Pistol caliber (lever gun ) barrel length

Status
Not open for further replies.
My use of PPCs in rifles is limited to the .500 S&W magnum pistol round for several years. I have a BHA Model 89 with a 1in24 twist and 18" barrel. I hand load and use the MFGs standard pistol loads which work excellently. What I can say compared to my .500 S&W magnum BFR revolver with 7" barrel is the rounds from the rifle have a greater FPS. Typically depending on powder and load range the rifles FPS is anywhere from 100 to 350 FPS more than the pistol loads.
 
I've got a 20" Rossi 92 in .44 mag, and love it. I took mine deer and black bear hunting in Prince William Sound just outside of Whittier AK, and it worked great. A 16" barrel would just be that much handier, and whatever velocity loss vs. a 20" barrel would be insignificant.

Drill and tap the receiver for a Williams peep sight, and you will have basically the same sight radius of a 20" carbine with the factory sights.
Adding receiver sights was a carefully measured cool project. Made up a fixture for the drill press. I cheated and used my old Sears 94 for an example of where to put them. Not a Joe Mcgee kind of project. You are correct in that the peep really helps. But I've wanted to try a tang sight just never have. A 24 inch hex barrel would look cool with one. Those M and R92s are long distance at 100 yds.
 
Those Winchester 94 AE are indeed a very nice rifle. Have one in 30-30, would really like to find one in .45 Colt.
I finally managed a Mirochester '92, and like the shorter action much better for pistol length cartridges. The .45 Angle Ejects can't be common; perhaps should have held mine for that reason alone.
Good luck in your search.
Moon
 
But I've wanted to try a tang sight just never have. A 24 inch hex barrel would look cool with one. Those M and R92s are long distance at 100 yds.
Not sure how 'cool' my Trapper looks with a tang, but certainly like how it works. It does help OFs use iron sights; think of a 19th Century red dot.
If you were brave enough to D/T a receiver, you shouldn't have any trouble doing a tang. :)
Moon
 
Not sure how 'cool' my Trapper looks with a tang, but certainly like how it works. It does help OFs use iron sights; think of a 19th Century red dot.
If you were brave enough to D/T a receiver, you shouldn't have any trouble doing a tang. :)
Moon
M 92 came tapped for tang sight. Brave has nothing to do with it. They were just another machine that needed work. Lay out , center punch, high quality bits of proper size for the tap, drill with lube slow to get threw the hard surface , put tap the drill press and turn by hand . Debur blow out. Break cleaner wash out. File screws to proper length. Always use the click adjust version. Sight in at 25 and repeat.
 
M 92 came tapped for tang sight. Brave has nothing to do with it. They were just another machine that needed work. Lay out , center punch, high quality bits of proper size for the tap, drill with lube slow to get threw the hard surface , put tap the drill press and turn by hand . Debur blow out. Break cleaner wash out. File screws to proper length. Always use the click adjust version. Sight in at 25 and repeat.
Oh, I know how to do it, and have done three or four. They're just tough to jig up in a press (used a machinist's vise, and something or other to support the rifle itself. Yes, follow all those steps, but it doesn't take much to, say, fracture a tap. Maybe careful would be a better word than brave? I'm an amateur, and self taught; I'll D/T for myself, but won't be responsible for other people's guns.
Also, which M92 came tapped for a tang sight? The Rossis do not; the Mirochesters do, even the '92 with it's tang safety.
Moon
 
A very general rule with PCCs is that heavier bullets perform better at range from longer barrels.
Depends on what you're measuring. Energy delta per length goes to lighter bullets, generally. *With factory loads.
A lot of people run 9mm 147s in subcompacts to sacrifice the least energy via short barrel.
 
Last edited:
I'm going to argue the other way, what advantage does a 16" have over a 20"? They're "neat" because they're short but is there really any tangible advantage? Not to me. Been there, done that. Had a really nice 16" Miroku Winchester Trapper .45Colt. After playing with it for a while, it really didn't do anything a 20" couldn't. Right now I have a 16" Levtac .45 and a 20" Puma .454. The only advantage the 16" has is reduced length with a suppressor. Otherwise, I prefer the added weight and balance of the 20". Four more inches of steel shifts the balance forward, instead of it being in the middle. Along with the added sight radius.

Also have two 20" Marlin .44's and no plans to go shorter. I'm actually considering trading my 16" Henry .357 for a 20" Rossi carbine.


The same factory load in the 16" vs a 5" pistol is likely to be 200fps or so faster.
More like 400fps.


The problem with those darn R92's is always going to be the fact that you'll end up with both a 16 and the 24 inch hex barrel. They are so inexpensive you will want both.
You mean octagon? Seen plain few hex barrels.


Depends on what you're measuring. Energy delta per length goes to lighter bullets, generally. *With factory loads.
A lot of people run 9mm 147s in subcompacts to sacrifice the least energy via short barrel.
Energy doesn't amount to a hill of beans. These ain't 9mm's and the revolver cartridges do all their best work with heavier bullets. They are more effective and more efficient, particularly with slower powders and longer barrels.
 
I'm going to argue the other way, what advantage does a 16" have over a 20"? They're "neat" because they're short but is there really any tangible advantage? Not to me. Been there, done that. Had a really nice 16" Miroku Winchester Trapper .45Colt. After playing with it for a while, it really didn't do anything a 20" couldn't. Right now I have a 16" Levtac .45 and a 20" Puma .454. The only advantage the 16" has is reduced length with a suppressor. Otherwise, I prefer the added weight and balance of the 20". Four more inches of steel shifts the balance forward, instead of it being in the middle. Along with the added sight radius.

Also have two 20" Marlin .44's and no plans to go shorter. I'm actually considering trading my 16" Henry .357 for a 20" Rossi carbine.



More like 400fps.



You mean octagon? Seen plain few hex barrels.



Energy doesn't amount to a hill of beans. These ain't 9mm's and the revolver cartridges do all their best work with heavier bullets. They are more effective and more efficient, particularly with slower powders and longer barrels.
I have two24's and my brothers 1, if I want them to be hex then they are hex. 16 inch Henry taught you to appreciate a 92. Seen hexagonal noted , better call the agon police. 16 is perfect for a little revolver cartridge. I think a 20 feels too much like a 30 30. Although there isn't a length police. 140 XTP and the lesser 140 FTX are effective deer killers at magnum max speed
 
Last edited:
About +25 fps per inch of barrel but there won't be as much difference in a 43 bore as a 357 or smaller in over 16" length. A 20" would be quieter and maybe kick a little less.

Use of w296 or Lil'gun powder highly recommened in cabine barrels with magnum handgun loads.
 
Last edited:
Ohh-wheee! That is a might pricey. Probably would look for 18.5"-20" barrel[round]. Nice looking '73 tho.
Okay, long as you realize this is a '73, not a '94.
Now, that said, the '73 is another cool levergun, AKA, "the gun that won the West". It is the final iteration of the Henry/M'66 Winchester, which isn't a Browning design. It is the knee-joint action, and a little longer receiver than the '92. It isn't as strong as the later Browning guns, but they are reputed smoother.
Moon
 
I have two24's and my brothers 1, if I want them to be hex then they are hex. 16 inch Henry taught you to appreciate a 92. Seen hexagonal noted , better call the agon police. 16 is perfect for a little revolver cartridge. I think a 20 feels too much like a 30 30. Although there isn't a length police. 140 XTP and the lesser 140 FTX are effective deer killers at magnum max speed
You can call them a pink tutu iffin ya want. Doesn’t change the fact that a hexagon has six sides and the rifle barrels in question have eight.
 
Okay, long as you realize this is a '73, not a '94.
Now, that said, the '73 is another cool levergun, AKA, "the gun that won the West". It is the final iteration of the Henry/M'66 Winchester, which isn't a Browning design. It is the knee-joint action, and a little longer receiver than the '92. It isn't as strong as the later Browning guns, but they are reputed smoother.
Moon
That's OK. Even John Wayne had them mixed up
 
I am just trying to fully understand the compromises for each length. The give and take.
My PCC lever guns all wear 16” barrels, in .357. .44 and .45C. (9mm too, but that’s a semi-auto.)

The 1892 action and the 16” barrel go well together, making a handy yet potent little rifle that fits into vehicles nicely. :D

.30-30, 35 Rem, etc. are great in the 20” barrel-length carbines made popular by millions of hunters. They are also very good for PC rifles, but I prefer the 16” myself.

Anything longer than 20” on a PC rifle rapidly becomes unwieldy, and pretty much defeats the purpose of a handy rifle shooting a limited powder capacity cartridge. (Like pistol calibers.)

These are merely my opinions. They’re no better or worse than anyone else's, and they’re worth exactly what you paid for them. 😇

My centerfire levers run from 16” (.357,.44,.45), to 18.5” (45/70), to 20” (.30-30’s, .35 Rem) to 26” (45/70). I had a 20” .357 and a 24” .45 Colt in the past, but those guns were sold off years ago to fund other projects.

I think you did well. The Rossi 92 is a fun rifle to shoot..Check out Stevesgunz.com for Rossi 1892 stuff like metal magazine followers, trigger/hammer spring kits, safety delete caps, etc.

Stay safe.
 
I'm going to argue the other way, what advantage does a 16" have over a 20"? They're "neat" because they're short but is there really any tangible advantage? Not to me. Been there, done that. Had a really nice 16" Miroku Winchester Trapper .45Colt. After playing with it for a while, it really didn't do anything a 20" couldn't. Right now I have a 16" Levtac .45 and a 20" Puma .454. The only advantage the 16" has is reduced length with a suppressor. Otherwise, I prefer the added weight and balance of the 20". Four more inches of steel shifts the balance forward, instead of it being in the middle. Along with the added sight radius.

Also have two 20" Marlin .44's and no plans to go shorter. I'm actually considering trading my 16" Henry .357 for a 20" Rossi carbine.



More like 400fps.



You mean octagon? Seen plain few hex barrels.



Energy doesn't amount to a hill of beans. These ain't 9mm's and the revolver cartridges do all their best work with heavier bullets. They are more effective and more efficient, particularly with slower powders and longer barrels.
I screwed up the quote reply, I think.
I just want to point out that the linked article is something between wrong and incomplete. The linked article was not about revolver handloads.
 
I have a R92 w/ a 16" and a Marlin w/ an 18.5" both in 357mag. I have to say I prefer the 18.5 length because its quieter and the same bullets go about 60fps on average faster out of the longer barrel.

Because of the 36kpsi of the 44mag I would opt for the 20" over the 16. I might also go w/ a marlin or 92 over a 73 for the 44mag. I would prefer the marlin w/ a recoil pad on the stock vs the typical steel butt plate on the R92 saddle ring carbine especially if planning on using hunting loads. The 20" r92 comes with a recoil pad so would be better than the short one IMO.

If in the lower pressure 45C or a 44-40 the 16" would be prefered. A 73, 92, or Marlin action would be fine for the lower pressure loadings. Mid tier 45C only in the 73 if you don't want the action to wear out too quick.
 
Last edited:
I've owned probably every barrel length imaginable in old lever guns from a short 16" to an old 1893 Marlin with special order 32" barrel. I personally have never gotten the idea of a very short barrel to be "handier" or a better brush gun. Can't imagine crawling through brush so thick that a 16" barrel is somehow better than a 20"? And I just don't care for the way a short barrel hangs when shouldering them.
Actually prefer a 26"-28" barrel on lever guns, and that's the length I've used mostly for deer hunting with my old lever guns. They hold better, and with iron sights give me more accuracy, so that's what I use. Actually use longer 30"-32" barrels when I hunt with single shot rifles, and love those even more!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top