What are pistol-caliber rifles all about?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I like my pistol caliber long guns for several reasons.

Since I reload for most of them I can shoot a ton more with much less cost compared to rifle caliber long guns. (El cheapo 7.62x39 and 5.56 is close tho)

Less recoil and blast makes it easier to graduate new or young shooters to centerfires from rimfires.

They’re a hoot! Besides fun plinking they can double for self defense in the home or on the farm, short range hunting and handy truck gun duties. :thumbup:

I have three levers in .38-.357, 44mag and .45 Colt and a Ruger PC9 9mm set up for Glock mags.

Stay safe!
 
I ran across a comment a couple of days ago, sorry that I cannot cite this, the comment related to the popularity of indoor, pistol only, ranges. PCC allow shooters to go to, and enjoy, those ranges with rifles.

That said, I have two PCC, a CZ scorpion with a brace, and a High Point/High Tower 9mm bullpup. I also expect to add a Ruger 77/44 soon, replacing one that was stolen about a decade ago. They just seem fun to shoot.
 
In modern times we are blessed with a multitude of choices and options in just about everything, including firearms. Unfortunately, somewhere along the way we have gotten to the point where we feel we must justify our choices. I refuse to do so. My little Winchester in the pistol cartridge 32-20 is more than adequate for the day-to-day problems that I may need a firearm for. The raccoon in the henhouse is not going to look at me disgusted after being shot with the weapon and the chickens wouldn't be nearly as stressed as they would have been with the 30-06. The heifer that had the poor judgment to pick the wrong bull and now has a calf hopelessly stuck inside her is going to be dispatched just as humanely and quickly with the 32-20 as it would a 45-70.

While I would not choose that rifle for the deer stand, I have the luxury of other choices. But for the day-to-day uses I have for a rifle, the lowly pistol cartridge is more than adequate. Just as it has been for four generations. Use, history and economy is reason enough in my mind and if that is not enough justification… Perhaps what's really needed is to justify why the opinion otherwise should matter.
 
Can you folks help me understand the uses and attraction of pistol-caliber rifles? What dictates the choice of a common pistol cartridge for a rifle over a higher velocity cartridge? Am I right that in the post-Civil War West it was fairly common to carry a pistol and rifle shooting the same cartridge? That would have been convenient, but it was also before the modern high velocity cartridges were invented. What’s up now?

I can't speak for others, but in my case my employer won't issue me an AR-15 as I'm assigned to investigations, not patrol. Yet bad guys don't see a difference between uniformed nor non-uniformed officers....
So I bought a 9mm carbine that uses Glock mags since I'm issued a Glock 19. It's quite accurate out to 100 yards with its 16" barrel. My Glock 19 with a 4" barrel, not so much.
So it's the best that I can do under the circumstances. At least I'm launching department ammo, if somebody wants to get upset for my defending myself with something other than my Glock.

JR Carbine https://justrightcarbines.com/gallery/

LD
 
I ran across a comment a couple of days ago, sorry that I cannot cite this, the comment related to the popularity of indoor, pistol only, ranges. PCC allow shooters to go to, and enjoy, those ranges with rifles.

Yep. There are many indoor ranges that do not allow firing rifle cartridges, and out of the ones that allow firing only pistol cartridges, some of those don't allow firing magnum cartridges above .22 WMR.

So, a 9mm, .40, or .45 ACP type pistol caliber carbine makes reasonable sense to own and shoot for an urbanite or suburbanite. A PCC in those calibers also makes for a nice home defense gun for the same urbanite or suburbanite. You get to practice shooting what you have "by your nightstand".

Some will say that's what a shotgun is for, but many paper hanging ranges won't allow shooting self defense shotguns at all. Plus, the ranges that do allow shooting shotguns at paper may restrict you to slugs. Which basically says, your shotgun is a "rifle" here.
 
Last edited:
Doing deer drives on hands and knees crawling through thorns, vines and various other flora and fauna. Humping an AR15 with all the various protrusions would be a nightmare.

That doesn’t sound like a nice dream with any rifle. The things we do for “fun” :)
 
Guns like the AR in 9mm or the Rugers make excellent defensive firearms. In places where these are illegal, lever guns in calibers like 357 are also capable. For a time, units in the USMC (FAST) used the 9mm Colt AR's.
 
Ok, I have to see the pictures of your Four Fourty Four and Fourty-five Seventy pistols.:D
(Definitely the Ninety Two, PapaG.)
The allure is they are so much fun to shoot! Like a big rimfire. Of course, not so much with the big guys!

So things haven't really changed. It's nice to have a rifle and pistol chambered in the same caliber. It's just nowadays it would be Nine Millimeter in the stead of Thirty-Eight Fourty Four.
444, 45-70, I have in Marlin rifle form but would be legal in my Contender. The 92 is a shot out 38-40 my brother and I bought for $45 in the mid sixties, shipped to Koozer who converted it (rebarreled) to .357 mag.
 
Can you folks help me understand the uses and attraction of pistol-caliber rifles? What dictates the choice of a common pistol cartridge for a rifle over a higher velocity cartridge? Am I right that in the post-Civil War West it was fairly common to carry a pistol and rifle shooting the same cartridge? That would have been convenient, but it was also before the modern high velocity cartridges were invented. What’s up now?
They didn't carry pistol-caliber carbines in the old west -- they carried carbine-caliber pistols. I cannot think of a pistol cartridge that was subsequently offered in a carbine, but I can think of several carbine cartridges that were offered later in pistols -- for example the .44 WCF and the .38 WCF (the .44-40 and .38-40,.resectively.).

For quite a while after repeating rifles were available you had to make a choice -- you could have a repeater, but it had to be in a cartridge more suitable for a handgun. Or you could have a REAL rifle, but it had to be a single shot. The advantage to having both rifle and pistol in the same cartridge was illustrated by James B. Gillette, in Six Years With the Texas Rangers: 1875-1881. He told how a Ranger in a fire fight inadvertently loaded a .45 Colt cartridge in a '73 Winchester and had to unscrew the side plates -- under fire -- to clear the resulting jam.
 
The advantage to having both rifle and pistol in the same cartridge was illustrated by James B. Gillette, in Six Years With the Texas Rangers: 1875-1881. He told how a Ranger in a fire fight inadvertently loaded a .45 Colt cartridge in a '73 Winchester and had to unscrew the side plates -- under fire -- to clear the resulting jam.

If only he could have called "time out". :eek:
 
They didn't carry pistol-caliber carbines in the old west -- they carried carbine-caliber pistols. I cannot think of a pistol cartridge that was subsequently offered in a carbine, but I can think of several carbine cartridges that were offered later in pistols -- for example the .44 WCF and the .38 WCF (the .44-40 and .38-40,.resectively.).

For quite a while after repeating rifles were available you had to make a choice -- you could have a repeater, but it had to be in a cartridge more suitable for a handgun. Or you could have a REAL rifle, but it had to be a single shot. The advantage to having both rifle and pistol in the same cartridge was illustrated by James B. Gillette, in Six Years With the Texas Rangers: 1875-1881. He told how a Ranger in a fire fight inadvertently loaded a .45 Colt cartridge in a '73 Winchester and had to unscrew the side plates -- under fire -- to clear the resulting jam.
It feels like the first sentences of your two paragraphs are contradictory. If you wanted a repeater rifle and had to choose a cartridge “more suitable for a pistol”, how is that not saying the rifle was chambered for a pistol cartridge?
 
Lots of reasons and it baffles me that so many just don't get it. Bottlenecked rifle cartridges add effective range. In truth, one can take larger game with a .44Mag revolver than a .30-06 rifle. The `06 just has more effective range, a lot more. If you don't need the rifle's range, you don't need the rifle's noise/weight/bulk/expense. Around these parts, I've never taken a shot on deer over 75yds. Most less than that. Why would I use a rifle with 400yd capability???

Pistol caliber rifles/carbines offer:
Less muzzle blast
Less recoil
Less expensive ammunition, handloaded or factory
Greater capacity
More fun to shoot in quantity
Lighter guns
Shorter guns
Suppressor/subsonic friendly
 
Lots of reasons and it baffles me that so many just don't get it. Bottlenecked rifle cartridges add effective range. In truth, one can take larger game with a .44Mag revolver than a .30-06 rifle. The `06 just has more effective range, a lot more. If you don't need the rifle's range, you don't need the rifle's noise/weight/bulk/expense. Around these parts, I've never taken a shot on deer over 75yds. Most less than that. Why would I use a rifle with 400yd capability???

Pistol caliber rifles/carbines offer:
Less muzzle blast
Less recoil
Less expensive ammunition, handloaded or factory
Greater capacity
More fun to shoot in quantity
Lighter guns
Shorter guns
Suppressor/subsonic friendly
Nice summary. Thanks.
 
I do not find it necessary to justify a gun purchase. If I want a custom built ..577 nitro derringer, or a 15 pound benchrest .22 Hornet, as long as I am paying for it, I don't care what anybody else thinks of it.

Hey! If you want to put ketchup on your apple pie that's your business!:neener:
 
Some of the original 9 mm pistol caliber carbines were workarounds to avoid negative karma for AR type guns for police agencies. The original Rugers and Beretta Storms were offered for that purpose. The Mini-14s served that purpose.

The current Ruger guns offer a gun for pistol carbine competition and we are seeing a lot of that. They also offer a long gun in the non-threaded barrel version that is legit for some ban states (like the Mini-14s) that have fits over AR type guns.

Then, they are cheaper to shoot and not expensive. They are running here about $399. On line you can match that and if you avoid tax, etc. it's a wash from a local store or online. The
 
32-20 is a rifle round that was also offered in some revolvers. :p

Picky, picky. Yes, you are correct. You could say the same for 44-40, 38-40, and 25-20.

Anyhoo, sometime back around 1975 I wandered into a local shop and found this Marlin Model 1894. It was chambered for a cartridge I had never heard of, called 44-40.

marlin189401_zps9b279dab.jpg




The actual caliber marking on the barrel was simply 44W, but the guys in the shop told me that stood for 44-40.

44W%20Marlin_zpsifmtmlrz.jpg



They even had a couple of boxes of ammo to go with it.

44-40HiVelocity.jpg




I am not a hunter, never have been, but I have always liked old guns. So I walked out of the door with the old Marlin and two boxes of ammo. No idea what I paid for it back then.

Much later I looked up the serial number and it turned out the rifle had been made in 1895. I fired most of the two boxes of ammo, and put the old rifle in the back of the closet where it sat unused for about 25 years until I heard about Cowboy Action Shooting. Yup, the old Marlin was perfectly acceptable as a 'pistol caliber' rifle for SASS competition so I went off to my first cowboy match with it. The problem was after firing one shot it jammed and I could not free it. Another cowboy got the spent case and the remaining ammo in the magazine out and I finished the match with a borrowed rifle.

I found a gunsmith who was good with old guns and brought him the old Marlin. It turned out the hook on the lever, that pulls down the bolt, had gotten so worn over the years that it would not reliably pull down the bolt, which was why the gun had jammed. In fact, the smith told me everybody including the village blacksmith had been inside that old rifle over the years, and somebody had even welded some bronze onto the hook at one point to make it function OK for a while. The smith removed all the bronze, welded some steel on, and filed it to shape to make the gun work properly again. By the way, the smith winced when I told him I had been shooting that old High Velocity ammo through it, but it turns out that stuff was OK. It really was not all that fast, and it did no harm to the old steel.

1894_action_open_upsidedown%20modified_zpsc4xfuafn.jpg




Not long after, I came across this Winchester Model 1892, made in 1894. Also chambered for 44-40. It had been nicely refinished, so the price was very affordable. This rifle became my main match rifle for a few years.

model1892rifle02_zps330f362f.jpg




Eventually the Black Powder bug hit. I had read that Black Powder and pitted old bores did not mix, too much trouble to clean all the fouling out of thousands of tiny pits. I have since found this to be untrue, if you know what you're doing, but life is a never ending learning experience, right? Anyway, I found a nice used Uberti Winchester 1873 replica for a good price. It had a nice, shiny-like-new bore and I was off and running down the Black Powder trail. Also chambered for 44-40 so my love affair with the cartridge continued.

Uberti1873_zpsa8de5b61.jpg



I soon realized that everybody and their brother was shooting 1873 Ubertis in CAS, so I decided to get something different. This Uberti replica iron frame 1860 Henry, also chambered for 44-40 of course, has been my main match rifle for the last ten years.

Henry08_zps9c489b6a.jpg




Over the years a few more pistol caliber lever guns have made their way into my safe. This 38-40 Winchester Model 1873 was made in 1886. Yes, the magazine is a replacement, but the rest of the rifle is original. This was my first adventure with 38-40.

187303.jpg




A couple of years ago I walked into a local shop and the owner, who knows I am a sucker for Winchesters, smiled as he handed me this Model 1892, chambered for 32-20. This one has a lovely octagon barrel and it left the factory in 1911. Of course it came home with me that day.

Model%201892%201911%2032-20%2002_zpsjnwdx0zf.jpg




The same dealer twisted my arm another time to buy a lovely little Winchester 1892 Carbine chambered for 25-20, that left the factory in 1928. It seems to be camera shy right now.



Am I right that in the post-Civil War West it was fairly common to carry a pistol and rifle shooting the same cartridge?

Technically, you are correct that having a rifle and a revolver chambered for the same cartridge was probably a good idea, but I have to wonder how many low paid cowhands could actually afford a revolver and a rifle, much less a pair chambered for the same cartridge. Don't forget, Colts and Winchesters were not cheap.

Another thing you may not be aware of is rifles were never chambered for 45 Colt in the old days. That is a modern development, going back to the 1980s. Mostly because of the popularity of the 45 Colt cartridge with us Cowboy shooters. There are a couple of reasons I can go into at another time.




Now let's talk for a moment about the difference between a rifle and a carbine. It is not just barrel length. In the old days, Winchester marketed their lever guns in three different configurations; Rifle, Carbine, and Musket.

Take a look at this photo of my Winchester Model 1892 rifle and a Winchester Model 1892 Saddle Ring Carbine.

The distinguishing characteristics are the rifle has a deeply scalloped, crescent shaped butt plate, the magazine is supported by a magazine hanger dovetailed into the underside of the barrel, and there is a metal cap on the for end. There is also another magazine hanger dovetailed under the barrel underneath the fore end cap.

The carbine has a different shaped butt plate, much less deeply scalloped then the rifle. The carbine butt plate is a formed piece of heavy sheet metal, the rifle butt plate is a casting. There is no fore end cap on the carbine, and the magazine is supported by two barrel bands. The front sight on this one is brazed to the barrel, sometimes the front sight was brazed to the front barrel band. That is the way Winchester used to market their lever guns as either rifles or carbines.

Rifle barrels were standard as 24" round barrels, although octagon barrels were available for the same price. Half round/half octagon could be ordered too. Barrel lengths were commonly made in 2" increments. Short rifles with barrels as short as short as 14" were made, although they were usually special order. These were sometimes known as Trapper models. Not carbines. Rifles could also be had with pistol grips and an accordingly bent lever. Carbine barrels were standard at 20" but could be ordered in a variety of different lengths.


1892rifleandcarbine02_zps27b9bf1f.jpg




Carbine barrels were also more sharply tapered than rifle barrels. These lever guns are both chambered for 44-40, but notice how much thicker the barrel wall is on the rifle on the left than the carbine at the right.

muzzlesrifleandsaddleringcarbine_zps9f08c536.jpg




Wait a minute, what about muskets? The top two lever guns in this photo are both 1873 rifles, the third is an 1873 carbine, the one at the bottom is a Winchester Model 1873 Musket. No, it is not a smooth bore, it is rifled. That is just what Winchester called them. The Musket was sort of an extra long carbine. Thirty inch round barrels were standard. The butt stock was configured the same way as a carbine. The barrel sported three barrel bands instead of two, and the fore end extended most of the way to the muzzle. The Musket models were not very popular, something like 36,000 1873 Muskets were produced. Most were sold to foreign governments under military contracts, so many were equipped with bayonet mounts.

winchesterconfigurations.jpg




Are these all truly 'pistol caliber' lever guns? Aren't 'pistols' semi-automatic handguns usually shooting rimless ammo? Well, back in the late 1800s it was fairly common to call a revolver a pistol. In fact in SASS competition we always refer to our handguns as pistols. We never call them revolvers. So from our perspective at least, pistol caliber is a correct term. It merely means a cartridge short enough to be loaded into the cylinder of a revolver. We call cartridges such as 45-70 rifle cartridges, because there are very few revolvers that have a long enough cylinder to chamber them.

Bottom line for me, nothing is as much fun as blasting Black Powder cartridges out of my Henry as fast as I can work the lever. On windless days I have to bob and weave to see the targets through the smoke, but that just adds to the fun.

BlackPowderCountryPondSepia_zpsf14459db.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thanks to DWJ for pointing out the distinguishing characteristics regarding carbines and rifles in the blackpowder era. Many folks don't seem to realize that it had little to do with barrel length. It was all about the configuration. Barrel profile, magazine attachment, forend attachment, buttplate, pistol grip or lack thereof, etc.. So one could easily have a rifle with a barrel shorter than a carbine.

While the 1873/1892 WCF's are technically rifle cartridges, they are configured like a pistol cartridge. Much like the later .30Carbine, the cartridge where one of the most effective PISTOL powders was born, H110.
 
Carbines are shoulder weapons that were originally designed to be carried by cavalrymen and fired from a moving horse. They were usually short - often as short as a sheathed saber - so as to not be an impediment to a horseman in combat. They were not expected to be particularly accurate or powerful, as they were primarily intended to drive off small parties of soldiers or other cavalrymen that refused to close to saber range.
All of this is why the carbine concept meshes well with the use of pistol cartridges.
 
Fun.

My father many moons ago brought home a Rossi 357 lever action and I wonder the same until I shot it. Was hooked every since to own pistol & rifle combo. For short range hunting a 357 or 44 lever or bolt makes a great gun. For HD a 9mm or 45 acp carbine makes a low recoil and noise choice especially for an inexperienced shooter. For teaching a kid, they are just fun.
 
Why a pistol caliber carbine. Fun, low recoil and I can make .38 specials for the price of .22s. I wanted a fun gun that the kids would get some use out of as well. Doesn't hurt that my Rossi 92 in .357 mag is a boom stick with full house .357 mags. I wouldn't feel uncomfortable hunting deer or hogs at all within 100 yards with .357s. What's not to like?
 
First of all, the phrase should be, "pistol cartridge" carbine or rifle. I know the commonly used phrase is, "pistol caliber," but .357 (.358") is not a pistol caliber when it's a 35 Whelen, and .44 (.429") is not a pistol caliber if it's a .444 Marlin. Cartridges, on the other hand, are designed and intended for either pistols or rifles. That isn't to say there aren't exceptions like the Thompson Center pistols or BFR's, but those would accurately be described as "rifle cartridge pistols" or revolvers rather than "rifle caliber pistols." Then we have, of course, the subject of interest, rifles and carbines chambered for cartridges conceived and intended for handguns.

The typically cited justifications are the low cost of cartridges, and the typically low recoil. Another important characteristic is not just the low recoil for full-auto, but also the ability to carry more rounds in a compact package, and round-count is especially meaningful for submachine guns.

The trade-offs are the typically low velocity, but more remarkably, the low ballistic coefficients of the high-drag bullet designs. Those two features conspire together to bring the bullet's velocity into transonic speeds at relatively short ranges. That often results in instability and yaw that hinders accuracy at those ranges. Or the bullet starts out subsonic and has simply dropped too far to be practical for longer range.

Within the range the high-drag bullets remain accurate and with practical trajectories, they can carry substantial momentum. A .357 Magnum rifle can shoot 180 grain bullets out of a package that's more comparable in cost and recoil to rifles that shoot 55 grain bullets like the .223 Remington. Within 100 yards, a .357 Magnum shooting 180 grain bullets has a lot to be said for it vs. a .223. No, it doesn't have the energy of the latter, but the .357 Magnum rifle can shoot a power factor of 340 or more, whereas a .223 Rem is more like PF 180.

In my mind, cartridges like the .454 Casull, 460 and 500 S&W kind of blur the line between pistol and straight-walled rifle cartridges, but let's consider the .45 ACP or a .45 LC loaded to not greater pressures. Out of a carbine or rifle, PF greater than 200 is easily attainable. And the somewhat lowly .44 Magnum can shoot a PF over 400 -- comparable to a .308 Remington.

So if your intended range is within a distance where a supersonic cartridge with a high-drag bullet is going to stay supersonic, or a heavy subsonic bullet won't drop too far, a pistol cartridge is typically going to deliver a larger caliber bullet with more mass. It might only do it with a 1/3 to 1/2 the energy, but I can't think of an application where the terminal effects of 3000 ft. lbs. of energy is useful to tasks commonly undertaken by most rifle shooters (I don't consider dangerous CXP4 game to be common to most shooters). Rifle cartridges generate those huge surpluses of energy at the shorter ranges so they can carry projectiles at supersonic velocity out to much longer ranges than the high-drag pistol cartridge bullets.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top