to dispatch Rooks?

http://www.pyramydair.com/s/m/AirForce_Talon_SS_Blue_PCP_Air_Rifle/2243

My crow rifle.

Savage 65M in .22 magnum using 40 grn CCI Maxi-mags. Up to 125 yards (my limit) crows are dust.

I am kind of hung upon the concept of a short, light (think splinter forearm), limited range, single shot or double

Click to expand...

Which is why a few of us mentioned Hofer's Hummingbird:

Rook rifle

Some years ago, there appeared on Gunbroker a Holland and Son rook rifle. It was a double rifle chambered for the .360 rook cartridge and, yes, it would shoot .38 Specials.
I bought it. Fortunately, I had a three day inspection period. It was a pretty gun until I picked it up and handled it. The forend was bubba'd with the wrong hardware and common wood screws. The barrels had been refinished to black - shiny and without character. Worst, though, was that the barrels no longer locked up tight to the receiver. I don't know what was done to that gun over the years but you could see light between the breech and the barrels.
Still, I made an appointment with Holland and Holland in NYC to have someone look at the gun.
They could not have been more gracious. It turned out, though,that records of the gun's manufacture had been destroyed during the war. The "restoration" attempts had destroyed any residual value and repairs were beyond what I could afford.
The advice was to send it back. Which I did.
Just before I left the manager, who had attended to me, noted "I believe that we have a nice rook rifle in the back. Would you like to see it?"
It was a single shot, falling block, octagonal barrel with the finest case colors that I have seen ever. It was not for sale.
Alas.
Nowadays, I find that my little Martini Cadet chambered for the .310 Cadet makes for a fine rook rifle.
Pete

natman said:

Exactly. All this talk of 22 Hornet and 17 HMR misses the point that a rook rifle has some specialized requirements that a varmint rifle doesn't. It's a short range proposition. You want a bullet that's relatively slow and not particularly aerodynamic.

Click to expand...

I know what your trying to say, but if you actually run the numbers on the 17HMR you will be surprised.

If you fired a 17HMR up in the air at a 45* angle, It would indeed go a long ways - but by the time it hit that theoretical 2 mile radius, but would be falling at an insignificant velocity. Just how slow is very difficult to tell, because at about 2000 yards (1.3 miles) it becomes so slow that none of the ballistic calculators can compute numbers for it (under 200fps). My guess is that if you managed to loft a 17HMR bullet out to 2 miles, it would be falling at LESS than 150fps, and have less than half the energy of a Daisy Red Ryder.

I tried to 'stack' the calculator outputs by going back and lowering the input velocity to the previous output velocity, but at around 2,000 yards the amount of drop becomes so huge it exceeds the amount of space allotted. SO huge, the programs still cant track it even if you set the zero range at 1,000 yards to negate some of the drop.

If you decreased the angle of incline to something more realistic, say 18* - 20*, the bullet would still travel nearly about 1.5 miles, but would still impact with less than 4 foot pounds of energy, which is about equivalent to that Daisy Red Ryder.

Yes, someone could get their eye put out if they happened to be looking up in the air at the exact angle in the exact place at the exact time the bullet landed. Or you may shatter a window... But simply knowing what is around you and down range of your target would negate that very very low risk.

Despite their velocity, the 17HMR bullets are just too light weight and have ballistic coefficient too low to carry any real energy. Combine that with their fragile construction and I just don't see that there is any significant risk to using a 17HMR as a 'rook rifle'.

That's why my 'ideal rook rifle' would be a Browning T-bolt in 17HMR, with some good iron sights custom fitted. The fielded rifle would still be under 5 lbs without the need for a scope, and have good capacity.

My vote would be a cooper, 22 mag, with Fed 50gr.

Henry lever action in .22wmr loaded with shotshells. Seriously why has nobody mentioned shotshells yet? They reach out and touch squirrels just fine. Even the tinyest ones on the highest branches.

devonlehto said:

Henry lever action in .22wmr loaded with shotshells. Seriously why has nobody mentioned shotshells yet? They reach out and touch squirrels just fine. Even the tinyest ones on the highest branches.

Click to expand...

See post #31.

A rimfire shotshell fired from a rifle has a range measured in feet, not yards. The rifling spins the shot and it rapidly disperses. Just too short range for the application.

I have a Stevens 44 in .22mag.It was a 25 rimfire and was rebarreled.Shoots well,is very light,a fun shooter,My favorite light caliber rifle actually started its life as a rook rifle.It is a BSA Martini Cadet.The original caliber was 310 Cadet.It now sports a Douglas XX barrel in .218 Bee.It's a little heavy for the rook concept now,but it sure is fun in a praire dog field.

It would be interesting if Taylor's & Co. were to chamber their Half Pint Sharpes in a 25-20,32-20 or one of the old rook cartridges.


oneounceload,
That Hofer's Hummingbird is an awesome gun.

The idea of a rook rifle is for shooting rooks out of trees. Rooks live in large colonies called rookeries. Rookeries can consist of hundreds of nests. In the early summer when the young are about to leave the nest and are out on the branches of the trees, just before they fly thats the time to go out with the rook rifle. Rook pie, lovely grub.
The rook rifle was used occasionally for shooting roe deer.

mjackson said:

Don't be shy about posting pictures of your rook rifles, guys.

Click to expand...

OK, but it isn't quite finished yet... It's a left hand center fire "T-bolt" single shot,



Chambered in 25/20WCF,



And it shoots my own swaged .257 "Keith" style bullet,



that is REALLY devastateing on small game, even at lower velocities!

I REALLY need to finish stocking this!!

DM

I've always wanted a small frame martini changed to 357 mag or 38 special

ruger 77-22 in 22 hornet.

If we are to adhere to rook rifle tradition (and I think if we are to call them "rook rifles", then we should adhere to original guidelines) forget about repeaters. Forget about anything over 6lbs. Forget about scopes, except small fixed power scopes for those with poor eyesight (think 2.5x) Forget about high velocity varmint cartridges like the .17HMR and .22Hornet. Forget about cheap guns like the Handi-Rifle (no offense intended). Forget about short barrels. It should be a single shot. It should be a small base centerfire, although I think .22LR's should be allowed. Maybe even dedicated .22Short guns. If we are to adapt common US cartridges to the task, I would say .32S&W and .32H&R would be prime candidates. As would the .25-20, .32-20 and .38Spl.

IMHO, Ruger should build the No. 1 in several frame sizes anyway. Let's start with one that is perfectly scaled down for cartridges no bigger than the small WCF's and .38Spl. For the sake of commercial success, it could be built in chamberings like the .22Hornet as well. It should have a long and lean barrel of 24" to 28". possibly an octagon option. It should have a thin forearm. It should have a properly proportioned buttstock, with a straight or English style grip and steel buttplate. No full pistol grips as on the current guns. It should be outfitted with a peep sight and scope mounts for those with poor eyesight. It should weigh no more than 6lbs, preferly closer to 5lbs. Make mine a .32H&R or .32-20 with upgraded wood and color case hardened receiver/lever. Dakota could make something similar with their Model 10 but it would cost five times as much.

a few such. The bottom is the .32S&W Long Steven;s Favorite "frog gun" which is a good example. Their is a BSA Martini in .17 K Hornet and another in .22 K hornet in the stack. My latest, not pictured is a Harry Pope barreled 25-20 Remington #2 RollingBlock with a Lichert 8x scope . This is certainly a very good Yankee Rook rifle and it is a sub MOA gun at 100 yards !

A bit more information on rook rifles. An early Sako L46 was chambered in 7x33. This is from a Swedish website, use google translate. www.jaktojagare.se/en/article_print.php?id=351332