How short of a barrel makes sense?

[Loyalist Dave]

I am leaning very hard towards a smoothbore though. I like the idea of using both shot and ball. It would be nice to have one gun when going on a hunting trip, and be able to hunt smaller game when my tag is filled, or to grab a quick lunch on a slow day.

Ah WELL...

Then you need a SxS...you can load one barrel with a ball, and the other with shot, OR...,

You can get fancy and get a caplock with a rifle on one side and a shotgun on the other. Here's Paints-His-Shirt-Red from Jeremiah Johnson, with such a SxS, note the muzzle of his gun :

LD

 

[Newtire]

I think length of barrel has little to do with effective range in a smoothbore.
In a rifle a longer barrel gives a longer sight radius, but a smoothbore is a short range weapon so barrel length isn't as vital.
Length of shotgun barrels has been debated Ad Nauseam, but I think anything 24" or so works well, especially if your talking about a cylinder choke. If you want to increase range of birdshot, look at a jug choke.

Some say a longer barrel swings easier, but most skeet shooters use short barrels. And they typically swing on their bird much more than trap shooters.

Who can we get to do a jug choke these days? I know from honing brake cylinders back in the old days that it takes one hellekuva long time to even hone a cylinder a couple of thousandths or would try that myself.

 

[Eterry]

Who can we get to do a jug choke these days? I know from honing brake cylinders back in the old days that it takes one hellekuva long time to even hone a cylinder a couple of thousandths or would try that myself.

I understand Danny Caywood will jug choke your barrel.

 

[Hglucky13]

Okay @Hglucky13, its time to save up your money and take a look at the Danny Caywood English Fowler. These are excellent firearms as a smoothbore and sine Caywood offers a 6 barrel interchangeable barrel system, you can have a smooth bored fowling piece and a rifled firearm. The 41 inch barrel 12 gauge fowler weighs about 5 pounds. Talk about pointing like a wand. In this case the 41 inch barrel makes a lot of sense.

http://www.caywoodguns.com/english-fowler.html

That is a beautiful gun! Something I could see having. Not necessarily what I would hunt with everyday. A bit fancy for that. But a great idea. That in an iron version could be cool

 

[Hglucky13]

Personally, I've always thought that the idea of a short-barreled gun being more useful in the woods is a bit specious. Now, for wing-shooting, sure, I get that because you're literally swinging and following a flying target, but for the average, deer, squirrel, pig or bear hunter, I'm just not sure I've ever seen it. I hunt in northern Pennsylvania and it's not at all unusual for me to hunt in or near recently cut over areas, even reverting clearcuts and I just don't see it. I say buy or build what pleases you and 99% of the time the barrel length will be fine.

Not so worried about the length during shooting. More about carrying it around. And dealing with the day to day of it. Where I'm at in Arizona, no big deal, its wide open. But back home in Montana, the forest is super thick, with lots of underbrush. That's where the shorter guns seem better to me.

 

[Hglucky13]

Ah WELL...

Then you need a SxS...you can load one barrel with a ball, and the other with shot, OR...,

You can get fancy and get a caplock with a rifle on one side and a shotgun on the other. Here's Paints-His-Shirt-Red from Jeremiah Johnson, with such a SxS, note the muzzle of his gun :

View attachment 50668

LD

I do like this alot!! I need to look into this more

 

[Hglucky13]

I do like this alot!! I need to look into this more

The more I think about this, I think this might be too heavy, too unwieldy. Kinda going against what I'm after here. I do like the idea of it though

 

[Loyalist Dave]

I think this might be too heavy, too unwieldy. Kinda going against what I'm after here. I do like the idea of it though

NAW..., not really. You get something like a Pedersoli Kodiak and have the worst of the two barrels turned into a shotgun. It will actually be lighter than a double rifle.

Easier IF you get a SxS, without chokes, and simply find out which barrel shoots the ball the best, then use the other for shot.

The Pedersoli standard 20 gauge SxS is cylinder-bore right barrel and modified left. I have one and they are nice and light.

IF you want super light, you could get the Howdah Hunter Kombo, which is 20 gauge and .50, and just get the shoulder stock to go with it....,

LD

 

[hanshi]

I had a 24" .50 (rifle) for 25 years and took many deer. Currently my shortest is a 25" .45 (rifle). They are both dandy for climbing with or beating one's way through briars. They both did as well as my longer guns.

I read an article a few years ago by a well known shooter about velocities from various length smoothbore barrels. He started with his personal 24" "canoe gun". I don't have the article handy but do recall the important observations. For one thing, the .62 X 24" barrel was a turning point from anything shorter. It gave impressive speeds. On up to 42" barrels there were moderate increases is ball speed. However at 30" the increases began dropping precipitously. My take-a-way on the article was that very little was to be gained by going over 30" in barrel length. From 24" to 30" velocities were impressive, and nothing was to be gained except a few fps from 30" to 42".

 

[Hglucky13]

I had a 24" .50 (rifle) for 25 years and took many deer. Currently my shortest is a 25" .45 (rifle). They are both dandy for climbing with or beating one's way through briars. They both did as well as my longer guns.

I read an article a few years ago by a well known shooter about velocities from various length smoothbore barrels. He started with his personal 24" "canoe gun". I don't have the article handy but do recall the important observations. For one thing, the .62 X 24" barrel was a turning point from anything shorter. It gave impressive speeds. On up to 42" barrels there were moderate increases is ball speed. However at 30" the increases began dropping precipitously. My take-a-way on the article was that very little was to be gained by going over 30" in barrel length. From 24" to 30" velocities were impressive, and nothing was to be gained except a few fps from 30" to 42".

Thwnk you this is exactly the kinda info i am looking for. Now I just have to find that article

 

[GANGGREEN]

My preference for longer barrels has almost nothing to do with velocity and darn near nothing to do with accuracy. As I said earlier in the thread, I've never really bought the idea that a shorter barreled gun was way handier in the woods (and I hunt the same eastern deer woods that many other guys here hunt and suspect that I often enter thickets that most wouldn't go in at all). My preference for longer barrels (say 39-42") is that TO MY TASTE, they simply look sleeker and prettier. I think guys spend way too much time arguing about such things; purchase what makes you happy and most .45-.62 muzzleloaders that a guy spends some time with at the bench will be perfectly acceptable for deer-sized game.

I had a 24" .50 (rifle) for 25 years and took many deer. Currently my shortest is a 25" .45 (rifle). They are both dandy for climbing with or beating one's way through briars. They both did as well as my longer guns.

I read an article a few years ago by a well known shooter about velocities from various length smoothbore barrels. He started with his personal 24" "canoe gun". I don't have the article handy but do recall the important observations. For one thing, the .62 X 24" barrel was a turning point from anything shorter. It gave impressive speeds. On up to 42" barrels there were moderate increases is ball speed. However at 30" the increases began dropping precipitously. My take-a-way on the article was that very little was to be gained by going over 30" in barrel length. From 24" to 30" velocities were impressive, and nothing was to be gained except a few fps from 30" to 42".

 

[Hglucky13]

My preference for longer barrels has almost nothing to do with velocity and darn near nothing to do with accuracy. As I said earlier in the thread, I've never really bought the idea that a shorter barreled gun was way handier in the woods (and I hunt the same eastern deer woods that many other guys here hunt and suspect that I often enter thickets that most wouldn't go in at all). My preference for longer barrels (say 39-42") is that TO MY TASTE, they simply look sleeker and prettier. I think guys spend way too much time arguing about such things; purchase what makes you happy and most .45-.62 muzzleloaders that a guy spends some time with at the bench will be perfectly acceptable for deer-sized game.

I'd never argue with that. Whatever makes you happy is most important. Besides the fact that if you really enjoy the way its set up you'll have a stronger mental game and it'll perform in your hands better than maybe even a more efficient piece of equipment you don't like.

 

[hanshi]

The article in question was in a Muzzleloader Magazine from a few years ago. It was written, IIRC, by Mike Nesbitt who owned several NSW trade guns. As for barrel length, I always used a rope to haul up any gun after I had already climbed and taken a seat. I no longer trust myself to climb and sit at ground level. I've also hauled 42" barrels through the woods and noticed no difficulty compared with shorter guns. My last long barrel rifle weighed around 9 pounds and too much for my arthritic left wrist to manage.

 

[hanshi]

I also have a .54 that weighs over 10 pounds that's killed deer in the past. But even though it isn't particularly long-barreled, toting it in the bush quickly wears one down.

 

[GANGGREEN]

If you were to ask my wife, she'd tell you that I never sell a muzzleloader once I build or own it, but the truth is that I've sold all of the guns that I had which weighed over about 7.5-8 pounds other than the first one I built (a fullstock Hawken percussion rifle that I'd probably sell for the right money). I have several with long barrels that I consider to be perfectly reasonable weights (6.5-7.5 pounds for me) and I have one on the bench and another at Dave Keck's having a barrel inlet. No reason in the world why you can't have a reasonably light gun with a reasonably long barrel with today's swamps and the right pattern.

The article in question was in a Muzzleloader Magazine from a few years ago. It was written, IIRC, by Mike Nesbitt who owned several NSW trade guns. As for barrel length, I always used a rope to haul up any gun after I had already climbed and taken a seat. I no longer trust myself to climb and sit at ground level. I've also hauled 42" barrels through the woods and noticed no difficulty compared with shorter guns. My last long barrel rifle weighed around 9 pounds and too much for my arthritic left wrist to manage.

 

[tenngun]

I had a ‘canoe’ gun with an 18 1/2” barrel. A cut off cheap Japanese import from the 70s. A shot tree rats real well. I loaded it with buck and experimented, but never hunted with it. Shot about 8” spread at twenty five yards. And I think it could have worked for deer at that range.
All and all I think short barrels are largely useless. I have no difficulty in thick ozark brush with a 42” barrel, and weight wise it’s less then an extra pound over short gun.

 

[hanshi]

If you were to ask my wife, she'd tell you that I never sell a muzzleloader once I build or own it, but the truth is that I've sold all of the guns that I had which weighed over about 7.5-8 pounds other than the first one I built (a fullstock Hawken percussion rifle that I'd probably sell for the right money). I have several with long barrels that I consider to be perfectly reasonable weights (6.5-7.5 pounds for me) and I have one on the bench and another at Dave Keck's having a barrel inlet. No reason in the world why you can't have a reasonably light gun with a reasonably long barrel with today's swamps and the right pattern.

My two deer rifles, a .45 & a .50, weigh 7 lbs for the .45 and 7 lbs 2.5 oz for the .50. My heaviest rifle is a .40 flintlock at 8 lbs 1oz. That's also what my .62 smoothbore weighs. The .40 is so well balanced it feels lighter than that. My .54 is a percussion and weighs 10 lbs 6-1/2 oz; way too much for this old guy.

 

[rodwha]

As something I’ve contemplated, mostly just because I thought capnball’s video on the short barreled German rifle was quite interesting, a short barreled <20” smoothbore might well be dandy to have as a swapable barrel were I to need to track down a wounded hog. I’m thinking buck n ball within 15 yds should be quite the medicine. Hogs love thick stuff where those long barrels might likely be a huge hinderance I’d think.

 

[Irishmusket]

it depends if its a smooth bore or a rifle .In the case of a smooth bore using real black powder the longer the better .Short barreled brown bess carbine 30 inch barrel loaded with 3 drams of powder 81 grains of 2f and I and1/4 once of no 4 shot effective range is less than 20 yards as it has a wide spread .How a long land pattern has 46 inch barrel and is very effective at 35 yards with the same load. Loaded with regulation military paper cartridges ( ball )the carbine 40 yards brigade firing at100 yards you might as well-be shooting at the moon .How ever the standard long land pattern is reasonably accurate at 60 to70 yards and brigade firing (volley firing)well past 150 yards with same ammunition .

 

[kingsax26]

wouldnt it be wise to look to our past? I am sure the wise for fathers would ahve used a short barreled fowler if they thought they were practical/ effective. I dont see a .24 inch barreled fowler being either... I would surmise that the lengths of guns from the past that we see are that way for a reason ...