Trapper Time...are they "worth" The Loss in Velocity?

Well, as mentioned, if one has reasonable skill with hand-tools, files, etc., a Trapper is easy to make. But with the half-magazine I really like my Marlin the way it is (22") and would not consider changing it. It's a light rifle (a little over 7#) perfectly "handy" and with a one-inch group at 100 yards messing with that barrel might not be such a good idea. !!!! And hey, great excuse to post this pic...again.

 

I can see the purpose in trappers especially in pistol calibers. All the lever gun candy. Not sure I’d want to lose the capacity in the magazine or velocity in rifle calibers. But in sense woods there is no better rifle.

 

I have the cutters, and have done some beautiful 11° target crowns by hand. Might even sharing that 1" group up a bit.
I'd just need a 458 pilot.

 

You missed my point...

I type long stories too... (1 finger at a time) lol.

My point was that after all that, you never said what caliber it was in.
I was curious.

 

The only interesting rifle is an accurate rifle... that is also short, handy, and moderately lightweight.

 

Yes I know, but I took the opportunity to explain why my posts can be long, and how strange comments might escape out my fingers. ! I did neglect to name the caliber.

I've always wanted one in .303 Savage, so it might have been...not for any good reason, just for the "cool factor". What I really wanted was one in .35 caliber, and it might have been, but even way back when I got the .30-30 they were hard to come by and expensive. For some reason, the ones in .30WCF would lay on the gun-show tables forever, at much lower prices.

 

Im not a fan of trappers, not due to any performance loss, more just due to unecessary noise. I also dont find a 20" ungainly getting in and out of trucks, boats, and heavy cover.

 

It depends on how you want to use your "Trapper." 30-30 loses a significant amount of velocity when you chop off a lot of barrel because t doesn't use fast burning powders.

The catalog figure for 150gr bullet velocities, usually around 2390 to 2410 fps, are from a 24" barrel. You're lucky to get 2250 fps from a 20" barrel. So a 16" Trapper in 30-30 is for very close range. You'll lose long range performance, but for close range where you can see the whites of their eyes a Trapper is useful.

 

Great way to put it!

 

I never looked for it, but if I had to hazzard a guess, someone makes 30-30 with the shorter barrel in mind.

 

I do love my Trappers and have few. It started with an 1895 G many years ago (maybe not a true Trapper). I then was able to pick up an 1894 P, CP and a Marlin 336 LTS. Those are probably more aligned to the true Trapper spirit. They are great for hunting the thick hardwoods where 75 yards would be a long shot. The 1894's are my favorite for this as they don't get hung in the brush and are more accurate than a traditional revolver type setup. Along the line, I picked up a 336 TK and Glenfield 30GT, both with 18.5" barrels. Those two have become my favorite two .30/30's for hunting. The 18.5" barrel seems like a good fit for compactness, balance, and accuracy.

I understand both the likes and dislikes of short barreled rifles, but they do have a legitimate purpose.

 

As many have stated, these short rifles really do have a purpose. My particular trapper, a 94 in.45 colt has been thousands of miles tucked very securely and compactly under a stirrup. These days folks probably don't appreciate the saddle ring itself, but for what it's intended for, it works.
I have every confidence in the rifle, and when spun up with a heavy cast bullet and a stiff load of powder, in my experience their isn't anything I've seen that it wont put down.

 

The loss depends on how one looks at it, and I prefer to look at the difference in yards, rather than feet per second.

Using the velocity figures quoted by @Beck (2400 vs. 2250 MV) and a Sierra 150 gr. FP (B.C. of .226), the slower load is but 50 yds. behind the faster. That is at 200 yds. the load that started at 2250 fps is still moving about 1744 fps at 150 yds. while the peppier load is still ginning along at about the same speed at 200 yds. Sight both of them +2" @ 100 yds. and the difference in drop at 200 yds. is negligible; a little over 1/2".



35W

 

Hey, the Army says Trappers are Tactical. M4 at 14.5", XM5 at 13"!

 

.30-30 is slow out of short barrels because it is slow in any barrel, because it has a low expansion ratio, and because it’s a low pressure cartridge. Powder burn rate has nothing to do with it.

We run slower powders (H4350 to H1000 class) in other cartridges in short barrels which don’t end up with the low velocities like .30-30. Short barrels don’t run faster with fast powders - they’re just quieter, AND slower.

 

Bingo!

 

Of course "Burn Rate" matters.

We're talking about relative burn rates of different powders, and we're talking about 30-30 Win. "Burn Rate", which is a street term of sorts, along with a thousand other variables have something to do with the velocity of a given projectile from a given cartridge through a given barrel length.

Cartridges like 7.62x39 and the new kid of the block, 300 Ham'r, can equal or surpass 30-30 in shorter barrels using faster powders like Accurate 1680 and H300 BLK.

Well anyway, I'm not going to make this into a teaching moment with the 30 pages I would have to write. That's how threads get off topic. Maybe it doesn't matter why most people think powders do what they do in the cartridges they do it in. It could be magic. It could be Satan.

It would be a great topic for another thread. "Relative Quickness" of peak chamber pressure or whatever you want to call it... smokeless powder companies publish relative burn rate charts for a reason. Those charts are more useful to experienced handloaders than the novice.

 

Gonna oblige you to prove that. I'm seeing the 14" .30-30 beating the .300Blk out of a 16" barrel.

The Hodgdon data between the .300 and .30-30 is all 24" barrels and the .300 never catches up. Same for the Russian. They use faster powders because they have to.

 

The thread is about short barrel velocity loss - teach away, professor.

A lot of us have owned lots of barrel lengths, and have disproven what you’re claiming. The fast MV powder in a long barrel remains the fast MV powder in short barrels.

 

It would seem the myth that faster powders work better in shorter barrels is still alive and well.

 

I studied geology through college including a Masters+. Along the way I studied some vertebrate paleontology. And like many, dinosaurs fascinated me. But this concept of them being invulnerable is over done. A raptor or in this case, a tyrannosaur, are basically large chickens with sharp teeth. A formidable foe for certain but those hollow bone structures were certainly no stronger than those of the African elephant, pounds for pounds. Not sure I would choose the .45-70 as my stopping caliber choice for such a beast but surely it would crush those big chicken bones with aplomb.

It is silly and it would take a (much) larger and heavier action version of the 1895 to accommodate the .577 Tyrannosaur (if even possible at all) but it would be cool, at least until the trigger was pulled! Would it be needed to kill a T-rex, no, I think not. I will take mine in a Trapper length .

 

I don't disagree with that. You must have me confused with somebody else. But the important thing here is chamber pressure and overall pressure limits. 30-30 has all kinds of room in the case, but don't try to use it all with powders that are too "Fast" such as those used in 7.62x39 or Wilson 300 HAM'R. You might blow stuff up in your face.

Anyway, I think we're done here. You will sacrifice velocity in a 30-30 trapper compared to a rifle with full length barrel. That's the right answer to the original question. If your purposes don't involve trying to reach out to the bleeding edge of 30-30 effective range then you might like a trapper.

(A lot of the time I feel like I'm surrounded by people who are too young to know on one side, and people who are so old they've forgotten on the other. And here I am... stuck in the middle with you)

 

I haven’t loaded the Ham’r, but I’ve built several 12.5” and 14.5” x39’s and 300blks. I haven’t loaded such light bullets in 30-30, but I can push a 150 to the same speed in a 14” Contender barrel as I can get either of the small cases to push a 123/5. Fast powders or otherwise.

 

It's been a minute since I've posted here, but I had to chime in...I love my 16.25" Marlin 1895 trapper in .45-70. That said I wouldn't dare use a magnum cartridge like a .300WM or 7mmRM, amongst others, in a similar barrel length (unless just for fun...and hearing prevention!). Like Jim said, the military sees usefulness in the shortened bbl too, but you do loose quite a bit on those super shorties. I'm actually building an old school GAU-5 replica (just waiting on the integral carry handle upper) right now and ironically already have a GAU-5A clone (albeit with a few parts swapped to save weight...that bbl release system is great, but surprisingly heavy).